弗朗茲•李斯特

李斯特，歐美姓氏，主要出現在德奧地區。弗朗茲•李斯特，匈牙利作曲家、鋼琴家、指揮家和音樂活動家，浪漫主義音樂的主要代表人物之一，被人們譽為“鋼琴之王”。 　　李斯特的作品充分挖掘了鋼琴的音響功能，對鍵盤音樂的發展作出了重大的貢獻，並且創造了交響詩這一音樂形式，在他的後期作品中最早使用了20世紀才普遍採用的和聲語言。 簡介 德語： Franz Liszt 匈牙利語：Liszt Ferenc 弗朗茲•李斯特（1811.10.22–1886.7.31） 匈牙利作曲家、鋼琴家、指揮家和音樂活動家，浪漫主義音樂的主要代表人物之一，被人們譽為“鋼琴之王”（又稱：鋼琴魔王）。 弗朗茲•李斯特於1811年10月22日生於匈牙利雷定（Raiding, Hungary）。當時匈牙利是奧匈帝國的一部分，李斯特的父親是匈牙利人，母親是奧地利的日爾曼族人，因此他有兩個名字，分別是匈牙利和德語兩種拼法。李斯特從小隨母親說德語，直到晚年才學會用匈牙利語寫作。 李斯特六歲起開始學習音樂，1821年移居維也納，曾先後作為薩里埃裡（Antonio Salieri，或譯薩列裡）、車爾尼(Carl Czerny)、雷哈、巴埃爾的弟子，1822年在他的個人音樂會上受到貝多芬的接見，貝多芬吻了他的額頭，李斯特視為音樂的洗禮。 1823年，李斯特來到巴黎，受雨果、拉馬丁、夏多布里昂等浪漫主義文藝家思想的影響，嚮往資產階級革命。在音樂上他主張標題音樂，首創了交響詩體裁，作有《塔索》、《前奏曲》、《匈牙利》等交響詩共十三部。 　　 李斯特還受帕格尼尼的影響，創作了十九首《匈牙利狂想曲》和十二首鋼琴練習曲以及超技練習曲。他樹立了與學院風氣、市民習氣相對立的新的浪漫主義原則，並支持阿爾貝尼斯、斯美塔那、蕭邦、柏遼茲、瓦格納等作曲家的創作。 李斯特還寫過多首改編曲，《弄臣》為其中的經典。他引用了威爾第的歌劇《弄臣》中著名的四重唱“讚美你，愛情的女神”的主題為主旋律，改編成鋼琴曲，技巧華麗，感情豐富。 1848年起他常住魏瑪（Weimar），擔任了魏瑪宮廷樂長，並經常來往於羅馬（Rome）、布達佩斯（Budapest）之間。1876年他創建了布達佩斯國立音樂院並任院長。 1886年7月31日李斯特因肺炎死於拜羅伊特（Bayreuth）。 李斯特創作活動的進步的民主主義的傾向在很大程度上是與匈牙利的民族解放運動相聯繫的（包括社會主義）。鋼琴曲《匈牙利狂想曲》是和李斯特的名字分不開的，正如圓舞曲和施特勞斯、交響曲與貝多芬的名字分不開一樣。李斯特的作品多姿多彩、極富想像力，充分挖掘了鋼琴的音響功能，對演奏者的技巧提出了很高的要求。作為那個時代最傑出的鋼琴家，他對鍵盤音樂的發展作出了重大的貢獻，在他的後期作品中最早使用了20世紀才普遍採用的和聲語言。它的鋼琴曲已列入世界古典鋼琴曲的文獻寶庫。 李斯特所創作的十九首鋼琴曲《匈牙利狂想曲》，在他的鋼琴作品中佔有特殊重要的地位。這些作品不但充分發揮了鋼琴的音樂表現力，而且，為狂想曲這個音樂體裁創作樹立了傑出的音樂典範。這些作品部是以匈牙利和匈牙利吉普賽人的民歌和民間舞曲為基礎，進行藝術加工和發展而成的，因而都具有鮮明的民族色彩。這些樂曲結構精煉、樂思豐富活躍，音樂語言與音樂表現方法同匈牙利鄉村舞蹈音樂和城市說唱音樂有密切聯繫，樂曲的形式雖然不時的變化，可是音樂形象始終鮮明而質樸，體現了自然美和藝術美的完美統一。 他是最早把匈牙利民族音提高到世界水準的民族音樂家，他有愛國思想和民主思想，有積極要求變革生活的熱情，也有懷疑和失望的消極情緒，但占主要地位的常常是前者而不是後者。李斯特是蕭邦的同代人，但他離開祖國的時間比蕭邦更早，因此，他的思想和創作不能簡單地納入“民族樂派”。然而，作為一個匈牙利人，李斯特對祖國的事業真誠關注；民族的歷史和英雄人物，民間音樂的音調和節奏，在他的創作中都得到生動的反映和運用；加之他對東、北歐及俄羅斯青年作曲家的大力提攜和鼓勵，使他在歐洲民族樂派的發展上起了積極的推動作用。在他的祖國，人民始終尊崇他為偉大的“民族藝術家”。 他一共創作了13首交響詩，又是現代鋼琴技術的創造者之一。 他一生創作了700多首音樂作品，並創造了交響詩這一音樂形式。他的主要音樂作品有吉普賽風格的《匈 李斯特生前使用的貝希斯坦鋼琴牙利狂想曲》（米高梅出品的動畫片“貓和老鼠”其中獲奧斯卡獎的一集“貓咪音樂會”使用了完整的匈牙利狂想曲第二號作為全集的背景音樂，也顯示出這個曲子彈奏的複雜技巧），《浮士德交響曲》，《但丁交響曲》，《帕格尼尼練習曲》，《瓦格納改編作品：湯豪舍》等。有人認為他的作品技巧輝煌， 李斯特生前使用的貝希斯坦鋼琴內容膚淺，但他不愧是位元偉大的音樂革新家，並在歷史上對改善音樂家地位，推動新生音樂風格起到相當大的作用。他最著名的貢獻包括發明了交響詩這一體裁。 他還著書立說，出版多部論文和書信集，他的論文《論藝術家的處境》對改善音樂家的社會地位起到很大的作用李斯特最重要的作品是《浮士德交響曲》、《但丁交響曲》、《匈牙利狂想曲》、交響詩《前奏曲》、《馬捷帕》、四首鋼琴協奏曲、《b小調鋼琴奏鳴曲》、《12首超技練習曲》和《旅行歲月》。鋼琴曲中最難的一首當屬《唐璜的回憶》。 李斯特生前使用的貝希斯坦鋼琴還完好保存在德國貝希斯坦的工廠。
	——————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
	李斯特最值得收藏的唱片版本為
	1. 卡拉揚（Karajan）指揮柏林愛樂樂團演奏的交響詩，包括《前奏曲》、《馬捷帕》、《塔索的悲傷與勝利》和《第二號梅菲斯特圓舞曲》、《匈牙利民歌幻想曲》、第二號和第五號《匈牙利狂想曲》, DG, CD編號415 967-2(兩張)或447 415-2，包括《前奏曲》、《馬捷帕》、《第四號匈牙利狂想曲》和斯梅塔那的《沃爾塔瓦》，企鵝評價三星。 2. 伯恩斯坦（Bernstein）指揮坦萊沃德(Tanglewood)節日合唱團、波士頓交響樂團演奏演唱的《浮士德交響曲》, DG, CD編號447449-20企鵝評價三星。 3. 裡赫特（Richter）演奏，康得拉辛指揮倫敦交響樂團的兩首鋼琴協奏曲，Philips, CD編號446 200-2，企鵝評價三星。 4.貝爾曼（Berman）、演奏的《旅行歲月》全集, DG,CD編號437 206-2（3張）。 5. 博列特（Bolet）演奏的《12首超技練習曲》，Decca, CD編號414 601-2。企鵝評價三星保留一星。 6. 齊夫拉（Cziffra）演奏的15首《匈牙利狂想曲》和《西班牙狂想》，EMI, CZSS 69003-2（兩張），企鵝評價三星。 7. 普列特涅夫演奏的《第一號梅菲斯特圓舞由》、《艾斯特莊園水的嬉戲》、《沉思的人》、《第十五號匈牙利狂想曲》、《B小調奏鳴曲》。Melodiya，CD編號MCD172o 8. 齊伯爾斯坦(Zilberstein)演奏的《兩首敘事曲》、《兩首傳奇》、《6首安慰曲》、改編自巴赫的《幻想曲與賦格》、《即興曲》與《國舞曲》，DG, CD編號447 755-2。 9. 格斯特指揮約翰學院合唱團（Atkinson, Tinkler,Royall, Kendall, Suart演唱，Cleobury管風琴）的《合唱彌撒》，Decca, CD編號430 364 – 2(與德沃夏克的《D大調彌撒》同為一張)。 10. 菲舍爾•迪斯考演唱，巴倫博伊姆伴奏的歌曲集，DG, CD編號447 508-2(3張)。
	——————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
	李斯特部分著名作品簡介
	愛之夢 《愛之夢》，S541，實際上是3首夜曲，據烏蘭（Ludwig Uhland，1788-1862）與符利拉德（Ferainand Freiligrath）的詩上所附《男高音或女高音獨唱用的三首歌曲》(Drei LiederFut eine Tenor Oder Sopran-Stimme)的編曲。共三首：1.據烏蘭的《高貴的愛情》（Hohe Liede）而譜曲，富於表情的小行板，降A大調。2.據烏蘭的《神聖的死亡》（Seliger Tod）譜曲，極似慢板，E大調。3.優雅的快板，降A大調，據符利拉德的《盡其所能愛德去愛》（Olied,so land du lieder kannst）譜曲。音樂會練習曲之一：森林的細語 李斯特從青年時代開始受蕭邦、帕格尼尼等人的影響，苦練鋼琴技巧，成為首屈一指的鋼琴演奏家。此後他也作了一些蕭邦式的練習曲。《森林的細語》（Waldesrauschen ）是李斯特呈現給其弟子普魯克納的《兩首演奏會用練習曲》之一，這兩首樂曲作於1862-1863年。熱愛大自然，崇拜大自然本是浪漫主義作家創作的一大特徵，而寫作此曲時作曲家已洞悉人世榮則極盛、逆則難逾的真諦，他于羅薩利奧聖母修道院所在的馬里奧山岡俯瞰俗世，寫出這富於哲理的名曲有其個人的感受。李斯特把音樂從近乎耳語的聲（pp，極弱），發展到颶風般地撼天氣勢（fff，最強），表現了鬼斧神工的浪漫主義大家手筆。《湯豪舍序曲》 　　 《湯豪舍》（Tannhauser）原是瓦格納創作的三幕歌劇。作於1842-1845年完整標題為《湯豪舍以及瓦爾特堡的歌詠比賽》。音樂以小號的號角式演奏揭開了典禮的序幕，音樂進入舒展高雅的“高雅主題”，使人們仿佛看到了瀟灑的紳士和端莊的貴婦人的進行佇列。而《湯豪舍》的序曲可以說是整個故事情節的縮影。整首作品不但技巧繁複且氣勢磅礴。有三個部分構成，中間部分表現肉預感的維納斯堡的世界，前後兩個部分是虔誠的朝聖者的音樂。而且這是一首結構宏大的歌劇改編曲，從各種快速音階、琶音、雙音到左右手跳躍的八度、和絃，是典型的李斯特筆下的炫技式作品。《梅菲斯托圓舞曲》 　　 李斯特的這首曲子也常被意為《魔鬼圓舞曲》，因為梅菲斯托就是歌德劇作《浮士德》中的魔鬼。李斯特的這部作品原來是一首鋼琴獨奏曲，作曲家在1862年將它改編成約10分鐘長的一首管弦樂交響詩，而後又將其發展成為總共約70分鐘長度的三樂章交響曲《浮士德》中的終樂章，鋼琴版的《梅菲斯托圓舞曲》則堪稱是李斯特炫技作品的代表之作。
	——————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
	李斯特的生平簡介
	綽號“鋼琴魔術師”。 李斯特的一生有兩個重要的女人陪伴過他，而且，她們都是公爵夫人級貴族兼美女作家！但她們和他的婚姻都不被教會認可，只能當同居看待。 第一個女人叫瑪麗?達古爾，是一位公爵夫人，並且是當時巴黎社交界的名人，美麗、幽默又聰明，和喬治?桑是好朋友。她結識了李斯特之後就拋棄了丈夫和他私奔去了瑞士，那一年李斯特23歲，她28歲，那部著名的《旅遊歲月》鋼琴集就是他們私奔到日內瓦後開始創作的。只可惜他們同居十年就分手了，理由竟然是兩人的性格不合！（藉口而已吧？嘎！）瑪麗嫌李斯特演出太過頻繁冷落了她，而且經常聽見他在各地與別的女人的風流事讓她倍覺反感，她以筆名達妮兒 . 史丹發表了一部自傳體小說《奈尼達》，永遠告別了和李斯特的愛情生活，1846年二人從此分道揚鑣。 1847 年，李斯特二度赴俄演出，在這段日子裡，他結識了波蘭的卡羅 琳•莎依•維根斯坦公主，這使他的生活出現了新的轉折。卡洛琳公主是波 蘭人，家財萬貫，在她的領地上有三萬農奴，是時她 28 歲，已與比她年長得 多的丈夫——維根斯坦公爵這位沙皇的寵臣分居。卡洛琳公主是個了不起的 女人，有著非凡的洞察力和極高的才智和文學藝術修養，除母語波蘭語之外 她還能熟練運用拉丁文、希臘文、法文、英文、德文、俄文。她還是一個虔 誠無比的天主教徒，經常幫助那些缺吃少穿的農奴。她的宗教觀念對李斯特 的晚年產生了很大影響。李斯特在俄國的那些演出，她幾乎每場必到，是李 斯特音樂的崇拜者。同樣，在與卡洛琳公主的交談中，李斯特也為她那豐富 的學識，敏銳的藝術鑒賞力和優雅的性格所打動，在一段頻繁的交往後，他 們倆終於相愛。這是一種相互敬佩和相互理解的愛，就像打鐵一樣，鐵錘打 在通紅的鐵上，濺起一束束思想的火花。李斯特曾在給朋友的一封信上寫道： “為了同卡洛琳公主談幾個小時的話，我願意多走成百上千公里的路。” 最為重要的是，卡洛琳公主終於說服了李斯特放棄顛沛的演奏生活，定 居安心轉向音樂的創作事業。1847 年 10 月，李斯特在葉利查維特格勒舉行 了他旅行演奏生涯中的最後一次公開音樂會後，結束了他輝煌的近十年的演 出生涯，並與卡洛琳公主隱居，開始了兩人的同居生活。這段感情一直持續 到李斯特去世，儘管其中李斯特也曾和其他女性有過各種感情上的糾絡，但 在感情深處，他卻一直忠實于卡洛琳公主，從未有過離開她的想法。然而令 李斯特終生遺憾的是：他和卡洛琳的結合並沒有得到教會或法定的認可，原因在於，俄國沙皇不批准卡洛琳正式離婚，公主的合法丈夫維根斯坦公爵也 不同意離婚，而且還欲加害公主，企圖搶奪她的巨額財產。最終卡洛琳公主 遺下了大量的財產從俄國逃了出來。在李斯特以後的生活中，他從未放棄過 要與卡洛琳成為正式夫妻的想法，並為之作出了很大的努力。