Modern classical music, why is always derelict?

[v russo]

Originally posted by Peter:

I don't regard the French 'Impressionist composers' as modern by contemporary standards - anyhow Debussy was the greatest of them and had a tremendous influence on the 20th century.

but Impressionism in any guise is really the dawn of modern art. Manet, Monet, Debussy, Ravel etc... They are the first modern radical innovators paving the way (as you say) for the 20th century. I mean Debussy's piano music sounds like it is from out of space next to Brahm's piano pieces. Monet's, "Impression Sunrise" is the first "modern" (in our sense of the term)art work.

just some thoughts,




------------------
v russo

[Opus131]

Originally posted by v russo:
but Impressionism in any guise is really the dawn of modern art. Manet, Monet, Debussy, Ravel etc... They are the first modern radical innovators paving the way (as you say) for the 20th century. I mean Debussy's piano music sounds like it is from out of space next to Brahm's piano pieces. Monet's, "Impression Sunrise" is the first "modern" (in our sense of the term)art work.

just some thoughts,

The French impressionists have to deal with the Grosse Fugue before claiming to be the ones who paved the way to 20th century music :P

[Peter]

Originally posted by v russo:
but Impressionism in any guise is really the dawn of modern art. Manet, Monet, Debussy, Ravel etc... They are the first modern radical innovators paving the way (as you say) for the 20th century. I mean Debussy's piano music sounds like it is from out of space next to Brahm's piano pieces. Monet's, "Impression Sunrise" is the first "modern" (in our sense of the term)art work.

just some thoughts,

I think we are mixing up modern and contemporary avant garde, Debussy is on another planet from Stockhausen, Cage or Harrison-Birtwhistle.

re. modern art I think Turner got there before Monet! Monet has much in common with Turner, for one both could paint - nothing with Damien Hirst or Tracy Enim.


------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by Ahmad:
Some classification please! I think Schoenberg,Webern and Berg are from the Second vinesse school composers which composed music in the atonality style...
What about Stravinsky, Ive and Partok?

You mean Bartok? Stravinsky is a good one to work with; his total output has a mixture of many styles, from neo-romantic to twelve tone and some jazz. Ives, I find very interesting--whether I like a particular work or not, it remains very interesting and captivating. As for Bartok, he can do no wrong with me.

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by Peter:
Well I'm a beginner as I have no trouble at least with Stravinsky and Bartok, though I would have added Britten, Shostakovich and Prokofiev to the list - I've tried going further beyond the 1950s but haven't had much success, so I've started going backwards which I find far more enjoyable - a dose of Hildegard Von Bingen is certainly good for the soul!

Is Britten more of a neo-romantic? I'm just getting into Prokofiev myself and find him very enjoyable to listen to. Shostakovich is always good to listen to. As for the serial composers, I think that anyone exploring 20th Century music needs to get a good dose of them. I've been a bit out of touch for 20 years with current trends, but it seemed to me that the two big camps of the 20th Century were centered around aleatoric vs serial. And alas, but I can't remember hardly any of the aleatoric composers anymore. Oh, well.

[v russo]

Originally posted by Opus131:
The French impressionists have to deal with the Grosse Fugue before claiming to be the ones who paved the way to 20th century music :P

great point! I agree with you in many ways...



------------------
v russo

[v russo]

Originally posted by Sorrano:

You mean Bartok? Stravinsky is a good one to work with; his total output has a mixture of many styles, from neo-romantic to twelve tone and some jazz. Ives, I find very interesting--whether I like a particular work or not, it remains very interesting and captivating. As for Bartok, he can do no wrong with me.

Stravinsky, Bartok, Ives, Shostakovich, Messian...these are the 20th century giants!



------------------
v russo

[Beyond Within]

""Listen to me, here is a great gift (and what a gift it is) given to us, do not let it pass. Your reward will be a lifetime of pleasure." Well.... At least that the way I feel.
Steve"

As someone 19...I find this especially frustrating. There is literally NOBODY my age that I know who listens to classical music. It would be so awesome just to sit with a passionate friend and obsess over Schubert lieder...

