Still he regards these studies as necessary preliminaries to the execution of artistic work. Then, after the elimination of all external difficulties, the imagination can move with greater ease and security, can give its creations life, light, and shade, and readily perfect what may still be lacking in spontaneity of composition." In addition to this, he then advises: "For practice in the capriccio style, I would recommend to pianists, besides the more oldfashioned works of Müller, those of Felix Mendelssohn, especially that (classic) in F sharp; and for acquiring a brilliant style of playing, the comparatively unknown but very clever caprices by J. Pohl. Some of the fugues from Bach's "Wohltemperirte Clavier" might also be profitably studied for this purpose, say those in C min., D maj., E min., F maj., G maj., in the first volume. and various others." This especial allusion to Mendelssohn's classic caprice is also worthy of note as showing the fundamental difference in the evolution of two masters otherwise so closely allied. Mendelssohn's whole education was early directed to giving his rich intellect that harmonious perfection and refinement upon which the consummate form of his artistic utterances rests. Therefore even his earliest artistic productions reveal an outward perfection scarcely consonant with their substance. His own individuality seems still so constrained by formality, it is still so overgrown with foreign matter learned in the schools, that it is hardly to be recognized. But by this very perfection he awed and impressed Schumann, whose strong mind, as we have seen, was forced to yield to foreign influences before his unbounded imagination could be schooled and restrained. Mendelssohn was obliged, by renewed efforts, to burst the fetters of form in which conventions had bound his fancy and his whole inner man, that they might break forth into freedom; while Schumann strove with equal

E

energy to acquire the laws of form in which his education was so deficient. In this sense he considered that caprice classic, as being perfect in form.

He published a second book of similar compositions during the following year under the title: "Six Concert Studies for the Piano, Op. 10." In regard to the distinctive characteristics of the two volumes, he himself declares: 1

"I placed an opus number on these studies because the publisher said that it would make them 'go' better- -a reason to which my numerous objections must needs yield. But I quietly considered the 10 (for I have not yet reached the ninth muse) as the symbol of an unknown quantity, and the composition up to the very basses, the richer middle parts, and especially the wealth of harmony, and here and there the more supple finish of the forms, as thoroughly Paganini-like. But if it be commendable to appropriate the idea of a superior with love and admiration, to remodel and reproduce it, I may perhaps lay claim to commendation. When I published an earlier book of studies after Paganini, I copied the originals, perhaps to their detriment, almost note for note, merely adding harmonies to them; but now I have broken loose from the pedantry of a literal translation, and desire to give the work in hand the character of an original piano composition, in which the violin origin is forgotten, without causing any loss of poetical ideas. When I say that much was necessarily altered, omitted, or added in order to attain this end, I think I need not add that the work was always done with the conscientious care which so great and honoured a spirit demands."

The gain which resulted to his growth from the arrange

"Collected Works," vol. ii., p. 29.

ment of these Caprices cannot be overrated. The difficulty of harmonizing them was not slight. They required a rich harmonic development, such as was consonant with his whole individuality. But in elaborating this there was great danger of injuring the peculiar character of the composition, of clogging the light-winged studies, and impeding them in their "strange, whimsical flight." But Schumann's chief task was just this, to impress them more firmly with this character; he wished not only to add a mere bass accompaniment, but also to transcribe the studies for the piano, still preserving their original nature, and thus he was led to invent that polyphonic piano-forte style which makes him the most important of the romanticists. This polyphonic style of instrumental music does not require a determinate number of parts as that of vocal music does, but only demands a free and intelligent exhibition of the harmonic materials in a greater or less number of parts. The orchestra, in its present construction, contains various instruments which cannot be used in the polyphonic treatment of the voice, such as the clumsy brass, and the instruments of percussion, which are lacking in tone; these require a different polyphonic treatment from the voice.

In instrumental polyphony the differing tone of the various instruments is no less decisive than the peculiar style of treatment. Even the piano can be but ill adapted to vocal polyphony; its tone not being so far-reaching or so enduring as the singing tone or the tone of the organ, it is difficult to follow the progress of the separate parts in continuous connection. Moreover, in the polyphonic treatment the instrument is apt to lose its highest charm, fulness of tone and melody. The most powerful and brilliant treatment of the piano is always the harmonic. But in order to remove the materialistic effect of this treatment,

it is again necessary either to introduce the chords in the most transparent open position, or to resolve them into easy, airy figure-work. We have no space to explain still further how this peculiar treatment of the piano, particularly inspired by J. S. Bach's corresponding piano compositions, came into prevalent use; how it called forth new forms in Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven, and was developed with increasing brilliancy by the masters of virtuoso pianoplaying, Clementi, Field, Hummel, &c. We might, ere now, have said that Schumann energetically joined in this effort to mould the polyphonic piano style in his own peculiar fashion. The only object of the preparatory studies already mentioned, upon which he insists in the preface to his Opus 3, is to promote the peculiar polyphony of the piano method, to heighten the fulness of tone in the instrument, and to increase its effect. The transcription of the Paganini Caprices gave him opportunity to practise this style. With his own rare vigour he grasped the often extravagant images of Paganini in their innermost essence, he followed them in their often excessively curious form and caught their most secret harmony, and although we cannot regard such counterpoint as this:

as either especially charming or worthy of imitation, still it shows us how firmly Schumann was determined to bend even harmonic forms and masses to more polyphonic treatment, and to create for himself that pianoforte method which afforded adequate means of representing the enchanting, gloriously ideal and romantic dream-world in which he lived. The very next work, completed during that same year (1832), Op. 4, “Intermezzi for Piano," clearly proves that the arrangement of those Paganini studies was of extraordinary technical advantage to him. He now seemed so fully master of the newly sought system of piano technique, that these intermezzi appear to be governed far more by that system than by any resistless idea. With the exception of the fifth intermezzo, whose enchanting beginning:

p

excellently characterizes the weak point of Schumann's individuality, changing in the "ALTERNATIVO" into subtly speculative activity, we might imagine this work to be the