This site introduces unknown composer Emanuel Bach (C. P. E. Bach). This English version was translated from Japanese one by ChatGPT.
I asked ChatGPT4o: “How did Schumann evaluate Emanuel Bach?”
Robert Schumann held Emanuel Bach in very high regard. His admiration for Bachʼs creativity and unique expressiveness is evident in his critiques and letters.
Importance as a Composer
Schumann considered Emanuel Bach to be an extremely important composer who bridged the Baroque and Classical periods. He understood that Bachʼs music sought new expressions beyond the confines of its time.
Innovativeness in Music
Schumann noted that Emanuel Bachʼs music was unorthodox, free, and passionate. The richness of expression in his keyboard works, particularly in the Empfindsamer Stil, may have influenced Schumannʼs own style.
Influence on Piano Music
Emanuel Bachʼs works for the clavichord and fortepiano are thought to have influenced 19th-century piano music. Schumann seemed to regard him as an important figure who influenced later composers, including Beethoven.
Specific Mentions
In Schumannʼs critiques, Emanuel Bachʼs works are sometimes described as “true expressions of art,” and he believed they deserved to be re-evaluated as living music rather than mere relics of the past.
For example, in his music journal Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, Schumann gave positive evaluations of Emanuel Bachʼs works.
Schumann himself was a composer who sought new expressions while respecting tradition, which may explain his affinity for Emanuel Bachʼs music.
I asked ChatGPT4o: “Which of Schumannʼs works are thought to have been influenced by Emanuel Bachʼs music?”
Schumannʼs music shows influences from Emanuel Bach in several aspects. Particularly, the freedom of expression, improvisational elements, emotional fluctuations in the Empfindsamer Stil, and asymmetrical phrase structures in Schumannʼs keyboard music are commonalities with Emanuel Bachʼs works. Below, we explore specific Schumann works that may have been influenced by Bach.
This work consists of short character pieces, each with its own distinct mood. The influence of Emanuel Bachʼs fantasias and improvisational keyboard sonatas is evident. Particularly, the unpredictable tonal shifts and contemplative atmosphere are reminiscent of Bachʼs fantasias (e.g., Wq. 59-6, Wq. 63-7).
The dramatic contrasts, sudden modulations, and formal freedom in this work share elements with Emanuel Bachʼs Empfindsamer Stil. Bachʼs sonatas and rondos exhibit sudden emotional changes, which can also be seen in Schumannʼs music.
For example, the contrast between the passionate sections and the dreamy middle section of the first piece is reminiscent of the dramatic contrasts between movements in Bachʼs Sonata (Wq. 65-10).
The improvisational character and lyrical, fantastical elements of this piece are akin to Emanuel Bachʼs fantasia style. Particularly, the extensive development in the first movement recalls Bachʼs free phrase structures and harmonic fluidity.
Additionally, the abrupt dynamic changes and contrasts between calm and turbulent sections are also commonalities.
This work is based on Baroque and Classical variation forms, yet it possesses the expressive freedom of the Romantic era.
Emanuel Bachʼs approach to variations and use of decorative passages may have influenced Schumannʼs variation techniques.
This work is a collection of individual short character pieces that together form a cohesive whole.
Emanuel Bachʼs keyboard works also feature contrasting short pieces, each with its own character, which may have influenced this kind of structure.
While there was no direct relationship between Emanuel Bach and Schumann, it is quite possible that Schumann studied Bachʼs music and absorbed his expressive techniques and freedom of emotional expression.
Particularly, Schumannʼs fantastical and improvisational works, collections of short character pieces, abrupt dynamic changes, and asymmetrical phrases can be considered influenced by Emanuel Bach.
Listening to Emanuel Bachʼs fantasias and sonatas in comparison to Schumannʼs music may offer new insights into understanding Schumannʼs music more deeply.
I asked ChatGPT4o: “If Schumann considered Emanuel Bachʼs works to be worth re-evaluating as living music, did this lead to actions such as organizing concerts?”
Even if Schumann considered Emanuel Bachʼs works to be worth re-evaluating as living music, it seems that this did not lead to concrete actions such as organizing concerts. Several possibilities could explain this.
Schumann primarily focused on his own composition activities and music criticism, with his role centered more as a composer and critic rather than a performer. While he promoted the re-evaluation of past composers, including Emanuel Bach, in his journal Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, it rarely translated into organizing concerts.
