Bach's Impact on 18th Century Music

[Hofrat]

Originally posted by robert newman:
As to the qualifications of Prof Taboga - if I'm not mistaken he studied the same subjects as Herr Koechel. You can ask him yourself on his website of course. He may be a botanist like Koechel ? Is that OK ? If not, he is certainly a man who has published many works already. Does that count ?

I do not know his blood group or his DNA profile. But Mr Taboga has not slavishly followed the official archives as though they were reliable. He has done rather better.

Robert

[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-28-2006).]

Dear Robert;

I thought Herr Koechel was a mineralogist!


Avishai

[robert newman]

Really, you thought that ? How interesting !

Koechel was many things. The point is that it doesn't really matter what profession Koechel had (and he had many). Nor does it matter what profession/s Mr Taboga had/has.

Most of what is called knowledge today is really a regurgitated form of dogma or myth.
Harmless in itself, it feeds chickens and keeps them scratching around in the barnyard but is hardly suitable for eagles.

The cult of Mozart is not so much history but pseudo-history.

[robert newman]

Dear Rod,

The disc containing WoO37 doesn't give its reference number. Its described only as a Trio Concertante. It's a work of no great musical significance (in my honest opinion). It sounds to me that it's the work of a quite different composer than the very fine WoO36.3

If you say this is the young Beethoven I am quite prepared to accept it.

Regards

"Take J. S. Bach, Goldberg, 30 and play it — you can do it a lifetime — and every time, every time, that electrical feeling runs through you and you awaken to the sublime."

(Cited from a Blog)



[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-28-2006).]

[Rod]

Originally posted by robert newman:

Dear Rod,

The disc containing WoO37 doesn't give its reference number. Its described only as a Trio Concertante. It's a work of no great musical significance (in my honest opinion). It sounds to me that it's the work of a quite different composer than the very fine WoO36.3

If you say this is the young Beethoven I am quite prepared to accept it.

Regards

I would say the trio is quite an ambitious effort, for an unusual combination of instruments (I remind you of the dedicatees for whom it seems to have been intended). But should I be surprised you can accept this now as a Beethoven piece when before it was in your list of doubtful works? Please forget WoO36, it's as pure Beethoven as 37 in every note, even if you and Ries are unaware of it.

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

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 04-28-2006).]

[Luis Mariano]

Originally posted by robert newman:
And there is a letter in Vienna in which it's said that Beethoven had only written 3 works in Bonn before his arrival in Vienna. One of these was a fugue and if I'm not mistaken the catalogue C53.1 has incipits for all 3 of these pieces.

Robert


[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-28-2006).]

Mr. Newman:

Since we know for sure that several works by the young Beethoven were published before he left Bonn, I wonder how well informed were the persons that were involved in the letter from Vienna and the catalogue that you mention:

° Dressler Variations published in Mannheim WoO 63
° Electoral pianoforte or cembalo sonatas published by Bossler WoO 47
° Rondo in C for cembalo or pianoforte WoO 48 published by Bossler
° Song “Schilderung eines Mädchens” WoO 107 published by Bossler
° Song “An einen Säugling” WoO 108 published by Bossler
°24 variations on “Veni amore” for pianoforte published in Mainz by Schot

Not to mention the letter from Haydn to the Elector in which he sends the Oboe Concerto (lost), the Partita for eight winds and a Fugue. The Elector replied that all those works were known and even performed in Bonn.

Regards
Luis Mariano



[This message has been edited by Luis Mariano (edited 04-28-2006).]

[robert newman]

Dear Luis Mariano,

Yes, certainly. I am sure the letter refers only to 3 works that Beethoven wrote at Bonn around the time of him leaving for Vienna - and not 3 works in total written at Bonn. I'm completely sure you are right.

That Beethoven wrote various works in Bonn is in my view beyond question. Whether they include the two cantatas for Joseph's death and for Leopold's accession, and whether he wrote a small number of others such as the 'Mozartean' piano quartets, the 'Witt' symphony, etc. etc. are other questions. On these individual matters we can of course hold differing views. But the main fact (as we agree) is that Beethoven was already an accomplished composer in Bonn before he arrived in Vienna - a fact I think is true beyond all reasonable doubt.

Very best regards

Robert Newman


[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-28-2006).]

[Luis Mariano]

Mr. Newman:

I understand your point. But... let´s take the Piano Quartet WoO 36 in C, which is in my humble opinion, the best of the three. The second theme of the first movement it is almost (well, let’s put the “almost” aside) identical to the one developed in the first movement of his Sonata for Pianoforte No. 3 in C (one of my favorites). Even a not very well trained “dilettanti” would notice that the difference is minimal. I do not believe that Beethoven at the beginning of his career in Vienna as a composer would assume the risk of being accused as a plagiarist if the theme were not of his own. It is very unlikely and it would be a very foolish attempt to sign those beautiful notes as of his, !In a set of Sonatas dedicated to Haydn¡

And we all know that the set of Sonatas Op. 2 was very well received by the public and their popularity was out of question.

I do not know if you have had the opportunity to listen to the fragment of the Violin Concerto WoO 5 in C. This work it is a proof of Beethoven’s skills and capabilities as a composer before his arrival to Vienna. More promising than the Ritterballet; of course, this statement it is just based on my taste.

About the Cantatas and the “Witt” Symphony, I am afraid that I won’t be able to provide facts or evidences, so I prefer to remain silent on these issues, lacking of first hand documents or testimonies. Besides that, not being objective it would be obvious that for me, Beethoven is the best composer ever existed; and that is a very vulnerable position to get into a healthy and worthy exchange of impressions with your impressive intellect.

