Originally posted by Schenkerian
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Chopin: Polonaise-Fantasie, Op. 61
Collapse
X
-
'Man know thyself'
-
Originally posted by Schenkerian View Post
Ok, but that excludes Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Brahms and the Austro-Hungarian Liszt! That doesn't explain Berlioz, though, who loved Beethoven.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sorrano View Post
How do you explain Berlioz, anyway? He, at least, had the sense to combine what he deemed to be good in both "camps" and (in my opinion) came up with some pretty good stuff.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Peter View Post
Not necessarily esteemed, but respected and influenced by to some degree - the composers I mentioned were fine musicians if not 'great' in comparison to Beethoven. It isn't always the case that a great musician has good judgement of another - Tchaikovsky thought Handel 4th rate and Brahms an untalented mediocrity. Brahms loathed Bruckner's music, Chopin disliked Liszt's music as did Clara Schumann.
As to Tchaikovsky thinking Handel was "4th rate"; that's very ironic indeed since the German/English composer's music has grown in stature while that of Tchaikovsky has largely remained static. We know Tchaikovsky was wrong and the reasons WHY he was wrong. I myself dislike the music of Bruckner but that's not the same as suggesting it has little musical merit.Last edited by Schenkerian; 06-24-2021, 06:15 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Schenkerian View Post
That's true in those examples you quote, but professional jealousy is almost always part of that mix. If you had sat down with Brahms and honestly asked him about the quality of Bruckner's music he would have said that it great musicality and originality; he just resented Bruckner because he felt his own musical language was becoming obsolete and this provided an understandable threat to Brahms. Goodness; he even admired the music of Strauss!! Clara Schumann disliked Liszt's music but that isn't quite the same as suggesting that it has little musical merit; again, she was siding with her friend Brahms and her own husband as she detected Liszt was moving music away from the aesthetic of the former two. In fact, both she and Brahms were absolutely vicious about the big-hearted Liszt and this just wasn't justified - but, again, there was HUGE professional jealousy at play. Clara slaved away as a pianist promoting Robert's work and Liszt was a sell-out with recital audiences.
As to Tchaikovsky thinking Handel was "4th rate"; that's very ironic indeed since the German/English composer's music has grown in stature while that of Tchaikovsky has largely remained static. We know Tchaikovsky was wrong and the reasons WHY he was wrong. I myself dislike the music of Bruckner but that's not the same as suggesting it has little musical merit.'Man know thyself'
Comment
-
Originally posted by Peter View Post
I'm not sure Brahms felt he was becoming 'obsolete', his standing in the musical world was pretty high in his lifetime and remains so. I think the dislike of the music was genuine enough and not down to jealousy, he simply had no sympathy for the Wagner school, hence his savage criticism of Hans Rott's remarkable 1st Symphony. I agree that not liking a composer's music doesn't necessarily imply it has little merit. Beethoven was certainly ahead of his time in regarding Handel as the greatest composer ever, not sure I entirely agree though!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Schenkerian View Post
I meant that Brahms's musical language and aesthetic was being threatened by the likes of Wagner, Liszt, Bruckner. His standing was very high, indeed, but he was prescient enough to understand the significance of the new musical movements and what this might mean in perpetuity for his own music.'Man know thyself'
Comment
-
Originally posted by Peter View Post
Maybe but he wisely kept out of disputes having learnt his lesson as a young man with the infamous 'Manifesto'. Hanslick became the voice of he conservative cause, Interestingly Schoenberg set out in his 1947 essay Brahms the progressive "to prove that Brahms, the classicist, the academician, was a great innovator in the realm of musical language, that, in fact, he was a great progressive.”
Comment
-
Brahms may have disliked Liszt intently (and said terrible things about him) but he's sure present here, at least in the first movement! It's almost Freudian, if you ask me!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIm-N9o9qN0
Comment
-
Originally posted by Schenkerian View PostBrahms may have disliked Liszt intently (and said terrible things about him) but he's sure present here, at least in the first movement! It's almost Freudian, if you ask me!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIm-N9o9qN0'Man know thyself'
Comment
-
Originally posted by Peter View Post
Yes indeed and though dedicated to Clara Schumann, it must have been written before he met her and came under the Schumann spell - I doubt she liked it or played it much!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Schenkerian View Post
Its year of composition was 1853; the year Brahms met the Schumann clan!! He had just been to Weimar and heard Liszt playing his own Sonata in B Minor, whereupon Brahms churlishly and childishly slept through the performance. Liszt was a great philanthropist and helped Clara Schumann quite a lot. It was niggardly of them to throw him under the reputational bus because they weren't enamored of his kind of musical style. It was more his popularity that they disliked, if truth be told. That all left a bad taste in my mouth about those two, Clara and Johannes!!'Man know thyself'
Comment
Comment