A Popular History of the Art of Music Part 18

"Man stands upon that which he really is," was a form of self-a.s.sertiveness, which, if not actually enunciated by him, at least represents his att.i.tude toward the conventionalities and superficialities of the courts, the social orders, and the general movement of mind into which he entered. Moreover this was the time when the romantic poets of Germany had already set the world thinking their new ideas. Close by the great composer, in the same city in fact, worked a young man, worshiping almost the very ground upon which Beethoven walked, but for the most part unknown to him--Franz Schubert, who in the symphony was cla.s.sic to the very highest degree, and a tone poet gifted lyrically not less than Mozart himself, a composer whose ideas have equal refinement and grace with those of Mozart, together with a certain charm peculiarly their own, and an instinct for musical coloration, which has never found its superior.

This obscure young man, whose lofty genius was recognized only after his soul had taken its flight from earth, was the founder of the modern romantic school of music--the musical commentator upon the productions of all the best of German poets; a composer of such inexhaustible fertility and melodic inspiration that Schumann said of him, that if he had lived he would have set to music the whole German literature. Thus by the combined efforts of all these composers, of Schubert no less than of the three great masters of whom we are more particularly speaking, the symphony came to its full expression.

In their relation to the sonata, these three great masters do not stand in the same position of _quasi_-equality. Haydn is here the first, as already in the symphony. But in his sonatas he is always rather hampered, and never attains the flow of his slow melodies for the violin. Mozart, also, while a beautiful player upon the pianoforte of his day, did not possess the prescience of Beethoven, who was able to see over the pianoforte of his time and write as if he felt the a.s.surance of the n.o.bler and yet n.o.bler instruments of these later times. Here he stands with Bach, who in his great Chromatic Fantasia and Fugue requires and confidently expects the breadth of tone and the power of the modern piano. It was Beethoven's fortune to live during the early days of the modern instrument. Just after his death the era of virtuoso piano playing began, the first appearances of Thalberg having been made as early as about 1830. He was himself a great pianist, as we see in the concertos which he wrote, always intending to play them at some concert or other in near prospect. Occasionally indeed he overshot his mark, as notably in the fifth, which, being finished just before his concert in 1809, he found too difficult for his fingers, whereupon he was obliged to fall back on the third.

Moreover, the pianists Hummel and Dussek were already before the public, and Clementi had made his concert tours, and established the lines of the cla.s.sical technique upon its brilliant side. All these influences find their ill.u.s.tration in the music of Beethoven, and especially find ill.u.s.tration in the last and greatest of his pianoforte sonatas. These beautiful tone poems were long regarded as impossible. But the genius of Schumann and Liszt came to their rescue by introducing a new style of touch and technique, which, when once found, proved to be the link missing for the proper interpretation of these till then obscure works.

Moreover, Beethoven occupied a different att.i.tude toward the sonata form from that which he held to the symphony. He deviated from the sonata form in every direction, and this not alone in his later works, when we might suppose he had become wearied with the repet.i.tion of his ideas in the same order, but in his works of middle life, when as yet he might apparently have gone on writing sonatas indefinitely, so fresh, so novel and so varied were the tone pictures which he gave the world under this name. He seems to have regarded music as an improvisation, not to be held to some one fixed type of expression, but free to go wherever the fancy of the poet took him, to the end that the entire heavens of the tone world might in time be visited. He expects of his readers an element of the devotee. It is not for amateurs that he writes, still less for the votaries of fashionable society, with its emptiness and repeated insincerities. There is a suggestion of entering into the closet, and of shutting the door, as a prerequisite to the full enjoyment of these ineffable pictures and images which come from his revelation.

