漢斯利克於1854年出版的《論音樂美》挑戰了標題音樂的擁護者，但是華格納與李斯特這兩位新德國樂派的重量級作曲家，不是「姍姍來遲」就是並未直接地回應漢斯利克。針對漢斯利克的論點做出直接回應的人，反而是來自支持李斯特與華格納的盟友，Franz Brendel即為其中之一。這位歐洲十九世紀中葉以推動前衛音樂聞名的音樂評論家與音樂史家，是鋼琴炫技家兼作曲家李斯特最堅強的盟友之一，樂劇作曲家華格納的支持者，也是新德國樂派的發言人。他於1856年發表的〈標題音樂〉，係從音樂歷史的角度建構與闡述標題音樂的美學基礎。受到黑格爾歷史哲學的影響， Brendel強調標題音樂是音樂歷史發展中的必然結果，是十九世紀中期前衛音樂的表徵，表達了與漢斯利克陣營相左的美學立場。令人驚訝的是，在〈標題音樂〉中他並未全然推翻漢斯利克的見解；相反的，他的部份論點與漢斯利克產生交集。針對這個部份，加拿大學者James Deaville認為Brendel試圖透過〈標題音樂〉為整場美學論爭做出一種妥協式的總結。不同於Deaville的解讀，筆者將檢視與分析Brendel於〈標題音樂〉所呈現的主要論點，並以他的音樂史論著為輔，呈現這位音樂評論家對標題音樂所抱持的雙重態度。筆者挪用Carl Dahlhaus解釋華格納對器樂曲美學意義的雙重態度，建議將Brendel看似妥協的態度，視為反應新德國樂派作曲家不同程度地承認器樂曲的「兩種事實」：在強調器樂曲應具有明確的表達性的同時，也不願放棄器樂曲的抽象與不確定性。Brendel那「兼容並蓄」的觀點，體現了他這位浪漫主義者在黑格爾歷史哲學的影響下，於標題音樂美學的論述中所表現出的烏托邦嚮往。

Franz Brendel, one of Franz Liszt’s strongest allies and a spokesman for the New German School, was closely engaged in the aesthetic debates concerning program music in the mid-nineteenth century. Influenced by the Hegelian philosophy of history (Geschichtsphilosophie), Brendel’s music criticism emphasized the importance of artistic progression that also respected traditional German aesthetics. This dialectical perspective informed his aesthetic defense of program music, which prompted opposition from the adherents of “absolute music” led by Eduard Hanslick. Although Hanslick’s aesthetic treatise On the Musically Beautiful (Vom Musikalisch-Schönen, 1854) would provoke responses from defenders of program music, neither Richard Wagner and Liszt replied immediately to Hanslick. One of the immediate responses to Hanslick from the New German School was offered by Brendel, who examined the historical and aesthetic basis of programmatic music in his article “Program Music” (“Programmmusik,” 1856). Surprisingly, Brendel did not attempt to refute Hanslick’s position; on the contrary, he adopted a conciliatory tone. James Deaville has argued that through the article, Brendel was attempting to conclude the entire aesthetic debate. Differing from Deaville, this paper examines the arguments laid out in Brendel’s article along with his other writings to highlight Brendel’s dual perspective regarding instrumental music. Adopting a term introduced by Carl Dahlhaus to describe Wagner’s complex attitude towards instrumental music, the paper suggests that we conceive Brendel’s seemingly compromising tone as a reflection of the “twofold truth” held by composers of the New German School: the indeterminate quality of German music could coexist with an admission of the representational quality of music. This paper argues that this assimilation of diverse aesthetic positions embodies a utopian aspiration conditioned by Hegelian philosophy and German Romantic ideology.