Whether one likes or hates Schubert and whether one thinks highly or poorly of Schubert’s music belongs to his/her taste. I won’t respond to any negative and offensive comments on Schubert’s music any more. Instead, I listed what characteristics of Schubert’s music have fascinated me so much.

Peacefulness or Tranquility
* Themes are not in opposition or conflict, but in harmony with one another.
Simplicity
* Themes are not adorned or polished, but expanded spontaneously.
* Themes appear repeatedly, but in different musical color.
Spontaneity or Naturalness
* The musical flow is not controlled, but let go freely.
* Musical ideas spring from creative source without being checked.
Ambiguity
* Boundary is obscured and contrasting parts contain each other.
* Sadness is felt in laugh. Major mode sounds more sorrowful than minor mode.
Illogicality
* The sections of sonata are connected rather loosely.
* The musical flow changes abruptly and unexpectedly.
Inconspicuousness
* Schubert is susceptible to the beauty of small and minor things.
Subtlety
* Schubert catches any delicate change of human feeling or natural color well.
Incompleteness
* Schubert is comfortable with incompleteness because he has no goal to attain.
* Schubert expresses the transience of life and nature that passes unnoticed.
Ordinariness
* Profound emotional depth is concealed beneath easily recognizable melodic surface.

Of those features that fascinated me about Schubert’s music, I feel the need to add a commentary on ‘incompleteness’ (‘Schubert’s comfortable with incompleteness because he has no goal to attain.’). As a self-confident artist, Schubert is no less goal-oriented than other composers. His ultimate aim is no other than to create ‘true masterpiece’ that matches Beethoven’s in scale and depth. But in his music itself, Schubert does not seem goal-oriented at all. His music including sonata-form reads as ‘aimless wandering’. What I meant by ‘incompleteness’ is the severely-criticized repetition of themes in his music. In the mainstream western world of art, repetition is viewed as a very negative element that degrades artistic perfection, because perfection can be reached gradually through developing and improving materials constantly. But, beauty is not always found in things new, symmetrical and perfect, judging from eastern perspective at least. Beauty can be appreciated also in imperfect and flawed things. When approaching Schubert’s music from eastern perspective, alleged negative elements like repetition can appear totally different.

In my opinion, the way Schubert treats themes in his sonata-form is very similar to Easterners’ attitude to nature. In the East, emphasis has always been placed on “seeing nature as it is”, because nature itself is fundamentally beyond human language and conception. Accordingly there is no point in importing human plan and will into nature. Schubert’s tuneful themes are mainly self-contained and closed entity. A renowned aesthetician considered them “utopian,” and worth visiting again and again, which justifies Schubert’s “redundant and excessive” repetition. As Schubert’s themes are self-sufficient and closed, so they leave little room for composer’s manipulation. In other words, themes are embraced in their entirety. It would be wrong to say that Schubert never develops his themes, but he clearly prefers showing them in different musical color to altering their contents. If Schubert’s themes are compared to nature (one of key Taoist concepts ‘zi-ran’, equivalent of nature in meaning, can be literally translated into ‘so of its own’ or ‘so of itself’, which does not admit of human intervention.), this attitude is thought to be like “seeing nature as it is.”
If we cannot grasp nature with our conception and other abstract means, it may not be desirable to interfere with the flow of nature. That’s why Easterners think that we should “let nature take its course.” This means nature should not be exploited or conquered according to human plan and will. In his sonata-form, Schubert seems not interested in directing and developing his multiple themes toward a certain goal. The musical flow is not controlled, but “let go” freely. When it changes abruptly and unexpectedly, listeners feel transported to another world. From my impression, Schubert expands his music spontaneously as Eastern artists did in their sumi-e paintings.