In the present full-grown faith in the doctrine of the capacity of man for a development continually progressive, it would be presumptuous to say that the three composers, Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven, have reached the limit of art, so far as instrumental music goes. In the nature of the case, there is not, nor can there be an _Ultima Thule_ in art. Whatever the splendor of color, the n.o.bility of conception, or the sincerity and loyalty of purpose, and however resplendent the works created by these exceptional talents, there is reason to hope that better works still may yet be in store. Stronger and yet stronger imaginations, more perfect technique of expression and finer inspiration, may yet be the lot of fortunate individuals of the twentieth century, inheriting the richly diversified musical experiences of the present time. But in one direction there is little doubt that these three great masters _did_ carry the art of instrumental music to a pinnacle beyond which no one as yet has been able to soar. They represent the climax of cla.s.sical art. In the nature of the case, the term cla.s.sical itself is subject to an element of uncertainty. According to the philosopher Hegel, the cla.s.sical is that art in which the _form_ is beautiful and wholly satisfactory in symmetry, while the _content_ exactly matches it in fullness and beauty. Or, in ordinary usage, the cla.s.sical is the first-cla.s.s, the superior, the highly finished, the standard. And since music is a matter of sense perception, and the impressions resulting from it are in some degree dependent upon the ability of the hearer to find the principles of unity (in other words, "the sense of it"), every generation extends the list of the cla.s.sical, and includes much which the preceding one found imperfect and strained. So far as our knowledge and experience have yet gone, however, there is a sense in which the productions of these great masters are likely to remain long unmatched in beauty and worth.

Nothing has been done since that surpa.s.ses the sustained beauty of the Beethoven adagios, of which we find the most beautiful specimens naturally among the orchestral pieces and in the chamber music, where he could depend upon the long phrases and sustained tones of the violins. But in the sonatas for pianoforte he is equally at home. He seems to have foreseen the possibilities of the modern piano. In his latest sonatas there are pa.s.sages which foresee the modern technique, and suggest effects which only the pianoforte of the past thirty years has been capable of attaining. This is the prophetic element in the writings of this great master.

The same difference in the sweep of mind shows itself in the lighter movements. In the minuets Haydn is playful, Mozart is occasionally tender and arch; Beethoven alone is vigorous and humoristic in the modern sense. And, in the finales of the sonatas there is a movement in those of Beethoven which we look for in vain in those of the older composers. It was not in Haydn, nor yet in Mozart, to play with tones in this masterly spirit.

Hence the true relation of these great masters might be summed up without intending to be disrespectful to either, as the following: Haydn provided the form, the order of keys and the general character of the contrasts between the two subjects. Mozart invented a myriad of tender _nuances_ which ill.u.s.trated the fine points of music, and imparted to the works a sweetness and pleasing quality which everybody recognized as irresistible. Beethoven added to these ingredients of popular music a depth, a soulful quality, an earnestness and a universal intelligibility to spirits of the necessary depth, which have stood to all the world ever since as models. Such, in general, are the points of relation and of contrast.

It is not to be overlooked, however, that the tendency of musical taste is to leave the works of Mozart behind. Haydn is gaining ground, relatively, through the admiration of musicians for the cleverness with which he treats themes. Beethoven holds his own by reason of his vigorous personality, which is to be felt in every page of his music.

Mozart, however, appeals less to the taste of the present time, and his pianoforte works are now cultivated chiefly for technical purposes, in the earlier stages of study.

[Ill.u.s.tration]

CHAPTER XXIX.

OPERA IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.

I.

Upon the musical side, and in one instance upon the dramatic side as well, there were three great forces in opera during this century. The first of these in order of time was Karl Heinrich Graun (1701-1759). A native of Dresden, he was educated there, and having early a beautiful voice became treble singer to the town council--a curious name for a position in the leading church. He profited by the instruction of the official directors of the choir and the church, Petzold and Schmidt, and very early he was an enthusiastic student of the compositions of the Hamburg director, Keiser, whose style influenced his own in his later work. Lotti, the Italian composer, who conducted a series of performances in Dresden with a picked company of Italian singers, was another force operative in his development. He early commenced to write cantatas and motettes for the seminary, of which he was a member, all of which show traces of the Italian influences. In particular his biographer speaks of a Pa.s.sion cantata, in which an opening chorus, "_La.s.set uns aufsehen auf Jesum_," is singularly forcible for the work of a boy of fifteen. His first entrance upon operatic work was as tenor, when he was scarcely twenty-four years of age. Being dissatisfied with the music of his part (written by one Schurmann, a local director), he subst.i.tuted other airs of his own composition, which were so popular that he was commissioned to write an opera, and was appointed a.s.sistant director. His first opera, "_Polliodoro_," was successful, and he was commissioned to write five others, some in Italian, some in German. Besides these he composed several cantatas for church use, and several instrumental pieces. In 1735 he was invited to the residence of the crown prince of Prussia, afterward Frederick the Great. This powerful potentate remained Graun's friend and patron until his death. Here, among other works, he composed fifty Italian cantatas, usually consisting of two airs with recitative. In 1740 Frederick came to the throne, and gave Graun the post of musical director, with a salary of $2,000. Selecting his singers in Italy, where his singing was very highly appreciated, he returned to Berlin and a.s.sumed the duties of his position. Here he composed no less than twenty-seven operas, the last being in 1756, all in the Italian style, in so far as a German might master it, and all making the singer the prime person of consideration, and the listener next. The poet took whatever of opportunity these two might not have needed. His best talent both as singer and as composer lay in his power of expressing emotion in _adagios_. In this respect he had, no doubt, more influence upon the development of the lyric slow movement than he has generally been credited with. Later in his life he turned once more to church music, and in his cantatas, and especially in his oratorio, "_Der Tod Jesu_" ("The Death of Jesus"), a Pa.s.sion oratorio, he made a distinct impression upon the practices of his successors. In Germany this work is held in nearly the same affection as the "Messiah," of Handel, in England. Graun's influence upon the later course of opera, besides the adagio aria already mentioned, lay princ.i.p.ally in his accompaniments, which were often strong and highly dramatic.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 60.]