在他 50 歲生日 那年，和卡洛琳結婚這一努力差點得到成功，然而，迫于卡洛琳前夫維根斯 坦公爵的無理糾纏和俄國教廷的壓力，梵蒂岡教廷將他們的婚事予以無限期 的延緩。 這時的歐洲正處於動盪不安的時刻，戰亂四起。尤其是在匈牙利，爆發了反抗異族統治的革命起義，這使得李斯特不得不放棄回到祖國匈牙利定居 的打算。1848 年，李斯特再度接受了魏瑪公國宮廷樂長和樂隊指揮的職務， 和卡洛琳公主定居于魏瑪。 如果說1848 年以前的那些歲月是李斯特奮鬥——成長——演奏藝術輝 煌的成功的歲月，那麼，在這以後直到1861 年共 13 年的時間中，則是他一 生中最重要的時期，他的創作才能在這段時間裡得到了最充分的展示。他把 他多年的思考、探索，業已成熟卻又是較為複雜的思想，對人生的看法和追 求，對祖國、民族的熱愛及對飽受災難之苦的民眾的同情都濃縮在他的創作 中。他首創了“交響詩”這一音樂體裁。並創作了他一生中最重要的一些作 品。如交響詩《前奏曲》、《塔索》、《普羅米修士》、《英雄的葬禮》、《匈牙利》、《但丁交響曲》、《浮士德交響曲》、《匈牙利狂想曲》等等， 這些作品從各個不同的側面反映了他的心聲，從中你可以聽出他對人生的思 索，對英雄人物的謳歌，對祖國民族的讚頌，對未來美好生活的嚮往。尤其 是《英雄的葬禮》，反映了李斯特對在匈牙利民族解放戰爭中犧牲的烈士的深切哀悼和對奧地利統治者——俄國沙皇血腥鎮壓起義的憎恨，正像亡國的 波蘭在蕭邦的音樂中得到反映一樣，飽受煎熬的匈牙利也在李斯特音樂中得 到了反映。 除此之外，李斯特的宮廷樂長和指揮的職位給他的音樂活動帶來了極大 的便利，他不僅經常為觀眾們上演一些經典的古典歌劇和交響曲，還廣為宣 傳和演奏當時歐洲一些作者的新作，介紹他們的音樂風格。尤其是對那些具 有革新思想不受傳統條條框框所約束的新音樂他更加推崇，並竭力為之鼓 吹，使這些音樂能受到世人的認可，這可以從他對瓦格納及其音樂的大力協 助中可以看得出來。 李斯特與德國音樂家瓦格納在 1842 年他旅行演奏時期相識，有趣的是， 儘管他兩人年齡相仿並且瓦格納後來也成了世人矚目的歌劇宗師，然而在當 時李斯特已是遠近聞名的鋼琴大師時，瓦格納還默默無聞，懷才不遇。但當 李斯特讀到瓦格納早期作品時，立刻就為他作品中所蘊藏著的天才所打動， 留下了很深刻的印象。1849 年 5 月，瓦格納作為一個革命者參加了德累斯頓 起義。在起義被鎮壓後，受到通緝，四處逃難，走投無路時投奔了李斯特， 李斯特熱情接待了他，並竭力幫助他逃亡，逐漸兩個人建立了深厚的友誼。 在瓦格納生活困難時，他儘量資助，在他精神上苦悶、孤獨、氣餒而對人苛 求時，李斯特又耐心地給予安慰並幫助他建立起信心，最為重要的是，李斯 特甚至不顧後果，竭力排練上演瓦格納的各個新作《羅恩格林》、《湯豪塞》 等等，使瓦格納和他的音樂受到了社會的充分重視。為此他也招來了許多不 喜歡這些新音樂的人的攻擊，甚至在他指揮的音樂會上大打出手，連他的朋 友柏遼茲、舒曼等人也開始遠離他，並對他為瓦格納所做的一切進行攻擊， 然而，李斯特一如既往，不為所動。並不帶任何偏見地繼續為之努力，不僅 僅是對瓦格納，而且是通過這些行動去鼓勵更多的音樂家。 在李斯特的努力下，小小的魏瑪逐漸成為了全歐洲的一個音樂中心，吸引了不少的國外音樂家和各種藝術流派的人，因為他們認為只有在魏瑪才能 公開地宣揚自己的觀點，各種流派才能健康有為地發展。李斯特周圍團結了 一大批年輕有為的音樂家、藝術家，他們形成了一股強勁的潮流，給當時的 歐洲樂壇吹來了一片清風，給魏瑪這座城市帶來了極大的光榮。1854 年，李 斯特把一些和他志同道合的音樂家們組織起來，建立了“新魏瑪協會”。1861 年他又進一步建立了“全德音樂家協會”，在協會的支持宣導下，他們演奏 了幾乎所有大師的著名作品，而且還包括他的若干首交響詩、鋼琴協奏曲、 交響曲等。尤其是他的交響詩，這是他青年時期和年富力強的中年時期的總 結。儘管李斯特從小就著迷於貝多芬等古典大師們的交響曲，然而他並沒有 把熱愛變成迷信，他進一步發展了交響曲的形式，使之更加自由，有更廣闊 的發展天地。 然而，李斯特的革新精神和他的劃時代的作品遭到了許多粗暴的攻擊， 這些攻擊來自於那些因循守舊的一些人，這些人認為，古典大師們的作品和 他們創造的形式都是神聖的、完美的，後輩只需模仿就行了。而李斯特的音 樂違背了這些傳統原則，是音樂的離經叛道者，應該受到懲罰。 鬥爭日趨激烈，甚至他自己的學生和朋友也頂不住壓力而背叛了他。有 時攻擊不只針對他，而且還把矛頭指向卡洛琳公主。從祖國匈牙利傳來的消 息也是相同的，那些文藝界的人士對他是口誅筆伐，極盡挖苦之能，而且對 李斯特的愛國之情都開始懷疑，這使李斯特十分傷心。這些人忘了歐洲的很多人是通過他的《匈牙利狂想曲》才瞭解匈牙利的。即使如此，李斯特強迫 自己對別人的誹謗不加理睬，在他給別人的信中寫道：“我憑經驗就知道我 的作品是多麼不受歡迎，我只能默默地忍受。” 即使在李斯特最不受讚揚的那段時間裡，他仍舊不停止他對新的表現形 式的探索，發表他支援新音樂的一些觀點，儘管這樣會招致更大的攻擊，他 對他的作品終究有一天會受到人們的讚賞有著強烈的自信心。他曾對他的學 生說道：“對我來說，這一天會來得很晚，因為那時我將不再和你們在一起。 但我的目標是要盡可能地把一根長矛投向未來廣闊無垠的王國。” 1861 年底，由於李斯特的敵對派們激烈地反對李斯特的新音樂傾向，並 對他的人格及其作品進行無休止的攻擊，使他逐漸喪失了魏瑪大公對他的支 持。他終於辭去了宮廷樂長之職，他自己曾記述到：“我有意為魏瑪帶來一 個新的藝術時代，由瓦格納和我領導，但不利的環境使這個夢想成為泡影。” 此後，李斯特和他的終生伴侶卡洛琳公主離開了魏瑪；來到了天主教的中心 地義大利羅馬，開始了他的退休生活。在這段時間裡，他對宗教的傾向日益 強烈。青少年時對宗教的狂熱迷戀這時也仿佛一起迸發出來，他的大部分時 間都花在祈禱與宗教活動上，並經常與教皇接觸，教皇曾極力地勸說李斯特 加入到宮廷的行列中去，並希望他能領導並説明教會音樂重現往日的輝煌， 這無疑使李斯特心動，如果說他早年兩次投身於宗教的企圖被他的父親和拉 門內神父所阻止而未能如願，那麼這次他對教皇的邀請所表現出來的少些猶 豫則被卡洛琳公主的極力支持沖得乾乾淨淨，就像十多年前她說服李斯特放 棄演出生涯而開始創作生活一樣，這次她建議李斯特毫不猶豫地選擇教會： “您一生的生活只不過是那偉大的旋律——教堂音樂的前奏曲”。 的確，生活給他帶來了無以名狀的痛苦和毀人心智的打擊：長女和兒子丹尼爾的早逝，女兒科西瑪與自己心愛的學生馮•彪洛的婚姻的破裂，自己 的好友瓦格納與科西瑪曖昧關係以至於二人終於反目，再加上那些保守音樂 家們對他音樂無休止的指責，無一不深深刺痛他的心，他需要一種寧靜的氣 氛，而教堂給了他所需要的保護。 1865 年4 月25 日，李斯特加入了教會，接受了神父稱號，成了一個虔誠的天主教徒。這期間，他創作了好幾部宗教音樂，如：《聖伊莉莎白逸事》、《耶穌基督》、《匈牙利加冕彌撒》等。 儘管李斯特隱身教會並很少提起他自己的那些作品，然而他的許多才華出眾的學生和致力於新音樂發展的朋友們並沒有忘記他的那些天才之作。馮.彪洛在海牙演奏他的《死神之舞》取得了轟動性的成功；他的《聖伊莉莎白 逸事》在匈牙利也引起了巨大反響，隨之而來的是他的《但丁交響曲》、《拉 科齊進行曲》在匈牙利又一次轟動——匈牙利音樂界似乎已經覺察到誹謗和 攻擊可能會使李斯特和他們疏遠。他的義大利學生斯加姆巴演奏的《耶穌基 督》也獲得盛讚；俄國鋼琴大師魯賓斯坦把李斯特的許多作品列入了他的音 樂會必彈曲目。法國作曲家聖•桑在聽了他的作品後曾熱烈稱頌道：“李斯 特是我們眾人的師表。他的勇氣和膽識激勵著我們所有的人。他的音樂成了 真正的預言。仿佛雄鷹的眼睛透過了未來時代的雲層，他已經看到了下一個 世紀的美景。”這段話無疑道出了李斯特其人及其音樂的真諦。一切似乎又 回到了李斯特過去的時光。但李斯特不為所動，他知道他的作品離大多數人 還很遙遠，他需要等待，未來會證明他是對的。 李斯特終究不是一個恪守清規戒律的人。它更受不了那種寂寞和孤獨。 雖然他是神父，身披黑黑的道袍。但在這衣服下仍跳動著一顆火熱、充滿生 活意志的心。他關注世上發生的一切變化，關心他身邊的那些年輕音樂家， 並開始從事教育他們的工作，使他們能更快的成長。艱苦的日子磨練了他的 意志，但沒有給他帶來仇恨，而是使他更為溫厚和善良。他原諒了那些攻擊 他和背叛他的人，並一如既往地給他們所需要的那些説明。儘管上了年紀， 他的身邊還是聚滿了一些年輕的音樂家們。 1869 年，在魏瑪大公及音樂界各方人士的不斷請求下，李斯特再次回到 魏瑪，並在那裡從事一些音樂教育和藝術管理方面的工作，因為自從他離開 魏瑪後，德國就失去了往日藝術的繁榮景象，而現在，魏瑪似乎又煥發出昔 日的光輝，他仿佛是一塊磁鐵，他的學生們，那些老朋友們又向他聚集過來， 同時更多的新朋友也走到他的周圍，他和與他反目的老朋友瓦格納又和好 了，並一同出席了他的《耶穌基督》在魏瑪的演出儀式。 1875 年，李斯特又接受了布達佩斯音樂學院院長一職，至此，他把他幾 乎全部的精力都投身到了教育工作中，他堅持一條基本的原則，從不收學生 的學費。從 1876 年開始，他就走馬燈似地奔波于布達佩斯、魏瑪和羅馬之間， 忙於教學工作和一些藝術活動。現在他的學生遍及全世界——美國、俄國以 及歐洲各地，多達幾百名，繁忙的教學工作幾乎耗盡了他所有的時間。然而， 李斯特從不拒絕別人的求教，儘管許多求教者沒有任何音樂的天賦。李斯特 對學生的要求極為嚴格，他不僅給學生們灌輸鋼琴藝術的各種知識，而且還 給他們的心靈灌輸音樂的精髓。在他的門下，湧現了一大批優秀的享譽世界 的鋼琴家；馮•彪羅、陶西格、艾米爾•沙瓦、羅仙達、德爾貝、索菲亞•曼 達、安索爾格等人。他並沒有忘記他的創作，儘管已經年過花甲，但他還在緊張而充滿熱情地進行探索，繼續尋找音樂的新規律、新真理，從他的作品中再很難看到他 早期音樂的那種令人激動的焰火，輝煌而又華麗的畫面，有的是簡單樸素、 筆直挺立，甚至可以說是枯槁、嶙峋，有些苦澀，卸盡鉛華，猶如苦行僧一般。 1886 年,各地為了慶祝李斯特 75 歲生日而舉行了各種慶祝活動，紛紛邀請他出席。他不得不拖著衰老的身體奔往各地，開始了他最後一次長途跋 涉，他途經了法國、英國、德國、比利時等地，無不受到熱烈的歡迎。尤其 是在倫敦，他受到了一個國王才能受到的隆重接待。“當他走進大廳時，人 們全體起立，熱烈歡迎這位當代活著的最偉大的音樂家、鋼琴之王。”儘管長時間的旅行給年老的李斯特帶來無法控制的疲勞，但他仍不忍拒絕各地的殷切希望——聆聽大師的演奏。這時，他的演奏讓人更加難忘，音 樂在他的手下充滿了一片祥和而透明的光芒。旅途的勞累，摧垮了李斯特渾身疾病的身體，然而他不顧這些，堅持要 從巴黎儘快趕回拜洛伊特出席瓦格納的歌劇《特裡斯坦與伊索爾德》的演出 儀式，並連夜兼程，以致於途中受了風寒，病情直轉急下，在神智昏迷時還 不斷地喊著：“特裡斯坦、特裡斯坦——”。 1887 年7 月31日晚，這位偉大的天才終於與世長辭。 李斯特的創作道路和他的演奏經歷正好相反，後者一帆風順，在世時就被冠以“鋼琴之王”的美譽，而前者則歷盡坎坷，眾說紛紜，褒貶不一。無 論是成功還是失敗，他歷來就安之若素，但他對自己作品的未來充滿信心。 在他去世的前一年，他與他的學生去瞻仰著名義大利詩人塔索在羅馬逝世的故居時，他把這偉大詩人的遺體像英雄凱旋似地被運往神殿去戴上桂冠時所 走的路徑指給他的學生看，並說到：“我不會被當作英雄運往神殿，但我的 作品受到賞識的日子必將來臨，不錯，對我來說是太遲了些，因為那時我已 不再和你同在人間。” 究其原因，不外乎於有兩種，一是他的作品反映出較為複雜的藝術面貌， 二是他的作品具有較強的革新意識。 李斯特長年處於一種動盪的生活中。少年時因其父對他嚴格的鋼琴訓 練，而荒廢了文化的學習，到了青年時代，他意識到了知識的重要，讀書廢 寢忘食，最終使自己成為一個飽學的藝術家。然而，他對知識的不加選擇的 吸收，導致了他自相矛盾的思想的形成：一方面他深受雨果、巴爾扎克、裴 多菲等積極浪漫主義作家的影響，具有滿腔熱情，同情革命，為受苦的大眾 疾呼，激烈抨擊不合理的社會制度，而另一方面他又不能擺脫拉馬丁、夏托 布裡安、諾地埃等消極浪漫主義作家的迷惑，感傷飄零命運，在挫折面前表 現出抑鬱、孤獨甚至是厭世的感傷情懷。李斯特個人信仰的形成也並非單一 的。年幼時受巴爾汀神父的影響，認為宗教能拯救人類於苦難之中，在青年 時則轉向聖西門主義，幻想用空想的社會主義來代替資本主義，而當聖西門 主義受到禁止之後又轉向拉門內神父的基督教社會主義。所有這些，都在李 斯特的思想中造成不可調和的碰撞。這些在他的創作中都得到了反映：早期 的作品較為單純，充滿了天才之光和技巧的炫耀，旅行演奏時期大量的改編 曲，即興的以及一些小型作品都針對鋼琴及其技術和演奏藝術的革新，他的 大部分重要的作品都在中年時期完成，複雜的思想無不反映在他各式各樣的 題材中，對英雄的謳歌、對死者的哀悼，對民族的謳歌、為民眾的呐喊。