<font size="4">Michael Lorenz lê o verbete "Franz Schubert" na segunda edição do <i>New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians</i> (2001) e descobre que está tudo errado.<br></font><br><h3 class="post-title entry-title">
"Franz Schubert" in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (2001)
</h3>
<div class="post-header">
</div>
In Robert Winter<i>'</i>s book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Music-Our-Time-Robert-Winter/dp/images/0534131042" target="_blank"><i>Music for our Time</i></a> (Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company 1992) the following paragraph appears on p. 358:<br>
<div style="text-align:justify">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
FRANZ SCHUBERT (1797-1828)
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Franz Schubert was the only Viennese Classicist born in Vienna, and
except for an extended summer holiday in the west of Austria in 1825, he
never ventured beyond the suburbs of that city. His father was a
schoolmaster who taught boarding students in the family quarters, an
activity that brought little income or social standing. Franz was the
eleventh of twelve children, only four of whom survived infancy. He and
his brothers all learned to play musical instruments and often came
together in the evening to play chamber music. </blockquote>
</div>
The only part of this quote that does not contain a mistake is the title. In 1818 and 1824 Schubert was in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%BDeliezovce" target="_blank">Zséliz</a>
and in 1819 and 1825 he visited Upper Austria. In 1827 he went to Graz,
Gastein and Salzburg. Schubert's father had no "boarding students".
Where should he have provided housing for them? He was a regular
school-teacher. Not four but five of the Schubert children survived
infancy: Ignaz, Ferdinand, Karl, Franz und Theresia (whom Winter is
obviously unaware of). Karl Schubert did not join the music making but
became a painter (see Ferdinand Schubert's account from 1839). To round
up the affair <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SchubertAndVogl.jpg" target="_blank">Schober's caricature</a> of Vogl and Schubert is wrongly attributed to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moritz_von_Schwind" target="_blank">Moritz von Schwind</a>. Although by 1992 Robert Winter had not even read Maurice Brown's <a href="http://books.google.at/books/about/The_New_Grove_Schubert.html?id=Kv9IAIm6J5YC&redir_esc=y" target="_blank">old Schubert article</a> in <i>Grove</i>, the editors of <i>New Grove</i>
commissioned him to write the new one. After several years of absence
from Schubert research in which he dedicated himself to the development
of computer software, Winter faced the opportunity to delve into the
literature, preparing to write the article on Schubert that, due to <i>New Grove</i>'s
worldwide popularity, must be regarded the most widely read printed
publication on Schubert. The result was made available on the internet
on <a href="http://www.grovemusic.com/">www.grovemusic.com</a> prior to
the printed version of the encyclopedia which was officially presented
on 8 January 2001. According to the international press the new owners
of <a href="http://www.macmillan.com/" target="_blank">Macmillan</a> demanded <i>The New Grove</i>'s
immediate release, a policy which the editors refused for the
understandable reason that it was far too premature to guarantee a
result that would meet scholarly demands. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Sadie" target="_blank">Stanley Sadie</a> was appointed "Editor emeritus" and replaced by <a href="http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/music/contactsandpeople/profiles/tyrrellj.html" target="_blank">John Tyrrell</a>,
who in the meantime has passed on his function to Laura Macy. To put
the encyclopedia to print at all costs the last corrections were
proofread by a "teenage army of non-musicological graduates" ("How music
got its Grove Back", <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/" target="_blank"><i>The Independent</i></a>,
30 December 2000). Given the fact that some of the important entries
were commissioned long before 1996, even more meticulous correction work
could not have provided a less faulty edition. There was ample time to
take care of the major mistakes, but unfortunately this time seems to
have been wasted.<br>
<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear:both;text-align:center">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oXxunA1Ml0w/UWgpNzXOEcI/AAAAAAAACAY/bPs9oK7k4YM/s1600/schubert.jpg" style="margin-left:1em;margin-right:1em"><img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oXxunA1Ml0w/UWgpNzXOEcI/AAAAAAAACAY/bPs9oK7k4YM/s1600/schubert.jpg" border="0"></a></div>
<br>
Avoiding any risk Robert Winter could have chosen an easy way out by just copying everything from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Erich_Deutsch" target="_blank">Otto Erich Deutsch</a>,
a method usually applied these days by many Schubert scholars. But this
turned out to be impossible. The zeitgeist and the heated and
politically influenced discussion about Schubert's sexuality that had
dominated the preceding decade demanded a heavily revised image of
Schubert which was likely to meet the expectations of "new musicology".
Therefore Winter did not rely on the <i>Dokumente</i>, but wrote his
biography of Schubert in the style of a medley based on the literature.
Although this is by no means an unusual method, the result is a mixture
of personal recollection and scholarly impromptu that makes the reader
waver continuously between astonishment and amusement. As will be
shown, Winter sometimes did not even consult the literature given in his
own bibliography. The list of mistakes will be presented quite
prosaically, based exclusively on original quotes from Winter's text and
any claim of completeness may be premature. My critical point of view
is influenced by a statement in a "letter of the editors" on Macmillan’s
web-page: "The primary objective of a reference work is to give
accurate, reliable and up-to-date information."
In the first chapter of Winter's article, titled "Background and
childhood" we learn that "[Schubert’s father] took up the position of
schoolteacher, one that offered little social standing or financial
reward; education was an enterprise supported only meagrely by the
imperial government." If we keep in mind all the various honours the
house-owner Franz Theodor received, together with all the efforts
Empress Maria Theresia had put in place to improve educational standards
in Vienna, we cannot accept Winter's statement (see also Herwig Knaus's
excellent book <i>Franz Schubert: vom Vorstadtkind zum Compositeur</i>,
Vienna: Löcker 1997). Winter continues to present a strictly personal
state of information: "All of the [Schubert] children were born in a
one-room apartment in a house called 'Zum roten Krebsen'". This is
false. Ignaz and Elisabeth Schubert were not born in this house (see
Heinz Schöny, in <i>Jahrbuch der Heraldisch-Genealogischen Gesellschaft Adler </i>1974/78,
III. Folge, vol. 9, Vienna 1978, p. 15, an important genealogical
article that is missing in Winter's bibliography). Regarding Schubert's
studies with Salieri the following information is given as a fact:
"During his first two years [at the <i>Stadtkonvikt</i>] he received
permission to take regular lessons with Salieri, who urged him to find
his models in Italian opera, [...]". Wrong again. As far as we know,
Schubert first started studying with Salieri in June 1812. On the
occasion of the premiere of the F major mass in 1814 Winter deals with
an old imaginary problem that actually has been solved a long time ago:
"Near the end of July [1814] he completed his first mass (in F, d105),
written for the centenary of the Lichtental church he had attended since
a child. Although Schubert's spirituality was never in doubt, his
freedom with the text (including the omission of 'Et in unam sanctam
catholicam et apostolicam ecclesiam') suggests that the church as an
institution was not sacrosanct to him. [...] Schubert conducted the
first performance himself in October." We are still waiting for Joseph
Haydn being suspected of not believing in Christ being the Son of God
and the significance of the Holy Spirit, because in his "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_Mass" target="_blank">Missa in Angustiis</a>" he left out the passage "Et in unum Dominum Jesum Christum Filium Dei unigenitum" and in his "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missa_sancti_Bernardi_von_Offida" target="_blank">Missa sancti Bernardi von Offida</a>" he failed to set to music the words "Qui ex Patre Filioque procedit". In Haydn's "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missa_in_tempore_belli" target="_blank">Missa in tempore belli</a>"
even the line "Qui cum Patre et Filio simul adoratur et
conglorificatur" is missing. And yet this composer is still being
considered a devoutly catholic classic. As Erich Benedikt has shown in
1997, in countless masses of Schubert's time large parts of the Credo
text are missing and not even <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Bruckner" target="_blank">Anton Bruckner</a>
dealt with this text too meticulously, because the celebrant had to say
the complete Credo anyway. But no, the presentation of Schubert as an
individual with shaky religious beliefs must forever be continued. For
the sake of his morals and dubious private life this seems to be very
important.
Unfortunately Winter calls the performance of the "<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2hwiEflpM8" target="_blank">Ouverture in Italian Style</a>" the "first public performance" of one of Schubert's works. This applies for the performance of the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0ehtzMY01c" target="_blank">F major mass D. 105</a>, because in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lichtental_Church" target="_blank">Lichtental parish</a>
holy mass was no private event. The premiere of this mass did not take
place - as given by Robert Winter - in October 1814, but on 25 September
of the same year. Erich Benedikt's article "Notizen zu Schuberts
Messen" (<i>Österreichische Musikzeitschrift</i> 1-2, 1997, pp. 64-69), where this issue is resolved, is given in Winter's bibliography. Winter seems never to have read it.
Regarding the topic "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therese_Grob" target="_blank">Therese Grob</a>"
(Schubert's beloved), Winter quotes the entry on 8 September 1816 in
Schubert's diary ("For a free man marriage is a horrible thought these
days.") and closes the chapter "Finding a career" with the following
statement: "Although not yet 20, Schubert never spoke of marriage
again." "To whom?" is the question that comes to the reader's mind here.
In chapter five, "Independence", Winter writes: "At some time that
autumn [1816] Schubert refused to return to his father's school, left
home and moved to the lodgings of Franz von Schober". But Schubert's
note on the autograph of the song D. 509 is no proof that at that time
he was actually living with Schober. Schubert's move to the house of his
father in August 1817 (Winter writes "In the autumn") was caused -
according to Winter - by financial circumstances. The truth is that
Schubert had to clear the room for Schober's brother Axel who was
expected to return from France. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_von_Schober" target="_blank">Franz von Schober</a>
simply is out of luck in the recent literature: "Schubert was
introduced by Josef von Spaun to [...] Franz von Schober (1797-1882).
Although his father died when Schober was six, the family remained
prosperous enough for him to attend private schools for the nobility
[...] in both Germany and Austria. He began law studies in Vienna in
1816 but failed to complete the course". Note Schober's wrong year of
birth. (In <i>New Grove</i>'s article "Lithographisches Institut" it is also given incorrectly as 1798). According to the death certificate issued by the <a href="http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torup" target="_blank">Torup</a> parish priest Olof Borup, Franz von Schober senior died on 8 February 1802.
The schools in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schnepfenthal_Salzmann_School" target="_blank">Schnepfenthal</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kremsm%C3%BCnster_Abbey" target="_blank">Kremsmünster </a>were
nor exclusively reserved for the nobility and Schober did not study law
in Vienna, but philosophy.
On the occasion of dealing with Schubert's activity as music teacher in
Zséliz it becomes apparent that Winter is unaware of the fact that from
1811 on the Austrian monarchy had two different currencies. Schubert's
monthly income is given succinctly as "some 75 florin" without the
important information that this is <i>Conventionsmünze</i> (Assimilated
Coinage). Regarding Schubert's estimated fee in 1821-22 Winter gives an
amount of "more than 2000 gulden" without mentioning that this is the
less valuable <i>Wiener Währung</i> (Viennese Currency, i.e. 800 fl in
Assimilated Coinage). Winter's subsequent claim that "the annual salary
of a minor civil servant - the social layer from which Schubert sprang -
was about 400 gulden" only confuses the reader, because this again
amounts to a mix-up of two different currencies which had an exchange
rate of 1 to 2,5. This important detail is also missing in connection
with the fee of 100 fl <i>Conventionsmünze</i> that Schubert received in
1826 form the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. Following a consequent
tactic of confusion the concert revenue in 1828 is again being given in
Viennese Currency. Concerning the year 1818 Winter writes: "During that
summer Esterházy introduced him to Baron Karl Schönstein (1797-1876), a
senior official at the Hungarian ministry of finance who was also a
passionate amateur singer". Karl von Schönstein was not born in 1797,
but on 27 June 1796 in Ofen. He also was not an employee of the
Hungarian ministry of finance, but from 1813 on a practitioner with the
county of Pesth and the Hungarian governor. Beginning on 1 April 1816 he
was <i>Konzeptspraktikant</i> at the court chamber and promoted to <i>Hofkonzipist</i> on 11 September 1823. He retired an official of the Austrian ministry of finance.<br>
<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear:both;text-align:center">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-76tq0xWGCvc/UWghCtJsfmI/AAAAAAAACAI/yXJ7x0L_gBM/s1600/schoenstein.jpg" style="margin-left:1em;margin-right:1em"><img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-76tq0xWGCvc/UWghCtJsfmI/AAAAAAAACAI/yXJ7x0L_gBM/s1600/schoenstein.jpg" border="0"></a></div>
<div style="text-align:center">
<span style="font-size:x-small">Baron Carl von Schönstein's date of birth in his own handwriting</span></div>
<br>
Regarding the arrest of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Senn" target="_blank">Johann Senn</a>
Winter writes: "In mid-March [1820] the other side of Schubert's
existence surfaced when he was present at the time his schoolfriend
Johann Senn's room was searched by the police". It remains undecided
what the paranoia of the Austrian police had to do with Schubert's
"other side". Winter also accuses Schubert of dishonesty: "Schubert, who
somewhat disingenuously registered himself as the 'school assistant
from the Rossau' [...]". In chapter seven, titled "The Professional
Composer" in connection with Schubert's residence in 1821 we are again
faced with the wrong address "21 Wipplingerstraße" (correct is No. 15), a
seemingly ineradicable error that Rudolf Klein already corrected in his
1972 standard work <i>Schubertstätten</i> (which is listed - without effect - in Winter's bibliography).<br>
<br>
According to Winter Schubert lost his innocence in 1823. On which
occasion? Of course at a Schubertiad, where else? "A Schubertiad at
Schober's in mid-January of 1823 probably brought down the curtain on
Schubert's age of innocence." In chapter eight, titled "Crisis", Winter
addresses the topic of sexuality which was the reason of a new Schubert
article being commissioned in the first place: "it was only in the late
1980s that scholars brought the contradictions in the composer's
personality into the open." Once again the well known musings are being
presented as facts and as far as this issue is concerned Winter's
article proves to be truly out-of-date. His former editor Stanley Sadie
was obviously not able to make his influence felt. In the aforementioned
article in <i>The Independent</i> Sadie was quoted as follows: "He
[Sadie] pours scorn on the sexual fellow-travellers who now claim
Schubert as gay. 'The evidence is non-existent, but you can't say that
in America without being branded a homophobe.'" Winter mentions
Holzapfel's and Bauernfeld's references to Schubert being in love with a
girl, but then writes: "On the other hand, it is difficult to explain
away Schubert's
pronounced preference throughout his life for the company of men. Not a
single letter survives from Schubert to a woman, or to Schubert from a
woman". This utterly nonsensical statement causes the reader to draw a
deep breath while he realizes that Winter actually meant to write
"love-letter", but failed to use this word. Although a few pages later
Winter openly contradicts himself with the statement "Upon his
[Schubert's] return to Vienna he wrote to Frau Pachler [...]", the