The great operatic mind of this century, and one of the greatest of all time, was that of Christopher Willibald von Gluck (1714-1785). By the middle of the eighteenth century the influence of the Italian composers, helped out by the superficial German composers, such as Graun and Ha.s.se, had reduced the Italian opera to a collection of mere showpieces of singing, the arias having indeed an excuse in the story, but the action of the drama had been lost entirely, owing to the long stretches of time needed for these elaborate arias and the recalls to which they inevitably gave rise. During these pauses the action ceased entirely, as we see at the present day in many Italian operas still current--as in the "mad scene" from "_Lucia_," for instance. In that scene where everything ought to be wild excitement, the chorus singers, representing the relatives and friends of poor Lucia, stand around while she sings long cadenzas with the flute, in such trying relationships as would test the vocal technique of a sane person. In the time of Gluck this abuse had reached about the same height, and to make the matter less bearable, the Italian composers had not yet attained the art of expressing sentiment simply and directly, but were intent upon sweet-sounding trivialities calculated to please the groundlings, but of little or no relation to the drama. Gluck sought to restore the ideal of the original inventors of opera, with such unconscious modification as had been made meanwhile. But before undertaking this he had to undergo the usual long and severe apprenticeship of reformers. In his time the rules for a composer had become well settled, every personage must have his or her aria immediately upon their first entrance. The character of the arias had been well settled. There was the _aria cantabile_, a flowing melody, very lightly accompanied, affording opportunity for embellishments; the _aria di portamento_, introducing long swelling notes, affording the singer opportunity for ill.u.s.trating his length of breath and sustaining power. And so on with several other forms of aria. The part of hero, whether male or female, was a.s.signed to a man, an artificial soprano, although it might be a hero--like Hercules, for example. The subject had to be cla.s.sical, and the _denouement_ happy.

There were invariably six princ.i.p.al characters, three men and three women. The first woman was always a high soprano; the second or third a contralto; the first man, always the hero of the piece, an artificial soprano. The second man might be an artificial soprano or a contralto. The third man might be a ba.s.s or tenor. But it was not at all unusual to confide all the male parts to artificial sopranos. Each princ.i.p.al character claimed the right to sing an aria in each of the three acts of the drama. Each scene ended with an aria of some one of the cla.s.ses already mentioned, but no two arias of the same cla.s.s were permitted to follow each other. Gluck was the reformer destined by the fates to rectify some of these artificial traditions. He was educated at the Jesuit seminary in Komotow, and later in Prague. He was engaged in the musical forces of Prince Melzi, who took him to Italy, where he became a pupil of the famous Italian composer and teacher, Sammartini.

To this fact, no doubt, is due his early attachment to the Italian opera.

