Historical critiques of Schubert’s methods of development hold that he substitutes ‘genuine’ development with sequences of variation, blurring the boundary between musical progression (development via fragmentation) and additive expansion (repetition via sequence and variation; Adorno 1928, Salzer 1928). Recent appraisals of Schubert’s expansive developmental strategies suggest, alternatively, that the distinction between the two techniques is not as unambiguous as might be assumed (Burstein 1997, Hyland 2013, Martinkus 2018), and have begun to problematise this binary opposition. Building thereon, this chapter brings the continuity drafts and autograph scores for the Piano Sonatas D958, D959 and D960 into focus by paying particular attention to the changes made by Schubert in the final versions, which employ variation or varied repetition as part of an ongoing developmental process. It assesses the impact on formal function and syntax caused by the introduction of varied repeats at different levels of structure, from the individual bar to the full phrase, underlining the resulting amalgamation of sonata (discursive) and variation (recursive) techniques that these works articulate (Ivanovitch 2010). Ultimately, through close examination of Schubert’s compositional revisions, this chapter presents a fuller understanding of what constitutes development in a Schubertian context and the vital role of variation therein.

Chapter 4 begins by exploring the productive tension that can exist between gestural articulation and formal continuity in Schubert’s music, and its affinity with Schubert’s paratactic forms which exploit unexpected disjunction as a formal premise. It focuses on the expositional interpolations in Schubert’s sonatas that exhibit characteristics normally associated with development sections. The three analytical case studies that follow have been chosen for their distinctive approach to this formal practice, and demonstrate its early stages of development in D36/i and D353/i as well as a mature example, D804/i. Three fundamental questions underline my analyses: first, in what sense do the interpolations in Schubert’s first-movement expositions function as development (D353/i); second, the question of whether or not synthesis of the formal dialectic is achieved (D36/i), and finally, what the implications of this are for the articulation of a lyrically conceived teleology (D804/i). This chapter also contains a methodological interlude wherein I define my extension of Edward T. Cone’s concept of stratification to Schubert’s music and its relevance to the sonatas.

The introduction outlines the musicological context for the book’s engagement with Schubert’s string quartets. It offers a fresh perspective on the issues surrounding the early reception of Schubert’s instrumental music and considers the lingering tendencies of that history in more recent scholarship. It situates Schubert in relation to Carl Dahlhaus’ concept of the Stildualismus of the nineteenth century, and problematises the frequent setting of Schubert and Beethoven as opposites, exposing the disciplinary remnants of Beethoven’s centrality to the formalisation of music theory in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.It also lays the foundation for considering the lyric as a category of form, which the later chapters develop, and defines the concept of ’lyric teleology’ which is foundational to the book’s analytical case studies. Finally, the introduction explains and rationalises the book’s specific areas of focus (string-quartet first movements) and situates the book within existing and emerging debates surrounding nineteenth-century musical form and Schubert’s place within them.

Chapter 5 brings questions of musical time front and centre in order to explore and explicate the diverse temporal modes that co-exist in Schubert’s quartet movements. The static nature of the lyric mode is first considered via a reading of the Andante con moto from the Quartet in D, D94, which furnishes an example of the ways by which Schubert progressivises lyric time. The chapter then considers Schubert’s prominent amalgamation of sonata and variation impulses and its implications for the sense of time articulated by his music since the temporal perspective articulated by variation form is typically understood as being one of retrospection in contrast to the sonata. The role of variation as a technique of expansion is explored via the Quartet in G Minor, D173, and the chapter culminates in a reading of the late G-Major Quartet, D887. The analyses pursue two related ends: first, to analyse the movements’ formal syntax afresh by bringing their variational structures into dialogue with form-functional theory, and second, to demonstrate the role played by ambiguity and form-functional multiplicity in the movements’ generation of competing manifestations of musical time.

Chapter 2 considers Schubert’s string quartets, their early reception, broader historical circumstances, and some contemporaneous examples of the genre. It begins by considering the issues surrounding the posthumous dissemination of the quartets and the ramifications of that for the reception of the works in future generations, focusing in particular on the disparity of treatment between the post-1824 quartets and Schubert’s earlier examples of the genre. It goes on to clarify the backdrop against which Schubert’s quartets were written by exploring string-quartet publication and performance in Vienna in the period 1800–28. From this, it isolates Joseph Mayseder’s quartets as providing a novel and distinct formal context for Schubert’s contemporaneous works and considers areas of overlap and their meaning for Schubert’s works.

The epilogue draws together the book’s main aims: to define and explore the formal tendencies of Schubert’s lyric teleology; to revive analytical engagement with the composer’s pre-1816 string quartets, and to reflect on analytical methodology. It also considers paths not taken and questions not asked in an attempt both to rationalise the contribution made by the book and to contextualise its findings. Finally, it addresses the lingering question of how impactful Schubert’s instrumental lyricism was, and whether it can be perceived in the music of later nineteenth-century composers. To this end, the chapter considers the music of Brahms (whose debt to Schubert is well documented), Bruckner (who knew Schubert’s music intimately and whose compositions were the subject of similar criticisms of formal redundancy and seemingly disjunctive and self-contained themes), and Chopin (in whose early work we see formal strategies akin to those of Schubert’s lyric form). These correspondences suggest that Schubert’s lyric teleology can be understood as prescient of a distinct turn to Romantic form, and provide recommendations for further study.