Breitkopf and Härtel compilation; this
surely provides significant evidence that contradicts the idea that Chopin
could not master the large-scale classical forms.
Leichtentritt's major analytical study of virtually all
Chopin's published works further attests to Chopin's "honorary membership" of
the German tradition. Jim Samson notes that a work of this magnitude based upon
a single composer was rare at this time, and that few composers were given such
an honour.
He adds, "it was truly a monument to a recently established and increasingly
specialised Musikwissenschaft."
In spite of Leichtentritt's objection to the idea that
opus 35 had a imperfect structure, negative criticisms continued in following
years, although by the 1940's attitudes had begun to change. Henry Bidou
maintains that "[i]t is true that [Chopin's sonata opus 35] is not very
coherent. Schumann has pointed out the defect in its composition."
Gerald Abraham also considers the first movement of opus 35 as being "something
less than first-rate Chopin."
He thought it unusual that Chopin employed unmodified four- or eight-bar
phrases as well as undisguised squareness of phrasing for such a long period.
This is evident in the second subject of the first movement, which can be seen
as two 4-bar phrases followed by an 8-bar phrase, as shown in Example 1:
