# Definitive Early Romantic Music



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

One of my pet projects is contextualising the arts in a particular time in trying to appreciate each branch with the others. Currently I'm going through an English Romantic poets phase (Wordsworth, Keats, Shelley, Coleridge et al) and I'd like some music to accompany the poetry, literature and visual arts. I'm just looking for a little illumination and some thought provoking listening from the 1790's through the 1820's. Now I know that the so called Romantic period is a nineteenth century movement but I'm not hard and fast about this, there's always a bit of transition (I'm thinking of Haydn's so called _Sturm und Drang_ symphonies here). Links to YouTube vids are particularly appreciated. Inspire me, excite me let's share the fabulousness of the movement. Oh, and I'm not expecting only English works, let's run the whole gamut, but let's go for really, really Romantic pieces. Any kind of discussion, observations and thoughts are welcome.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Mendelssohn - Hebrides Overture (Fingal's Cave)


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

This is something I have tried to do in my mind a few times but I am not sure music and poetry align together that well. I am comfortable enough thinking of Beethoven as a Romantic composer but in my mind the poetry of, say, Keats came decades earlier than what I hear as their true equivalents in music (Schumann? Berlioz?).


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> This is something I have tried to do in my mind a few times but I am not sure music and poetry align together that well. I am comfortable enough thinking of Beethoven as a Romantic composer but in my mind the poetry of, say, Keats came decades earlier than what I hear as their true equivalents in music (Schumann? Berlioz?).


You know I totally understand where you're coming from and what you mean. Keats was dead by 1821! It seems to me that the Romantic movement in music comes too late for the Romantic movement in poetry, literature and art, it's a little perplexing. I wonder why music is so far behind? I had a great thread on whether _Sturm und Drang_ could be considered a 'musical' movement which also veered into the territory of Empfindsamer Stil (a kind of proto Romanticism?).


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Haydn's sturm and drang period was over by 1775, 20 years before the period you say you want to study. If you are gung ho on early romantic music you may wish to look at Carl Maria von Weber's music including his Symphony No. 1 written 1806:






A better starting point would be Beethoven's Eroica symphony that is commonly known as the first Romantic symphony written 1803. It has all the earmarks of emerging romanticism -- it has a name, it is twice the duration of any symphony ever composed before it, it has vast changes from high to low and softness to loudness in metrics and volume, it carries forth a big idea:






Please note both performances are in period style.


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

I think it is difficult to define the turning point between Classicism and Romanticism (not only but especially) in music. Often, even experts do not agree and I presume, there is no exact answer. So, though apparently not a romantic work, I would definitely recommend Beethoven's Symphony #3 "Eroica". I think it has certain features of the emerging style and is, in a way, groundbreaking. I would maybe add (my favorite) Violin Concerto #8 by Louis Spohr (but Romanticism in this case is also questionable).


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Classical Yorkist, your interests line up exactly with mine Of course the ultimate fusion of music and poetry lies in Schubert's song cycles, pinnacles of early Romanticism. Winterreise and Die Schone Mullerin get all the press, but they only work as huge narratives and I can find my attention span wavering. My personal favorite is Schewanengesang; an unending stream of perfect melodies and a wide gamut of emotions that is not a strict narrative cycle. Beethoven's "Pastoral" Symphony is a natural accompaniment to the nature imagery of the Romantic poets.

And, though this is past the dates you're looking for, the very first thing that comes to mind when I think of the marriage of poetry and music is Liszt's B Minor Sonata. For me it's one of the high points of the Romantic movement as a whole in any art, right alongside _Moby-Dick_, _The Prelude_, _Walden_, Mahler's 2nd, and _The Raft of the Medusa_.


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

larold said:


> Haydn's sturm and drang period was over by 1775, 20 years before the period you say you want to study. If you are gung ho on early romantic music you may wish to look at Carl Maria von Weber's music including his Symphony No. 1 written 1806:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm in no way proposing that we start Romanticism in music as early as Haydn, although I would argue that the Empfindsamer Stil is a kind of proto Romanticism. It just seems that, in terms of the Romantic movement, music is a late flourisher. I am, of course, aware of the Eroica (it's good) but I'm not aware of that Weber piece and I look forward to hearing it.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Except the Liszt's B Minor Sonata was written 1853 in the peak of romanticism. The Schubert songs would be a good start, I agree. Schubert and Beethoven were almost exact peers.