In the past the comparative studies between Schubert and Beethoven always came to the conclusion that Schubert as instrumental composer is greatly inferior to Beethoven. But recent studies started to do justice to the uniqueness of Schubert’s large-scale instrumental music; the difference between Schubert and Beethoven does not mean that Schubert is far behind Beethoven in artistic accomplishment. When approaching Schubert’s sonatas in light of Beethoven’s counterparts, the former is studied mainly in reference to Beethoven’s works in the “middle period.” It may be because differences are quite noticeable between “lyric and wandering” Schubert and “dialectic and goal-oriented” Beethoven. Curiously enough, Schubert is rarely compared with Beethoven of “the Late Period.” On the surface similarities are remarkable rather than differences. In his late works Beethoven could be roughly characterized as (1) dominantly lyrical and meditative (2) strong irregularities and ambiguities (3) classical form is expanded to its absolute limit. In fact, these features are shared by Schubert in his mature works. But, I think that beneath these superficial similarities lie fundamental differences between Schubert and late-period Beethoven. The following dichotomy is purely based on my personal impression and may seem too generalized.
Schubert vs. late-period Beethoven
Concrete --- Abstract
Individual --- Universal
Relative --- Absolute
Earthly --- Transcendental
Sensuous --- Spiritual
Finally characterized as
Ecological --- Metaphysical
It is very miraculous that even under overwhelming influence of his contemporary Schubert could create unquestionable masterpieces of which aesthetics is entirely different from Beethoven’s.

I want to add a closing remark on Schubert vs. Beethoven of the Late Period. I am not musicologist, but believe that Schubert is the first and last composer in the history of music that instilled “life” into “logic-governing” sonata-form. If the philosophy of Nietzsche is summarized as that of “Body (or Earth) and Life”, he must have “barked up the wrong tree,” because the perfect match of Nietzsche’s philosophy is not Wagner’s music, but Schubert’s. After fifteen years of my voyage in Schubert’s music, I reached the conclusion that Schubert’s music is no other than “Feeling for Life” It may not be wrong to say that Schubert is unsurpassed in the “depth of Ecological Sensitivity”.

Those who associate Nietzsche with “Wille zur Macht” or “Ubermensch” would find it very strange that Schubert’s music is a perfect match of his philosophy. As Schubert’s instrumental music has been reappraised, so Nietzsche’s philosophy went through complete re-interpretation; “Macht” also includes the meaning of “power of life or vitality” and “Ubermensch” is more like “child with pure heart (i.e. free from dualism) who indulges in the pleasure of creation.” In the history of western thought, so-called dualism had great influences on philosophers and artists alike: reason and emotion, spirit and body, male and female, man and nature, heaven and earth etc. The former group (equivalent to “yang” in Eastern terminology) was always thought to be superior to the latter (“yin”). Accordingly, it is quite natural that the former dominates the latter. If Nietzsche is philosophically on the latter group (emotion, body, female, nature, earth), Schubert is artistically on the same side. Nietzsche identified life with woman and thought that truth is closer to female. His philosophy boils down to “eternally repeating and generating cosmic play of life.” Nietzsche must have regarded Schubert as mere songwriter as his contemporaries did. But if he had fully appreciated Schubert’s two great C-major works replete with explosive “Dionysian” power of life, he would have mentioned Schubert much more than any other composers.

Schubert’s themes are simply concrete, not abstract. They are appreciated and enjoyed sensuously. I think Ecology should start with feeling nature with our own senses. Any metaphysics about Ecology would sound empty without this kind of ecological sensitivity. As Schubert’s music is based on this sensuous experience, it is basically about “Here and Now.” Through continuous repetition, Schubert slows down musical time and allows listeners leisure for feeling his themes fully. Schubert’s themes maintain their individuality, because Schubert rarely alters their contents, but modulates them in different musical color. According to Ecological thought, all things have their own intrinsic value and should not be sacrificed for the sake of the whole. In other words, they do not merely function as part of the whole, but also have their own worth of appreciation. Schubert’s themes are basically in complementary relationship (like “yin and yang”) and harmonize (rather than strive) with one another peacefully. In the natural world, all organisms seem to struggle for survival, but in deeper level they need others for existence because all things in the ecosystem are interconnected. Schubert’s instrumental music was severely criticized for its melody-like themes, repetition and too lyrical atmosphere, but it is because of these elements that Schubert’s music sounds deeply ecological.

