Imitation, they say, is the sincerest form of flattery. That Schubert idolized Beethoven and consciously attempted to emulate him could hardly be a revelation, although some might be surprised to learn that he did not hold him in such high regard throughout his life. In 1816, Schubert’s diary reveals his rejection of Beethoven’s ‘fusion of tragic and comic components’, yet by 1822 he was eager to dedicate his Variations Op. 10 to the great man.Footnote ¹ What John M. Gingerich’s book makes abundantly clear is that in the last few years of his life, Schubert devoted himself to writing more serious compositions in the kinds of areas that established Beethoven’s greatness. Gingerich explores the genesis and subsequent progress of Schubert’s late instrumental works (namely the last three string quartets, the last six completed piano sonatas, the ‘Great’ Symphony in C, the two piano trios in B-flat and E-flat, the String Quintet in C and the Octet), and argues convincingly that Schubert was striving to be taken seriously by a public that associated him principally with songs and dance music of a rather less exalted nature. By referring to this repertoire as belonging to ‘Beethoven’s genres’, Gingerich might be accused of slightly stretching the point. Audiences then as now would associate such works just as much with Haydn and Mozart, as Gingerich himself points out (p. 237). But it is difficult to pinpoint another suitable appellation. ‘Classical genres’ might be a more fitting term, but it suits Gingerich’s purpose to highlight Beethoven’s ‘ownership’ of the territory, not least because it was from Beethoven’s shadow that Schubert was aiming to emerge. The ‘imitation’ here is of a structural rather than a stylistic nature, since Schubert chose to follow the four-movement design favoured by Beethoven in nearly all of these cases (the exception being the Octet, which is clearly modelled on Beethoven’s Septet, a work that enjoyed great popularity at the time). Perhaps ‘sonata-form genres’ would be more accurate, since it was a hallmark of seriousness that at least the first movement would involve a thorough workout of the sonata principle, with audiences expecting innovative treatments of structure, tonality and thematic development. However, this might place undue emphasis on the first movements, overshadowing the seriousness to be found in the variations, rondos, scherzos and sublime slow movements that both composers were capable of producing in their different ways. Gingerich’s use of ‘Beethoven’s genres’ certainly serves to remind us that Schubert was always aware of the great man looking over his shoulder.

Gingerich takes as his starting point the famous letter by Schubert to Kupelwieser of 31 March 1824, in which he expresses his despair at the prospect of a life wrecked by illness and pain (Schubert had been diagnosed with syphilis the previous year), and with the expectation of a premature end (pp. 41–2). Less often quoted is a passage later in the letter where Schubert says:

Taking this as a kind of manifesto, Gingerich argues the case for regarding 1824 as a watershed year, and goes on to demonstrate Schubert’s attempts to execute his grand plan, his ‘Beethoven Project’. Importantly, it was the leading proponent of Beethoven’s chamber music, the violinist Ignaz Schuppanzigh, who Schubert sought to impress; it was Schuppanzigh’s series of subscription concerts (in which the works of Beethoven featured most prominently) that would potentially provide the platform for Schubert’s efforts. Unfortunately for Schubert, it appears that Schuppanzigh was less than enthusiastic, and only three works – the A minor Quartet, the Octet and the B-flat Trio – were performed in the series between 1824 and 1827. Gingerich devotes four chapters to an in-depth exploration of the history and the repertoire related to Schuppanzigh’s concerts, uncovering the reasons why Schubert’s offerings did not meet with greater success, and highlighting their compositional worth through close discussion of selected passages. One subject explored in detail is Schubert’s apparent quotations from his song ‘Die Götter Griechenlands’ in both the A minor Quartet and the Octet (pp. 90ff), and the case for deliberate connections between these works is argued persuasively.Footnote ² The issue of self-quotation crops up regularly with Schubert, so it is tempting to draw the parallel between a death reference in his opera Fierrabras and the coda of the first movement in the D minor Quartet (as Gingerich does pp. 99ff). The harmonies are undoubtedly the same, but I remain unconvinced that the opera is being consciously quoted here. Schubert is referring to the language of ombra, associated with death and the supernatural, where such progressions might well be expected.Footnote ³ In fact, Schubert is rather fond of ombra references, as Gingerich demonstrates elsewhere, and in this respect he does not follow Beethoven’s lead.Footnote ⁴ The sudden outbursts in the Octet are so unexpected (pp. 164ff) that the possibility of parody ought to be considered, given the stylistic traits normally displayed in such pieces. This is a work that certainly was influenced directly by Beethoven; it is by no means a lightweight piece, despite the Biedermeier gemütlichkeit exhibited in places. Beethoven’s Septet in E-flat was clearly a model, and enjoyed such popularity that Schubert must have been tempted to emulate its success, going as far as ‘one-upping’ Beethoven by adding a second violin, thus making full use of Schuppanzigh’s own quartet of players (p. 141).

