# Schumann, the first of the true romantics?



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

Schumann, to me, seems like the first romantic composer. 
His music is unbelievably emotional and he was also a very versatile composer, because, where Chopin didn't he wrote symphonies and orchestral works, violin sonatas. And then there are the great concertos, the solo work, the songs. The chamber works, the opera and a requiem. So all round he was the first, I think.

What do you think?


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

requested advice on another thread but nothing as yet-have paid little attention to Schumann-listen to Brahms in particular and Sibelius remains my 'mainman'so which recordings of the symphonies would you recommend-I feel as if this may be a great gap and my loss


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

jim prideaux said:


> requested advice on another thread but nothing as yet-have paid little attention to Schumann-listen to Brahms in particular and Sibelius remains my 'mainman'so which recordings of the symphonies would you recommend-I feel as if this may be a great gap and my loss


Karajan's recording of the symphonies are brilliant


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2013)

Burroughs said:


> Schumann, to me, seems like the first romantic composer.
> His music is unbelievably emotional and he was also a very versatile composer, because, where Chopin didn't he wrote symphonies and orchestral works, violin sonatas. And then there are the great concertos, the solo work, the songs. The chamber works, the opera and a requiem. So all round he was the first, I think.
> 
> What do you think?


Well, since movements blend into each other, rather, it would be difficult to pinpoint an actual first for any of them. And ultimately, it doesn't really matter. Tracing influences can be fun, but designating the very first for a movement? Especially since everyone has predecessors.

Otherwise, if you have a case to make, a historical case rather than a personal one, then you'll have to satisfy us that you have a good grasp of what romanticism is. Is "unbelievably emotional" a component of Romantic art? Is "unbelievably emotional" the most important component of Romantic art? (For that matter, is "unbelievably emotional" an apt description of Schumann's music?)

For sure "versatile," which is where you put the bulk of your emphasis, is not exclusive to Romanticism.

In any case, and now let me play you this broken record here that I like so much, does Schumann's position as number one or not--does even getting agreement that he was number one--really affect how Schumann's music sounds? Does it affect how much you enjoy listening to Schumann? And isn't that the whole point, really?


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Donald Grout claims Rossini as the first to move strongly toward romanticism, but frankly I don't hear it. Certainly Berlioz was "dying" and carrying on about how much of a suffering genius he was somewhat before Schumann came along with his Papillons. 

You can easily guess which I take more seriously though.


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2013)

Weston said:


> carrying on about how much of a suffering genius he was....


Was he now? And perhaps you could favor us with a wee bit text or summat, in a good translation if not in the original, that supports your conclusion. Preferably some text by Berlioz himself and not someone just drawing the same conclusion as yours.

Conclusions are so freakin' easy to draw. Not so easy to support, howsumever.

Which is, I suppose, one reason so many people favor the unsupported conclusion.

And then there are those one or two spoilers in the group who are never satisfied with bare assertions. Such a pain those people are, eh? Never happy with the jerking of knees or with pontificating, plain style. Always needing "proof" of some kind. So annoying....:devil:


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

some guy said:


> So annoying....:devil:


Quite. But admission is half the battle.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Of course there's always Schubert.

As for recordings of Schumann's symphonies I would go with John Eliot Gardiner or George Szell.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Carl Maria von Weber, with dates nearly parallel Beethoven, is the first, from the get-go, romantic composer, very early romantic of course, but there he is, sitting between dates not ever mentioned as "romantic" and also not do be denied.

Schubert is next, early romantic, with a lot of the tinge of classical Beethoven and Mozart, initially, about him.

As vociferously and pointedly mentioned deus ex machina, Berlioz is also not to be denied 

Schumann is mid-romantic, and I agree, the first to make 'that kind of big sound' we generally associate as the overt gesture, stylized harmonically and dynamically, "Romantic." -- at least _Germanic Romantic._
Like this:





Those following are also mid, then late(r) romantic.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

some guy said:


> Was he now? And perhaps you could favor us with a wee bit text or summat, in a good translation if not in the original, that supports your conclusion. Preferably some text by Berlioz himself and not someone just drawing the same conclusion as yours.
> 
> Conclusions are so freakin' easy to draw. Not so easy to support, howsumever.
> 
> ...


Do you know that I hear babbling around this thread ,rather like a mountain brook ,clear and empty of anything solid.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Of course there's always Schubert.
> 
> As for recordings of Schumann's symphonies I would go with John Eliot Gardiner or George Szell.


Ceretainly not Karajan.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

I like to think of the first romantics as Beethoven and Schubert and Berlioz.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

He was the first of the fake Romantics. The first (and only) true Romantic was Wagner. 

I do however enjoy Schumann's many treatises on concert etiquette.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Couchie said:


> He was the first of the fake Romantics. The first (and only) true Romantic was Wagner.
> 
> I do however enjoy Schumann's many treatises on concert etiquette.


