performance, says much in a few words. “Mozart’s music seems
to come from the air and should return to it,” and the ecstatic
eulogy of Goethe, to whom genius meant Mozart, should be fa-
miliar to all. “What else is genius than that productive power
through which deeds arise, worthy of standing in the presence of
God and of Nature, and which, for this reason, bear results and
are lasting? All the creations of Mozart are of this class; within
them there is a generative force which is transplanted from age
to age, and is not likely soon to be exhausted or devoured.”
[Footnote 122: For extended comment, see theOxford History
of Music, Vol. V, p. 246,seq.]
In studying Mozart’s works the special points to be noticed
are these: the wider sweep and freer rhythmic variety of the
melodic curve; the more organic fusion of the different portions
of a movement—Mozart’s lines of demarcation being perfectly
clear but not so rigid as in Haydn; the much greater richness
of the whole musical fabric, due to Mozart’s marvellous skill
in polyphony. The time had not yet come when the composer
could pique the fancy of the hearer by unexpected structural
devices or even lead him off on a false trail as was so often done
by Beethoven. Both Haydn and Mozart are homophonic com-
posers,i.e., the outpouring of individual melodies is the chief
factor in their works; but whereas in Haydn the tune is almost
invariably in the upper voice, in Mozart we find the melody ap-
pearing in any one of the voices and often accompanied with
fascinating imitations. See, in corroboration, any of the first
three movements of theG minor Symphonyor the slow move-
ment of theE-flat major Symphony. In the structure of music
Mozart made slight changes; the forms were still fresh—having
just been established by Haydn—and Mozart with his genius
filled them to overflowing. His one important contribution to
the development of instrumental form was the Pianoforte Con-
certo; but, as a consideration of this would lead us too far afield,
the student is referred to the life of Mozart in Grove’s Dictio-
nary and to the Oxford History, Vol. V. The literature[123]
about Mozart and his works is voluminous. Our chief attention
nevertheless should be centered on the works themselves rather
than on what anyone else writes about them. Certain of these
criticisms, however, are so suggestive and illuminating that the
student should become familiar with them.
[Footnote 123: We recommend especially the refreshing essay by