對 人生的思索、對死的無奈、對宗教神靈的崇拜等等，而在晚年的作品中則充 滿了孤獨、哀慟、粗礪和紛亂，充滿了對生命的空虛和虛無的哀歎。由此可 見他在思想的熔爐中經受煎熬的苦痛。 複雜的藝術面貌導致了他對多樣化、矛盾的創作題材的選擇，而這些又促使他對音樂體裁與形式進行創新以便適應內容的需要，由此，他首創了交 響詩這一新的體裁形式，他認為，形式並非是一成不變的，不能用一種形式 去規範形象各異的內容。形式應服從于樂思，而樂思則又應該順應題材本身 的發展，而交響詩這一體裁的最大特點就是，沒有一種固定模式，而是使音 樂順應所要表達的詩歌的內容，這樣，音樂也就具備了詩意。 交響詩使得音樂的標題性原則成了李斯特創作的主要特徵，同時也反映他革新的另一個方面。這也許是他的音樂受到攻擊的主要原因，儘管在他 之前，標題音樂就在貝多芬和柏遼茲等人的音樂中有了最初的萌芽，但對其 理論的系統探討與發展以及對其合理而實際的運用則應歸功於他。可以說他 是標題音樂的光大者，他認為，標題音樂能使聽眾在作曲家所希望的軌道上 去理解音樂、發揮想像力，井同作曲家保持思想上和精神上的一致性，這樣， 聽眾就可不必在一種無目的狀態下去感受音樂；此外，標題音樂可以使音樂 創作避免流入概念化、抽象化，音樂的描述在形式上更加自由而在內容上則 更有目的性，聽眾對音樂所表現的內容的認識也能更加具體和明確。 翻開《格羅夫音樂與音樂家大辭典》就會發現李斯特的創作遺產極為豐 富，近達千部。其寫作風格也是千姿百態。他的若干首匈牙利狂想曲是他愛 國主義的寫照，凝煉了濃郁的匈牙利民族風格；他以人物來命名的標題性交 響曲和交響詩反映了他對英雄人物的崇敬之情，並暗喻自己的人生；他用宗教性題材來寫作的音樂則表現了他神秘的宗教情緒；他的許多鋼琴曲則又是 一幅幅多彩畫面；而他的晚期作品則側重於音樂表現的多方面探索，其新穎 的和聲運用，無調性的和聲寫法，推開了 20 世紀音樂的大門。 今天，當音樂經過了近百年的發展之後，人們才終於正確認識到李斯特 的成就，認識了李斯特音樂的內涵。正是他的革新精神，影響了一大批作家， 才把音樂帶向了今天，帶向未來。 晚年在魏瑪時，他身邊一直圍繞著一群德國年輕音樂家。而且，歐洲各國的音樂新秀也都在尋求他的評點與稱許。經他 品評而成名的有：挪威的格裡格，捷克的史美塔那，俄國的鮑羅廷、季姆斯基，美國的麥克道威爾等。他是十九世紀下半葉歐洲音樂界的唯一大老。當然，偶爾也有例外，他不喜歡布拉姆斯，而布拉姆斯也厭惡他，曾發表宣言攻擊以他為首的“魏瑪樂派”。 李斯特早年以演奏為主，一八三五年以後才逐漸有重要作品產生。他的音樂喜好大膽創新，“交響詩”這種曲式就是他“創造”出來的。他和柏遼茲代表浪漫樂派的“革命派”，對瓦格納影響極其深遠。據說，有一天李斯特和瓦格納一起聆聽瓦格納著名的《特理斯坦與依索爾德》前奏曲時，瓦格納說：“父親大人，這是您的和絃哪!”李斯特有點酸味地回答說：“我現在總算聽到你承認了。” 　　這可能也反映了李斯特音樂的命運：他走了新路，但瓦格納做得更完美、更好，因此他容易被人遺忘。在所有浪漫樂派大作曲家中，他的曲子現在最少演奏、最少人聽。 現在李斯特最通行的樂曲是：第一號鋼琴協奏曲，第二號匈牙利幻想曲、交響詩《前奏曲》及《B小調鋼琴奏鳴曲》。這些曲子表現了共同的特色：雄大的氣魄與細膩的詩情的交迭出現與揉和。前者可以看出他“鋼琴英雄”的風度，缺點是有些虛張聲勢；後者可看出他的柔情與冥思，缺點是有些矯揉做作。上面這四首曲子，可以說是優點集中表現出來，缺點減到最小(甚至沒有)，是他的代表作(特別是一、四兩首)。這是李斯特複雜、矛盾性格的最佳體現。 李斯特以作曲家、指揮家、教師和音樂活動家的身份佔據了19世紀藝術生活的中心位置。浪漫主義音樂的主要代表人物之一。 匈牙利人自詡為歐洲唯一的有色人種，他們的姓名排列也和其他歐洲人不同：姓在前，名在後。 然而這位取得了巨大成功的藝術家沒有脫離浪漫主義的傷感。他說道：“死去，在年輕時死去——多麼幸福。” 匈牙利鋼琴家和作曲家李斯特•菲倫茨生於1811年，自幼跟其父學習鋼琴，9歲時就能演奏難度很大的裡斯（1784——1838）的協奏曲。其後，一些匈牙利貴族提供的津貼，使李斯特能夠繼續深造。 1821年他隨家遷往維也納，拜車爾尼為師，並師從薩列裡學作曲。1823至1835年間在巴黎和音樂家蕭邦、柏遼茲、帕格尼尼等交往，深受他們的影響，嚮往著用藝術改造世界。 1831年，小提琴家帕格尼尼在巴黎出現，引起了空前的轟動，他使李斯特認識到演奏大師所能達到的高度。而新的大量觀眾要求有更加輝煌技巧的演奏家，李斯特便試著迎合了這樣的需求。 李斯特別出心裁地用手指表演，並在演出時不再站在鋼琴前面對著觀眾或背對著觀眾，而採取了更有效果的坐姿。這種姿態顯出了演奏者輪廓清晰的側面像，使人聯想起但丁式的人物。 他俯身在鍵盤上，時而雷鳴轟隆，時而愛語絮絮，時而面帶夢幻般微笑，時而悲慟欲絕。他的個性魅力使許多貴婦人神魂顛倒，他成了最偉大的鋼琴家和引人注目的節目主持人之一。 李斯特最有傳奇色彩的是他的愛情部分。他有三個孩子，但他從沒有結過婚，在他50多年的大部分時間裡，他一直生活在歎息、眼淚和自殺的威脅中。 他曾和著名作家喬治•桑產生了愛情，他們曾一起在瑞士共同生活了一個夏天，後來，因故不歡而散。後來又和洛拉•蒙泰和瑪麗亞•迪普萊西先後愛過，其中瑪麗亞成為小仲馬《茶花女》中的原型。1835年他和達爾古特伯爵夫人同居，1840年分手，伯爵夫人為他生了三個孩子，其中一個女兒（柯西瑪）後來嫁給瓦格納。1843年擔任魏瑪大公的宮廷樂長，1848年他又和俄國親王王妃莎茵-維特根斯坦同居，並成為貴族，改名為弗蘭茲•馮•李斯特。 對李斯特生活發展起過更重要作用的是他和瑪麗•達古爾伯爵夫人的關係，他們一起出走到瑞士，過著田園般的生活。這種關係持續了五六年，他們有了三個孩子，其中的科西瑪後來成了瓦格納的妻子。 不久，這種關係又發生了變化，李斯特和伯爵夫人由恩愛如漆變成了仇目相見，於是又在怒憤中分手。分手後，伯爵夫人用丹尼爾•斯特恩為筆名，在小說中把李斯特作為諷刺的對象。 李斯特作為卓越的鋼琴家在他名聲鼎盛時期退出舞臺，專攻作曲。1848年，他定居在魏瑪，擔任大公爵的宮廷指揮。 在這一時期，李斯特和親王夫人卡洛琳•桑威根斯坦雙雙墮入情網。不久，親王夫人來到魏瑪，把自己的生命與李斯特緊緊地結合在一起。 這以後，李斯特思想趨於消極，篤信天主教，1865年在羅馬梵蒂岡受剪髮禮，成為修士。加入教會後，他寫出了主要的宗教作品，獲得了新的成功。 1875年，李斯特創辦了布達佩斯音樂學院，並親任院長。 1886年，李斯特到拜羅伊特去看望女兒、瓦格納的遺孀科西瑪，在演奏瓦格納作品的音樂節期間逝世，終年76歲。 李斯特的目標是完美的抒情表達方式，用他所說的“音調的神秘語言”來表現精神狀態。他創造性地寫出交響詩的形式，使他的抒情有自由表現的餘地。 李斯特的作品遍及聲樂和器樂的各種體裁，但最重要的是13首交響詩、《浮士德交響曲》、兩首鋼琴協奏曲、19首匈牙利狂想曲、B小調鋼琴協奏曲和三集《巡禮的歲月》。 李斯特把標題音樂的創作提高到新水準，並在貝多芬、孟德爾松和柏遼茲等的音樂會序曲的基礎上開拓出標題音樂的新領域，首創了交響詩的體裁。 李斯特在1848至1858年間，寫了12首交響詩，連同晚年所作的《從搖籃到墳墓》，共13首。這些作品，從形式到內容都和柏遼茲的標題交響曲迥然不同，其目的不在於用音樂來描繪戲劇場面或故事情節，而在於表現某種詩的意境或思想境界。 下面試舉《塔索》說明之。《塔索》是13首交響詩之二，又名“悲哀和勝利”，是為紀念歌德誕生100周年而作，首演於1849年8月28日歌德誕辰紀念會上。 　　塔索全名叫托爾夸脫•塔索，是義大利文藝復興時期的偉大詩人，一生悲慘，曾因神經錯亂而被幽禁多年，晚年窮困潦倒，在義大利四處流浪。 《塔索》的樂曲的標題上，李斯特這樣寫到： 　　“最不幸的詩人的悲慘命運，曾激起當代天才詩人——歌德和拜倫的創造力。歌德的生涯是燦爛幸福的，而拜倫的深刻痛苦卻蓋過了他那高貴的身世。不必隱瞞，當1849年接受為歌德的戲劇寫作序曲時，我們從拜倫否請偉大詩人的靈魂所寄予的尊敬和同情中所得到的靈感，比從歌德作品中所得到的更多、更直接、更豐富。” 李斯特將該曲的主題音樂，取材於義大利威尼斯的船歌，這船歌正是以塔索的著名詩篇《被解放了的耶路撒冷》的開頭幾行為歌詞的。全曲用主題和變奏的形式，結合三部曲式原則而寫成。 《威尼斯船歌》的旋律徐徐飄來，情緒抑鬱而悲壯，歌腔哀傷而嚴肅，像葬禮進行曲。 　　接著主題像一首夜曲，敘述塔索生前一些比較明朗的日子，這又像一首堅定而雄偉的進行曲，體現了詩人的崇高氣質。 音樂很快形成高潮，好像是歡迎詩人到來的熱烈場面。然後轉入篇幅較大的小步舞曲，旋律美妙，富有魅力。它使人聯想到塔索在菲拉臘公國的宮廷舞會上，受到特別優待的動人情景。 接著，哀傷的船歌和夜曲式的旋律再次響起。那悲劇式的音調再次奏出時，銅管樂發出號召式的音響，弦樂齊奏出向上、奔騰的樂句，船歌的音樂主題變得充滿勝利，歡樂、熱烈的氣氛，顯示了塔索死後的光榮。 李斯特的交響詩《塔索》雖從歌德的戲劇得到啟發，但他的創作意圖並不是要表現後世文學家所渲染的這位16世紀義大利大詩人的生活故事，而是把塔索生前的苦痛和死後的榮譽作為鮮明的對照，顯示崇高的文藝事業的偉大力量和最終取得的光輝勝利。 所以說，李斯特的音樂交響詩並不去描繪具體的戲劇情節，而是從性格開始，著力刻畫基本人物的形象，即使在《浮士德交響曲》這樣多樂章的標題交響曲中，也是這樣。 　　李斯特給音樂注入了鮮明的個性，這是浪漫主義個性的具體體現。我們知道，李斯特是現代鋼琴技術創造者之一，他的鋼琴小品像他的歌曲一樣，具有真正的浪漫主義的抒情性質。 李斯特的19首匈牙利狂想曲，可以說是一幅幅匈牙利人民的生活圖畫，具有鮮明的民族色彩。他的這些作品在他的鋼琴作品中佔有特殊的地位。 　　李斯特的19首匈牙利狂想曲都是以匈牙利人和匈牙利的吉普賽人的民歌和民間舞曲為基礎，進行藝術加工和發展而成的。 匈牙利有一種民族舞蹈叫“查爾達什”，由緩慢的“拉蘇舞”和活躍的“弗裡士舞”組成，反映匈牙利的吉普賽人時而鬱鬱寡歡，時而熱情奔放的性格。李斯特的大多數狂想曲都具有這種舞蹈的特性。 匈牙利民間音樂的調式、音樂、樂器演奏方式和民間說唱藝術的朗誦調，都在一定程度上反映在他的每一首狂想曲中。下面，試舉一例說明之。在李斯特的狂想曲中，其中演奏最多的是第二、第六、第十五狂想曲。這些狂想曲作於1851—－1854年間。 《匈牙利狂想曲》第2首運用匈牙利的民間舞曲“查爾達什”寫成。這種舞曲的主要特點是雙拍子，前半部稱“拉蘇”，速度緩慢，後半部稱“弗裡士”，速度迅急。 樂曲開始是緩慢的引子，它沉著有力而帶有宣敘調性，帶倚音的音調具有濃烈的匈牙利民間音樂的色彩。然後是“拉蘇”部分，悲愁的旋律充滿內在的激情，它唱出人民的悲痛、民族的不幸。 隨後，音樂變化反復，猶如鐘聲敲鳴不停。接著，速度加快，進入“弗裡士”部分，高潮來臨，猶如民間節日歡欣鼓舞的場面。然後重整旗鼓，一瀉千里.在振奮人心的沸騰氣氛中終曲。 《匈牙利狂想曲》第6首由四部分組成：l.“威爾本科什”風格的進行曲；2.生動的活潑的二拍子舞；3.朗誦調式的行板；4.熱烈歡快的“弗裡士”舞曲。 其中的“威爾本科什”是盛行於18至19世紀前半葉的匈牙利士兵舞曲，常于募兵時在吉普賽樂隊的伴奏下，由驃騎兵作宣傳鼓動演出之用。 《匈牙利狂想曲》第15首是根據《拉科西進行曲》加工改編而成。《拉科西進行曲》是由拉科西（1676—－1735）創作，經比哈裡加工的一首士兵舞曲。這首舞曲曾受到李斯特的讚譽。 這部狂想曲共分三段：第一段是雄健的進行曲；第二段優美生動，和第一段形成對比；第三段發展為輕巧的華彩段；最後以氣勢豪邁的尾聲結束全曲。 李斯特的鋼琴曲色彩豐富，極富特點，像《愛之夢》，用鋼琴“歌唱”： 愛吧，能愛多久，願愛多久就愛多久吧， 你守在墓前哀訴的時刻快要來到了。 你的心總得保持熾熱，保持眷戀， 只要還有一顆心對你回報溫暖。 只要有人對你披露真誠，你就得盡你所能， 教他時時快樂，沒有片刻愁悶！ 還願你守口如瓶；嚴厲的言辭容易傷人。 天啊——本來沒有什麼惡意—— 卻有人含淚分離。 李斯特晚年的鋼琴作品中，還有一部《匈牙利歷史畫卷》，別出心裁地用音樂為匈牙利傑出人物畫像。其中有政治家舍琴伊、埃奧特活士、泰勒基、德阿克、詩人菲奧遼士馬蒂、裴多菲、音樂家莫松伊等音樂畫像。 李斯特是個偉大的音樂家，他的許多作品取材於詩歌和美術，如從拉斐爾的畫《訂婚》、米開朗基羅的雕刻《思想家》、彼特拉爾卡的3首14行詩等中得到靈感，寫成了《巡禮的歲月》中的5首曲子。 如果說，柏遼茲的音樂語言接近於戲劇語言的話，那麼，李斯特的音樂語言可以說是和詩歌語言血脈相通的。” 今天，“李斯特音樂”的時代已成過去，但李斯特作為人和音樂家，仍然是一個時代的代言人。他說：“在藝術中，一個人必須以宏大的規模進行工作。” 他就是這樣做的。