Im a music major right now, and sadly everyone here is doing it all for Jazz. Jazz has consumed the music intellectuals. As for classical, a majority of the potential composers turn to atonality or writing trashing pop for teenage heart throbs.

[mrfixit]

Modern Music has only itself to blame. I cant really think of anything post early 20th century worth listening too. Even the least composers of the past are giants compared to anyone alive now.

[Steppenwolf]

Originally posted by Beyond Within:


As someone 19...I find this especially frustrating. There is literally NOBODY my age that I know who listens to classical music. It would be so awesome just to sit with a passionate friend and obsess over Schubert lieder...

I know exactly how you feel! They (we) ARE out there, but there are not many of us. I have learned to shut up about my love of classical music around my friends, or at least not to make a big thing of it around some. There is a general perception among young people that classical music is boring, dry and stuffy and only for old-fashioned, un-cool squares. The same perception is held normally by those who have never actually tried listening to it seriously with an open mind. That's why Jazz is studied more ... because if you want to act cool that really is on the only acceptable choice for intellectual/art music. Classical is out of the question.

[judith]

As regards John Cage music for prepared piano (if it can be called music), I agree with King Stephen - YUK!! The piano is indeed a beautiful enough instrument and doesn` t need "vandalising". My son, who hopes to have a career as a musician brought home a book and CD for GCSE music. When we opened the book it just looked like a load of computer language and the CD was just a series of grunts, howls and clangs. No wonder the school curriculum says pupils dont need to read music to do the GCSE.

[King Stephen]

You young people out there who feel isolated because of your love for classical music why do you dispair?
The people who look upon classical music as boring, not melodic ect. are the poor losers, for we, at any age, are truly the winners for having the foresight to love the classics.
When I was about 16 ( Many years ago) and I first meet my future wife she did not believe that I liked classical music and that I was putting on an "act", it took her a couple of years to realize that I in fact did like, love, pursue classical music.
I really never gave a rats rump what other people thought about my liking the classics.
To be sure if anyone shot of their mouth to me about liking it they were in peril of getting a wack on the head. I was not what you might have called a "nerd". You could almost say I was walking around with a temperment like not unlike LvB. In the end don't concern yourself with what others think for you are the ones with the ability to see beyond the garbage that they classify as music.

"Being young is nice, being retired is Great"

[v russo]

Originally posted by mrfixit:
Modern Music has only itself to blame. I cant really think of anything post early 20th century worth listening too. Even the least composers of the past are giants compared to anyone alive now.

Not True. Lutoslawski, Messian, Elliot Carter, Shostakovich, Aaron Copland, Steve Reich are just a few and are hardly anything to sneeze at.



------------------
v russo

[Peter]

Originally posted by v russo:
Not True. Lutoslawski, Messian, Elliot Carter, Shostakovich, Aaron Copland, Steve Reich are just a few and are hardly anything to sneeze at.

Maybe, but if you had to choose would you pick any of them in preference to Beethoven, or any other of your favourite 18th/19th century composers?

Out of the list you mention I quite like Shostakovich, but I'd listen to a classical symphony any day in preference even to Shostakovich's best such as no.10. I admire his cello concertos, but in place of the Schumann, Dvorak, Haydn and Elgar - never!


------------------
'Man know thyself'

[v russo]

Originally posted by Peter:
Maybe, but if you had to choose would you pick any of them in preference to Beethoven, or any other of your favourite 18th/19th century composers?

Out of the list you mention I quite like Shostakovich, but I'd listen to a classical symphony any day in preference even to Shostakovich's best such as no.10. I admire his cello concertos, but in place of the Schumann, Dvorak, Haydn and Elgar - never!

look, Beethoven is far and away my favorite composer (that is why I am here at this site). All I am saying is that not all newer music is bad(OR DERELECT),that line of thinking implies ignorance in my view.
And Shostakovich blows away Dvorak and Schumann and many of these other luke-warm-post-Beethovenians. His Symphonies and Quartets are far more significant in Western Classical music than that of these 2 men.

listen and you shall hear....

respectfully,

------------------
v russo

[This message has been edited by v russo (edited February 23, 2004).]