You are on page 1of 17

Making up Romanticism

Christopher Nicklin
Music 603D Romantic Music History
November 29, 2015

During the Romantic era music saw one of the most prolific times in exploring
fantasy in relation to reality. Opera was less about going to the event and becoming more
about the actual stories. The rich no long controlled music and using it primarily for their
entertainment functions. Rather everyone had the opportunity to enjoy and engage each
other on a musical level. Additionally, there was the exploration of ones self and their
place of history. As a result this was an era where composers strained to make pieces that
would establish themselves in the music canon forever rather than just pleasing the
common people of the time. Composers would look into their heritage and how the past
shaped them. Nationalism would be an example. By looking in ones self a composer
could create fantasy that helped enrich the reality that they dwelled in.
One of the most expressive forms of creation is improvisation. It was a tradition
that was practiced throughout the previous centuries of western music. Bach would
improvise toccatas and Weiss on the spot would create many fantasias. Stories of Weisss
improvisation were so great that Bach actual went to visit him and see it for himself while
in England. Later on in the classical era this tradition was continuing at a fervent pace.
Most people have heard stories of the genius of Mozart and his facility of improvising on
the keyboard. Improvisation became so important to performers that they competed in
improvisation duels. These duels conjure the imagery of two composers at high noon
staring each other down with guns. Some of the most famous of these musical battles are
battles between: Mozart and Clementi, Steibelt and Beethoven, Liszt and Thalberg.
Improvisation became one of the key ways to measure of composers compositional skill
in the classical era. In letters and stories about these composers improvisation is one of
the key ideals to compare one player to another. In the battle between Steibelt and

Beethoven it was noted that in the first round there was not much to separate them but as
soon as the next round of improvisation came along it was no contest because of
Beethovens prowess.
With improvisation having such a power to express ones self at that moment and
romanticism being an era about expression and persons fantasy in relation to their reality
one would think that improvisation would be one of the most important practices during
the romantic era. However, just the opposite was the caseimprovisation declined
steadily, and that trend would continue into the twentieth century within western classical
music. Looking into the romantic era it is difficult to comprehend why this would be so,
as it would almost seem like a shoo-in for the 19th century. To understand this it is
imperative that we look at the Classical era to see what it meant to improvise at the time
while simultaneously looking at composers who were pushing improvisation into the 19th
century. With this knowledge improvisation can be traced to see if the tradition continued
into the Romantic era and to see if improvisation changed with the centuries. When
looking at romantic improvisation it is necessary to see where it came from.
Improvisation played a huge role in western music through the entirety of its tradition
until the romantic era. The Renaissance is one of the clearest eras of improvisation.
However, because its style and tradition is vastly different to what would become the
romantic style, we will not look at improvisation during the Renaissance, Instead the
Classical era will be our guide to understanding what became of improvisation in the
Romantic era. Many composers have been noted for their improvisation. Mozart,
Beethoven, and Haydn are the dominant examples during the Classical era. However, that
should not exclude many composers that also participated in this tradition. It is just they

were the most documented and successful at it. At one soiree Johann Albrechtsberger,
teacher to many famous composers, was asked by Mozart to give him a theme to
improvise on. With that Albrechtsberger gave him a German folk song. Mozart spent an
hour with this German folk song creating variation after variation. He even created
fugues with this theme during that time, which impressed Albrechtsberger given that he
was one of the leading contrapuntalists of his time (Todd 46). This suggests that
improvisation was used in a way to display ones virtuosity to the public. In this case it
was at a party and, as the way the text reads, it was treated as a game. One question that
arises is whether it part of the concert life. Many letters indicate that this was the case. In
January 1787 Mozart improvised for a half hour at the end of his concert (34). Due to his
ability he received so much applause that he was forced to sit down and play another
piece. Not only does its length indicate its relative importance in the concert program, but
it also showed that it was interesting enough to garner an encore.
Beethoven is another of the important improvisers of the Classical era. He also
helps bridge the gap to the Romantic era. Because of this, in many ways he can be
considered one of the first composers to improvise in the Romantic era. In one of
Beethovens letters he comments on being afraid of other pianists listening to his
improvisation. His fear is that they would steal his ideas and mannerisms while passing
them off as their own (Samson 127). This was important because improvisation was a
tool for gaining respect and notoriety during the Classical era. It was used as a form of
entertainment for the patrons to judge the worth of the composer. This is why it would be
nerve-racking to Beethoven to have other pianists copy him, because if everyone else
were doing what he was doing then he would not be considered great anymore. This is

