1. Now penni, I never said it wasn't important that he valued the forms. What I basically said was that in view of music history's assessment of the position of his music, it is not so important what he thought he was doing himself as what the end results were (since obviously he did not say, "I think I will move towards Romanticism," he was really just writing music the way he wanted to).
2. I will fully allow that he maintained much of the classical forms quite assiduously. He certainly did not dismiss the Viennese School totally out of hand at any time. However, he roundly dismissed quite a lot of it at one point or another, openly stating that he was going his own way (for example, throwing out the whole tonic/dominant harmonic basis of the School as in Waldstein). Some scholars in fact think that he moved closer towards adherence to the Classical elements later in his life, not just early on. And it's true that he never grew self-indulgently excessive as is the case in the worst of Romanticism, although the dissonance (I would say chromaticism rather than real dissonance) you refer to is more characteristic of the very late part of the movement.
3. One scholar I have read may have framed it correctly in calling Beethoven a product of the Viennese School who basically became a "proto-Romantic" while still embodying much of existing Classicism. Interestingly, Schubert (who among the next generation probably most closely adhered to Beethoven's musical beliefs and precepts) roundly condemned much of the budding Romanticism; for example he considered Chopin's Funeral March sonata to be unspeakably vulgar, esp the last movement, interesting to compare it with Beethoven's equivalent sonata. It is true that many Romantics tried to hitch themselves to Beethoven's coattails after his death, perhaps more out of association with his greatness than out of love for his music.
I think that's a pretty good windup. Now, back to Wagner... |