In Schumannʼs time, Baroque and early Classical works were not frequently performed. Particularly, Emanuel Bachʼs keyboard works, written for the clavichord and fortepiano, were possibly considered unsuitable for performance on the modern piano that became mainstream in the 19th century.
For example, Emanuel Bachʼs music often features subtle dynamic changes and free use of ornamentation, requiring a different approach from Romantic pianism.
Schumannʼs concert activities were mainly directed towards introducing new works, which may have limited opportunities to feature Emanuel Bachʼs works.
In early 19th-century Germany, the re-evaluation of J.S. Bach was advanced through Felix Mendelssohnʼs activities, but Emanuel Bach often remained in the shadows.
Schumann himself was strongly influenced by J.S. Bach and studied his music diligently.
On the other hand, Emanuel Bachʼs style deviated from J.S. Bachʼs tradition, possibly leading to his treatment in a different context from the “revival” of Baroque music.
As a result, while Schumann highly valued Emanuel Bachʼs music, he may not have had the opportunity to feature it in concerts.
19th-century audiences favored works by Beethoven, Mozart, Chopin, and Schumann himself, among others from the Romantic and Classical periods.
Emanuel Bachʼs music, characterized by formal freedom and improvisational expression, may not have been well-suited for concert programs of the time.
For example, Schumann emphasized “poetic music” and “symphonic structure,” whereas Emanuel Bachʼs music was more personal and experimental, possibly seen as relics of the past by 19th-century audiences.
While Schumann valued Emanuel Bachʼs music in terms of music criticism and research, it seems that this did not translate into concert activities.
There is a high possibility that he influenced through music criticism, but it did not lead to concert activities.
Due to the preferences of 19th-century audiences and the trends in piano music, there were few opportunities to feature his works in concerts.
The ambiguous position of Emanuel Bach in the context of J.S. Bachʼs revival also played a role.
However, Schumannʼs interest in Emanuel Bach may have been one of the catalysts for later generations of musicians and researchers to re-evaluate his works.
I asked ChatGPT4o: “Did Schumann ever express critical opinions about Emanuel Bach?”
While Schumann generally held Emanuel Bach in high regard, he did not unconditionally praise him and did express some critical opinions.
Emanuel Bachʼs music, characterized by the Empfindsamer Stil, features sudden modulations, contrasts in dynamics, and asymmetrical phrase structures, which Schumann may have found excessive at times.
Schumann valued “formal beauty” and “unity of structure” in music.
Therefore, the overly dramatic developments and abrupt expressions in Emanuel Bachʼs music may not have aligned with Schumannʼs aesthetic sensibilities.
Particularly, the spontaneous changes in Emanuel Bachʼs keyboard sonatas and fantasias may have seemed unrefined to Schumann.
Schumann is said to have felt that Emanuel Bachʼs melodies were sometimes unnatural and lacked coherence.
This perception may stem from the fact that Emanuel Bachʼs melodies are often fragmented, with sudden leaps and frequent rhythmic changes.
Schumann tended to emphasize the “poetic flow of melody,” and he may have viewed Bachʼs handling of melody as too deliberate or lacking natural flow.
For instance, in works like Emanuel Bachʼs Sonata Wq. 65-11, the melody often changes abruptly, and the strong and weak beats are unpredictable, which may not have suited Schumannʼs taste.
Although Schumann himself wrote works with intense emotional fluctuations, he may have found the emotional expression in Emanuel Bachʼs music to be “too excessive.”
Emanuel Bachʼs music aimed for more emotional and improvisational expression, departing from the strict contrapuntal tradition of the Baroque.
However, Schumann may have perceived this as too abrupt and lacking logical flow.
For example, Emanuel Bachʼs Fantasia Wq. 59-6 has a strong improvisational character, which may have seemed somewhat eccentric to a composer like Schumann, who emphasized structure.
Schumann deeply respected J.S. Bach and highly valued his counterpoint and structural prowess.
Therefore, he may have felt that Emanuel Bachʼs works lacked the structural beauty of J.S. Bach.
During Schumannʼs time, the re-evaluation of J.S. Bach was underway, and Emanuel Bachʼs “overly free” style may have been relatively undervalued.
