Brahms has carried into his romantic song-writing a classic regard for form. In the more general sense this means that he always observed artistic proportion, giving unity and body to his melodies, and curbing the exuberant imagination which in so many song-writers makes the parts attempt to be more important than the whole. Concretely considered, we find that Brahms nearly always held to the strophic form, seeing his poems as stanzas which could be set to the same melody. In some cases, as in his first song, ‘Faithfulness,’ he treated the last strophe somewhat differently from the others. A few of his songs are _durchkomponiert_, after the manner of Schubert. But in general he felt his songs to be far more musical architecture and less mere running comment on the words. Certainly every one of his songs would be a satisfactory piece of pure music, apart from the text and apart from the special meaning conveyed. His regard for form makes this possible. Sometimes the form is hard to analyze, not coinciding with any set formula, but the sense of form, of architecture, of proportion, of restraint is always there. Some have said that Brahms’ songs are mere instrumental compositions with words added. As a final criticism this is certainly unjust. But it has a certain superficial justification, for Brahms certainly had less regard for the words themselves than any other great song-writer. He is not unwilling to force the text into the form necessary to fit the music. Sometimes he consistently and deliberately misplaces accents, as in the first line of the song, _Wie bist du, meine Königin_, which with Brahms’ music reads, ‘_Wie_ bist du, _mei_ne Köni_gin_.’ He is very free with slurred notes and shows not the slightest hesitation in putting two notes to one syllable in measure after measure. The music has its own architecture, derived from formal or melodic considerations and not from considerations of the text. Of course, this is not the result of carelessness on Brahms’ part, nor a belittling of the importance of the words. It was merely that Brahms regarded his songs as interpretive music, and not as ‘heightened speech.’ In this he differed from nearly every great song-writer, and put himself in opposition to the taste of the time. For those who feel Schumann’s scrupulous regard for the text this will rank as a fault, a blot on the beauty of Brahms’ songs. The student should decide the matter for himself. At any rate, the fact points to the peculiar interpretation which Brahms’ songs demand--an interpretation which involves firm, reserved, controlled modelling rather than minute emphasis on the parts. Out of this regard for the design as a whole rather than from the direct meaning of the details will come the interpretive truth of the song.