weaknesses of great masters, among which the passages in question are
not to be counted, still more so, special peculiarities, should be
left untouched. What would become of Beethoven, if each generation of
musicians, according to individual judgment, arrogated to itself the
right, here and there, of expunging hardnesses, smoothing down
peculiarities, and softening even sharp points with which, from time
to time, we come into unpleasant contact? Works of art must be
accepted as they are."

The first part of Bitter's argument is sound; but, unfortunately for
the last, the writer in his life of Emanuel Bach and his brothers
insists on the necessity of _not_ accepting Emanuel's clavier works
_as they are_.

He quotes a passage from the Andante of the 4th Sonata of the second
set of the "Reprisen Sonaten," and comes to the natural conclusion
that it was only an outline requiring filling up.

With all his faults, one cannot but admire the spirit in which Bülow
worked. He felt the greatness of the old masters, regretted the
limited means which they had at their command, also the stenographic
system in which they were accustomed to express their thoughts; and he
sought, therefore, to make use of modern means, and thereby was
naturally tempted to introduce modern effects. The restoration of the
old masters is a difficult and delicate task, and in most cases, one
may add, a thankless one. In the matter of transcription, however, it
is important to distinguish between a Bülow and a Tausig: the one
displayed the intelligence of an artist; the other, the
thoughtlessness of a _virtuoso_.