what it is. The term Romantic is perfectly clear in its appli-
cation to literature, from which music borrowed it. It refers to
the movement begun about the year 1796 among such German
poets as Tieck, the two Schlegels and Novalis, to restore the
poetic legends of the middle ages, written in the Romance di-
alects, and to embody in their own works the fantastic spirit
of this medieval poetry.[173] In reference to music, however,
the terms Classic and Romantic are often vague and mislead-
ing, and have had extreme interpretations put upon them.[174]
Thus, to many, “romantic” implies ultra-sentimental, mawkish
or grotesque, while everything “classic” is dry, uninspired and
academic. How often we hear the expression, “I am not up to
classic music; let me hear something modern and romantic.”
Many scholars show little respect for the terms and some would
abolish them altogether. Everything, however, hinges upon a
reasonable definition. Pater’s well-known saying that “Roman-
ticism is the addition of strangeness to beauty” is fair; and yet,
since strangeness in art can result only from imaginative concep-
tion, it amounts to nothing more than the truism that romantic
art is imbued with personality. Hence Stendhal is right in saying
that “All good art was Romantic in its day”;i.e., it exhibited as
much warmth and individuality as the spirit of its times would
allow. Surely Bach, Haydn and Mozart were real characters,
notwithstanding the restraint which the artificialities of the pe-
riod often put upon their utterance. On the other hand, work
at first pronounced to be romantic establishes, by a universal
recognition of its merit, the claim to be considered classic, or
set apart; what is romantic to-day thus growing to be classic[175]
tomorrow. It is evident, therefore, that the terms interlock and
are not mutually exclusive. It is a mistaken attitude to set one
school off against the other, or to prove that one style is greater
than the other; they are simply different. Compositions of last-
ing worth always manifest such a happy union of qualities that,
in a broad sense, they may be called both romantic and clas-
sic,i.e., they combine personal emotion and imagination with
breadth of meaning and solidity of structure.
[Footnote 173: For a more complete historical account see the
article “Romantic” in Grove’s Dictionary and the introduction
to Vol. VI ofThe Oxford History of Music.Rousseau and Ro-
manticismby Professor Irving Babbitt presents the latest inves-
tigations in this important field.]