Periodization of works by Robert Schumann regarding evaluative opinions
Creative career of R. Schumann differs from usual way of composer’s development – a way that is resembled by first, largely traditionalist works with occasional sparks of author’s originality followed by the search of unique means of music expression leading to creation of a complete style system that is only slightly adjusted by the hand of a skillful master. Contrary to the common smooth and gradual transition from one stage to another one, evolution of R. Schumann’s creativity consists of tugs, and that causes a problematic cognitive situation. Different musicological approaches to the solution of the pronounced problem are based on three fundamental questions regarding: artistic and aesthetic qualities of R. Schumann’s works from 1840 until 1854, starting point of periodization, and names of periods. The first question has two contrary solutions. According to the first one, piano works of the 1830s are the culmination of composer’s creativity followed by decrease of creative energy with eventual artistic accomplishments (D. Zhytomirskiy, 1964, N. Nikolaeva, 1990). According to another one, merits of works of different years are not just equal, but even have tendency to increase through the composer’s life (G. Ganzburg, 2004, 2005, E. Romanova, 1997). Periodization by N. Nikolaeva consists of such stages as the 1820s, the 1830s, and period from 1840 until 1854; and last 15 years are divided into the “Leipzig” (until 1844) and “Dusseldorf” (since 1844) phases. G. Ganzburg and E. Romanova lean towards two-phase division of R. Schumann’s creative life, dubbing the 1830s as “early” stage, and the following years as “late”. Accepting general evaluations of two mentioned authors on composer’s works belonging to both stages of his evolution, we can’t accept this periodization unreservedly. While missing of R. Schumann’s youth out from this periodization can be explained by fact that the composer wasn’t a wunderkind, usage of terms “early” and “late” as names of two periods doesn’t seem to represent their style features properly. Obviously, the term “early” implies that results of the creative process are not of the highest artistic values as well as author’s individuality is somewhat obscure. This is not relevant to R. Schumann’s piano works of the 1830s, marked by brightness and clarity of author’s individuality, a fact providing a possibility to create the conception of “two Schumanns”, favouring “Schumann of the 1830s”. And stylistic features of composer’s works in the following years do not match the features of a late style determined by M. Druskin and N. Savytskaya. One shouldn’t disregard the fact that R. Schumann was only 46 years when he died, while two mentioned scholars explain common for artists phenomenon of “late style” by age-driven psychophysiological changes of artist’s mind. Moreover, the two-phase periodization does not provide information about composer’s professional maturity, because “early” stage is followed by “late”. Critical approach to regarded periodization and observance on constantly changing image of musical realm of R. Schumann’s works allow us to suggest a new periodization considering existing conceptions, that consists an aim of this research. For its fulfilling, all the traditional methods of historical musicology were used. Given that constructing of one’s own individuality as well as of unique artistic personality is a form of expression of creative intentions, it seems reasonable to consider youth years (the 1820s) as the first period of R. Schumann’s creative life, according to a standpoint proposed by N. Nikolayeva. These years result in quick progress of composer’s piano works of next decade, involving recent interest in literature as a basis for R. Schumann’s own type of program music. In the1830s R. Schumann acknowledged the genre of piano sonata, creating all 3 of his Sonatas. In these works classical rules of composition coexist with R. Schumann’s unique principles of construction of musical form. Sonatas also show an incredible variety of possibilities of composer’s methods of creation and modification of musical themes. These tools were mastered and used with perfect skill in sonata-allegro form of Piano concerto – a piece not belonging to the second period. Schumann’s intensive usage of different music genres and forms shows composer’s increasing interest in cultural inheritance of the past. One can regard this as development of idea used in Sonatas, the idea of revival of artistic possibilities of existing traditions and simultaneous enrichment of it by new language, compositional, and dramaturgical innovations – approach, in Late Romantic music associated with the method of J. Brahms. This is a third period of R. Schumann’s creative life, and it lasts until 1848, a year described as a turning point. This third phase ends with creation of “Genoveva”, a work summarizing all composer’s innovations made since 1840 and beginning last, fourth period. Fourth period (1848-1854) leads to artistic and aesthetic ideas of last stage of German Romantic music in 19th century. Works created between 1848 and 1854 are marked by significant changes and innovations of harmonic language, unprecedented concentration of musical thoughts, tendency to the creation of new genres as well as to the usage of traditional genres and forms, and all these features allow us to say that Schumann’s creative potential in his last years was not exhausted. As a result of this paper, thesis that R. Schumman’s artistic evolution is inseparable and whole process is confirmed. In conclusion, derived from stated above, we can say that R. Schumann’s creative life consists of four periods: the 1820s – formation of artistic principles, the 1830s – crystallization of author’s style, 1840-1848 – expansion of style system and its enrichment, and 1848-1854 – innovations similar to mainstream tendencies in German Romanticism in its last phase.