Another possible forum for Schubert’s more serious works was the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, who held their Abendunterhaltungen (evening concerts) four times each year. Schubert’s membership of the Society ought to have presented him with a captive audience, but a ‘mutual wariness’ (p. 177) seems to be the main cause of his lack of success here. Gingerich goes on to explore Schubert’s personal circumstances in the first of two chapters on the subject, before an in-depth study considering aspects of the ‘Great’ C Major Symphony (a work that Schubert dedicated to the Society) in the second. While necessarily selective, there is a wealth of analytical detail in this account, including consideration of the writing for horns and trombones. The next two chapters explore other ways that Schubert sought to engage the public with his more serious works, beginning with his piano sonatas, then proceeding to examine his attempts at getting works published. The chapter on the sonatas has a useful snapshot of the stage the genre had reached by 1825, but unfortunately lacks any detailed consideration of a particular work or movement, which is an opportunity missed as far as providing evidence of a deliberate emulation of Beethoven is concerned. Schubert’s relationship with his various publishers in Vienna and beyond was somewhat varied, and this chapter succinctly summarizes the difficulties both personal and practical that he had to face. The volume ends with two more chapters on individual works, the Piano Trio in E-flat and the String Quintet in C, where there are plenty of well-focussed analytical observations, particularly regarding the recurring material in these pieces.

There are some questions that remain unanswered, or at least not fully addressed. Why, for instance, did Schubert not emulate Beethoven by writing a concerto? There were plenty of virtuosi around in Vienna in the 1820s (such as the pianists Moscheles, Czerny and Thalberg and the violinists Mayseder and Paganini) that might have helped him to reach a wider audience, and while the status of the genre may have been undermined by the frequent passages of mere virtuosic display, Schubert could have contributed to re-establishing a sense of seriousness (as Mendelssohn was able to do just a few years later). Is there an explanation for the keys of the three string quartets written in 1824–1826 (A minor, D minor and G major) being precisely the same as for the piano sonatas composed in the same period? Schubert certainly had ‘favourite keys’, but his reasons for choosing them are not always clear. Can a quintet with two cellos rightly be labelled as one of ‘Beethoven’s genres’? The quintets of Georges Onslow had the same scoring, and while some are mentioned as having been performed in Schuppanzigh’s concert series, the idea that they might have provided direct models is not considered. Might the ‘serious’ vocal models like the song cycle or the mass be considered as ‘Beethoven’s genres’? An die ferne Geliebte and the Missa Solemnis had certainly reached a more elevated plane. These are issues that might usefully have been addressed in a closing chapter, rounding off the volume with wider considerations and drawing some general conclusions. As it stands, the book ends somewhat abruptly with the close of the Quintet.

Accessibility is a great strength of this book. The prose writing is commendably clear, and sometimes colourful in an entertaining yet evocative manner. Thus a passage in the first movement of the ‘Great’ C Major Symphony (from bar 174) is described as a ‘gleefully wrong-footed G-major stomping dance’ (p. 218), and later the ‘bumptious second dance reaches its stentorian climax’ with the closing bars of the Exposition referred to as an ‘aggressively wrong-footed hoe-down’ (pp. 218–19). Elsewhere, the slow movement of the Piano Trio in E-flat is described as ‘a great, sweet, sad tango’ (p. 293). One can quibble about a few minor details such as the use of the much less common spelling of Fierrabras with one ‘r’ or the simply incorrect a cappella with one ‘p’ (students please note!), and even the slight obsession with the adjective ‘protean’, but these are small distractions. While the analytical passages are strongly prose-driven, they demonstrate a close engagement with the music that encompasses structural tables, voice-leading techniques, hermeneutic approaches and even a little topic theory, illustrated by well-chosen music examples.

Overall, this is a book that offers a skilful blend of well-researched historical context, considered aesthetic observation and precise analytical insight. Gingerich demonstrates a thorough familiarity with a wide range of primary sources, including letters, concert programmes and reviews. He also references a number of German-language sources that are not readily available, and these help to shed light on important areas. Frustratingly, though, there is an inconsistent approach to translation, with many passages not translated at all. A case in point is p. 204, n. 75, where the first of two passages is rendered in English followed by the original German, and the second is given only in German. Even with a reasonable working knowledge of the language, the reader may well be considerably slowed down by trying to make sense of the untranslated quotations. Presumably, because some of the material in this book is based on earlier published research, ideas or sources are sometimes repeated unnecessarily, where cross-referencing would have been useful.Footnote ⁵ Thus the anecdote about Beethoven’s pun on the name of one of Schubert’s publishers Leidesdorf as ‘Dorf des Leidens’ (‘village of suffering’) because of his melancholy disposition is duplicated (pp. 4 and 261). There are one or two other examples of this sort, but they are only really noticeable to someone who is reading the book cover-to-cover. Although the idea of the ‘Beethoven Project’ is a clear connecting theme, the book rewards the reader who might want to dip in for individual chapters.

Schubert’s reverence for Beethoven was confirmed by his dying wish to hear Beethoven’s String Quartet in C-sharp minor Op. 131. In many ways it is the greatest quartet that Schubert never wrote. It contains a number of features that we have come to think of as ‘Schubertian’ – memorable melodies (not always Beethoven’s strongest suit), structural innovations, inventive variations and wide-ranging modulations, with passages that are by turns monumental, contemplative, heroic, playful, mysterious, dance-like, tragic and ebullient. Schubert, looking back on a career that had largely seen failure in terms of getting his most serious works performed, could not have made a better choice. His ‘Beethoven Project’, like many of his individual works, remained unfinished at his death, but his rich legacy survives, and Gingerich has contributed much to our understanding of it through this book.