Franz Liszt (German: [fʁant͡s lɪst]); Hungarian: Liszt Ferencz, in modern use Liszt Ferenc),^[1] (October 22, 1811 – July 31, 1886) was a 19th-century Hungarian^[2][3][4] composer, pianist, conductor, and teacher.

Liszt became renowned in Europe during the nineteenth century for his virtuosic skill as a pianist. He was said by his contemporaries to have been the most technically advanced pianist of his age. In the 1840s he was considered by some to be perhaps the greatest pianist of all time.^[5] He was also a well-known composer, piano teacher, and conductor. He was a benefactor to other composers, including Richard Wagner, Hector Berlioz, Camille Saint-Saëns, Edvard Grieg and Alexander Borodin.^[6]

As a composer, Liszt was one of the most prominent representatives of the “Neudeutsche Schule” (“New German School”). He left behind an extensive and diverse body of work in which he influenced his forward-looking contemporaries and anticipated some 20th-century ideas and trends. Some of his most notable contributions were the invention of the symphonic poem, developing the concept of thematic transformation as part of his experiments in musical form and making radical departures in harmony.^[7]

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Main article: Life of Franz Liszt
Early life

The earliest known ancestor of Liszt is his great-grandfather, Sebastian List, who was one of the thousands of German migrant serfs locally migrating within the Austrian Empire’s territories (around the area now constituting Lower Austria and Hungary), in the first half of the 18th century, and died in 1793 in Rajka, Moson County, Kingdom of Hungary.[8] Liszt’s grandfather was an overseer on several Esterházy estates; he could play the piano, violin and organ.[9] The Liszt clan dispersed throughout Austria and Hungary and gradually lost touch with one another.[10]

Franz Liszt was born to Marie Anna Lager and Ádám Liszt on October 22, 1811, in the village of Doborján (German: Raiding) in Sopron County, in the Kingdom of Hungary.[note 1] His father would use only the Hungarian language when dealing, as steward, with the folk of the village in which the family settled.[11]

Liszt’s father played the piano, violin, cello, and guitar. He had been in the service of Prince Nikolaus II Esterházy and knew Haydn, Hummel and Beethoven personally. At age six, Franz began listening attentively to his father’s piano playing and showed an interest in both sacred and Romani music. Adam began teaching him the piano at age seven, and Franz began composing in an elementary manner when he was eight. He appeared in concerts at Sopron and Pozsony (German: Pressburg; Slovak: Bratislava) in October and November 1820 at age 9. After the concerts, a group of wealthy sponsors offered to finance Franz’s musical education abroad.

In Vienna, Liszt received piano lessons from Carl Czerny, who in his own youth had been a student of Beethoven and Hummel. He also received lessons in composition from Antonio Salieri, who was then music director of the Viennese court. His public debut in Vienna on December 1, 1822, at a concert at the “Landständischer Saal,” was a great success. He was greeted in Austrian and Hungarian aristocratic circles and also met Beethoven and Schubert.[12] In spring 1823, when the one year leave of absence came to an end, Adam Liszt asked Prince Esterházy in vain for two more years. Adam Liszt therefore took his leave of the Prince’s services. At the end of April 1823, the family returned to Hungary for the last time. At end of May 1823, the family went to Vienna again.

Towards the end of 1823 or early 1824, Liszt’s first published composition appeared in print, a Variation on a Waltz by Diabelli (now S. 147), which was Variation 24 in Part II of Vaterländischer Künstlerverein. This anthology, commissioned by Diabelli, included 50 variations on his waltz by 50 different composers (Part II), Part I being taken up by Beethoven’s 33 variations on the same theme, which are now better known as the Diabelli Variations, Op. 120.

Adolescence in Paris

After his father’s death Liszt moved to Paris; for the next five years he was to live with his mother in a small apartment. He gave up touring. To earn money, Liszt gave lessons in piano playing and composition, often from early morning until late at night. His students were scattered across the city and he often had to cover long distances. Because of this, he kept uncertain hours and also took up smoking and drinking—all habits he would continue throughout his life.[13][14]

The following year he fell in love with one of his pupils, Caroline de Saint-Cricq, the daughter of Charles X’s minister of commerce. However, her father insisted that the affair be broken off. Liszt fell very ill, to the extent that an obituary notice was printed in a Paris newspaper, and he underwent a long period of religious doubts and pessimism. He again stated a wish to join the Church but was dissuaded this time by his mother. He had many discussions with the Abbé de Lamennais, who acted as his spiritual father, and also with Chrétien Urhan, a German-born violinist who introduced him to the Saint-Simonists.[13] Urhan also wrote music that was anti-classical and highly subjective, with titles such as Elle et moi, La Salvation angélique and Les Regrets, and may have whetted the young Liszt’s taste for musical romanticism. Equally important for Liszt was Urhan’s earnest championship of Schubert, which may have stimulated his own lifelong devotion to that composer’s music.[15]

During this period Liszt read widely to overcome his lack of a general education, and he soon came into contact with many of the leading authors and artists of his day, including Victor Hugo, Alphonse de Lamartine and Heinrich Heine. He composed practically nothing in these years. Nevertheless, the July Revolution of 1830 inspired him to sketch a Revolutionary Symphony based on the events of the “three glorious days,” and he took a greater interest in events surrounding him. He met Hector Berlioz on December 4, 1830, the day before the premiere of the Symphonie fantastique. Berlioz’s music made a strong impression on Liszt, especially later when he was writing for orchestra. He also inherited from Berlioz the diabolic quality of many of his works.[13]

Paganini

After attending an April 20, 1832 concert for charity, for the victims of a Parisian cholera epidemic, by Niccolò Paganini,[16] Liszt became determined to become as great a virtuoso on the piano as Paganini was on the violin. Paris in the 1830s had become the nexus for pianistic activities, with dozens of pianists dedicated to perfection at the keyboard. Some, such as Sigismond Thalberg and Alexander Dreyschock, focused on specific aspects of technique (e.g. the “three-hand effect” and octaves, respectively). While it was called the “flying trapeze” school of piano playing, this generation also solved some of the most intractable problems of piano technique, raising the general level of performance to previously unimagined heights. Liszt’s strength and ability to stand out in this company was in mastering all the aspects of piano technique cultivated singly and assiduously by his rivals.[17]

In 1833 he made transcriptions of several works by Berlioz, including the Symphonie fantastique. His chief motive in doing so, especially with the Symphonie, was to help the poverty-stricken Berlioz, whose symphony remained unknown and unpublished. Liszt bore the expense of publishing the transcription himself and played it many times to help popularise the original score.[18] He was also forming a friendship with a third composer who influenced him, Frédéric Chopin; under his influence Liszt’s poetic and romantic side began to develop.[13]

 With Countess Marie d’Agoult

n 1833, Liszt began his relationship with the Countess Marie d’Agoult. In addition to this, at the end of April 1834 he made the acquaintance of Felicité de Lamennais. Under the influence of both, Liszt’s creative output exploded. In 1834 Liszt debuted as a mature and original composer with his piano compositions Harmonies poétiques et religieuses and the set of three Apparitions. These were all poetic works which contrasted strongly with the fantasies he had written earlier.[19]
In 1835 the countess left her husband and family to join Liszt in Geneva; their daughter Blandine was born there on December 18. Liszt taught at the newly founded Geneva Conservatory, wrote a manual of piano technique (later lost)[20] and contributed essays for the Paris Revue et gazette musicale. In these essays, he argued for the raising of the artist from the status of a servant to a respected member of the community.[13]

For the next four years Liszt and the countess lived together, mainly in Switzerland and Italy, where their daughter, Cosima, was born in Como, with occasional visits to Paris. On May 9, 1839 Liszt’s and the countess’s only son, Daniel, was born, but that autumn relations between them became strained. Liszt heard that plans for a Beethoven monument in Bonn were in danger of collapse for lack of funds, and pledged his support. Doing so meant returning to the life of a touring virtuoso. The countess returned to Paris with the children, while Liszt gave six concerts in Vienna, then toured Hungary.[13]

Touring Europe

For the next eight years Liszt continued to tour Europe, spending holidays with the countess and their children on the island of Nonnenwerth on the Rhine in summers 1841 and 1843. In spring 1844 the couple finally separated. This was Liszt’s most brilliant period as a concert pianist. Honours were showered on him and he was adulated everywhere he went.^[13] Since Liszt often appeared three or four times a week in concert, it could be safe to assume that he appeared in public well over a thousand times during this eight-year period. Moreover, his great fame as a pianist, which he would continue to enjoy long after he had officially retired from the concert stage, was based mainly on his accomplishments during this time.^[21]

After 1842 “Lisztomania” swept across Europe. The reception Liszt enjoyed as a result can only be described as hysterical. Women fought over his silk handkerchiefs and velvet gloves, which they ripped to shreds as souvenirs. Helping fuel this atmosphere was the artist’s mesmeric personality and stage presence. Many witnesses later testified that Liszt’s playing raised the mood of audiences to a level of mystical ecstasy.^[22]

Adding to his reputation was the fact that Liszt gave away much of his proceeds to charity and humanitarian causes. In fact, Liszt had made so much money by his mid-forties that virtually all his performing fees after 1857 went to charity. While his work for the Beethoven monument and the Hungarian National School of Music are well known, he also gave generously to the building fund of Cologne Cathedral, the establishment of a Gymnasium at Dortmund, and the construction of the Leopold Church in Pest. There were also private donations to hospitals, schools and charitable organizations such as the Leipzig Musicians Pension Fund. When he found out about the Great Fire of Hamburg, which raged for three weeks during May 1842 and destroyed much of the city, he gave concerts in aid of the thousands of homeless there.^[23]

 Liszt in Weimar

In February 1847, Liszt played in Kiev. There he met the Princess Carolyne zu Sayn-Wittgenstein, who dominated most of the rest of his life. She persuaded him to concentrate on composition, which meant giving up his career as a travelling virtuoso. After a tour of the Balkans, Turkey and Russia that summer, Liszt gave his final concert for pay at Elisavetgrad in September. He spent the winter with the princess at her estate in Woronince.[24] By retiring from the concert platform at 35, while still at the height of his powers, Liszt succeeded in keeping the legend of his playing untarnished.[25]

The following year, Liszt took up a long-standing invitation of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna of Russia to settle at Weimar, where he had been appointed Kapellmeister Extraordinaire in 1842, remaining there until 1861. During this period he acted as conductor at court concerts and on special occasions at the theatre. He gave lessons to a number of pianists, including the great virtuoso Hans von Bülow, who married Liszt’s daughter Cosima in 1857 (years later, she would marry Richard Wagner). He also wrote articles championing Berlioz and Wagner. Finally, Liszt had ample time to compose and during the next 12 years revised or produced those orchestral and choral pieces upon which his reputation as a composer mainly rests. His efforts on behalf of Wagner, who was then an exile in Switzerland, culminated in the first performance of Lohengrin in 1850.

Princess Carolyne lived with Liszt during his years in Weimar. She eventually wished to marry Liszt, but since she had been previously married and her husband, Russian military officer Prince Nikolaus zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Ludwigsburg (1812–1864), was still alive, she had to convince the Roman Catholic authorities that her marriage to him had been invalid. After huge efforts and a monstrously intricate process, she was temporarily successful (September 1860). It was planned that the couple would marry in Rome, on October 22, 1861, Liszt’s 50th birthday. Liszt having arrived in Rome on October 21, 1861, the Princess nevertheless declined, by the late evening, to marry him. It appears that both her husband and the Tsar of Russia had managed to quash permission for the marriage at the Vatican. The Russian government also impounded her several estates in the Polish Ukraine, which made her later marriage to anybody unfeasible.

Liszt in Rome

The 1860s were a period of great sadness in Liszt’s private life. On December 13, 1859, he lost his son Daniel, and on September 11, 1862, his daughter Blandine also died. In letters to friends, Liszt afterwards announced that he would retreat to a solitary living. He found it at the monastery Madonna del Rosario, just outside Rome, where on June 20, 1863, he took up quarters in a small, Spartan apartment. He had on June 23, 1857, already joined a Franciscan order.[26]

On April 25, 1865, he received the tonsure at the hands of Cardinal Hohenlohe. Following this he was sometimes called the Abbé Liszt. On July 31, 1865 he received the four minor orders of porter, lector, exorcist, and acolyte. On August 14, 1879 he was made an honorary canon of Albano.[27]

On some occasions, Liszt took part in Rome’s musical life. On March 26, 1863, at a concert at the Palazzo Altieri, he directed a programme of sacred music. The “Seligkeiten” of his “Christus-Oratorio” and his “Cantico del Sol di Francesco d’Assisi”, as well as Haydn’s “Die Schöpfung” and works by J. S. Bach, Beethoven, Jommelli, Mendelssohn and Palestrina were performed. On January 4, 1866, Liszt directed the “Stabat mater” of his “Christus-Oratorio”, and on February 26, 1866, his “Dante Symphony”. There were several further occasions of similar kind, but in comparison with the duration of Liszt’s stay in Rome, they were exceptions. Bódog Pichler, who visited Liszt in 1864 and asked him for his future plans, had the impression that Rome’s musical life was not satisfying for Liszt.

Threefold life

Liszt was invited back to Weimar in 1869 to give master classes in piano playing. Two years later he was asked to do the same in Budapest at the Hungarian Music Academy. From then until the end of his life he made regular journeys between Rome, Weimar and Budapest, continuing what he called his “vie trifurquée” or threefold existence. It is estimated that Liszt travelled at least 4,000 miles a year during this period in his life—an exceptional figure given his advancing age and the rigors of road and rail in the 1870s.[28]

Last years

Liszt fell down the stairs of the Hotel in Weimar on July 2, 1881. Though friends and colleagues had noted swelling in his feet and legs when he had arrived in Weimar the previous month (an indication of possible congestive heart failure), he had been in good health upto that point and was still fit and active. He was left immobilized for eight weeks after the accident and never fully recovered from it. A number of ailments manifested—dropsy, asthma, insomnia, a cataract of the left eye and heart disease. The last-mentioned eventually contributed to Liszt’s death. He became increasingly plagued by feelings of desolation, despair and preoccupation with death—feelings which he expressed in his works from this period. As he told Lina Ramann, “I carry a deep sadness of the heart which must now and then break out in sound.”[29]

He died in Bayreuth, Germany, on July 31, 1886, at age 74, officially as a result of pneumonia which he may have contracted during the Bayreuth Festival hosted by his daughter Cosima. Questions have been posed as to whether medical malpractice played a direct part in Liszt’s demise.[30]

Composer Camille Saint-Saëns, an old friend, whom Liszt had once called “the greatest organist in the world”, dedicated his Symphony No. 3 “Organ Symphony” to Liszt; it had premiered in London only a few weeks before his death.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Liszt as pianist

Performing style
There are few, if any, good sources that give an impression of how Liszt really sounded from the 1820s. Carl Czerny claimed Liszt was a natural who played according to feeling, and reviews of his concerts especially praise the brilliance, strength and precision in his playing. At least one also mentions his ability to keep absolute tempo,[31] which may be due to his father’s insistence that he practice with a metronome.[citation needed] His repertoire at this time consisted primarily of pieces in the style of the brilliant Viennese school, such as concertos by Hummel and works by his former teacher Czerny, and his concerts often included a chance for the boy to display his prowess in improvisation.

Franz Liszt Fantasizing at the Piano (1840), by Danhauser, commissioned by Conrad Graf. The imagined gathering shows seated Alfred de Musset or Alexandre Dumas, George Sand, Franz Liszt, Marie d’Agoult; standing Hector Berlioz or Victor Hugo, Niccolò Paganini, Gioachino Rossini; a bust of Beethoven on the grand piano (a “Graf”), a portrait of Lord Byron on the wall, a statue of Joan of Arc on the far left.[32][33][34]Following the death of Liszt’s father in 1827 and his hiatus from the life as a touring virtuoso, it is likely Liszt’s playing gradually developed a more personal style. One of the most detailed descriptions of his playing from this time comes from the winter of 1831/1832, during which he was earning a living primarily as a teacher in Paris. Among his pupils were Valerie Boissier, whose mother Caroline kept a careful diary of the lessons. From her we learn that:

“M. Liszt’s playing contains abandonment, a liberated feeling, but even when it becomes impetuous and energetic in his fortissimo, it is still without harshness and dryness. […] [He] draws from the piano tones that are purer, mellower and stronger than anyone has been able to do; his touch has an indescribable charm. […] He is the enemy of affected, stilted, contorted expressions. Most of all, he wants truth in musical sentiment, and so he makes a psychological study of his emotions to convey them as they are. Thus, a strong expression is often followed by a sense of fatigue and dejection, a kind of coldness, because this is the way nature works.”

Possibly influenced by Paganini’s showmanship, once Liszt began focusing on his career as a pianist again his emotionally vivid presentations of the music were rarely limited to mere sound. His facial expression and gestures at the piano would reflect what he played, for which he was sometimes mocked in the press.[35] Also noted was the extravagant liberties he could take with the text of a score at this time. Berlioz tells us how Liszt would add cadenzas, tremolos and trills when playing the first movement of Beethoven’s Moonlight Sonata, and created a dramatic scene by changing the tempo between Largo and Presto.[36] In his Baccalaureus letter to George Sand from the beginning of 1837, Liszt admitted that he had done so for the purpose of gaining applause, and promised to follow both the letter and the spirit of a score from then on. It has been debated to what extent he realized his promise, however. By July 1840 the British newspaper The Times could still report

“His performance commenced with Händel’s Fugue in E minor, which was played by Liszt with an avoidance of everything approaching to meretricious ornament, and indeed scarcely any additions, except a multitude of ingeniously contrived and appropriate harmonies, casting a glow of colour over the beauties of the composition, and infusing into it a spirit which from no other hand it ever received.”

Repertoire
During his years as a travelling virtuoso Liszt performed an enormous amount of music throughout Europe,[37] but his core repertoire always centered around his own compositions, paraphrases and transcriptions. Studying Liszt’s German concerts between 1840 and 1845, the five most frequently played pieces were the Grand galop chromatique, Schubert’s Erlkönig (in Liszt’s transcription), Réminiscences de Don Juan, Réminiscences de Robert le Diable, and Réminiscences de Lucia de Lammermoor.[38] Among the works by other composers we find compositions like Weber’s Invitation to the Dance, Chopin mazurkas, études by composers like Ignaz Moscheles, Chopin and Ferdinand Hiller, but also major works by Beethoven, Schumann, Weber and Hummel, and from time to time even selections from Bach, Handel and Scarlatti.

Most of the concerts at this time were shared with other artists, and as a result Liszt also often accompanied singers, participated in chamber music, or performed works with an orchestra in addition to his own solo part. Frequently played works include Weber’s Konzertstück, Beethoven’s Emperor Concerto and Choral Fantasy, and Liszt’s reworking of the Hexameron for piano and orchestra. His chamber music repertoire included Hummel’s Septet, Beethoven’s Archduke Trio and Kreutzer Sonata, and a large selection of songs by composers like Rossini, Donizetti, Beethoven and especially Schubert. At some concerts Liszt could not find musicians to share the program with, and consequently was among the first to give solo piano recitals in the modern sense of the word. The term was coined by the publisher Frederick Beale, who suggested it for Liszt’s concert at the Hanover Square Rooms in London on June 9, 1840,[39] even though Liszt had given concerts all by himself already by March 1839.[40]

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Musical works

Liszt was a prolific composer. His composition career has a clear arch that follows his changing professional and personal life.[citation needed] Liszt is best known for his piano music, but he wrote extensively for many media. Because of his background as a forefront technical piano virtuoso, Liszt’s piano works are often marked by their difficulty. Liszt is very well known as a programmatic composer, or an individual who bases his compositional ideas in extra-musical things such as a poetry or painting. Liszt is credited with the creation of the Symphonic Poem which is a programmatic orchestral work that generally consists of a single movement.

Liszt’s compositional style delved deeply into issues of unity both within and across movements. For this reason, in his most famous and virtuosic works, he is an archetypal Romantic composer. Liszt pioneered the technique of thematic transformation, a method of development which was related to both the existing variation technique and to the new use of the Leitmotif by Richard Wagner.