especially difficult because performance and improvisation is what his career was
founded on. Another example of the importance of improvisation in the Classical era was
the piano duel, as mentioned earlier. These duels showcased all the techniques that a
composer needed to be a good musician. These skills would include a piece with
immense virtuosity, sight-reading, and improvisation. These duels could make or break
players, as was the case with Steibelt. Beethoven was involved in many of these duels,
one of the more famous ones being his duel with Joseph Wolffl. It was widely considered
a tie by most people at the duel. It is clear by all the letters of accounts of these events
that improvisation played a huge function in the music life of the Classical era.
One of the most prominent figures to look at in the 19th century was Carl Czerny.
Even though he is not as well known for his music, even though he composed a large
number of pieces, his contributions to piano pedagogy and improvisation cannot be
overlooked. He learned piano under the supervision of Beethoven and Clementi. These
were two of the most prominent improvisers of the era. With the wealth of knowledge
that he gained he became one of the most prominent teachers to this date that has taught
classical piano. Some of his most famous students included Sigismund Thalberg and
Franz Liszt. The effects of his teaching followed even into the Modern era. Rachmaninoff
can even trace his lineage of learning to Czerny. (The Etude 287).
Even though his pedagogy and etudes for piano is the most well known aspects
that people remember about Czerny in history, his contributions to improvisation are
equally important. This is showcased through his students. Franz Liszt was well known
for continuing the tradition of improvisation. For that matter Thalberg had an illustrious
career that also involved improvisation in her playing. So successful were these two

students that they had a piano duel with each other, upholding the older classical
traditions. Even though it is known that these two students studied under Cznery it does
bring up the question of what they learned. These lessons were not recorded like they
could be today. This is where Czernys treatise on improvisation on the pianoforte comes
into importance. This treatise covers when and how improvisation is to be used during
the 19th century. Some of the most important chapters that are covered in this treatise are
the chapters concerning preludes, cadenzas, fermatas, variations, and single themes. In
the forward by Alice Mitchell she explains that the treatise does not explain how to
improvise as much as to extend the domain of what it means to improvise. In looking at
these treatises it can be seen that Czerny is more concerned with the performer knowing
when to appropriate improvised passages rather then how to construct a phrase. This
would lead one to believe that this treatise is directed to a player that can already
compose and is rather looking at more of the issues with organizing a structure for their
writing.
Czernys comments regarding preludes alters the perception of what people
understand about preludes today if he does not begin directly with the composition itself
but is capable by means of a suitable prelude of preparing the listeners, setting the mood,
and also thereby ascertaining the qualities of the pianoforte, perhaps unfamiliar to him(
Czerny 6). As was stated preludes were used to set the mood of the next work. If
anything it could be considered mini overture for a piece. One of the key differences that
are noteworthy is that the prelude is not to present ones virtuosity, as were the
improvisation duels considered earlier. It is only meant to help aid the listener. Anything
more, as is written by Czerny, would be considered in bad taste. One other wording that

helps bring to light the purpose for improvising preludes during this part of the 19th
century comes in the wording and also thereby ascertaining the qualities of the
pianoforte, (6). One has to decipher the meaning of qualities of the pianoforte. There are
two possible definitions to his meaning. One is that one has to get used to the piano and
listen to the timbre of the piano. Therefore the prelude is used to get comfortable with the
instrument and quickly gain knowledge of the piano in the different timbre areas and how
to exploit them later on in the actual composition. The other explanation to this wording
is that Czerny is referring to the tuning of the pianoforte. Especially at this time tuning
was not as refined as it is now. Equal temperament as well as just temperaments along
with a few other variations were used at the time. The prelude could be then used to
figure out how the composition will sonically lay in the pianoforte as well as prepare the
listening for what type of tuning they will be experiencing. Czerny also notes that
preludes can be used to warm up the fingers as well as try out different instruments (5).
This would suggest that preludes should not be taken seriously and only meant to be used
as a way to get into a piece or to prepare oneself. In essence it is only warm-up material.
This is in stark contrast to today where the music in the forms of preludes has been
perverted. However, this will be considered more later on when discussing Chopin and
improvisation.
On page eleven of Czernys treatise he goes into greater detail about the
preparation and practice of improvisation. He starts off by saying one should practice the
same passage in all the keys and mix the passages that he has exemplified in the treatise.
This is similar in character to how jazz players practice improvisation. They frequently
practice certain lines or what they call licks in all twelve keys and execute them in every

