Part I- Schumann and Jean Paul
The concept of humor is widely discussed in Romantic writing, and the definition of its precise characteristics and purpose varies to some extent. I have chosen to base my study on the ideas of Jean Paul Richter- the influential German novelist and humorist.
Jean Paul is the obvious choice for several reasons:
Firstly, he was very likely the greatest theoretician among "romantic humorists", and an exceptional artist among the theoreticians and philosophers of his time. In other words, being an actual author of humoristic literature as well as a thinker and theoretician on the subject, he is ideally placed to make practical observations about humor in the arts; therefore I prefer to use Jean Paul's definition of humor than a purely theoretical one by one of his renowned contemporaries such as Friederich Schlegel or Immanuel Kant.
Secondly, Richter's Vorschule der Aesthetik ("Introduction to Aesthetics") contains the most comprehensive study of humor (and its applications in literature) to be written at his time. This book, published in 1804 and greatly expanded in 1813, will provide the primary source material for my study.
Lastly, and most importantly, it is well known that Jean Paul was Schumann's favorite author. Schumann's letters reveal to what extent he was influenced by the former:
On the composition of Papillons, op. 2: "I kept on turning over the last page (of Richter's Die Flegelyahre), for the end seemed like a new beginning -- almost unconsciously I went to the piano and so one Papillon after the other appeared."
The influence of Jean Paul doesn't only manifest as programmatic inspiration for one particular work or another- it permeates Schumann's psychology entirely. 18-year-old Schumann wrote in his diary: "Jean Paul is all the time portraying himself in his works, but always in the form of two persons (...) only a Jean Paul could have combined in himself such opposite characters- the contrasts are very harsh sometimes, not to say extreme- only he could have done it".
When considered in the context of Schumann's artistic/autobiographical personas, Florestan and Eusebius, the above quote is particularly telling and can provide the basis for an entirely separate research. Schumann later adds in his diary, significantly: "I often ask myself what would have become of me if I had never known Jean Paul: in one respect at any rate he seems to have an affinity with me, for I foresaw him. Perhaps I would have written the same kind of poetry but I would have withdrawn myself less from other people and dreamt less. I cannot decide, really, what would have become of me, the problem is impossible to work out."
Schumann never outgrew his affection for Jean Paul- from the asylum at Endenich, where he spent his dying days, Schumann requested to be sent "two volumes of my compositions and 'Die Flegelyahre' by John Paul".
In his article "Schumann and John Paul" Robert L. Jacobs provides a detailed study of the psychological connection between the two. Indeed I would prefer to use here the term "connection" than "influence"- Schumann certainly felt that there were similarities between himself and Jean Paul, that they were "kindred spirits" of sorts, and while there is evidence that Schumann had read Richter's Vorschule and was aware of the writer's concept of humor, I wouldn't go so far as to assume that this directly influenced Schumann's style or the Humoreske in particular. What I hope to achieve by proceeding to summarize Richter's main ideas is rather to illuminate Schumann's music in a new, subjective way, which will provide fresh inspiration for me as a performing artist.