Page:Pratt - The history of music (1907).djvu/521

 how to speak his thought clearly, forcibly, with elegance, often with brilliant wit, but also with unfailing graciousness, even when finding fault. His literary impulse led him to an easy amplitude of style, often full of apt discussion or illustration, yet nothing is said that is not worth saying. Though he abounds in quotable apothegms, there is none of the journalist's eagerness to seem clever. The thrill of imaginative ideality is seldom absent, and many pages are made charming by the play of quiet humor.

In his earlier works the extravagant dialect of Jean Paul and his school is much in evidence, but this gradually disappears. For several years (from about 1833) he often used the device of introducing imaginary personages, giving voice to varying views. Some of these, like 'Florestan,' 'Eusebius' and 'Meister Raro,' refer to aspects of himself—the first standing for his impulsive and fanciful eagerness, the second for his quieter and more contemplative thoughtfulness, and the third for his cool judgment as between opposing impulses. A variety of other names refer to various friends, especially to his colleagues in the Zeitschrift enterprise and to Clara Wieck. Many of these fictitious names were freely used with his shorter piano-works as well as in his literary writings.

Prominent among the composers to whom he gives careful attention were the following:—Bach, Beethoven, Schubert, Weber, Field, Berlioz, Mendelssohn, Chopin, Liszt, Wagner, Henselt, Heller, Franz, Bennett, Gade, Clara Wieck, and (in 1853) Brahms. When one considers how rich the period was in the outpouring of musical inspiration, it is easy to see what a magnificent field it offered for a truly great critic.

But Schumann's influence extended beyond what is often considered to be the domain of criticism. He recognized the value of genuine music-history and perceived its large structural outlines. Although not himself a historian by formal publication, he was thoroughly historical in habit of thought. He had a fine sense of the large movements of musical art, and of the relation of composers and styles to them. He had the scholar's desire for accuracy and willingness to spend time in research. He did valuable service in bringing to light forgotten works of Schubert, and he set a pattern in the important task of purifying scores from errors and glosses. He was also pedagogically wise, and his many aphorisms about the spirit, methods and objects of music-study have permanent validity and cogency. Hence it is safe to call him the first shining example of truly modern musical scholarship, one whose influence has been enduring and altogether beneficial.