Here he wrote several operas, all more or less in the Italian style as he had been taught it, and as he heard it upon every hand. His first work, "_Artaserse_," the book by Metastasio, was produced with such success in Milan, in 1741, that he presently wrote several others for other Italian theaters. For Venice in 1741, "_Demetrio_," and "_Ipermestra_"; for Cremona, "_Artamene_" (1743); for Turin, "_Alessandro nelle Indie_" (1745); for Milan, "_Dem.o.f.oonte_,"

"_Siface_" and "_Fedra_" (1742-1744); in all, eight operas in five years. None of these works in their complete form are now in existence; fragments alone have been preserved. If any inference is justified from these extracts the style throughout was that of the Italian opera of the day.

The fame of Gluck had now extended to England, and in 1745 he was invited to London to compose operas for the Haymarket theater. He came and wrote the year following (1746) "_La Caduta de Giganti_," after which he produced the Cremona opera. Handel a.s.sisted at the production of these two operas, and is reported to have said that the author knew no more of counterpoint than a pig. Naumann thinks that Gluck learned much from hearing Handel's oratorios in England, and that his subsequent deeper and n.o.bler dramatic style was formed upon these great models. The two operas produced in London made but a moderate success, and Gluck was commissioned to write a "_pasticcio_" or medley of styles. He did so, imitating all styles according to the best of his ability, but it made no better effect than the works before it.

This was the turning point in his career. The failure mortified him deeply, and led him to reflect concerning the nature of dramatic music. On his way back to Vienna he pa.s.sed through Paris, where he heard certain operas of Rameau, which also influenced his style later.

The declamation and the dramatic treatment of the recitative were the points upon which his attention princ.i.p.ally dwelt. Upon reaching Vienna he wrote a number of instrumental pieces, bearing the name of symphonies, pieces which in no way differed from the conventional music of the day. The Haydn symphony had not yet been invented, and the form was wholly indeterminate. There was an opera in this year; also a love affair. Gluck was deeply in love with the beautiful and charming daughter of a rich merchant, who upon no account would consent to her marriage with a musician. So Gluck went back to Italy, and there he wrote another opera, rather better in quality than his previous ones. Early in 1750 the inexorable parent died, and late in the year Gluck married the woman of his choice, who made him a model wife, being educated above the average of her times, and entering into his ideals and aspirations with ever ready sympathy. Her wealth also placed the composer in an easy position as regarded the world, and permitted him to devote himself to study. For nearly ten years following Gluck produced occasionally an opera, but as yet the _man_ had not arrived; all these were early and apprentice works. At length in 1762 was produced his first master work, "Orpheus and Eurydice,"

the libretto having been written by the imperial councillor Calzabigi.

The novelty of this great work was not above the appreciation of the Viennese public of the day. "Orpheus" made a decided success. Its princ.i.p.al innovations consisted in its more powerful instrumentation, the introduction of a chorus having an integral part in the movement of the piece, and in the highly dramatic treatment of the second act, where Orpheus descends into the lower world to seek his lost love.

Nevertheless, the composer had not reached true self-consciousness. A retrogression followed. He went back to Metastasio, and in conjunction with him produced three or four small operas, all in his earlier style. But in 1767 he returned to Calzabigi, and upon a libretto of his wrote "_Alceste_" which was produced at the Vienna opera house in 1767 with vastly more success than "Orpheus." The story is that of the tragedy of Euripides, and the music is exclusively severe and tragic.

The public was divided concerning the merit of the new work. Already the notion of a music of the future had been conceived, and the notion suggested that only in a more self-forgetful future would a work of such severity and of such lofty aim find acceptance.

In the dedicatory epistle to the duke of Tuscany, prefixed to the score, Gluck defines his intentions. He says: "I seek to put music to its true purpose; that is, to support the poem, and thus to strengthen the expression of the feelings and the interest of the situation, without interrupting the action. I have therefore refrained from interrupting the actor in the fervor of his dialogue by introducing the accustomed tedious _ritournelle_; nor have I broken his phrase at an opportune vowel that the flexibility of his voice might be exhibited in a lengthy flourish; nor have I written phrases for the orchestra to afford the singer opportunity to take a long breath preparatory to the accepted flourish; nor have I dared to hurry over the second part of an aria, when such contained the pa.s.sion and the most important matter, to find myself in accord with the conventional repeat of the same phrase four times. As little have I permitted myself to close an aria where the sense was incomplete, solely to afford the singer an opportunity of introducing a cadenza. In short, I have striven to abolish all these bad habits, against which sound reasoning and true taste have been struggling now for so long in vain."