Ah, that little spoken of, swept under the carpet set of composers, Der Ersatz Romntische Componisten.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

I've changed my mind. The first true romantics were (in order) Beethoven from about halfway through his middle period, Rossini, Schubert from the 8th symphony onwards, Weber, Berlioz.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Burroughs said:


> Schumann, to me, seems like the first romantic composer.
> His music is unbelievably emotional and he was also a very versatile composer, because, where Chopin didn't he wrote symphonies and orchestral works, violin sonatas. And then there are the great concertos, the solo work, the songs. The chamber works, the opera and a requiem. So all round he was the first, I think.
> 
> What do you think?


Well this kind of thing was said at a pre concert talk I went to many years ago. I don't have what I'd call expert listener type experience with Schumann's music, but this is what the person giving the talk alluded to.

Schumann was a typical (stereotypical?) Romantic, because:
- Of his interest in nature (eg. bringing images of nature in his music)
- The literary element in his music (eg. Manfred, Faust)
- That thing of nature, God, man coming through the the composer as music (a kind of Holy Trinity)
- His madness/insanity - the suicide attempt and ending his days in an asylum
- Pivotal role of women in his life - not only Clara, but also in terms of being a romantic in the sense of him being very busy in the 'female' department especially in his student years (probably that's how he got syphillis - if that is what he had?)

My memory of the lecture goes like that, I did not take notes, but my reading about the man backs these things up. If people want to check my facts, the onus I'm afraid is on them, I don't have time (relying on memory!).

I would say that he was among the first generatin of true Romantics rather than what I see as pre or maybe early Romantics (Schubert, Beethoven). Hard to categorise those two guys as part of a wider movement, they where things in themselves. But guys like Liszt, Wagner, Verdi, Schumann, Tchaikovsky - well they're 'proper' Romantics, aren't they? Dunno who is the first 'true' one - and what about those retaining more of the Classical aesthetic, eg. Mendelssohn or Brahms or even Saint-Saens? are they Romantic? - but Schumann is a biggie for sure. Dunno about Berlioz, I see him as a bit of a loner or oddball in music history, again a thing in himself (perhaps Weber too? & Alkan is even more like that!).

Well, that's categories, but I can hardly think of any life as having that kind of Romantic tragedy to it as Schumann's and Chopins' has. The live fast die young thing...


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

_As for recordings of Schumann's symphonies I would go with John Eliot Gardiner or George Szell._

Moody- Certainly not Karajan.

I like Karajan for a lot of things... but I would agree with you here.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

The first true romantics were... Schubert from the 8th symphony onwards...

Why does everyone focus on the damn symphonies and forget the lieder?! What are Schubert's lieder if not "Romantic"?


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> The first true romantics were... Schubert from the 8th symphony onwards...
> 
> Why does everyone focus on the damn symphonies and forget the lieder?! What are Schubert's lieder if not "Romantic"?


Because you know, and others do top, that often enough, it takes a while for the general fan to get to lieder, if they ever do at all: it is generally the same whether the chamber music is ever gotten to, or "takes."

My first real in, to Schubert, was Winterreisse. This is not just for anyone, right away, and looking back on my taste during my early teens, I'm a bit surprised that is what bit me first, but it sure did.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

So what about Beethoven? Chopped liver? Listen to the two Romances...WAY to Romantic for my taste! Good thing he wasn't normally in the mood for that sort of thing.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

LvB, first Romantic composer.

Schumann cycle, VPO/Bernstein.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Weston said:


> Donald Grout claims Rossini as the first to move strongly toward romanticism, but frankly I don't hear it. Certainly Berlioz was "dying" and carrying on about how much of a suffering genius he was somewhat before Schumann came along with his Papillons.
> 
> You can easily guess which I take more seriously though.


In view of some unpleasantness regarding my claim, I probably do stand corrected. I think in retrospect I was remembering a biography I had read about Wagner, not Berlioz, but now I can no longer find the source. I do remember distinctly it uses the "dying" in quotes just as I have done, and reports about this mystery composer's habit of proclaiming his genius. So maybe it was not Berlioz. Remember folks, these threads are not necessarily doctoral dissertations. I am not required to include a citation for my every thought. Some of us are here merely because our surroundings preclude conversation with like minded people.

It still remains that while I am dubious of Berlioz's ability to engage me mentally and emotionally, he is probably among the earliest of the true romantics.

Beethoven is not romantic to me because he remained very much in the realm of classical form in spite of the program element to his music. Program alone does not make it romantic. Even the baroque had its programmatic works, such as any of the operas or ballets from that time, or even concertos with names, e.g. Corelli's / Vivaldi's _La follia._


----------



## mtmailey (Oct 21, 2011)

TCHAIKOVSKY is too me a real romantic composer.


----------