Late-period Beethoven’s music is extremely complex and elusive, so very difficult to categorize. On the contrary, middle-period Beethoven is rather easy to characterize. I got the impression that if middle-period Beethoven’s music is compared to straight line, Schubert’s is to curve. The following is food for thought from Korean understanding of “Line Aesthetics.”
If straight line symbolizes male characteristics, curve represents female. In contrast to sharp, aggressive and space-dividing straight line, curve swims in space unhurriedly, allowing of gap and accepting bent and folded course. If straight line directs flow and direction of time, that is, goal-oriented, curve shows circular structure of repeating and returning movement. Curve hesitates like stammerer and wavers as if it lost sense of direction. If masculine straight line epitomizes modernism art based on reason, progress, development, science and creative mythology of a heroic individual, curve is close to postmodern art embracing femininity. Straight line connects separate points reflecting accumulation of time, that is, linear concept of time. On the other hand, curve suggests circular concept of time, very similar to eastern view of time.

If there is the best of studies on Schubert’s music, it is attributed to Maurice J.E. Brown. When professional musicologists still underestimated and ignored Schubert’s instrumental works, this former science teacher wrote the most important book ever on Schubert and his music. The following quotation from his book gave me inspiration in studying “Zen aesthetics of Schubert’s sonata.” I think this short quotation is worth any full biography on Schubert and has strong penetration enough to overpower all negative and ill-informed criticisms on Schubert’s music

“The reason why Schubert is criticized on the grounds that his movements lack an organically planned structure lies possibly in his poetic approach to the composing music. He wished to feel intensely, and to express to the utmost of his powers, the present moment in his music: nor for its significance as a link with what has gone and what is to come, but for its momentary effect as sound, as pleasure for the listener.”

The reason why Schubert’s sonata form is severely criticized is closely related to the attachment to “order.” In Schubert’s sonata form, each section does not only function as part of the whole , but have worth of appreciation on its own. Accordingly, sections of Schubert’s sonata-form are rather loosely connected and their logical coherence is weak. Certainly this is not the way traditional sonata form works where each section contributes to “order” of the whole by doing its own proper function well. Schubert’s sonata form was subjected to criticism because parts are not strictly controlled for the fulfillment of order of the whole.
On the surface the natural world looks very orderly and seems to fit mathematical framework perfectly. But in much deeper level things become entirely different; nature is closer to “chaos” rather than “order.” The reason why nature looks so orderly is that we just projected our frame of thought into the outer world. Nature itself still remains indefinable despite our highly advanced contemporary science. Besides, beauty is not always found in orderly things, so we don’t have to cling to order. If Schubert fully expressed power of life through the looseness of form, credit should be given to him for that.

I think that the tunefulness of Schubert’s music is considered both his strength and weakness. On the one hand, distinct melodic line makes his music more accessible to listeners and more popular. On the other hand, tuneful Schubert’s music was criticized as “easy and without depth”. To these critics, depth is attributed only to the “difficult music” that is highly abstract in contents and complicated in structure. In fact, this standard of appreciation is accepted by mainstream western thought in general; the “abstract and complicated” is the result of evolution and progress from the “concrete and simple”.
Schubert did not compose highly abstract music like Bach’s “Kunst der Fuge”, at all. The first movement of his last string quartet sounds exceptionally abstract, but even this work is full of pure Schubertian characteristics. Such complicated structure as Beethoven’s sonata form (especially development section) is basically foreign to his music. On the contrary, Schubert embroidered his works with “concrete tunes” from early to late works and expanded his music with comparatively simple structure based on repetition.

In the East, there is strong tendency to take dim view of the abstract and complicated. These two are thought of as work of “dividing intellect”, which functions by separating the subject from the object in the first place. But, Easterners regarded this dividing intellect as a serious hindrance to “enlightenment”. One can reach the state of enlightenment by seeing the world as it is and freeing oneself from any attachment to the object. This traditional thought had much influence on Easterners’ aesthetic attitude; importance is attached to the depth concealed in things ordinary, easy and simple. This kind of depth must be very paradoxical from the standpoint of western thought.
Schubert’s music could be re-appraised when critics and listeners started to discern the profound depth beneath easy-to-access melodic surface. This depth has innocent, inward and emotional nature above all and is reached spontaneously through intuition. It is like feeling of wonder that child with pure heart had when seeing the world for the first time. It cannot be expressed with human language and grasped with abstract and conceptual means, either. I think Schubert set great example by proving that depth can be also appreciated in “concrete and simple” music.