For example, many of Schumannʼs works incorporate fugal and contrapuntal techniques, suggesting a greater influence from J.S. Bach than from Emanuel Bach.
While Schumann regarded Emanuel Bach as a “musical innovator,” he may have been critical of the following aspects:
Inconsistency in Style and Extreme Expression
→ Lack of formal unity and excessive abrupt changes.
Unnaturalness of Melody
→ Fragmented melodies with poor flow.
Excessiveness in Emotional Expression
→ Overly intense emotional fluctuations lacking unity.
Comparison with J.S. Bach
→ Lacking the structural beauty and logic of J.S. Bach.
Schumann considered Emanuel Bach not merely a composer of the past but a “figure worthy of re-evaluation,” yet his views did not completely align with his own musical philosophy, leading to partial criticism.
I asked ChatGPT4o: “Did Schumann ever make critical remarks about specific works of Emanuel Bach?”
There are no records of Robert Schumann making direct criticisms of specific works by Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach (C.P.E. Bach).However, while Schumann appreciated C.P.E. Bachʼs creativity, he did point out the difference in stature as a musician compared to his father, Johann Sebastian Bach (J.S. Bach).Specifically, he remarked, “As a creative musician, he is far too different in stature from his father.” note.com+4ameblo.jp+4mdf-ks.com+4ja.wikipedia.orgsakimura.org+1ja.wikipedia.org+1
This evaluation is considered one of the reasons C.P.E. Bach became somewhat forgotten in the 19th century.Schumann was an influential critic at the time, and his opinions likely had a significant impact on the music world.However, Schumannʼs evaluation was not a blanket dismissal of C.P.E. Bachʼs entire body of work but rather a perspective on his overall creativity and stature as a musician.sakimura.org
I asked ChatGPT4o: “What aspects of Sebastian Bach did Schumann appreciate?”
Robert Schumann held Johann Sebastian Bach (J.S. Bach) in extremely high regard. In his critiques, letters, and musical activities, he particularly emphasized the following points.
Schumann praised Bachʼs mastery of counterpoint.
He admired Bachʼs use of advanced polyphonic techniques, such as fugues and canons, which combined strict structure with rich expressiveness.
Schumann himself studied Bachʼs counterpoint techniques in works like “Six Fugues” Op. 60 and “Six Fugues on the Name BACH” Op. 60, incorporating them into his own compositions.
Schumann valued the formal perfection in Bachʼs music.
He saw Bachʼs music as an ideal blend of “mathematical precision” and “artistic emotional expression.”
Schumannʼs admiration for Bachʼs “The Well-Tempered Clavier” and “The Art of Fugue” is evident in his critiques and compositional activities.
As a Romantic composer, Schumann emphasized emotional expression in music and believed that Bachʼs music was rich in this element.
He was deeply impressed by the dramatic expression in Bachʼs religious music, such as the “St. Matthew Passion” and “St. John Passion”, and the inner resonance of chorales.
Schumann felt that Bachʼs music had the power to “speak to the depths of the heart.”
Schumann was concerned that Bachʼs works were becoming forgotten in the 19th century and contributed to the Bach revival movement.
Inspired by Felix Mendelssohnʼs revival performance of the “St. Matthew Passion” (1829), Schumann also took an interest in promoting Bachʼs works.
He studied Bachʼs keyboard music and advocated for its importance in being passed down to future generations.
Schumann believed that Bachʼs music was indispensable for the training of composers and performers.
He regarded works like “Inventions and Sinfonias” and “The Well-Tempered Clavier” as “foundational for all musicians to learn.”
This belief influenced Schumannʼs own educational philosophy, incorporating Bach-like educational elements into his works such as “Album for the Young” Op. 68 and “Scenes from Childhood” Op. 15.
Schumannʼs high regard for Bach was based on the following elements:
Excellence in Counterpoint
→ Perfect polyphony and structural beauty.
Perfection and Unity of Structure
→ Fusion of mathematical precision and artistic sensibility.
Depth of Emotional Expression
→ Rich spiritual and inner expression.
Interest in Bach Revival
→ Promoting the re-evaluation of Bachʼs music alongside Mendelssohn.
High Educational Value
→ Essential works for the foundational training of musicians.
Schumann considered Bachʼs works not merely as relics of the past but as “music that continues to live in the present,” actively studying and striving to convey their value.