Dvorak on Schubert

In 1894 , in anticipation of the centenary of Schubert’s birth and in an effort to correct the then prevalent failure to understand the extent of his genius, Dvorak wrote an enthusiastic but none the less frank article on Schubert for New York Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine. The following extracts are taken word for word (in the English of Dvorak’s collaborator Henry T. Finck) from that enlightened article.

Schubert’s chamber music, especially his string quartets and his trios for pianoforte, violin and violoncello, must be ranked among the very best of their kind in all musical literature…Schubert does not try to give his chamber music an orchestral character, yet he attains a marvellous variety of beautiful tonal effects. Here, as elsewhere, his flow of melody is spontaneous, incessant and irrepressible, leading often to excessive diffuseness. Like Chopin and Rossini, Schubert has frequently shown how a melody may be created which can wonderfully charm us even apart from the harmonic accompaniment which naturally goes with and enriches it…

No doubt his education in counterpoint had been neglected. It is not likely, however, that such study would materially have altered his style. This was too individual from the beginning to undergo much change, for Schubert did not outgrow his early style so noticeably as did Beethoven and Wagner, for example. Besides, Schubert had no real need of contrapuntal study. In his chamber music, as in his symphonies, we often find beautiful specimens of polyphonic writing - see, for instance, the andantes of the C major Quintet and the D minor Quartet - and though his polyphony may be different from Bach’s or Beethoven’s, it is none the less admirable. Mendelssohn is undoubtedly a greater master of polyphony than Schubert, yet I prefer Schubert’s chamber music to Mendelssohn’s.

Schubert and Mozart have much in common; in both we find the same delicate sense of instrumental colouring, the same spontaneous and irrepressible flow of melody, the same instinctive command of the means of expression, and the same versatility in all the branches of their art…But in one respect these two master differ widely. Mozart was greatest in the opera, where Schubert was weakest. Schubert’s attempts to exercise his genius and improve his fortunes by writing operas came at an unpropitious moment - a time when Vienna was so Rossini-mad that even Beethoven was discouraged from writing for the stage…He was always unlucky with his librettos, which are, without exception, inadequate…Yet the chief cause of his failure lay, after all, in the nature of his genius, which was lyrical, and not dramatic, or, at any rate not theatrical…

Schubert created a new epoch with the Lied, as Bach did with the piano, and Haydn with the orchestra. All other song writers have followed in his footsteps, all are his pupils, and it is to his rich treasures of songs that we owe, as a heritage, the beautiful songs of such masters as Schumann and Brahms.

Greatly as I esteem Schubert’s songs, I value his instrumental works even more highly. Were all his compositions to be destroyed but two, I should say, save the last two symphonies. Fortunately we are not confronted by any such necessity. The loss of Schubert’s pianoforte pieces and songs would indeed be irreparable. For although much of their spirit and substance has passed into the works of his imitators and legitimate followers, the originals have never been equalled in their way. In most of his works Schubert is unique in melody, rhythm, modulation and orchestration, but from a formal point of view he is most original in his songs and his short pieces for piano.

Of Schubert’s symphonies…I am such an enthusiastic admirer that I do not hesitate to place him next to Beethoven, far above Mendelssohn, as well as above Schumann…In originality of harmony and modulation, and in his gift of orchestral colouring, Schubert has had no superior…Both Schumann and Liszt are descendants of Schubert; Brahms, too, whose enthusiasm for Schubert is well known, has perhaps felt his influence; and as for myself, I cordially acknowledge my great obligation to him.