Beethoven - The first freelance ?

[Peter]

I was always taught that B was this great liberator of musicians, that before him they had all been enslaved by the church or court and he changed the situation single handidly! - Surely there are several things wrong with this view. Mozart had set out on his own a decade before B settled in Vienna - it was a struggle for him (though he was never the pauper of popular imagination).Indeed had he lived a few more years, he would have known tremendous financial and artistic success. When B arrived on the scene there had been several important social changes in Austria, largely as a result of the liberal reforms of Joseph II and the French Revolutuion. There was no great class barrier - the nobility freely mixed with the lower classes - the Emperor himself moved freely amongst the people in the fashionable parks such as the Prater and with a rising middle class there was great demand for new music. So my point is that B did not create the circumstances whereby a composer was a free agent, he merely took advantage of the conditions that were present at the time. A composer such as Wagner was employed at the Dresden court a good 20 years after the death of Beethoven.

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

[PDG]

Isn`t the difference between Mozart & Beethoven that M was constrained in his composing in that his works were either commissioned or were written for subscription concerts/tutoring? This inevitably stifled (to an extent) his creativity, whereas B, very soon after arriving in Vienna, unshackled himself, & pretty much did as he pleased, musically speaking.

Also, maybe the Viennese were tolerant towards B`s music, at least in part, because although many found it strange & uncouth, subconsciously they knew that they`d not given M his due appreciation during his life, & didn`t want to risk making the same mistake again.

------------------
Peter (PDG)

[Peter]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PDG:
Isn`t the difference between Mozart & Beethoven that M was constrained in his composing in that his works were either commissioned or were written for subscription concerts/tutoring? This inevitably stifled (to an extent) his creativity, whereas B, very soon after arriving in Vienna, unshackled himself, & pretty much did as he pleased, musically speaking.


I don't think Mozart's creativity was stifled after leaving Salzburg - that's precisely the reason he left for Vienna! An example of just how free he was is the Marriage of Figaro based on the Beaumarchais play that was banned in Vienna, even under the liberal minded Joseph ll.
B's late quartets were commisioned, no hint of stifled creativity there! B was extremely fortunate in the patronage he received from the aristocracy, and his forceful personality must have played a part in that.


Also, maybe the Viennese were tolerant towards B`s music, at least in part, because although many found it strange & uncouth, subconsciously they knew that they`d not given M his due appreciation during his life, & didn`t want to risk making the same mistake again.



I personally doubt that - they didn't feel that guilty, as they did the same to Schubert!
B was the first to complain of the fickle Viennese, so much so that he contemplated leaving the place on more than one occasion.


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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:

... So my point is that B did not create the circumstances whereby a composer was a free agent, he merely took advantage of the conditions that were present at the time. A composer such as Wagner was employed at the Dresden court a good 20 years after the death of Beethoven.

B was far from the first in this respect, though is is often stated as being the first freelance. Handel could be composing for the Duke of Chandos one minute, the next he would be opening his own opera company in London to perform his own works. His music to could be written to order, or for sale to any subscriber - you could hear his Op6 concertos in London tea rooms! Composers were not restricted to being humble servants by rule of law, but, as you say, by rule of circumstance, or convenience, or laziness!

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[PDG]

Peter, three of the last five quartets were commissioned, yes, but Beethoven`s position as Vienna`s greatest living composer was already secure, as were his finances, & this, along with rock-solid support from his patrons, gave him a considerable amount of artistic freedom. Mozart always had to be more wary because he was not working from such a secure base.

Also, I don`t think the Viennese felt guilty immediately following Schubert`s death because, by & large, they were unaware of him when he was alive! This is not the case with Mozart.

------------------
Peter (PDG)

[Serge]

No matter what the precedence, I don't think there was a composer before Ludwig who was offered an annual guaranteed salary by three individuals whether anything was composed or not. Nor do I believe that composers before L. could have taken five years off work to fight an expensive lawsuit. Plus, while I'm sure previous composers had some freedom in choosing publishers who'd pay for their work, none bothered to dick around with them as often as Beethoven. While the circumstances of Beethoven's life were indeed nice, it is unfair to the man to claim he had little role in affecting his very comfortable status or decent financial situation.

[Peter]

Originally posted by PDG:
Peter, three of the last five quartets were commissioned, yes, but Beethoven`s position as Vienna`s greatest living composer was already secure, as were his finances, & this, along with rock-solid support from his patrons, gave him a considerable amount of artistic freedom. Mozart always had to be more wary because he was not working from such a secure base.

Also, I don`t think the Viennese felt guilty immediately following Schubert`s death because, by & large, they were unaware of him when he was alive! This is not the case with Mozart.

Precisely ! By ignoring Schubert in life they treated him worse than they ever treated Mozart - and that was bad enough! B's finances often went through strained circumstances, even after the annuity was granted. There was tremendous inflation plus B had the added expenditure of Karl and the lawsuits that entailed.
My point is that B was one of the first composers who was fortunate to be able to take advantage of the new post French revolution order. Mozart tried a decade earlier and was very nearly succesful.

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

[Peter]

Originally posted by Serge:
No matter what the precedence, I don't think there was a composer before Ludwig who was offered an annual guaranteed salary by three individuals whether anything was composed or not. Nor do I believe that composers before L. could have taken five years off work to fight an expensive lawsuit. .