possible way to make sure they can use the line in all instances. On page eleven he goes
further in saying, know how to execute everything with such ease and lack of restraint
that the preludes maintain the character of a momentary fancy. For nothing is more
disturbing to the effect than the recognition that it has been drilled into the performer.
Here Czerny warns on the lack of practice of lines but at the same time tricking the
listener into thinking that it has not been drilled into the performer. In essence he is
warning the performer to not fall into the trap of turning the lines they have practiced into
something preconceived because then it is no longer improvisation it is just a poorly
constructed composition and does not fit into the improvisation mold nor the category
composition. This can seem esoteric in many ways but at the same time people can
realize when something has been made up on the spot rather than just practiced for
countless hours. Another detail that makes this treaty in particular fit the category of the
Romantic era rather than the Classical is Czerny advocating modulations to remote areas
within a prelude, it is not necessary to begin in the same key in which one must
conclude. Furthermore, even daring, remote modulations are appropriate in these
preludes, and whoever posses a thorough knowledge of harmony can easily indulge in the
most interesting ventures, (11). This point more than anything else is showcasing what
was happening at the time. It proves, along with the examples provided, that people were
more explorative and contemplative with the keys they went through in a prelude. The
only thing stopping the performer is their imagination and knowledge of harmony. At the
end of the chapter he states that every performer should have the ability to play a prelude
before every piece they play or study as well introduce many different modifications to it
so that the performer does not perform it the same way every time. This emphasizes that

performances in general should have a level of spontaneity to them so that pieces or


preludes do not become stale.
In Czernys second chapter about prelude improvisation he discusses the idea of
extended preludes. On page seventeen he explains the appropriateness of using an
extended prelude before a piece. In essence he talks about rondos and theme and
variation pieces that just start with no proper introduction. In those cases it is appropriate
and not expected of the performer at the time to be able to create and perform a prelude
based off of their own ideas before it. The one rule that was brought up in the practice of
extended prelude improvisation that it must end on the dominant seventh chord of the
theme. This could be a rule bent in the future but for the sake and success of the
improvisation this would be a principal to consider heavily. Czerny suggests studying
introduction by good composers in order to improve on ones own ideas. All of these
chapters so far as to express the idea that the performer is expected to create alongside the
compositions that they are playing and suggesting if anything that composers expected
their pieces to have preludes before them. That is why some composers did not write
introductions for their pieces. It was in order to let the performer to have more freedom.
Also, an alternate idea is that some introductions to pieces are just ideas that the
performer can either take or manipulate to their liking and what ever is written down is
just a suggestion.
This idea of inviting a performer to put in their own ideas also comes into play
during certain fermatas and cadenzas, prolonged pauses appear very frequently in the
midst of a piece over the six-four or seventh chord, where either the composer has
actually inscribed above Cadenza ad libitum, or at least a fermata, which would not be

superfluousor finally where a cadenza that has actually been written out but is much too
brief can be nicely extended, (26). Here Czerny suggests that there are many
opportunities to improvise during a piece of music. It does not matter whether the person
sees the suggestion Cadenza ad libitum above. They only need to see a fermata on the
dominant or six-four chord to put in a improvisation. This does not mean that one should
be put in every time. One would have to think beforehand if it would make the piece
better or more interesting. In essence it needs to serve the piece. Czerny alludes to this by
saying, these elaborations in music, just as in other arts, are a measure of good taste,
they arouse the attention of the listeners and direct it toward the following material, (26).
Directing it to the following material are the key words. If the improvisation does not
serve the piece then there is no point in it being there. On another point that Czerny
makes is that some times the cadenza written out is not adequate enough for the music
and extensions can be made. This highlights the point that what is written does not have
to be set in stone. Pieces can be altered to fit the performers needs. It is all a matter of
knowing what is the typical performance practice in regards to where alterations can
typically be made. The argument could even be made that one could throw out the written
out cadenza completely. After all, cadenzas in publications could be there just so that the
performer has something to play if they do not know how to create one themself. It
should be noted that publications were typically made with amateurs in mind. It would be
problematic at best if the piece did not have a written out cadenza because if they did not
know how to create themselves they would have a unfinished piece. This is even part of
the reason why Czerny wrote A Systematic Introduction to Improvisation on the

