music drama.  It requires the grand manner to read it adequately, and the doppio movemento is exciting to a dramatic degree.  I fully agree with Kullak that too strict adherence to the marking of this section produces the effect of an “inartistic precipitation” which robs the movement of clarity.  Kleczynski calls the work The Contrition of a Sinner and devotes several pages to its elucidation.  De Lenz chats most entertainingly with Tausig about it.  Indeed, an imposing march of splendor is the second subject in C. A fitting pendant is this work to the C sharp minor Nocturne.  Both have the heroic quality, both are free from mawkishness and are of the greater Chopin, the Chopin of the mode masculine.

Niecks makes a valuable suggestion:  “In playing these nocturnes—­ op. 48—­there occurred to me a remark of Schumann’s, when he reviewed some nocturnes by Count Wielhorski.  He said that the quick middle movements which Chopin frequently introduced into his nocturnes are often weaker than his first conceptions; meaning the first portions of his nocturnes.  Now, although the middle part in the present instances are, on the contrary, slower movements, yet the judgment holds good; at least with respect to the first nocturne, the middle part of which has nothing to recommend it but a full, sonorous instrumentation, if I may use this word in speaking of one instrument.  The middle part of the second—­D flat, molto piu lento—­however, is much finer; in it we meet again, as we did in some other nocturnes, with soothing, simple chord progressions.  When Gutmann studied the C sharp minor Nocturne with Chopin, the master told him that the middle section--the molto piu lento in D flat major—­should be played as a recitative.  ’A tyrant commands’—­the first two chords—­he said, ‘and the other asks for mercy.’”

Of course Niecks means the F sharp minor, not the C sharp minor Nocturne, op. 48, No. 2, dedicated, with the C minor, to Mlle. L. Duperre.

Opus 55, two nocturnes in F minor and E flat major, need not detain us long.  The first is familiar.  Kleczynski devotes a page or more to its execution.  He seeks to vary the return of the chief subject with nuances—­as would an artistic singer the couplets of a classic song.  There are “cries of despair” in it, but at last a “feeling of hope.”  Kullak writes of the last measures:  “Thank God—­the goal is reached!” It is the relief of a major key after prolonged wanderings in the minor.  It is a nice nocturne, neat in its sorrow, yet not epoch-making.  The one following has “the impression of an improvisation.”  It has also the merit of being seldom heard.  These two nocturnes are dedicated to Mlle. J. W. Stirling.

Opus 62 brings us to a pair in B major and E major inscribed to Madame de Konneritz.  The first, the Tuberose Nocturne, is faint with a sick, rich odor.  The climbing trellis of notes, that so unexpectedly leads to the tonic, is charming and the chief tune has charm, a fruity charm.  It is highly ornate, its harmonies dense, the entire surface overrun with wild ornamentation and a profusion of trills.  The piece—­the third of its sort in the key of B—­is not easy.  Mertke gives the following explication of the famous chain trills: