Comparing Felix and Clara's Variations

Mendelssohn’s Variations Serieuses and Clara Schumann’s Variations on a theme by Robert Schumann are completely different pieces. To start out, Clara Schuman’s piece starts with a relatively unimaginative theme, which is not a bad thing. However, she does little to alter these themes throughout the piece. The main eight measure parallel period contains many repetitions of C#. The second or B section is in a sentence structure—meaning a lot of repetitious fragments here “C# B# C# E C#”. The first variation basically fills in the harmony with broken chords and interesting chromatic neighboring tones. The second features sixteenth-note chords which hide the melodic line fairly well. Only in the return of the A section does the original theme appear. The third variation is interesting that the key changes from F# minor to F# major. Besides that, there is not a lot of difference. The following variation contrasts greatly: Schumann returns to F# minor and adds a brilliant style with rapid right-hand scales and broken arpeggio figures. Once again it sounds impress, but there is nothing about it that stands out. There is nothing abnormal and that is its greatest fault.
Mendelssohn however starts off with an unusual theme filled with chromatic pitches. The basic form is binary, so, unlike Schumann’s piece, Variation Serieuses has eliminated a possible problem: redundancy. Theme and variation form, in itself, implies a substantial amount of repetition. There is nothing wrong with a rounded binary theme; however composers should be cautious in how they use it. The first variation is similar to Clara’s in that Mendelssohn creates a faster chromatic voice in-between the theme and the base. He creates variety in his texturing: the bass consists of sparse dry octaves. Unlike Schumann’s piece, Mendelssohn paces the intensity of the piece through several variations. This intention is clearly delineated by the expressive markings: “Un poco piu animato….piu animato…” Although the rhythmic division increases only from var. 1 to var. 2, the increase in texture in var. 3 (left-hand octaves) justifies another aspect of intensification. Unlike Clara’s piece, Mendelssohn loses the theme almost immediately. It is not too hard to see where Mendelssohn is getting his ideas from. Beethoven is well known for his use of variations: Diabelli, and in his late sonatas (for example op. 111). His use of grotesque melodies and harmonies as well as experimental textures reflects Beethoven’s style.
I enjoy Schuman’s last variations (5-7) because there is more of a sense of interconnectedness. For some reason, she decides to place the end of her third variation in the middle of the seventh. This is probably the most interesting aspect of her use of form. It is also interesting that this last variation is, along with var. 3, in F# major. Is there a symbolic purpose in having this key end the piece? Perhaps she recognizes the problems in her life: the struggle between Robert and her father, his mental sickness. But perhaps in the middle of all these thoughts, these painful experiences, she remembers her love. She remembers that she wrote this piece for him, that the memory of him allows her to push through the darkness in her life. The fifth variation seems to reflect a Liszt technique: maintaining a simple melody but with complementary left-hand octaves. The effect is dazzling but the value, the deep intrinsic musical expression is somewhat shallow. But variation six is full of sensitive colors beautiful ninth sonorities. It is simple yet, full of surprising suspensions.
Mendelssohn continues to develop his variation in a Beethoven obsessed way. His discipline to stick to organic elements within each variation suggests Beethoven ideals. Perhaps he has a more universal goal in terms of human expression. Clara, however, portrays a more personal form of expression.