Pianoforte. This treaty can be specifically linked to helping amateurs work on their skills
in musicality.
Looking at improvisation one problem comes to mind when writing about or
studying it. This is the issue is that it is not written down. The only thing that is typically
looked at is the letters and if lucky, as is the case with the Czerny treatise, look at
treatises about the practice of improvisation. On the account of letters there is no
problem. There are countless accounts of composers well into the 19th century
improvising, especially in the art of preluding. The reason for this not being noted now is
the fact that composers did not make suggestions to improvise a prelude as they did with
cadenzas (Goertzen 1996). As was stated earlier Clementi, Beethoven, Mendlssohn,
Schumann, Liszt, and Brahms were all noted for their improvisation within many
accounts, (Levesque 109). This would suggest that virtually every composer that
performed had this ability. This would exclude composers like Wagner because he was
not a performing musician like the rest. This would suggest that Chopin was an
improviser and this turned out to be the case. Much of this can be heard in his music,
which has improvisation-like qualities. Pieces like his Nocturnes follow a structured first
section and then are varied over and over again until they are finished. This would leave
one to believe that his Nocturnes could have once been improvisations and then he later
then decided to write them down on paper.

As can be seen from the examples above from Copins Op.9 no 2 he is constantly varying
the same ideas over again. He is not so much writing anything new as changing ideas
over and over again as if the Nocturne is a standard for Jazz. Along these lines it brings to
question what other pieces he has written down that are actually based off of his own
improvisations or meant as a showcase of what could be improvised. Collections of
composed preludes occasionally contained title pages indicating that they were not only
published for performing, but were also examples intended for study, borrowing,
imitating, and improvisatory modeling. To enhance their marketability, these collecting
were sometimes arranged by difficulty level instead of tonality, (110).

As can be seen from this score from Wessel & Co the words This work forms book 5 &
6 of Chopins grand studies. Wessel and & Co had exclusive rights to publish Chopins
music in England from 1836 on
(http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/institutions/detail/id/1725). This particular image comes
from their publication of the 24 preludes from 1840. The particular wording of Chopins

studies can make one allude to the idea that Chopins 24 preludes are no more than
compositions based off of Chopins typical improvisations. If this is indeed the case then
these 24 preludes are an invaluable tool in order to understand how people improvised
during the 19th century. This is especially true due to the fact that these preludes are not
connected to pieces afterward as are the Well temper Clavier by Bach as well as other
pieces. If anything this set of preludes more closely fits the idea set forth by Levesque
that these preludes were meant for study and ideas. Given the fact that Chopin was a
piano composer and improvised countless preludes it would not be a stretch to say that
these preludes in particular are based off his best improvisation. Chopin does go through
countless amounts of characters and figurations during these preludes that would further
suggest that they were more based of his improvisation rather than fully thought out
compositional style. The prelude that easily exemplifies the idea that his preludes are
improvisation preludes rather than worked out works is number 4 in E minor. The
melody is just a simple descent from the 4th beat to the 1st for every measure with an
occasional flourish in the melody at two different points to build tension. To further the
point the accompaniment are just block chords that change typically one note at a time.
The piece goes on a type of exploration of the tonality of E minor. If anything this
prelude perfectly exemplifies Czernys ideals for a prelude that is improvised. With this
knowledge one can use these preludes as evidence of what type of improvisation was
going on at the time concerning preludes.
One has to consider whether any other instruments followed the ideas of
improvising preludes for pieces. One instrument that would come to mind is the guitar.
The guitar has a rich history in the Classical era that mirrors that of the piano, even

though it may be less successful. Based off of the fact that Tarrega idolized Chopin, this
would also help strengthen the idea that Tarregas written preludes are also just writtenout ideas of his improvisations. Evidence of this can be based on the idea that all of his
preludes are simplistic and considering that Tarrega only played concerts in a salon,
where improvisation was most practiced, it can be implied that all of his preludes were
actually just improvisations at one time.