Piano music

The largest and best-known portion of Liszt’s music is his original piano work. His thoroughly revised masterwork, “Années de pèlerinage” (“Years of Pilgrimage”) includes arguably his most provocative and stirring pieces. This set of three suites ranges from the virtuosity of the Suisse Orage (Storm) to the subtle and imaginative visualizations of artworks by Michelangelo and Raphael in the second set. Années contains some pieces which are loose transcriptions of Liszt’s own earlier compositions; the first “year” recreates his early pieces of “Album d’un voyageur”, while the second book includes a resetting of his own song transcriptions once separately published as “Tre sonetti di Petrarca” (“Three sonnets of Petrarch”). The relative obscurity of the vast majority of his works may be explained by the immense number of pieces he composed, and the level of technical difficulty which was present in much of his composition.

Liszt’s piano works are usually divided into two categories. On the one hand, there are “original works”, and on the other hand “transcriptions”, “paraphrases” or “fantasies” on works by other composers. Examples for the first category are works such as the piece Harmonies poétiques et religieuses of May 1833 and the Piano Sonata in B minor (1853). Liszt’s transcriptions of Schubert songs, his fantasies on operatic melodies, and his piano arrangements of symphonies by Berlioz and Beethoven are examples from the second category. As special case, Liszt also made piano arrangements of his own instrumental and vocal works. Examples of this kind are the arrangement of the second movement “Gretchen” of his Faust Symphony and the first “Mephisto Waltz” as well as the “Liebesträume No. 3” and the two volumes of his “Buch der Lieder”

Transcriptions

When Liszt wrote transcriptions of works by other composers, he invested a lot of creativity in doing so. Instead of just overtaking original melodies and harmonies, he ameliorated them. In the case of his fantasies and transcriptions in the Italian style, composers such as Bellini and Donizetti knew that certain forms, usually periods of eight measures, were to be filled with music. Occasionally, while the first half of a period was composed with inspiration, the second half was added with mechanical routine. Liszt changed this by modifying the melody, bass and occasionally the harmonies.

Liszt’s transcriptions yielded results that were often more inventive than what Liszt or the original composer could have achieved alone. Some notable examples are the Sonnambula-fantasy (Bellini), the Rigoletto-Paraphrase (Verdi), the Faust-Walzer (Gounod), and “Réminiscences de Don Juan” (Mozart). Hans von Bülow admitted that Liszt’s transcription of his Dante Sonett “Tanto gentile” was much more refined than the original he himself had composed.[41] Liszt’s transcriptions of Schubert songs, his fantasies on operatic melodies, and his piano arrangements of symphonies by Berlioz and Beethoven are other well known examples of piano transcriptions.[citation needed]

Liszt was the second pianist (after Kalkbrenner) to transcribe Beethoven’s symphonies for the piano. He usually performed them for audiences that would probably never have an opportunity to hear the orchestral version.

Original songs

Franz Liszt composed about six dozen original songs with piano accompaniment. In most cases the lyrics were in German or French, but there are also some songs in Italian and Hungarian and one song in English. Liszt began with the song “Angiolin dal biondo crin” in 1839, and by 1844 had composed about two dozen songs. Some of them had been published as single pieces. In addition, there was an 1843–1844 series “Buch der Lieder”. The series had been projected for three volumes, consisting of six songs each, but only two volumes appeared.

Although Liszt’s early songs are seldom sung, they show him in much better light than works such as the paraphrase “Gaudeamus igitur” and the Galop after Bulhakow, both composed in 1843. The transcriptions of the two volumes of the “Buch der Lieder” can be counted among Liszt’s finest piano works.[42] However, the contemporaries had much to criticise with regard to the style of the songs. Further critical remarks can be found in Peter Raabe’s Liszts Schaffen.

Today, Liszt’s songs are nearly entirely forgotten. As an exception, most frequently the song “Ich möchte hingehen” is cited. It is because of a single bar, most resembling the opening motif of Wagner’s Tristan und Isolde. While it is commonly claimed that Liszt wrote that motif ten years before Wagner started work on his masterpiece,[43] it has turned out that this is not true: the original version of “Ich möchte hingehn” was composed in 1844 or 1845. There are four manuscripts, and only a single one, a copy by August Conradi, contains the said bar with the Tristan motif. It is on a paste-over in Liszt’s hand. Since in the second half of 1858 Liszt was preparing his songs for publication, and he just at that time received the first act of Wagner’s Tristan, it is most likely that the version on the paste-over was a quotation from Wagner.[44] This is not to say, the motif was originally invented by Wagner. An earlier example can be found in bar 100 of Liszt’s Ballade No. 2 in B minor for piano, composed in 1853.[45]

Programme music

Liszt, in some of his works, supported the idea of programme music – that is, music intended to evoke extra-musical ideas. By contrast, absolute music (a radical new idea in the 19th century world of music) stands for itself and is intended to be appreciated without any particular reference to the outside world.

Liszt’s own point of view regarding programme music can for the time of his youth be taken from the preface of the Album d’un voyageur (1837). According to this, a landscape could evoke a certain kind of mood. Since a piece of music could also evoke a mood, a mysterious resemblance with the landscape could be imagined. In this sense the music would not paint the landscape, but it would match the landscape in a third category, the mood.

In July 1854 Liszt wrote his essay about Berlioz and Harold in Italy that stated that not all music was programme music. If, in the heat of a debate, a person would go so far as to claim the contrary, it would be better to put all ideas of programme music aside. But it would be possible to take means like harmony, modulation, rhythm, instrumentation and others to let a musical motif endure a fate. In any case, a programme should only be added to a piece of music if it was necessarily needed for an adequate understanding of that piece.

Still later, in a letter to Marie d’Agoult of November 15, 1864, Liszt wrote:

“Without any reserve I completely subscribe to the rule of which you so kindly want to remind me, that those musical works which are in a general sense following a programme must take effect on imagination and emotion, independent of any programme. In other words: All beautiful music must be first rate and always satisfy the absolute rules of music which are not to be violated or prescribed”.[46]

Symphonic poems

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Literary works

Besides his musical works, Liszt wrote essays about many subjects. Most important for an understanding of his development is the article series “De la situation des artistes” (“On the situation of the artists”) which was published in the Parisian Gazette musicale in 1835. In winter 1835–36, during Liszt’s stay in Geneva, about half a dozen further essays followed. One of them was slated to be published under the pseudonym, “Emm Prym”, was about Liszt’s own works. It was sent to Maurice Schlesinger, editor of the Gazette musicale. Schlesinger, however, following the advice of Berlioz, did not publish it.[56] In the beginning of 1837, Liszt published a review of some piano works of Sigismond Thalberg. The review provoked a huge scandal.[57] Liszt also published a series of writings titled “Baccalaureus letters”, ending in 1841.

During the Weimar years, Liszt wrote a series of essays about operas, leading from Gluck to Wagner. Liszt also wrote essays about Berlioz and the symphony Harold in Italy, Robert and Clara Schumann, John Field’s nocturnes, songs of Robert Franz, a planned Goethe foundation at Weimar, and other subjects. In addition to essays, Liszt wrote a book about Chopin as well as a book about the Romanis (Gypsies) and their music in Hungary.

While all of those literary works were published under Liszt’s name, it is not quite clear which parts of them he had written himself. It is known from his letters that during the time of his youth there had been collaboration with Marie d’Agoult. During the Weimar years it was the Princess Wittgenstein who helped him. In most cases the manuscripts have disappeared so that it is difficult to determine which of Liszt’s literary works actually were works of his own. However, until the end of his life it was Liszt’s point of view that it was he who was responsible for the contents of those literary works.

Liszt also worked until at least 1885 on a treatise for modern harmony. Pianist Arthur Friedheim, who also served as Liszt’s personal secretary, remembered seeing it among Liszt’s papers at Weimar. Liszt told Friedheim that the time was not yet ripe to publish the manuscript, titled Sketches for a Harmony of the Future. Unfortunately, this treatise has been lost.

Liszt also wrote a biography of his friend and fellow composer Frédéric Chopin, “Life of Chopin”.[58]

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Legacy Although there was a period in which many considered Liszt’s works “flashy” or superficial, it is now held that many of Liszt’s compositions such as Nuages gris, Les jeux d’eaux à la villa d’Este, etc., which contain parallel fifths, the whole-tone scale, parallel diminished and augmented triads, and unresolved dissonances, anticipated and influenced twentieth century music like that of Debussy, Ravel and Bartok.[59]

Liszt was one of the most noted teachers of the 19th century. This part of his career commenced after his father’s death in August 1827. For the purpose of earning his own and his mother’s living, Liszt gave lessons in composition and piano playing. According to a letter to Monsieur de Mancy on December 23, 1829, he was so full of lessons that each day, from half-past eight in the morning till 10 at night, he had scarcely breathing time.[60] Most of Liszt’s students of this period were amateurs, but there were also some who made a professional career. An example of the first kind is Valérie Boissier, the later Comtesse de Gasparin. Examples of the second kind are Julius Eichberg, Pierre Wolff, and Hermann Cohen. During winter 1835–36 they were Liszt’s colleagues at the Conservatoire at Geneva. Wolff then went to Saint Petersburg.

Cohen, who from George Sand received the nickname “Puzzi”, developed into a very successful pianist. Of Jewish origin, he was baptized on August 28, 1847. On this day he experienced what he called an “apparition” of Christ, Mary and the saints in an “ecstasy of love”. A year later he became novice of a Carmelite convent. When on October 7, 1850, he was professed, he took the name Père Augstin–Marie du Très Saint Sacrament (“Pater Augustin–Mary of the Most Holy Sacrament”). On April 19, 1851, he was ordained as priest. In spring 1862 he met Liszt in Rome. After colloquies with Pater Augustin, Liszt decided that he would himself become ecclesiastic.[61]

During the years of his tours Liszt gave only few lessons. Examples of students from this period are Johann Nepumuk Dunkl and Wilhelm von Lenz. Dunkl received lessons from Liszt during winter 1839–40. He had introduced himself by playing Thalberg’s Fantasy Op. 6 on melodies from Meyerbeer’s opera “Robert le diable”. Liszt later called him a “Halbschüler” (“half-student”). Lenz, from St. Petersburg, had met Liszt already at the end of 1828. In summer 1842 he was in Paris again where he received further lessons from Liszt. He was merely an amateur with a repertoire of pieces such as Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9/2. In spring 1844, in Dresden, Liszt met the young Hans von Bülow, his later son in law. Bülow’s repertoire included Thalberg’s Fantasy “La Donna del Lago” Op. 40 and Liszt’s Sonnambula-Fantasy.

Later students
Since Liszt had settled in Weimar, the number of those who received lessons from him was steadily increasing. Until his death in 1886 there would have been several hundred people who in some sense may have been regarded as his students. August Göllerich published a voluminous catalogue of them.[62] In a note he added the remark that he had taken the connotation “student” in its widest sense. As consequence, his catalogue includes names of pianists, violinists, cellists, harpists, organists, composers, conductors, singers and even writers. Another catalogue was prepared by Carl Lachmund. In Lachmund’s catalogue his own wife’s name, missing in Göllerich’s catalogue, is included. She had successfully persuaded Liszt to listen to her playing the harp. After she had played a single piece, without Liszt saying a word about it, she was nominated as Liszt’s student by her husband.

The following catalogue by Ludwig Nohl, headed with “Die Hauptschüler Liszts” (“Liszt’s main students”), was approved in September 1881 and, with regard to the order of the names, corrected, by Liszt.[63]

Later students
Since Liszt had settled in Weimar, the number of those who received lessons from him was steadily increasing. Until his death in 1886 there would have been several hundred people who in some sense may have been regarded as his students. August Göllerich published a voluminous catalogue of them.[62] In a note he added the remark that he had taken the connotation “student” in its widest sense. As consequence, his catalogue includes names of pianists, violinists, cellists, harpists, organists, composers, conductors, singers and even writers. Another catalogue was prepared by Carl Lachmund. In Lachmund’s catalogue his own wife’s name, missing in Göllerich’s catalogue, is included. She had successfully persuaded Liszt to listen to her playing the harp. After she had played a single piece, without Liszt saying a word about it, she was nominated as Liszt’s student by her husband.

The following catalogue by Ludwig Nohl, headed with “Die Hauptschüler Liszts” (“Liszt’s main students”), was approved in September 1881 and, with regard to the order of the names, corrected, by Liszt.[63]

In 1886 a similar catalogue would have been much longer, including names such as Eugen d’Albert, Walter Bache, Carl Lachmund, Moriz Rosenthal, Emil Sauer, Alexander Siloti, Conrad Ansorge, William Dayas, August Göllerich, Bernhard Stavenhagen, August Stradal, and István Thomán.

Nohl’s catalogue was by far not complete, and this even when the restriction to the period since the Weimar years is neglected. Of Liszt’s Hungarian students, for example, only Antal Sipos and Ilonka Ravasz were mentioned. Sipos had become Liszt’s student in 1858 in Weimar, after Liszt had heard him playing at a concert and invited him. In 1861 Sipos returned to Budapest, where in 1875 he founded a music school.[64] Ilonka Ravasz was since winter 1875–76 one of Liszt’s most gifted students at the newly founded Royal Academy for Music at Budapest. Astonishingly, the names of Aladár Juhász and Károly Aggházy are missing in Nohl’s catalogue, although both had been among Liszt’s favourite students at the Hungarian Academy.

Also missing are the names of Agnes Street-Klindworth and Olga Janina. Agnes Street-Klindworth had in 1853 arrived in Weimar, where she received lessons in piano playing from Liszt and lessons in composition from Peter Cornelius. Until 1861 she was Liszt’s secret mistress. Olga Janina had joined the circle around Liszt in 1869 in Rome. According to Liszt’s impression, she had rare and admirable musical talents.[65] In his presence, she performed his piano concertos in E-flat and A Major as well as further examples of his works.