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

I suppose I'm trying to push Romanticism in music backwards in time to 1800 (or 1790!) when it, perhaps, can't take it. I consider the Romantic movement to be over by 1853 in other art forms, certainly poetry and literature in Britain.

I also think it's quite interesting that Schubert set a series of _Sturm und Drang_ poems to music.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

classical yorkist said:


> I consider the Romantic movement to be over by 1853 in other art forms, certainly poetry and literature in Britain.


I don't spend a lot of time studying other art forms, so just for my education, what came after the Romantic movement in 1853? Would that be considered modernism? Thanks.


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

Manxfeeder said:


> I don't spend a lot of time studying other art forms, so just for my education, what came after the Romantic movement in 1853? Would that be considered modernism? Thanks.


There are several movements that splinter off from Romanticism. From a British perspective you have the Pre Raphaelites, Art Nouveau, Arts and Crafts. However, the biggest arts movement was Realism which was a reaction against Romanticism and which started in the 1840's in continental Europe.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Manxfeeder said:


> I don't spend a lot of time studying other art forms, so just for my education, what came after the Romantic movement in 1853? Would that be considered modernism? Thanks.


Realism sprang up around the mid-19th century beginning with literary works like Flaubert's _Madame Bovary_ and painters like James Whistler. They aimed to simply portray life as it was in a revolt against the haughty emotionalism of the Romantics - "art for art's sake" if you will. After that came Impressionism and Symbolism (dominated by the French) in the latter part of the century - painters like Monet and Degas, poets like Baudelaire, writers like Henry James, and of course Debussy as the musical representation. They focused solely on the senses and how we subjectively experience the world. Around the same time the Germans had Expressionism, sort of a pessimistic philosophical outrage expressed through art (I see Mahler as a musical predecessor). From there a natural progression to Post-Impressionism which became even more fragmented and esoteric and spawned the geometric paintings of Cezanne and Picasso; then to full-on modernism: Joyce's _Ulysses_ in literature and the _Rite of Spring_ and Second Viennese School in music. That was probably too convoluted of an explanation, but I'm a nerd.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

classical yorkist said:


> One of my pet projects is contextualising the arts in a particular time in trying to appreciate each branch with the others. Currently I'm going through an English Romantic poets phase (Wordsworth, Keats, Shelley, Coleridge et al) and I'd like some music to accompany the poetry, literature and visual arts. I'm just looking for a little illumination and some thought provoking listening from the 1790's through the 1820's. Now I know that the so called Romantic period is a nineteenth century movement but I'm not hard and fast about this, there's always a bit of transition (I'm thinking of Haydn's so called _Sturm und Drang_ symphonies here). Links to YouTube vids are particularly appreciated. Inspire me, excite me let's share the fabulousness of the movement. Oh, and I'm not expecting only English works, let's run the whole gamut, but let's go for really, really Romantic pieces. Any kind of discussion, observations and thoughts are welcome.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> That was probably too convoluted of an explanation, but I'm a nerd.


No, it was quite clear. I appreciate nerds; they understand a subject so thoroughly that they can explain it simply.


----------



## Caryatid (Mar 28, 2020)

classical yorkist said:


> You know I totally understand where you're coming from and what you mean. Keats was dead by 1821! It seems to me that the Romantic movement in music comes too late for the Romantic movement in poetry, literature and art, it's a little perplexing. I wonder why music is so far behind? I had a great thread on whether _Sturm und Drang_ could be considered a 'musical' movement which also veered into the territory of Empfindsamer Stil (a kind of proto Romanticism?).


The trouble with your project is that you are reading English poets but are going to find yourself listening to German and Austrian composers, who dominate the canon of the period. For a more cohesive experience, my advice would be to read E.T.A. Hoffman and listen to Robert Schumann, much of whose music Hoffman inspired.

If you really want to stick with English poets, probably Byron and Liszt or Byron and Berlioz are the best combinations.