This is just one line from Tarregas 7th prelude but it shows that his preludes are easy in
nature and can be used as examples of what type of improvisation was going on at the
time during the Romantic era, considering that preludes were improvised in common
practice.
One has to question why improvisation started to decline in the Romantic era.
One can point to notation as being a reason. As the Romantic era came in Romantic
composers had more control over their music and progressively started to add more
details to their compositions. It is only natural that as more details that are added the less
a performer can make decisions because they have already been made. However, when
looking at Romantic era manuscripts and scores one can see that even though there are
more details than in the Classical era there is still definitely room to interpret and make
changes within the score. For example, Brahms does not write in tempo markings in his
score as a Modern era composer would. He just has the typical word markings like
allegro or adagio. What has changed the most that makes people today believe that
improvisation declined in the Romantic era is their perspective from todays viewpoint.

In todays Modern view composers have complete control over the music and it is the
performers job only to interpret exactly how the composer is feeling or in other words
getting into the mind of the composer. This is an exceedingly different viewpoint to what
the viewpoint was during the romantic era. During that time music was for entertainment
as it happened in the salons. Music was used as a social functions as other events are used
today, one example being football. However, today classical music is only really listened
to or practiced in a concertizing manner. The idea of social functions centered around the
enjoyment and fun of playing music has left the realm of classical music and because of
this it colors ideas of what was actually going on during the past.
The idea that some of the written music in classical music is just a suggestion
would be a shock to many people who come to classical concerts these days. One could
imagine people rioting if someone played a prelude they had improvised for Beethovens
sonata Pathetique or if someone wrote a prelude for the Moonlight sonata. In general
someone should use good taste when deciding when to put in a prelude or when a piece
does not need one but the option should be open rather than never exploring the idea and
never moving a piece forward. However, this goes into the issue of whether classical
music is just a dying museum of art. Although one has to contemplate whether what
made classical music exciting hundreds of years ago was either the spontaneity of
improvisation or the actual composition itself. A case could be made for both. As for the
case of whether classical music in the Romantic era had improvisation or not it can be
confirmed that it did. It is not exactly how people today would imagine it but it did
happen. It was not like the piano improvisation duels that are in our minds it is in all the
smaller details and the things that are not written down in history. For example would be

Chopins preludes, which were probably improvised. Many things that were written
down did not have to be taken literally as they are today because people are more worried
than ever now to play classical music as perfectly as possible as if it was a fragile thing.
Audiences and performers worry about respecting the canon of music too much today. It
is treated as if it were holy and must be taken with the greatest respect. If anything it is
free and should be treated as such, and explored to its greatest depths. This has not been
done for some time in the art of improvisation and that is why classical music has issues
today, because it is missing one of its components from the past. All the well known
Romantic composers improvised. Brahms, Liszt, Mendelssohn were all examples of
people who improvised and yet it is something not looked at thoroughly enough now. It is
a huge part of history that has been missing that must be rediscovered.

Bibliography
"Czerny, the Forefather of Pianoforte Technic." The Etude, April 1, 1927, 287.
Czerny, Carl, and Alice L. Mitchell. A Systematic Introduction to Improvisation
on the Pianoforte: Opus 200. New York: Longman, 1983.
"Fryderyk Chopin - Information Centre - Wessel & Co. - Text." Fryderyk Chopin
- Information Centre - Wessel & Co. - Text. 2013. Accessed November 29, 2015.
http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/institutions/detail/id/1725.
Goertzen, Valerie Woodring. 1996. By Way of Introduction: Preluding by 18thand Early 19th-century Pianists. The Journal of Musicology 14 (3). University of
California Press: 299337. doi:10.2307/764060.
Larry Todd Perspectives on Mozart Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1991.
Levesque, Shane. "Functions and Performance Practice of Improvised
Nineteenth-Century Piano Preludes." Accessed November 29, 2015.
http://upers.kuleuven.be/sites/upers.kuleuven.be/files/page/files/2008_1_13.pdf.
Samson, Jim. The Cambridge History of Nineteenth-century Music. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2002.

You might also like