I didn't mean B had no role in his financial status, only that he was not the first to attempt a freelance career as is often suggested - the combination of his genius, a music loving arisocracy and post revolution attitudes made it possible. Haydn was granted leave by Prince Esterhazy for both London tours - an absence from court life of several years - he was also retained with full pay in later life whilst little in the way of duties was expected of him - the reason: his international status in the post Revolution world - the same reason the patrons you mentioned wished to retain B in Vienna.

P.S I don't regard B as having taken 5 years off work!

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

[PDG]

Originally posted by Peter:
Precisely ! By ignoring Schubert in life they treated him worse than they ever treated Mozart - and that was bad enough! B's finances often went through strained circumstances, even after the annuity was granted. There was tremendous inflation plus B had the added expenditure of Karl and the lawsuits that entailed.
My point is that B was one of the first composers who was fortunate to be able to take advantage of the new post French revolution order. Mozart tried a decade earlier and was very nearly succesful.

Whatever Beethoven`s expenditure, it was his choice to make; Mozart should have secured his family`s future, but, instead, he squandered his money through gambling. Thus, Mozart was always going cap in hand to his masonic friends for financial help, when, instead, he should have been free to concentrate his efforts on advancing the art of music. No complaints - Mozart was only human.

------------------
Peter (PDG)

[Peter]

Originally posted by PDG:
Whatever Beethoven`s expenditure, it was his choice to make; Mozart should have secured his family`s future, but, instead, he squandered his money through gambling.

Maybe, but it doesn't alter my initial point that B was not the first composer to attempt to go it alone! Mozart (NOT Beethoven) was the first to rebel and believe that his genius alone would be sufficient (that he was often in great difficulty shows how hard it was and why many composers preferred to remain within the system of court/church such as Salieri). He was the first to refuse to be treated as a mere servant and his financial difficulties were also partly the responsibility of his wife's frequent indulgences at the Spa in Baden. I think a patron such as Lichnowsky (who was also a friend to Mozart) would have been shocked by the sudden premature death of Mozart in such strained financial circumstances - this explains to me why when B arrived in Vienna a few years later, he was so willing to help.

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

[PDG]

Exactly. Lichnowsky was one among many influential people determined to see that Beethoven would not suffer the financial humiliations of Mozart. Salieri stayed in regular employment because, I suggest, he knew the limitations of his talent, whereas Mozart was a caged tiger!

Perhaps it can be summed up thus: Mozart was the first freelance musician to almost succeed; Beethoven was the first TO succeed.

------------------
Peter (PDG)

[Rod]

Originally posted by PDG:

Perhaps it can be summed up thus: Mozart was the first freelance musician to almost succeed; Beethoven was the first TO succeed.

Not sure about this, I would say Handel had the best financial accumen of all composers, he made thousands of pounds without the help of the elite (it was the middle classes who watched his oratarios). He also was adept at buying and selling shares. Financially, Beethoven was a destitute compared to Handel who was always seemed to be comfortably well off even when his shows were failures (which was quite often!). If B had come to England he would have become rich beyond his wildest dreams, I am sure of that.

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[PDG]

Originally posted by Rod:
Not sure about this, I would say Handel had the best financial accumen of all composers, he made thousands of pounds without the help of the elite (it was the middle classes who watched his oratarios). He also was adept at buying and selling shares. Financially, Beethoven was a destitute compared to Handel who was always seemed to be comfortably well off even when his shows were failures (which was quite often!). If B had come to England he would have become rich beyond his wildest dreams, I am sure of that.

Rod, I am not well-read on Handel (shame on me!), but are you sure he made "thousands of pounds"? By today`s standards, that would make him a millionaire. If he were so wealthy, then the question arises: Why didn`t Mozart (as an adult, & also considering Haydn`s London successes) or Beethoven come here? And what was it about England that offered such wealth as was not available in Austria?

------------------
Peter (PDG)

[Peter]

Originally posted by PDG:
If he were so wealthy, then the question arises: Why didn`t Mozart (as an adult, & also considering Haydn`s London successes) or Beethoven come here? And what was it about England that offered such wealth as was not available in Austria?

I believe Handel was quite a wealthy man - England did indeed value great musicians in the 18th century (things have certainly changed!)
Mozart did come here as a child (staying for around 18 months)and composed his first Symphonies in London - he always had happy memories of the place. In later life there were plans for him to visit again, but premature death put an end to that. Beethoven also contemplated coming to England - he very much admired the English and had friends such as F.Ries in London. There are various reasons why he never came - poor health and Karl chief among them. I also think he had a love-hate relationship with Vienna so whilst he often complained of the place and the lack of appreciation he received, he knew deep down that he had many staunch friends.

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

[Peter]

Originally posted by PDG:
Salieri stayed in regular employment because, I suggest, he knew the limitations of his talent, whereas Mozart was a caged tiger!

What about Haydn? Wagner 20 years after B was employed as a court musician at Dresden - I doubt he knew the limitations of his talent!

Perhaps it can be summed up thus: Mozart was the first freelance musician to almost succeed; Beethoven was the first TO succeed.

I don't think B could have succeeded without the financial support of his patrons - On his own as Mozart was, he would have been in dire straits, as he nearly was anyway on occasions. Had Mozart lived another year he would have made considerable profits from The Magic Flute. B's greatest financial success was the concerts of 1814 which enabled him to purchase 8 bank shares - he was fortuitous in that as the Congress of Vienna brought many thousands of people from all over Europe to Vienna. We must remember also that it was 'The Battle of Vittoria' that was the most popular and greatest success of all - the 9th symphony was a financial disaster, though a tremendous artisitic triumph.

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