Unfortunately, Olga Janina fell in love with Liszt. They had a short affair, until in spring 1871—on Liszt’s initiative—they separated. Olga went to America, but in spring 1873 returned to Budapest. In a telegram to Liszt she had announced that she would kill him. After three adventurous days together with Liszt in an apartment in Budapest she left.[66] Together with Liszt’s student Franz Servais she first went to Belgium where she gave concerts which were brilliant successes. She then, together with Servais, went to Italy.

During the 1870s Olga Janina wrote several scandalous books about Liszt, among them the novel Souvenirs d’une Cosaque, published under the pseudonym “Robert Franz”. In Göllerich’s catalogue of Liszt’s students she is registered as “Janina, Olga, Gräfin (Marquise Cezano) (Genf)”. Thus she may have changed her name and moved to Geneva. Taking the preface of her Souvenirs d’une Cosaque literally, she had first moved from Italy to Paris where she had lived in poverty. The last paragraph of the preface can be read as a dedication to Liszt.

Besides Liszt’s master students there was a crowd of those who could at best reach only moderate abilities.[67] In such cases, Liszt’s lessons changed nothing.[68] However, also several of Liszt’s master students were disappointed about him.[69] An example is Eugen d’Albert, who in the end was on nearly hostile terms with Liszt.[70] The same must be said of Felix Draeseke who had joined the circle around Liszt at Weimar in 1857, and who during the first half of the 1860s had been one of the most prominent representatives of the New German School. In Nohl’s catalogue he is not even mentioned. Also Hans von Bülow, since the 1860s, had more and more drifted towards a direction which was not only different from Liszt’s, but opposite to it

According to August Stradal, some of Liszt’s master students had claimed that Anton Rubinstein was a better teacher than Liszt.[71] It might have been meant as allusion to Emil Sauer, who had in Moscow studied with Nikolai Rubinstein. During a couple of months in summers 1884 and 1885 he studied with Liszt at Weimar. When he arrived for the first time, he already was a virtuoso of strongest calibre who shortly before had made a concert tour through Spain. The question of whether there was any change in his playing after he had studied with Liszt remains open. According to his autobiography Meine Welt, he had found it imposing when Arthur Friedheim was thundering Liszt’s Lucrezia-Fantasy. Regarding Liszt’s playing a Beethoven Sonata, however, he wrote, Liszt had at least given a good performance as actor. As his opinion, Sauer had told his fellow students that Anton Rubinstein was a greater composer than Liszt.[72] In Sauer’s own compositions, a piano concerto, two sonatas, about two and a half dozen Etudes and several concert pieces, no influence of Liszt as composer of the 1880s can be recognized.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Liszt’s teaching approach

Liszt offered his students little technical advice, expecting them to “wash their dirty linen at home,” as he phrased it. Instead, he focused on musical interpretation with a combination of anecdote, metaphor and wit. He advised one student tapping out the opening chords of Beethoven’s Waldstein Sonata, “Do not chop beefsteak for us.” To another who blurred the rhythm in Liszt’s Gnomenreigen (usually done by playing the piece too fast in the composer’s presence): “There you go, mixing salad again.” Liszt also wanted to avoid creating carbon copies of himself; rather, he believed in preserving artistic individuality.[73]

There were some pieces which Liszt famously refused to hear at his masterclasses. Among them were Carl Tausig’s transcription of J. S. Bach’s organ Toccata and Fugue in D minor, and Chopin’s Scherzo No. 2 in B-flat minor. Liszt also did not like to hear his own Polonaise No. 2 in E Major, as it was overplayed and frequently badly played.

Liszt did not charge for lessons. He was troubled when German newspapers published details of pedagogue Theodor Kullak’s will, revealing that Kullak had generated more than one million marks from teaching. “As an artist, you do not rake in a million marks without performing some sacrifice on the altar of Art,” Liszt told his biographer Lina Ramann. However, Carl Czerny charged an expensive fee for lessons and even dismissed Stephen Heller when he was unable to afford to pay for his lessons. Interestingly, Liszt spoke very fondly of his former teacher, to whom he dedicated his Transcendental Etudes. He wrote the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, urging Kullak’s sons to create an endowment for needy musicians, as Liszt himself frequently did.[28]

In the summer of 1936, Hungarian-French music critic Emil Haraszti published a two-part essay on Liszt, entitled Liszt á Paris in the publication La Revue musicale. In 1937 he published Deux Franciscians: Adam et Franz Liszt and in December of that year published La Probleme Liszt. The essay, which is a deep exploration of the musicality of Liszt, established Haraszti as one of the foremost Liszt scholars of his generation.[74]

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Royal Academy of Music at Budapest

Since the early 1860s there were attempts of some of Liszt’s Hungarian contemporaries to have him settled with a position in Hungary. In January 1862, in Rome, Liszt received a letter by Baron Gábor Prónay, since 1850 President of a Conservatory in Pest. Baron Prónay offered Liszt the position as President. When in 1867 the Conservatory became “Ungarisches National Konservatorium” (“Hungarian National Conservatory”), Baron Prónay still tried to persuade Liszt to take the leadership.[75] Liszt, however, in letters to Baron Prónay and further ones of his Hungarian contemporaries explained that his career as virtuoso and as conductor had finally ended. If he took a position in Hungary, it would be solely for the purpose of spreading his own compositions, his Oratorios and his symphonic works. Besides, as soon as he left Rome, it was his duty to spend some months of the year in Weimar. The Grand Duc had for several times asked for it.[76]

In 1871 the Hungarian Prime Minister Gyula Andrássy made a new attempt. In a writing of June 4, 1871, to the Hungarian King[77] he demanded an annual rent of 4,000 Gulden and the rank of a “Königlicher Rat” (“Crown Councillor”) for Liszt, who in return would permanently settle in Budapest, directing the orchestra of the National Theatre as well as music schools and further musical institutions. With decision of June 13, 1871, the King agreed.[78] By that time there were also plans of the foundation of a Royal Academy for Music at Budapest, of which the Hungarian state should be in charge. The Royal Academy is not to be confused with the National Conservatory which still existed. The National Conservatory, of which the city Budapest was in charge, was until his death in 1875 directed by Baron Prónay. His successor was Count Géza Zichy.

The plan of the foundation of the Royal Academy was in 1871 refused by the Hungarian Parliament, but a year later the Parliament agreed. Liszt was ordered to take part in the foundation. In March 1875 he was nominated as President. According to his wishes, the Academy should have been opened not earlier than in late autumn 1876. However, the Academy was officially opened already on November 14, 1875. Since it was Liszt’s opinion that his colleagues Franz Erkel, the director, Kornél Ábrányi and Robert Volkmann could quite well do this job without him, he was absent. He arrived on February 15, 1876, in Budapest. On March 2 he started giving lessons, and on March 30 he left. The main purpose of his coming to Budapest had been a charity concert on March 20 in favour of the victims of a flood.

In November 1875, 38 students had passed the entrance examinations. 21 of them wanted to study piano playing, the others composition. Details of the entrance examinations are known from an account by Károly Swoboda (Szabados), one of Liszt’s first students at the Royal Academy.[79] According to this, candidates for a piano class had to play a single piano piece of their own choice. It could be a sonata movement by Mozart, Clementi or Beethoven. The candidates then had to sight read an easy further piece. Candidates for a composition class had to reproduce and continue a given melody of 4, 5 or 8 bars, after Volkmann had played it for about half a dozen times to them. Besides, they had to put harmonies to a given bass which was written on a table.

After Liszt had arrived, he selected 8 students for his class for advanced piano playing. To these came Áladár Juhász as the most outstanding one. As exception, he was to study piano playing only with Liszt.[80] The others were matriculated as students of Erkel, since it was him from whom they would receive their lessons during Liszt’s absence. Erkel also gave lessons in specific matters of Hungarian music. Volkmann gave lessons in composition and instrumentation. Ábrányi gave lessons in music aesthetics and harmony theory. Liszt had wished that there should have been a class for sacral music, led by Franz Xaver Witt. He had also wished that Hans von Bülow should take a position as piano professor. However, neither Witt nor Bülow agreed.

In spite of the conditions under which Liszt had in June 1871 been appointed as “Königlicher Rat”, he neither directed the orchestra of the National Theatre, nor did he permanently settle in Hungary.[81] As usual case, he arrived in mid-winter in Budapest. After one or two concerts of his students by the beginning of spring he left. He never took part in the final examinations, which were in summer of every year. Most of his students were still matriculated as students of either Erkel or later Henrik Gobbi. Some of them joined the lessons which he gave in summer in Weimar. In winter, when he was in Budapest, some students of his Weimar circle joined him there.

Judging from the concert programs of Liszt’s students at Budapest, the standard resembled that of an advanced masterclass of our days. There was a difference, however, with regard to the repertoire. Most works as played at the concerts were works of composers of the 19th century, and many of the composers are now forgotten. As rare exceptions, occasionally a piece of J. S. Bach or Händel was played. Mozart and Haydn, but also Schubert and Weber, were missing. Of Beethoven only a comparatively small selection of his works was played. In typical cases Liszt himself was merely represented with his transcriptions.

The actual abilities Liszt’s students at Budapest and the standard of their playing can only be guessed. Liszt’s lessons of winter 1877–78 were in letters to Lina Ramann described by Auguste Rennebaum, herself Liszt’s student at the Royal Academy. According to this, there had been some great talents in Liszt’s class. However, the abilities of the majority had been very poor.[82] August Stradal, who visited Budapest in 1885 and 1886, took the same point of view.[83] In contrast to this, Deszö Legány claimed, much in Stradal’s book was nonsense, taken from Stradal’s own fantasy.[84] Legány’s own reliability, however, is not beyond doubt since many of his attempts of whitewashing Liszt and—even more—the Hungarian contemporaries are too obvious. Margit Prahács shared and supported Stradal’s view. Her quotations from the contemporary Hungarian press show that much of Stradal’s critique had been true. Concerning Liszt’s relation with his Hungarian contemporaries at the end of his life, for example, in spring 1886 the journal Zenelap wrote:

“It is solely in Budapest, where musicians are wandering on such high clouds that they hardly take notice when Liszt is among them.”[85]
In 1873, at the occasion of Liszt’s 50th anniversary as performing artist, the city Budapest had installed a “Franz Liszt Stiftung” (“Franz Liszt Foundation”). The foundation was destined to provide stipends of 200 Gulden for three students of the Academy who had shown excellent abilities and especially had achieved progress with regard to Hungarian music. Every year it was Liszt alone who could decide which one of the students should receive the money. He gave the total sum of 600 Gulden either to a single student or to a group of three or more of them, not asking whether they were actually matriculated at the Academy.

It was also Liszt’s habit to declare all students who took part in his lessons as his private students. As consequence, nearly none of them paid any charge at the Academy. Since the Academy needed the money, there was a ministerial order of February 13, 1884, according to which all those who took part in Liszt’s lessons had to pay an annual charge of 30 Gulden. However, Liszt did not respect this, and in the end the Minister resigned. In fact, the Academy was still the winner, since Liszt gave much money from his taking part in charity concerts.

The lessons in specific matters of Hungarian music turned out as problematic enterprise, since there were different opinions, exactly what Hungarian music actually was. In 1881 a new edition of Liszt’s book about the Romanis and their music in Hungary appeared. According to this, Hungarian music was identical with the music as played by the Hungarian Romanis. Liszt had also claimed, Semitic people, among them the Romanis, had no genuine creativity. For this reason, according to Liszt’s book, they only adopted melodies from the country where they lived. After the book had appeared, Liszt was in Budapest accused for a presumed spreading of anti-Semitic ideas.[86] In the following year no students at all wanted to be matriculated for lessons in Hungarian music. According to the issue of July 1, 1886, of the journal Zenelap, this subject at the Hungarian Academy had already a long time ago been dropped.