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

Caryatid said:


> The trouble with your project is that you are reading English poets but are going to find yourself listening to German and Austrian composers, who dominate the canon of the period. For a more cohesive experience, my advice would be to read E.T.A. Hoffman and listen to Robert Schumann, much of whose music Hoffman inspired.
> 
> If you really want to stick with English poets, probably Byron and Liszt or Byron and Berlioz are the best combinations.


I appreciate that and it's a good point. I actually listened to some of ETA Hoffman's music today.

Having thought about it a little it seems that the most visible and important musical episodes in the Romantic period in London may well be Haydn's two visits (1791-2 & 1794-5). They were both extremely successful.


----------



## Caryatid (Mar 28, 2020)

classical yorkist said:


> Having thought about it a little it seems that the most visible and important musical episodes in the Romantic period in London may well be Haydn's two visits (1791-2 & 1794-5). They were both extremely successful.


Yeah, but Mendelssohn's time in Britain is comparable.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

classical yorkist said:


> I wonder why music is so far behind?


That is curious, but it seems to be true.

One time it wasn't was with Erik Satie. He was writing Cubist-styled music (and he wasn't imitating Cubism; it was just his style, of taking a popular piece out of its context) when the Cubists were active, and he wrote Surrealist pieces before Surrealism became a movement (I think Apollinaire coined the term Surrealism when referring to Erik Satie's music), and he wrote the Dada-like De Piege de Meduse eight years before Dadaism.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Manxfeeder said:


> That is curious, but it seems to be true.
> 
> One time it wasn't was with Erik Satie. He was writing Cubist-styled music (and he wasn't imitating Cubism; it was just his style, of taking a popular piece out of its context) when the Cubists were active, and he wrote Surrealist pieces before Surrealism became a movement (I think Apollinaire coined the term Surrealism when referring to Erik Satie's music), and he wrote the Dada-like De Piege de Meduse eight years before Dadaism.


And Charles Ives was writing radical modernist avant-garde stuff 20 years before the Rite of Spring, the Cubist movement, and the modernist writers.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

classical yorkist said:


> It seems to me that the Romantic movement in music comes too late for the Romantic movement in poetry, literature and art, it's a little perplexing. I wonder why music is so far behind? I had a great thread on whether _Sturm und Drang_ could be considered a 'musical' movement which also veered into the territory of Empfindsamer Stil (a kind of proto Romanticism?).


It's natural that artistic movements should start with literature, since words are the most direct expression of ideas, and everyone can participate. Music may take longest among the arts to reflect new thinking because it's abstract, governed by formal considerations, and requires study of existing models to master. Finding new forms to express new sensibilities is a bigger undertaking than finding the words to express them. Nevertheless, music's lag in finding what we consider a fully Romantic voice is partly a matter of convention. In 1800 people were not calling the new music of their time "Classical"; the Classical/Romantic periods were an invention of the later 19th century, and Beethoven was considered a Romantic composer, despite his use of what we call Classical forms.


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

I had a thought last night while rereading Blanning's book The Triumph of Music; what if Opera is actually the most visible and influential musical style of this period? Now, I don't really like opera very much but it was extremely popular in London in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. I hadn't considered opera before, perhaps I'm missing a trick?


----------



## Caryatid (Mar 28, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> It's natural that artistic movements should start with literature, since words are the most direct expression of ideas, and everyone can participate. Music may take longest among the arts to reflect new thinking because it's abstract, governed by formal considerations, and requires study of existing models to master. Finding new forms to express new sensibilities is a bigger undertaking than finding the words to express them. Nevertheless, music's lag in finding what we consider a fully Romantic voice is partly a matter of convention. In 1800 people were not calling the new music of their time "Classical"; the Classical/Romantic periods were an invention of the later 19th century, and Beethoven was considered a Romantic composer, despite his use of what we call Classical forms.


This is true. In fact even Mozart was sometimes described as Romantic.

Hardly surprising to anyone who has heard the great works in G minor.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> And Charles Ives was writing radical modernist avant-garde stuff 20 years before the Rite of Spring, the Cubist movement, and the modernist writers.


More like 5 years before the Rite. Still impressive, but I don't believe Ives was writing music that could be considered avant-garde in the early 1890s. (& please prove me wrong if he was).