editors overlooked this mistake. "However congruent with contemporary
practices in Viennese society, his [Schubert's]
most intimate expressions of sentiment are all directed to men. Even
given Josef Kenner's near-puritanical uprightness, it is hard to imagine
'bathed in slime' as applying to orthodox heterosexuality." All the
shopworn props are being dragged on the stage again and it becomes
obvious that Maynard Solomon knew very well why he mistranslated <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Kenner" target="_blank">Joseph Kenner</a>'s
"Schlamm" (mud) with "Schleim" (slime). Winter joins a discussion that -
unbeknownst to him - is already over: "Hence we are left to ponder many
ambiguities - for example, whether 'Greek' describes a homosexual or a
devotee of ancient Greek culture, or
whether 'young peacocks' refers to Schubert's need for young boys or
for medicinal food". And regarding the summer of 1826 Winter notes:
"When Bauernfeld returned from Gmunden in July he found 'Schubert ailing
(he needs 'young peacocks', like Benvenuto Cellini), Schwind morose,
Schober idle, as usual'". If the 'young peacocks' refer to adolescent
boys rather than a dietetic antidote to syphilis, Schubert's friends
would have been no more explicit." What? Young boys again? How on earth
does Winter see a correlation which according to Maynard Solomon is
totally objectionable? Just like Solomon and <a href="http://info.music.indiana.edu/sb/page/normal/1180.html" target="_blank">Kristina Muxfeldt</a> before him, Winter has never actually seen the ominous page 61 of the excerpts of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_von_Bauernfeld" target="_blank">Bauernfeld</a>'s diary and only knows this quote from <a href="http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Glossy" target="_blank">Carl Glossy</a>'s fragmentary edition.<br>
<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear:both;text-align:center">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FBqFbecrzos/UWhCBPXA93I/AAAAAAAACBI/fb6GVCamEtA/s1600/Bauernfeld+2.jpg" style="margin-left:1em;margin-right:1em"><img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FBqFbecrzos/UWhCBPXA93I/AAAAAAAACBI/fb6GVCamEtA/s400/Bauernfeld+2.jpg" border="0" height="400" width="341"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear:both;text-align:center">
</div>
<div style="text-align:center">
<span style="font-size:x-small">Page 61 of Bauernfeld's diary excerpt. Note th<span style="font-size:x-small">a</span>t
the sentence "(Er bedarf junger Pfauen, wie Benv. Cellini!)" was added
apart from the main text and obviously refers to the punchline of a lost
inside joke. </span></div>
<br>
Once again - how can anybody come up with these ideas? - a scholar has
completely misunderstood Solomon's statements from 1989: "the prospect
of sexual relations between a man and a youth, with its
connotations of child molestation and its glimpse of a taboo realm of
experience". Anybody who is aware of Solomon's harsh letter to the <i>Österreichische Musikzeitschrift</i>
in September 1999
("I do not believe that the evidence warrants drawing such connotations
and I do not associate myself with Kenner's attitude which I describe as
'intolerant and condemnatory'.") can expect Solomon to soon direct his
protest towards the editors of <i>New Grove</i> as well. With the
statement: "Moreover, the rigid distinction between 'straight' and
'gay', which
solidified only at the end of the 19th century, would have been unknown
to Schubert." Robert Winter releases us from his world of yesterday.
Schubert was certainly unaware of the terms "straight" and "gay", but he
surely knew what the word "fornication" meant in common everyday
language of Biedermeier Vienna.<br>
<br>
In connection with the topic of Schubert's illness a certain "Dr Joseph
Bernhardt" enters the encyclopedic stage. A person by that name does not
exist in Schubert's life and the first name "Joseph" in this context is
a fabrication by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Richard_Marek" target="_blank">George Marek</a> which was copied by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Newbould" target="_blank">Brian Newbould</a>.
As I have shown in 2002, Schubert's mysterious physician was the Jewish
polymath Dr. Jacob Bernhard (1790 - 1846). Winter's description of a
diet, supposedly prescribed by Dr. Bernhard, "which in Schubert's time
simply meant a new (and medically benign)
diet. This one consisted of alternating days of pork cutlets and a dish
called panada that combined flour, water, breadcrumbs and milk", is
Winter's completely incorrect interpretation of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moritz_von_Schwind" target="_blank">Schwind</a>'s letter to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_von_Schober" target="_blank">Schober</a>
from 6 March 1824. No connection can be inferred from this document
between Schubert's nutrition at that time and a medical treatment.