In 1886 there was still no class for sacral music, but there were classes for solo and chorus singing, piano, violin, cello, organ and composition. The number of students had grown to 91 and the number of professors to 14. Since the winter of 1879–80, the Academy had its own building. On the first floor there was an apartment where since the winter of 1880–81 Liszt lived during his stays in Budapest. His last stay was from January 30 to March 12, 1886. After Liszt’s death Janós Végh, since 1881 vice-president, became president. No earlier than 40 years later the Academy was renamed to “Franz Liszt Akademie”. Until then, due to world war I, Liszt’s Europe and also his Hungary had died. Mainly, the only connection between Franz Liszt and the “Franz Liszt Akademie” was the name.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Liszt School of Music Weimar On June 24, 1872, the composer and conductor Karl Müller-Hartung founded an “Orchesterschule” (“Orchestra School”) at Weimar. Although Liszt and Müller-Hartung were on friendly terms, Liszt took no active part in that foundation. The “Orchesterschule” later developed to a conservatory which still exists and is now called “Hochschule für Musik “Franz Liszt”, Weimar”. ——————————————————————————————————————————————————————- References   ^ Liszt’s Hungarian passport spelled his given name as “Ferencz”. An orthographic reform of the Hungarian language in 1922 changed the letter “cz” to simply “c” in all words, except in surnames which led to the use of “Ferenc” a long time after his death. (Hungarian pronunciation: [list ˈfɛrɛnt͡s]), from 1859 to 1867 officially Franz Ritter von Liszt. Franz Liszt was created a Ritter by Emperor Francis Joseph I. in 1859, but never used the title in public. The title was necessary to marry the Princess of Sayn-Wittgenstein without her losing her privileges, but after the marriage fell through, Liszt transferred the title to his uncle Eduard in 1867. Eduard’s son was Franz von Liszt.
^ Walker, New Grove 2
^ “Franz Liszt”. Encyclopædia Britannica. 2008. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/343394/Franz-Liszt. Retrieved November 24, 2008.
^ “Franz Liszt”. Columbia Encyclopedia. http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-Liszt-Fr.html. Retrieved November 25, 2008.
^ An indication of this can be found in: Saffle: Liszt in Germany, p. 209. Regarding the 1840s Saffle wrote, “no one disputed seriously that [Liszt] was the greatest living pianist, probably the greatest pianist of all time.” Since Saffle gave no sources, his statement can only be taken as his own point of view.
^ Searle, New Grove, 11:29.
^ Searle, New Grove, 11:28–29.
^ Walker, Franz Liszt: The Virtuoso Years, 1811–1847, pp. 33–34
^ Walker, Franz Liszt: The Virtuoso Years, 1811–1847, p. 34
^ Walker, Franz Liszt: The Virtuoso Years, 1811–1847, p. 35
^ Dana Andrew Gooley, The virtuoso Liszt, Volume 13 of New perspectives in music history and criticism, Cambridge University Press, 2004, p.138
^ At a second concert on April 13, 1823, Beethoven was reputed to have kissed Liszt on the forehead. While Liszt himself told this story later in life, this incident may have occurred on a different occasion. Regardless, Liszt regarded it as a form of artistic christening. Searle, New Grove, 11:29.
^ a b c d e f g Searle, New Grove, 11:30.
^ Walker, Virtuoso Years, 131.
^ Walker, Virtuoso Years, 137–8.
^ The date is known from Liszt’s pocket calendar.
^ Walker, Virtuoso Years, 161–7.
^ Walker, Virtuoso Years, 180.
^ Searle, New Grove, 18:30.
^ For more details see: Bory: Une retraite romantique, pp. 50ff
^ Walker, Virtuoto Years, 285.
^ Walker, Virtuoso Years, 289.
^ Walker, Virtuoso Years, 290.
^ Searle, New Grove, 11:31.
^ Walker, Virtuoso Years, 442.
^ See the document in: Burger: Lebenschronik in Bildern, p. 209.
^ Alan Walker, Liszt, Franz in Oxford Music Online
^ a b Walker, New Grove 2, 14:781.
^ Walker: Final Years.
^ Walker: Final Years, p. 508, p. 515 with n. 18).
^ Review of a concert in Marseilles on April 11, 1826, reprinted in Eckhardt, Maria: Liszt à Marseille, in: Studia Musicologica Academiae Scientarum Hungaricae 24 (1982), p. 165
^ After the golden age: romantic pianism and modern performance by Kenneth Hamilton, p. 83, Oxford University Press 2008, ISBN 9780195178265
^ “Liszt at the Piano” by Edward Swenson, June 2006
^ Franz Liszt, am Flügel phantasierend at Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz
^ For example, see: Duverger, Franz Liszt, p. 140.
^ See Berlioz’s essay about Beethoven’s Trios and Sonatas, in: Musikalische Streifzüge, transl. Ely Ellès, Leipzig 1912, pp. 52ff
^ Comp.: Walker: Virtuoso Years, pp. 445ff
^ Comp.: Saffle: Liszt in Germany, pp. 187ff
^ Walker: Virtuoso Years, p. 356
^ Comp.: Óváry: Ferenc Liszt, p. 147.
^ Compare his letter to Louise von Welz of December 13, 1875, in: Bülow, Hans von: Briefe, Band 5, ed. Marie von Bülow, Leipzig 1904, p. 321.
^ Alan Walker, in: Virtuoso Years, p. 368, gives an example from “Die Lorelei”. While Walker claims Liszt had with this stolen from the future of music, especially from Wagner’s Tristan, he overlooked that his example was from Liszt’s second transcription of the song, S. 369, composed in 1860 after Liszt had already received the first act of Wagner’s opera.
^ For example, comp: Raabe: Liszts Schaffen, p. 127, and Walker: Virtuoso Years, p. 408.
^ Compare the discussion in: Mueller, Rena Charin: Liszt’s “Tasso” Sketchbook: Studies in Sources and Revisions, PhD dissertation, New York University 1986, p. 118ff.
^ Still earlier examples from works of Machaut, Gesualdo, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven and Spohr can be found in: Vogel, Martin: Der Tristan-Akkord und die Krise der modernen Harmonie-Lehre, Düsseldorf 1962.
^ Translated from French, after: Liszt-d’Agoult: Correspondance II, p. 411.
^ Kennedy, 711.
^ a b Spencer, P., 1233
^ MacDonald, New Grove (1980), 18:429.
^ Cooper, 29.
^ Temperley, New Grove (1980), 18:455.
^ Searle, “Orchestral Works,” 281; Walker, Weimar, 357.
^ Walker, Weimar, 304.
^ The inscription “In magnis et voluisse sat est” (“In great things, to have wished them is sufficient”) had in Liszt’s youth been correlated with his friend Felix Lichnowski.
^ Liszt wrote to the cover of the manuscript, “Darf man solch ein Ding schreiben oder anhören?” (“Is it allowed to write such a thing or to listen to it?”)
^ See the letter by Berlioz to Liszt of April 28, 1836, in: Berlioz, Hector: Correspondance générale II, 1832–1842, éditée sous la direction de Pierre Citron, Paris 1975, p. 295.
^ For example, see Liszt’s letter to J. W. von Wasielewski of January 9, 1857, in: La Mara (ed.): Liszts Briefe, Band 1, translated by Constance Bache, No. 171.
^ [1]
^ Elie Siegmeister, in The New Music Lover’s Handbook; Harvey House 1973, p. 222
^ See: La Mara (ed.) Liszts Briefe, Band 1, translated to English by Constance Bache, No. 2.
^ More details will be found in: Cross: “Puzzi” Revisited: A new Look at Hermann Cohen, in the Journal of the American Liszt Society, Volume 36 / July – December 1994, p. 19ff.
^ See: Göllerich: Liszt, pp. 131ff. According to Göllerich’s note, his catalogue was the most complete one which until then existed.
^ See: Nohl: Liszt, pp. 112ff. The book includes the facsimile of a letter by Liszt to Nohl of September 29, 1881, in which Liszt approved the catalogue. Liszt’s letter also includes his suggestions with tegard to the order of the names.
^ See: Prahács: Briefe aus ungarischen Sammlungen, p. 362, n. 1 to letter 263.
^ See his letter to Olga Janina of May 17, 1871, in: Bory, Robert: Diverses lettres inédites de Liszt, in: Schweizerisches Jahrbuch für Musikwissenschaft 3 (1928), p. 22.
^ Some details will be found in: Legány: Ferenc Liszt and His Country, 1869–1873.
^ On June 17, 1880, it was Hans von Bülow, who gave the lesson instead of Liszt. He tried to get rid of those with minor abilities, but in vain. A couple of days later they went weeping to Liszt and were accepted again; see: Ramann: Lisztiana, p. 151, n. 55.
^ For example, see: Stradal: Erinnerungen an Franz Liszt, pp. 157f.
^ See: Stradal: Erinnerungen an Franz Liszt, p. 158.
^ For example, see: Ramann: Lisztiana, p. 341.
^ See his Erinnerungen an Franz Liszt, p. 158.
^ See: Steinbeck: Liszt’s approach to piano playing, p. 70.
^ Walker, New Grove 2, 14:780.
^ Franz Liszt, Volume 1
^ See: Prahács: Briefe aus ungarischen Sammlungen, n.3 to letter 122.
^ For example, see Liszt’s letter of November 10, 1862, to Mihály Mosonyi, in: Prahács: Briefe aus ungarischen Sammlungen, pp. 112ff. A similar letter to Baron Prónay of November 9, 1862, is solely available in a translation to Hungarian, in Zenlap of November 27, 1862, p. 69f.
^ In 1867 the Austrian Emperor Franz Joseph I had been crowned as Hungarian King.
^ See: Prahács: Briefe aus ungarischen Sammlungen, p. 353, n. 1 to letter 221.
^ See: Prahács: Franz Liszt und die Budapester Musikakademie, p. 61.
^ Liszt later tried to install Juhász with a position at the Academy, but for some resons Juhász drifted towards a different path; see: Prahács (ed.): Briefe aus ungarischen Sammlungen, p. 405f, n. 5 to letter 439.
^ As consequence, there were complaints from the side of the Hungarian Parliament, according to which Liszt’s appointment had been a mistake.
^ See: Ramann: Lisztiana, p. 125.
^ See his Erinnerungen an Franz Liszt, p. 46.
^ See the critical notes in his Ferenc Liszt and His Country, 1874–1886.
^ Translated from German after: Prahács: Franz Liszt und die Budapester Musikakademie, p. 91.
^ Liszt was as composer boycotted by the Budapest Philharmonic Society. On October 22, 1881, his 70th birthday, for example, they gave a concert where exclusively works by Brahms, directed by Brahms himself, were played. Liszt afterwards refused to attend any further concert of the Philharmonic Society. ——————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Bibliography   ed. Abraham, Gerald, Music of Tchaikovsky (New York, W. W. Norton & Company, 1946). ISBN n/a.
Cooper, Martin, “The Symphonies”
Bory, Robert: Une retraite romantique en Suisse, Liszt et la Comtesse d’Agoult, Lausanne 1930.
Burger, Ernst: Franz Liszt, Eine Lebenschronik in Bildern und Dokumenten, München 1986.
Ehrhardt, Damien (éd.): Franz Liszt – Musique, médiation, interculturalité (Etudes germaniques 63/3, 2008).
Franz, Robert (i. e. Janina, Olga): Souvenirs d’une Cosaque, Deuxième édition, Paris 1874.
Göllerich, August: Musikerbiographien, Achter Band, Liszt, Zweiter Theil, Reclam, Leipzig, without date (1887–88).
Gibbs, Christopher H. and Gooley, Dana. Franz Liszt and his World. (Princeton : Princeton University Press, 2006.)
Hamburger, Klara (ed.): Franz Liszt, Beiträge von ungarischen Autoren, Budapest 1978.
ed. Hamilton, Kenneth, The Cambridge Companion to Liszt (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005). ISBN 0-521-64462-3 (paperback).
Shulstad, Reeves, “Liszt’s symphonic poems and symphonies”
Jerger, Wilhelm (ed.): The Piano Master Classes of Franz Liszt 1884–1886, Diary Notes of August Göllerich, translated by Richard Louis Zimdars, Indiana University Press 1996.
ed. Latham, Alison, The Oxford Companion to Music (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2002). ISBN 0-19-866212-2
Spencer, Piers, “Symphonic poem [tone-poem]”
Legány, Dezső: Franz Liszt, Unbekannte Presse und Briefe aus Wien 1822–1886, Wien 1984.
Legány, Dezső: Ferenc Liszt and His Country, 1869–1873, Occidental Press, Budapest 1983.
Legány, Dezső: Ferenc Liszt and His Country, 1874–1886, Occidental Press, Budapest 1992.
Liszt, Franz: Briefwechsel mit seiner Mutter, edited and annotated by Klara Hamburger, Eisenstadt 2000.
Liszt, Franz and d’Agoult, Marie: Correspondence, ed. Daniel Ollivier, Tome I: 1833–1840, Paris 1933, Tome II: 1840–1864, Paris 1934.
Motta, Cesare Simeone: Liszt Viaggiatore Europeo, Moncalieri, 2000 (ISBN 8877600586)
Nohl, Ludwig: Musikerbiographien, Vierter Band, Liszt, Erster Theil, Reclam, Leipzig, without date (1881–82).
Ollivier, Daniel: Autour de Mme d’Agoult et de Liszt, Paris 1941.
Prahács, Margit (ed.): Franz Liszt, Briefe aus ungarischen Sammlungen, 1835–1886, Budapest 1966.
Prahács, Margit: Franz Liszt und die Budapester Musikakademie, in: Hamburger (ed.): Franz Liszt, Beiträge von ungarischen Autoren, pp. 49ff.
Raabe, Peter: Liszts Schaffen, Cotta, Stuttgart und Berlin 1931.
Ramann, Lina: Lisztiana, Erinnerungen an Franz Liszt in Tagebuchblättern, Briefen und Dokumenten aus den Jahren 1873–1886/87, ed. Arthur Seidl, text revision by Friedrich Schnapp, Mainz 1983.
Rellstab, Ludwig: Franz Liszt, Berlin 1842.
Rosen, Charles. The Romantic Generation. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1995.
ed Sadie, Stanley, The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, First Edition (London: Macmillian, 1980). ISBN 0-333-23111-2
MacDonald, Hugh, “Symphonic poem,” “Transformation, thematic”
Searle, Humphrey, “Liszt, Franz”
Temperley, Nicholas, “Symphony: II. 19th century”
Saffle, Michael: Liszt in Germany, 1840–1845, Franz Liszt Studies Series No.2, Pendragon Press, Stuyvesant, NY, 1994.
Sauer, Emil: Meine Welt, Stuttgart 1901.
Steinbeck, Arne: Franz Liszt’s approach to piano playing, PhD dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park 1971.
Stradal, August: Erinnerungen an Franz Liszt, Bern, Leipzig 1929.
Walker, Alan: Franz Liszt, The Virtuoso Years (1811–1847), revised edition, Cornell University Press 1987.
Walker, Alan: Franz Liszt, The Final Years (1861–1886), Cornell University Press 1997.
Walker, Alan: Article Liszt, Franz, in: Sadie, Stanley (ed.), The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, Second Edition, London 2001).
Walker, Alan et al. “Liszt, Franz.” Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. November 20, 2009. (subscription required)
Watson, Derek: Liszt, Schirmer Books, 1989, ISBN 0-02-872705-3