There were several numbers in "_Alceste_" which exercised an influence upon subsequent composers, among the more notable being the speech of the oracle, which Mozart must have had in mind in writing the commandatore's reply to Don Giovanni; and the sacrificial march, which probably influenced the priests' march in the "Magic Flute."

Gluck was forty-eight when he wrote "Orpheus," and fifty-three when "_Alceste_" appeared.

Galled by the criticisms of his countrymen, and encouraged by the friendship of the French amba.s.sador, Gluck now went to Paris, where his operas were presently brought out, but with the same varying favor as at home. Marie Antoinette, who had been his pupil, befriended him and granted him a pension of 6,000 francs. Thus supported, he brought out still another grand opera in the French language, "_Iphigenie en Aulide_," produced at Paris in 1774. In this work cla.s.sical severity was scrupulously observed, and the opera is full of telling points of dramatic musical coloration. In "_Armide_," 1777, he endeavored to show that he was equally at home in richly conceived sensuous music, and succeeded so well that the famous controversy was precipitated with the Italian composer, Piccini, who had just arrived in Paris, preparatory to bringing out his opera of "Roland." Volumes were written in praise of Italian music, and in disparagement of the roughnesses of that of Gluck. On the other hand, the friends of Gluck stood up for him manfully, and the contest raged fiercely--with the usual result of thoroughly advertising the music of both. Gluck's last opera for Paris was "_Iphigenie en Tauride_," 1779, the same subject already having been treated by his rival Piccini. The superiority of Gluck's was incontestable. He died at Vienna, of apoplexy, November 15, 1787.

Gluck's place in art has been well summed up by Padre Martini, and the opinion is all the more worthy of attention from the general charge of Gluck's enemies that his music had overturned the traditions of pure Italian art. He says: "All the finest qualities of Italian, and many of those of French music, with the great beauties of the German orchestra, are united in his work." This is tantamount to crediting Gluck with having created a cosmopolitan music--which is precisely the position which posterity has a.s.signed him. For the time when he wrote, his music is wonderfully fine. It still retains its vitality, as has been vividly shown in several revivals of his "Orpheus" within recent years, in two of which (in America and in Italy) the American prima donna, Mme. Helene Hastreiter, has n.o.bly distinguished herself.

The third force alluded to at the outset of the chapter, as having been mainly influential in German opera during the eighteenth century (and until our own time, it might be added), was Mozart, whose works have already received attention in former pages of the narrative. It must suffice here to remind the reader of the successes and qualities of his operas, in order that he may be remembered in this connection; for, like Gluck, his art was cosmopolitan, having in it the sweetness of the Italian, the richness of the German, and occasional traces of the declamation of the French.

II.

After Lulli, the next great name in the history of French opera was that of Jean Philippe Rameau (1683-1765). This great master was one of the most versatile men of whom we have a record in music. He was a mathematician, physicist, a profound theorist, and a virtuoso upon the piano and harpsichord. He is one of the four great names in music of the period of Bach and Handel, the fourth being Scarlatti. His education in music began while he was very young, and it is said of him that such was his talent that he could improvise a fugue upon any theme a.s.signed, when he was but fourteen years of age. His father wished him to be trained for the law, but music had greater charms for him, and the margins of his books were marked over with crotchets and quavers. Having become desperately in love with a fascinating young widow, whom his father was opposed to his marrying, he was sent at the age of seventeen to Italy, ostensibly to study. He came, therefore, to Milan about 1701, a few years before Handel came there. Italian music was little to his taste. The dignified declamation of the Lulli operas seemed to him better worthy the attention of men than the tunes of the Italians. Accordingly he took service as a violinist with a traveling operatic troupe, and in this capacity visited the south of France. In Paris he became a pupil of the court organist Marchand, of whom we hear again in connection with certain tests of proficiency with Handel. Marchand was at first delighted with his new pupil, but presently dropped him when he discovered how talented he was, and liable to prove a dangerous rival. Accordingly he left Paris and took service as organist at Lille, which post he exchanged afterward for one at Clermont. In this quiet town he devoted himself to the study of harmony, and to reflection upon the principles of music. He read here the works of Zarlino, and other Italian theorists, and in 1721 he returned to Paris and published his treatise on harmony, in which he propounded the theory of inversions. His second treatise on harmony, "New System of Musical Theory," was published in 1725. These works excited a great deal of attention and brought the author renown, but his soul yearned for recognition as composer, and in 1730 he obtained from Voltaire a libretto, "Samson." This work was declined at the national opera, on the ground that the public was not attracted by Biblical subjects. Three years later, however, he composed another, "_Hypolite et Arcie_," which was performed with moderate success. He had now reached the age of fifty, and entered upon the second stage of his artistic career, and the second period of the French opera. The admirers of Rameau invited appreciation of the new works upon the ground of their being better than those of Lulli, and all Paris was divided into two opposite camps. Rameau is ent.i.tled to having developed his operas more musically than those of Lulli, and the later ones became still richer upon the orchestral side.