Winter refers to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_von_Spaun" target="_blank">Joseph von Spaun</a>
having been absent from Vienna in 1824. This is not correct, because
Spaun left Vienna but on 25 May 1825 to accede his post in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lviv" target="_blank">Lemberg</a>. It is not possible to uncover the origin of every false bit of information presented by Winter. About <a href="http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_von_Bruchmann" target="_blank">Franz von Bruchmann</a>
he writes: "Bruchmann was also educated at a Piarist school and was
associated
with the unfortunate Johann Senn. Free of financial worries, he never
trained for a profession, becoming a Redemptorist in 1826." When
Bruchmann married Juliana von Weyrother on 25 June 1827(!), he had
acquired a doctorate in law and was employed as <i>Konzeptspraktikant</i> at the office of the court- and chamber-procurator (the <i>Hof- und Kammerprokuratur</i>).
He only became a Redemptorist after his wife's death in 1830. It is not
necessary to check the marriage records of St. Stephen's (Tom. 86a,
fol. 128) to figure this out; a quick look into O.E. Deutsch's <i>Dokumente</i>
will do as well (p. 438 and 605). Winter considers Schubert's "abrupt"
departure from Zséliz to be in contradiction to the posthumous reports
about the composer's love for Caroline von Esterházy. Not a word is said
about the fact that Schubert left because he thought that he had been
poisoned. Now follows one of those dictums that we already know too
well: "On his return to Vienna Schubert moved briefly - probably for
financial
reasons - for one last time into the Schubert family home in the
Rossau. To be sure, it was the only place he ever lived in that
contained a piano; Schubert never bought, leased or borrowed[!] a piano
of
his own." Winter is obviously unaware of Schwind's 1821 drawing of
Schubert's room with a piano. Several works listed in Winter's
bibliography contain this illustration.<br>
<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear:both;text-align:center">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-1YzrbqESgno/UWhaKujkF6I/AAAAAAAACBY/aB9JV76-9x8/s1600/schubertspiano.jpg" style="margin-left:1em;margin-right:1em"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-1YzrbqESgno/UWhaKujkF6I/AAAAAAAACBY/aB9JV76-9x8/s1600/schubertspiano.jpg" border="0"></a></div>
<br>
In one of the following chapters Winter contradicts his own statement
regarding Schubert's access to a piano: "In March [1827] Schubert moved
in with Schober for the last time,
remaining, except for a two-month holiday, at the new house on the
Tuchlauben (where he had his own music room) [...]" and in the chapter
"Piano music" Winter follows this up with another contradiction:
"Although he [Schubert] made little use of the extra low notes available
on larger Viennese pianos from 1816 (his borrowed[!] instruments
evidently
did not include these notes)".<br>
<br>
Let me conclude with a few minor inaccuracies that are simply out of
place in the Schubert article of "the world's definitive music reference
resource" (as <a href="http://www.latimes.com/" target="_blank">The Los Angeles Times</a>
described NG on 13 December 2000). Schober did not go to Breslau in
August, but in late July 1823. He returned from there not in July 1825,
but in June of the same year. Therese Grob's father was not a teacher,
but a silk maker. The center of Schubert's Vienna should not be called
"the Ring district" and "the inner Ring". The name "Franz Xaver
Schlechta" is incomplete and therefore wrong. Winter also denies <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron_Anton_von_Doblhoff-Dier" target="_blank">Anton von Doblhoff</a>
the predicate of nobility which instead is given to members of the
Sonnleithner family, although only Ignaz and his son Leopold received it