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Woodduck said:


> It's natural that artistic movements should start with literature, since words are the most direct expression of ideas, and everyone can participate. Music may take longest among the arts to reflect new thinking because it's abstract, governed by formal considerations, and requires study of existing models to master. Finding new forms to express new sensibilities is a bigger undertaking than finding the words to express them. Nevertheless, music's lag in finding what we consider a fully Romantic voice is partly a matter of convention. In 1800 people were not calling the new music of their time "Classical"; the Classical/Romantic periods were an invention of the later 19th century, and Beethoven was considered a Romantic composer, despite his use of what we call Classical forms.


Damn, you've hit the nail on the head. I never thought about it that way.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

flamencosketches said:


> More like 5 years before the Rite. Still impressive, but I don't believe Ives was writing music that could be considered avant-garde in the early 1890s. (& please prove me wrong if he was).


Well, the "Variations on America" for organ from 1893 is not modernist but very indicative of the wry parody that would come to mark his style - it sounds like nothing else that was being composed at the time. But then, there is this magnificent oddity from 1898:


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

flamencosketches said:


> Damn, you've hit the nail on the head. I never thought about it that way.


I think its also the end of the patronage system in music composition that signals the beginning of composing for ones self. I hadn't realised that before. Poets and authors were at the behest of no one but their audience ostensibly unlike the composers we talk about. It's less poetic, and more prosaic, a reason but I think it's true nevertheless.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

classical yorkist said:


> I had a thought last night while rereading Blanning's book The Triumph of Music; what if Opera is actually the most visible and influential musical style of this period? Now, I don't really like opera very much but it was extremely popular in London in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. I hadn't considered opera before, perhaps I'm missing a trick?


The French opera was a crucial aspect of musical romanticism in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Edward J. Dent's book _The Rise of Romantic Opera _ (rev. ed. 1976) makes this point eloquently. English Romantic poets would have been aware of French opera in connection with the French Revolution and subsequent events. Music by the French composers Mehul, Auber, and Meyerbeer we don't hear much nowadays, but they are important historically anyway.


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

Roger Knox said:


> The French opera was a crucial aspect of musical romanticism in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Edward J. Dent's book _The Rise of Romantic Opera _ (rev. ed. 1976) makes this point eloquently. English Romantic poets would have been aware of French opera in connection with the French Revolution and subsequent events. Music by the French composers Mehul, Auber, and Meyerbeer we don't hear much nowadays, but they are important historically anyway.


Great post!!! Thanks so much for this. That book looks interesting I'll see if I can find a copy. I also appreciate you mentioning those composers, names I recognise but I don't know their works. To YouTube!


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

I know very little of English Romantic poets. The only one I am little familiar with is Keats, and that is only because the Hyperion cantos. I think what you are looking for is the Sturm und Drang movement, so look into the Sturm und Drang symphonies of Haydn and Mozart, and Carl Maria von Weber


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

Jacck said:


> I know very little of English Romantic poets. The only one I am little familiar with is Keats, and that is only because the Hyperion cantos. I think what you are looking for is the Sturm und Drang movement, so look into the Sturm und Drang symphonies of Haydn and Mozart, and Carl Maria von Weber


I already have a fascinating thread about Sturm und Drang here:

https://www.talkclassical.com/62998-sturm-und-drang.html?highlight=


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

classical yorkist said:


> Great post!!! Thanks so much for this. That book looks interesting I'll see if I can find a copy. I also appreciate you mentioning those composers, names I recognise but I don't know their works. To YouTube!


Some Italian pre-Romantic and Romantic opera composers were also connected to the Paris Opera -- and therefore to French Romanticsm -- Cherubini, Spontini, sometimes Rossini, Donizetti, even Verdi. This is public musical Romanticism, the Romanticism of Berlioz's orchestra music. Often we think first of the inward German Romanticism, composers of lieder and piano "character pieces" like Schubert, Schumann -- but they are only part of the picture.

I think your project of bringing in other arts is excellent and wouldn't worry if everything doesn't line up perfectly, because it just doesn't. Making these connections helps not only to increase knowledge but to develop artistic understanding and taste. Best of luck!


----------