The entire list of operas by Rameau numbers about thirty. That they did not preserve their popularity so long as those of Lulli is due to their deficiency upon the dramatic side, especially to the inherent inexpressiveness of the music itself. The treatment of the orchestra is clever in many places, showing a manifest improvement over that of Lulli, especially in the freedom of thematic work. He also ventures occasionally on enharmonic changes.

Contemporaneous with him was that remarkable genius, Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), the father of the kindergarten idea, and of many other humanitarian and educational novelties. Rousseau's importance in the history of music is not sufficient to justify an account of his early days. With a great fondness for music, he found it extremely difficult to read by note, as he was almost entirely self-taught. This led him to devise a simpler notation, which he did about 1740, publishing an account of it in 1743. His system was substantially that of the tonic sol fa, except that he used figures in place of letters. He presented a memorial to the Academy of Sciences upon this subject in 1742, but his plan was so vigorously opposed by Rameau that nothing came of it; nevertheless the idea was afterward worked out by M. Paris, in the present century, and has proven very useful among the _Orpheonistes_. In 1752 Rameau produced his first opera "_Le Devin du Village_," a very light affair, somewhat on the order of what Germans call a Singspiel. The most remarkable piece that he produced was his comedy "_Pygmalion_" in 1775. There is no song in this opera. The only music in it is that for orchestral interludes in the intervals between the phrases of declamation.

The continuation of French opera was due to Philidor, the celebrated chess player (1726-1795). He was very talented in many directions, and from the production of his first opera in 1759, to his last, _Belisaire_, finished by his friend Berton, and produced in 1796, he enjoyed an uninterrupted popularity, having brought out in that time about twenty-one operas, some of them comic, one or two of them serious. His music is light and pleasing, and he is credited with having been the first to produce descriptive airs ("_Le Marechal_") and the unaccompanied quartette ("Tom Jones," 1764). The great merit of his works was their clever construction for the stage.

Contemporaneous with him was Pierre Alexander Monsigny (1729-1817).

Not having been intended for the profession of music, he had a cla.s.sical education, and upon the death of his father obtained a clerkship in Paris. He belonged to a n.o.ble family, and at first pursued music as a recreation. His first opera was produced after five months' tuition in harmony and theory, in 1759; this was followed by about thirty other works. His greatest skill was melody and ease of treatment. In 1812 he was appointed inspector of the Conservatory, and in 1813 he succeeded Gretry in the Inst.i.tute, and in 1816 he received the cross of the Legion of Honor.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 61.

GReTRY.]

Upon the appearance of Andre Ernest Modest Gretry, (1741-1813), we come to a real genius, although not of the first order. He was the son of a poor violinist of Liege, Belgium, and when about sixteen years of age he composed six small symphonies and a ma.s.s. The latter gained him the protection of the canon of the cathedral who sent him to Rome, where he pursued his studies with very little credit. After producing one small work in Rome, he made his way to Paris, and his first opera, "_Le Huron_," was successfully produced in 1768. This was followed by more than fifty operas of all sorts, some of which still survive.

Gretry was a very charming man, and wrote upon music and other subjects in a pleasing manner. His importance in the history of music is due more to the number of works by him, than to their striking musical qualities.

