Liszt as Writer.—As a critic, Liszt must stand as a pioneer although in a different direction from Schumann. Liszt’s early essay on the position of the artist is extremely significant; his criticisms during the Weimar period, especially his analyses of Wagner’s operas were of great value; his “Life of Chopin,” while untrustworthy in detail and somewhat overdrawn, is nevertheless graphic; “The Gipsies and Their Music” is picturesque if not entirely accurate. Liszt’s letters contain glimpses of his high qualities as well as vital presentations of his musical views. The correspondence between Wagner and Liszt gives conclusive evidence of the latter’s unselfishness in Wagner’s behalf.
Liszt’s Position and Influence as a Composer.—Liszt’s rank as a composer was undoubtedly overshadowed by his fame as a pianist and teacher, and by his facility as an arranger. For many years neither critics nor public would acknowledge his creative gifts. Whatever our opinion of the symphonies, the symphonic poems and the concertos, there is no doubt that Liszt rendered an inestimable service to the development of music in breaking away from the sonata form, and in demonstrating that form and substance can go hand-in-hand without detriment to organic unity and coherence. His forms are novel, his orchestration highly effective in spite of the achievements of Berlioz and Wagner in this direction. Liszt’s church music and his oratorios are worthy efforts towards a reform of ecclesiastic music. His songs are truly spontaneous lyrics, which are not appreciated at their true value. In spite of Liszt’s unquestioned attainments as a composer, there is a suggestion of skilful assimilation in his individuality rather than of unique and unquestioned personality. Nevertheless his influence has been vast. In his old age he encouraged Borodin and Glazounoff, he conducted works by Rimsky-Korsakoff, he made his pupils play Balakireff’s “Islamey.” In turn, the “new-Russian” school owes much to him. Tchaikovsky could hardly have written his symphonic poems without Liszt’s pioneer work to show the way. Saint-Saëns admits a similar influence. In fact, the entire development of the symphonic poem is directly due to Liszt; it is so considerable in extent that the details cannot be examined here, but while both Wagner and Berlioz contributed much to the growth of orchestral style and individuality of expression, the originality of the symphonic poem form belongs entirely to Liszt. Thus Liszt’s share in the evolution of ultra-modern orchestral music, as well as in the development of piano playing, is very important, and the greatest living composer, Richard Strauss, although also influenced by both Berlioz and Wagner, frankly avows himself to be a disciple of Liszt.
- References.
- Grove’s and Riemann’s Dictionaries.—Article on Liszt.
- Newman.—A Study of Liszt. (Century Library of Music.)
- Ramann.—Franz Liszt as Artist and Man.
- Saint-Saëns.—Franz Liszt. (Century Magazine, Feb., 1803.)
What was the nature and extent of Liszt’s early musical education?
What was the effect of his wide travels and meeting with notable persons on his character?
What set him to perfecting his technic?
Name the most important events in his career.
What educational work was the feature of his later years?
Sketch Liszt’s personality and character.