When someone told Stravinsky that Schubert’s works were so boring that they put listeners to sleep, he replied that it did not matter when he woke up he was in paradise. It is not only Stravinsky that felt that Schubert’s music is heavenly, but many listeners got similar impression. In fact, the word “heavenly” is more suitable for describing Bach’s and Mozart’s music. Out of religious piety Bach aimed for the heavenly world. The impeccable perfection of Mozart’s music brings heaven itself to our mind. In contrast, Schubert’s music is closer to “Song of the Earth” which expresses the beauty of earthly beings. Certainly his music seems loose and flawed in comparison with Mozart’s. Its key elements are all of earthly character: (1) Sensuous melody-like themes appeal to listeners’ heart (rather than spirit). (2) Frequent modulations (Schubert’s specialty) make his music very colorful. (3) Human emotion is displayed as it is (rather than sublimated).
One may wonder why Schubert’s music sounds heavenly in spite of that. Schubert does not control his musical materials strictly, but takes “let-go” attitude instead. In other words, he does not try to grasp something in his music, but let it flow aimlessly. When listening to Schubert’s music, we are often reminded of “the world of innocence” far from worldly obsession. Only those children who feel one with everything around them belong to this world. It is not different from “the beautiful world” (Schone Welt, Wo bist du?) that Schubert yearns for in his music.

If question is asked about the most noticeable characteristics of Schubert’s music, these two will be pointed out: “tuneful and repetitive.” Though critics focused on such characteristics and underestimated Schubert’s music in the past, it is also true that Schubert’s music is much more tuneful and repetitive than any other classical composers’.
1. Tuneful
The meaning of tunefulness is that Schubert’s music is firmly rooted in the phenomenal world that we experience with our senses. It can be argued that such sensuous and relative world is fundamentally imperfect and there is a transcendental, absolute and perfect world beyond it that we should search for. On the other side, the phenomenal world exists as it is, that is to say, regardless of our artificial division of perfect and imperfect. I have an impression that Schubert accepts this transient world and catches its subtle beauty in his music.
2. Repetitive
Through repetitions Schubert’s music slows down allowing listeners leisure for appreciating it fully. Objection can be made to this: repetition is no better than “regressing tautology,” and music should move forward in the form of renovation. This kind of thought is closely related to the linear concept of time which lays stress on future. But, if we consider time differently, present may not be mere connecting link between past and future. On the contrary, past and future can be our conceptual composition, because we live neither in past nor future, but in continuing present. If there is any meaning in the repetition of Schubert’s music, it may be that repetition makes us aware of how precious the present moment is and how valuable to appreciate it is.

From my personal appreciation, the essence of Schubert’s music lies in no other than ‘Feeling of Life’, which can be confirmed in the following three elements.
1. Individual
The themes of Schubert’s music can be compared to ‘Living Individuals.’ They are totally different from motivic cells. These living individuals cannot be manipulated nor used as building materials for architecture, but have their own value of appreciation. They require loose structure, because their power of life cannot be expanded fully in tight structure.
2. Change
The themes of Schubert’s music are in the state of continuous change. Like wanderer, they frequently move from one key to another and often fluctuate between major and minor modes. This kind of change is also the expression of power of life and subtlety (one of conspicuous characteristics of Schubert’s music) can be perceived in there. While development implies that what comes later is more important because of its linear character, change means that every moment is precious and is worth appreciating.
3. Relation
The themes of Schubert’s music are not controlled, but let go for the sake of their power of life. In the traditional Western Art, great emphasis is laid on the control of materials, because the beauty of art can be found in the order which is materialized through controlling its materials. Unlike atoms, the themes of Schubert’s music do not exist in isolation, but can maintain their power of life when connected to other themes. Harmony is the result of their having relation with others spontaneously. In the harmonious whole the power of life of each theme is expanded to the full with its individuality preserved.

I think the following remark of a renowned contemporary composer goes to the heart of Schubert music.
"The writing of music is “a purposeless play,” which is an affirmation of life, not an attempt to bring order out of chaos nor to suggest improvement in creation but simply a way of waking up to the very life we're living.”