Grove's dictionary of music and musicians

298 1822 SCHUBERT 1822
of his visitors, could not collect himself
sufficiently to write a word. Then the Variations
were produced, with their enthusiastic
dedication, which probably added to Beethoven's
good humour. He opened them and looked
through them, and seeing something that
startled him, naturally pointed it out. At
this Schubert's last remnant of self-control
seems to have deserted him, and he rushed
from the room. When he got into the street,
and was out of the magic of Beethoven's personality,
his presence of mind returned, and all
that he might have said flashed upon him, but
it was too late. The story is perfectly natural,
and we ought to thank Beethoven's Boswell for
it. Which of us would not have done the
same 1 Beethoven kept the Variations and
liked them ; and it must have been some consolation
to the bashful Franz to hear that he
often played them with his nephew. Huttenbrenner'si
story is that Schubert called, but
found Beethoven out ; which may have been
an invention of Diabelli's to shield his young
client.
This autumn Schubert again took up the
Mass in At*, which was begun in 1819 ; finished
it, and inscribed it ' wn. 7* 822 teendet.' ^ Not
that that was the final redaction ; for, contrary
to his usual practice—^in fact it is almost a
at in his brother Ignaz's letter of Oct. 12,
1818.* At any rate it is deeply pathetic and
poetical.
During this summer Joseph Hiittenbrenner
was active in the cause of his friend. He
made no less than four endeavours to bring out
the 'Teufels Lustsohloss'— at the Josefstadt
1 K.I7. p. 281 (i. 284). 2 l'' atands tor September.
3 This was kindly pointed out to the writer by Johannes Brahms,
who had an early copy ol the score, made by Ferdinand Schubert
from the autogiaph in Its original condition. In this shape Eiuhms
rehearsed the maas, but found many portions unsatisfactory, and
was intereated to discover subsequently from the autograph that
Schubert had altered the very passages alluded to, and made them
practicable.—He made three
'
attempts at the Cum Sancto ' before
succeeding, each time in fugue, and always with a dliTerent subject.
Of tlie flrst there ai'e four bars ; of the second 199 ; the third ia that
printed in Schreiber'a edition. Tills edition is unfortunately very
incorrect. Not only does it swarm with misprints, but whole
paesagea, and those most important ones (as in the Horns and
Trombones ot the Dona), are clean omitted. The nuances also are
shamefully treated.
* First printed by B. Schumann in the ^eue Zeitachrift fS/r
Muiile for Feb, S, 1839. See also K.B. p. 333 (11. 18).
5 E.H. p. 146 (I. 148).
and Court theatres of Vienna, at Munich, and'
at Prague. At Prague alone was there a gleam
of hope. Hollbein, the manager there, requests
to have the score and parts sent to him, at the
same time regretting that during a month which
he had passed in Vienna, Schubert had not once
come near him. Hiittenbrenner also urged
Schubert on Peters, the publisher, of Leipzig,
who in a tedious egotistical letter, dated Wov.
14, 1822, gives the usual sound reasons of a
cautious publisher against taking up with an
unknown composer—for in North Germany
Schubert was still all but unknown. One is
sorry to hear of a little rebuff which he sustained
at this time from the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde
of Vienna, to whom he applied to be
admitted as a practising member (on the viola),
but who refused him on the ground of his being
a professional, and therefore outside their rules.*
A somewhat similar repulse was experienced by
Haydn from the Tonkiinstler Societat. [See
vol. ii. p. 354.] On the other hand, the
musical societies both of Linz and Graz elected
him an honorary member. To the latter of
these distinctions we owe the two beautiful
movements of the symphony No. 8, in B minor,
which was begun at Vienna on Oct. 30, 1822,
and intended as a return for the compliment.
The Allegro and Andante alone are finished,
but these are of singular beauty and the greatest
solitary instancy—^he took it up again before
his death, and made material improvements' originality. In them, for the first time in
both in the position of the voice-parts and in orchestral composition, Schubert exhibits a
the instrumentation, aa may be seen from the style absolutely his own, untinged by any
autograph score now in the Library of the predecessor, and full of that strangely direct
Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde.
appeal to the hearer of which we have already
This year seems to have been passed entirely spoken. It is certain that he never heard the
in Vienna, at least there are no traces of any music played, and that the new and delicate
journey ; and the imprisonment in the broiling effects and orchestral combinations with-which
city, away from the nature he so dearly loved, it is crowded, were the result of his imagination
was not likely to improve his spirits. What alone. The first movement is sadly full of
events or circumstances are alluded to in the agitation and distress. It lay hidden at Graz
interesting piece called 'My Dream,'* dated
'July 1822,' it is hard to guess. It may not
improbably have been occasioned by some dispute
on religious subjects of the nature of those hinted
for many years, until obtained from Anselm
Hiittenbrenner by Herbeok, who first produced
it in Vienna at one of the Gesellschaft concerts
in 1865.^ It was published by Spina early in
1867 ; was played at the Crystal Palace, April
6, 1867, and elsewhere in England, and always
with increasing success. In fact no one can
hear it without being captivated by it.
The Songs composed in 1822—fourteen
printed and two in MS.—comprise ' Epistel von
Collin' (Jan.) ;
' Heliopolis
'
(April); 'Todesmusik,'
with a magnificent opening (op. 108,
No. 2 ; Sept.) ;
' Schatzgrabers Begehr ' (op. 23,
No. 4 ; Nov.) with its stately bass ;
'
Willkommen
und Absohied ' (op. 56, No. 1 ; Dec.) ; ' Die
Rose ' (op. 73) and Der Musensohn ' ' (op. 92).
The concerted pieces, ' Constitutionslied ' (op.
157 ; Jan.), Geist der ' Liebe' (op. 11, No. 3),
'
Gott in der Natur ' (op. 133), and Des Tages
'
Weihe' (op. 146), all belong to this year.
Publication went on in 1822, though not so
B K.H. p. 280 (i. 283). 7 See Hanalick, CovctrUaal, p. 350.