Another remarkable musician of this period in France was Francois Joseph Gossec (1733-1829), who also was a Belgian from Hainault. His early training was obtained in the cathedral at Antwerp. He came to Paris in 1751 and became a pupil of Rameau. He conceived the idea of writing orchestral symphonies, and produced some pieces of this kind in 1754, five years before the date of Haydn's first. In 1759 he published some quartettes. In 1760 he produced his best, "_Messe des Morts_," in which he made a sensation by writing the "_Tuba Mirum_"

for two orchestras, one of wind instruments concealed outside. Berlioz probably derived an idea from this. He wrote twelve operas which were successfully produced, twenty-six symphonies and a variety of other works. He founded his amateur concerts in 1770, and his sacred concerts in 1773. In 1784 he organized his school of singing, out of which the Conservatory of Music was afterward developed. Upon the foundation of the conservatory, in 1795, he was appointed inspector with Cherubini and Mehul. His influence upon the general development of music is local to Paris, where he did more to enrich opera on the instrumental side than any other composer of the eighteenth century.

etienne Henri Mehul (1763-1817) was another of these prolific composers of light operas. Son of a cook at Givet, he had pa.s.sion for music, and soon became a good organist. At fourteen he was deputy organist, and in 1778 he arrived in Paris and at once commenced to study and teach. The next year he was so fortunate as to listen to Gluck's "_Iphigenie en Tauride_," which made a great impression upon him. He called upon Gluck himself in order to express his admiration, and, in consequence of the encouragement received from the eminent composer, he proceeded to write three operas, one after another, which are now lost. His fourth was accepted at the Academy, but not performed. Finally his "_Euphrosine et Coradin_" was produced at the Opera Comique in 1790. The public immediately recognized a force, a sincerity of accent, a dramatic truth, and a gift of accurately expressing the meaning of words, which always remained the main characteristics of Mehul. Within the next seventeen years he produced twenty-four operas, besides a large number of cantatas and other works. Upon the whole, this sincere master must be regarded as one of the most eminent in the history of French opera.

Somewhat later in the operatic field was Jean Francois Lesueur (1763-1837). After serving as a boy chorister at Abbeville and Amiens, he came to Paris, where in 1786 he was appointed musical director at Notre Dame, and distinguished himself by giving magnificent performances of motettes and solemn ma.s.ses, with a large orchestra in addition to the usual forces. His first opera, "_La Caverne_," was produced in 1793, after which he wrote four others, as well as three which were never performed. In the line of church music he was much more productive, and one might say, more at home. His music is marked by grand simplicity. As a teacher in later life he was very celebrated, among his pupils being the greatest of French masters, Berlioz.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 62.

BOIELDIEU.]

The most gifted of the French composers of light opera at the end of the eighteenth century, and in the part of the nineteenth, was Francois Adrien Boieldieu (1775-1834). This talented musician was born at Rouen, where his father was secretary to the archbishop. The boy was educated in the ecclesiastical schools, having begun as a choir boy in the cathedral. His first little work for the stage was performed at Rouen when he was about seventeen, "_La Fille Coupable_,"

with such success that the author was encouraged to go and seek his fortune in Paris. Here for a long time he met with little encouragement, and was obliged to make a living at first as a piano tuner; later he was fortunate enough to have certain romances of his sung by popular singers, and thus his name became somewhat known. For these songs he received the munificent compensation of two dollars and a half each. Presently he secured a libretto, "_La Dot de Suzette_,"

which was composed and performed at the Opera Comique, with so much encouragement, that he soon after produced his one-act opera, "_La Famille Suisse_." His popularity was not fully established, however, until "_Zoraime et Zulnare_" in 1798. This work possesses a vein of tenderness, a refined orchestration, and singularly clear and pleasing forms. In 1800 his world-wide favorite, "_Le Caliph de Bagdad_," was produced, and its taking overture was played from one end of Europe to the other, upon all possible instruments and combinations of them. His other two successful operas were "_Jean de Paris_" (1812), and "_La Dame Blanche_" (1825). Both these made as much reputation outside of France as in it, and are still produced in Germany. In 1803 Boieldieu received an appointment in St. Petersburg and lived there six years, but he returned to Paris later, and in 1817 became Mehul's successor as teacher of composition at the Conservatory.

Of the French stage during this epoch it is to be observed that nothing of a large and serious character was produced upon it, except the operas of Gluck, which of course were not indigenous to France.

What progress was made by the composers before mentioned, and others of less importance, consisted in acquiring fluency, ease and effective construction. The ground had been prepared from which the century following would reap a harvest.