in 1828. The instrument <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arpeggione" target="_blank">Arpeggione </a>was not invented in 1814, but in 1823 (a piece of information to be found in the old edition of <i>Grove</i>). The performance of the A minor quartet <span class="st">D. 804 </span>on 14 March 1824 is not proven because the written program of this particular concert is not preserved. <a href="http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Nepomuk_Dankesreither" target="_blank">Johann von Dankesreither</a> was not a relative of Schober. None of <a href="http://members.aon.at/michaelorenz/schober" target="_blank">Schober's forebears</a>
bears this name. The Schubert bibliography presented by Winter is
selective and very fragmentary. In the chapter "Catalogues" the youngest
entry is Walburga Litschauer's book <i>Neue Dokumente zum Schubert-Kreis</i> from 1986. The periodical <i>Schubert durch die Brille</i>
appears only with a few and less significant contributions (obviously
Winter does not know any other). The existence of Ernst Hilmar's und
Margret Jestremski's 1997 <i>Schubert-Lexikon</i> is kept secret. To find this book in <i>New Grove</i>
one has to read the article about Hüttenbrenner(!), revised by Ewan
West. The list of Schubert's works was copied from the old edition
almost without change. Thus newly discovered compositions are absent,
such as the "Ombre amene" and a <i>Canon à tre</i>, both dating from
1816. The "Grazer Fantasie" (D. 605A) however, whose authenticity is
being doubted in the standard literature, has been included without any
comment. <br>
<br>
In the age of the computer it has become possible to accumulate endless
amounts of text which easily turn out to be too much for editors to deal
with. Some publishers are not willing to pay the necessarily qualified
staff who can handle the mistakes that are likely to be amassed in 29
volumes. Robert Winter's article does not stand out that negatively. In
his article about Beethoven <a href="http://www.princeton.edu/music/people/display_person.xml?netid=sburnham" target="_blank">Scott Burnham</a>
shows that he still considers the English sentence "I will arrange it
with you and me that I can live with you" to be an acceptable
translation of Beethoven's statement "mit mir und dir rede ich mache daß
ich mit dir leben kann". Accidents like this have almost become a rule
in today's monstrous encyclopedias. According to <i>New Grove</i> the
great-grandfather of Johann Strauß II moved to Vienna "around 1850" and
since the editors consulted an "expert", Joseph Lanner is now presented
with a wrong date of birth and a wrong date of marriage. A correction of
the mistakes is projected only for <i>New Grove</i>'s web-based edition. On 5 January 2001 Macmillan's then chief executive Richard Charkin was quoted in <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/" target="_blank">The Guardian</a>
as follows: "I very much doubt that the hard copy will ever become
obsolete, but I would anticipate a gradual movement in scholarly circles
from usage of the book to usage of the online version." The scholarly
damage that was done by the Schubert entry of the printed edition will
remain irreparable for a long time to come.<br>
<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear:both;text-align:center">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-i0lvZBgDCZ8/UWlKVIKSp-I/AAAAAAAACCI/xtfprzKLelk/s1600/schubert+%282%29.JPG" style="margin-left:1em;margin-right:1em"><img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-i0lvZBgDCZ8/UWlKVIKSp-I/AAAAAAAACCI/xtfprzKLelk/s400/schubert+%282%29.JPG" border="0" height="116" width="400"></a></div>
<br>
<span style="font-size:x-small">This review was first published in <i>Schubert durch die Brille</i> 26 (Tutzing: Hans Schneider, January 2001). The online version of the Schubert article in <i>New Grove</i> has still not been overhauled. © Dr. Michael Lorenz 2001.</span><br>
<br><a href="http://michaelorenz.blogspot.com.br/2013/04/franz-schubert-in-new-grove-dictionary.html">http://michaelorenz.blogspot.com.br/2013/04/franz-schubert-in-new-grove-dictionary.html</a><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div>
carlos palombini<br></div><a href="http://ufmg.academia.edu/CarlosPalombini" target="_blank">ufmg.academia.edu/CarlosPalombini</a><br><a href="http://proibidao.org" target="_blank">proibidao.org</a><br><div></div><div></div>
<div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div>
<div style id="__af745f8f43-e961-4b88-8424-80b67790c964__"></div>