in particular an article by the same author in
the Century Magazine for August, 1918.]

[Footnote 296: Gosse also calls it a _famous miracle of
intelligibility_.]

Now that we may look forward to no more compositions from
Debussy[297]--he died in March, 1918--it is certainly fitting to
attempt a forecast as to the permanent worth of his achievements and
his influence upon future development. Like all music his compositions
may be judged from several points of view: the worth of the content,
the perfection or inadequacy of style and the manner in which the media
of presentation are used. To begin with the last characteristic--there
is no doubt that Debussy has enlarged the resources of our two chief
modern instruments, the pianoforte and the orchestra. By him the
pianoforte is always treated according to its true nature, _i.e._, as
an intimate, coloristic instrument and, in amplifying all its
resources of tone-color, flexible rhythm and descriptive power he is
the worthy successor of Chopin. In his orchestral compositions such as
the _Nocturnes_ (_Clouds_, _Festivals_ and _Sirens_), the _Sea Pieces_
and _Images_, of which the _Rondes de Printemps_ and _Iberia_ are the
most significant, there is a union of warmth and delicacy as
individual as it is rare. _Iberia_, in fact, for vitality of
imagination and flawless workmanship may be considered the acme of
Debussy's orchestral style. The great resources of the modern
orchestra are often abused. Compositions are rich and gorgeous but at
the same time inflated, turgid and bombastic. Certain works of Richard
Strauss and Mahler are examples in point. Debussy's treatment,
however, of the varied modern orchestra is remarkable for its economy.
The melodic lines stand out clearly, there is always a rich supporting
background and we are convinced that everything sounds just as the
composer meant. As to the structure and style of his music, these are
more subtle matters to estimate. We may acknowledge at once that
Debussy's style is free and individual, for he has written his music
his own way, with slight regard for academic models. But a thorough
examination of his works shows no evidence of carelessness or
uncertainty of aim. There is, to be sure, nothing of that routine
development of musical material which we associate with classic
practice--instead a free, imaginative growth. But there is always a
definite structural foundation to support the freedom of expression.
This coh