With all my respect
Luis Mariano

[Agnes Selby]

Originally posted by robert newman:

Really, you thought that ? How interesting !

Koechel was many things. The point is that it doesn't really matter what profession Koechel had (and he had many). Nor does it matter what profession/s Mr Taboga had/has.

Most of what is called knowledge today is really a regurgitated form of dogma or myth.
Harmless in itself, it feeds chickens and keeps them scratching around in the barnyard but is hardly suitable for eagles.

The cult of Mozart is not so much history but pseudo-history.

-----------

This is a wrong. There are documents you have not studied and by the statements
made by Mr. Taboga, neither has he.

History and biographical data are derived
from documentations and not from a writer's
imagination. I hope you can understand that.
And neither are documentations twisted
to suit your own imagining, Robert.

I wonder what it is you aim to achieve.
People who have studied relevant data
will never accept your theory. Your
ample postings carry not an iota of proof.
So we are going in circles without aim or reason.

Agnes.

[robert newman]

Dear Agnes Selby,

The aim and purpose of Mozart research is to establish the truth in respect of the life, work and career of Mozart.

Part of that process is to separate fact from fiction. If you wish to get involved in this you must commit yourself to being honest, even though your honesty might call in to question traditional views, documentary statements and even deeply held opinions. Such is the process of learning and of teaching others.

In trying to establish the truth we must not be asked dozens of times to provide a simple, honest answer to questions such as 'Is the signature and text written on the first page of the Requiem a fogery ?' but must, out of love of the truth, and out of respect for students, be willing to admit without delay that it IS a forgery. If we cannot bear to accept saying so then, I suggest, we have no business claiming to have the best interests of students at heart.

It's for you and I to be honest. But, at present, you seem to be in a state of permanent denial. I don't understand what it is that you actually believe you are achieving. Your role seems to be that of showing how justified a detailed criticism of tradition is on these issues.

What exactly are you defending ? Nothing but a bunch of lies. And that can never be right.

Regards



[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-29-2006).]

[robert newman]

Beethoven not only learned the '48 Preludes and Fugues' of Bach but described hin as being the "Urvater der Harmonie" ("original father of harmony") and also as "nicht Bach, sondern Meer" ("not a stream but a sea", punning on the literal meaning of his surname.

Furthering Bach's reputation was publication in 1802 of Johann Nikolaus Forkel's 1802 biography. This is known to have been read by Beethoven.

[Agnes Selby]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by robert newman:
[B]Dear Agnes Selby,

The aim and purpose of Mozart research is to establish the truth in respect of the life, work and career of Mozart.
--------

Reply:

The truth has long been established,
Robert, by careful analysis of available data.
---------

Part of that process is to separate fact from fiction. If you wish to get involved in this you must commit yourself to being honest, even though your honesty might call in to question traditional views, documentary statements and even deeply held opinions. Such is the process of learning and of teaching others.


Reply:

Robert, you are not being honest but at the same time you are accusing others of dishonesty. You have so far avoided giving
references to your opinions. The only references you make are to your own writings. This is not good enough, and you know it. You avoid the question of quoting reliable data like the plague. So where does your honesty come into this argument?
In my humble opinion, you are seeking limelight by destroying the reputation of great composers. It may give you some moments in the sun but it will not convince anyone.
----------

In trying to establish the truth we must not be asked dozens of times to provide a simple, honest answer to questions such as 'Is the signature and text written on the first page of the Requiem a fogery ?' but must, out of love of the truth, and out of respect for students, be willing to admit without delay that it IS a forgery. If we cannot bear to accept saying so then, I suggest, we have no business claiming to have the best interests of students at heart It's for you and I to be honest. But, at present, you seem to be in a state of permanent denial. I don't understand what it is that you actually believe you are achieving. Your role seems to be that of showing how justified a detailed criticism of tradition is on these issues.

What exactly are you defending ? Nothing but a bunch of lies. And that can never be right.


Reply:

No, Robert, I am defending the right for
the correct history, based on historical evidence to survive. Do you want me to accept your version of events without you ever supplying evidence to support your claims? Your statements are figments of your imagination but not science. History,
if it is to be accepted as historical fact,
must be documented. Otherwise it remains
in the realm of one man's imagination.

No matter how much you and Mr. Taboga will scream at people all over the internet or write books, without supporting evidence, your words will be lost in space. If I am defending a "bunch of lies" it is for you to prove it with evidence.

Agnes Selby.

[Cetto von Cronstorff]

Originally posted by robert newman:

The cult of Mozart is not so much history but pseudo-history.

In retrospect there is no other history than 'pseudo-history'. Any historian will confirm this. This is a Bach thread, so let's return to the subject:

'A study by an academic who has spent more than 30 years looking at Bach's work claims that Anna Magdalena Bach, traditionally believed to be Bach's musical copyist, actually wrote some of his best-loved works, including his Six Cello Suites... He points to what he regards as the uniquely symmetrical nature of the work, and to the fact that the manuscripts included many corrections and adjustments, suggesting that they were original composing scores.'


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/04/2 3/nacad123.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/04/23/ixhome.html



[This message has been edited by Cetto von Cronstorff (edited 04-29-2006).]

[Rod]

Originally posted by Luis Mariano:
Mr. Newman:

I understand your point. But... let´s take the Piano Quartet WoO 36 in C, which is in my humble opinion, the best of the three. The second theme of the first movement it is almost (well, let’s put the “almost” aside) identical to the one developed in the first movement of his Sonata for Pianoforte No. 3 in C (one of my favorites). Even a not very well trained “dilettanti” would notice that the difference is minimal. I do not believe that Beethoven at the beginning of his career in Vienna as a composer would assume the risk of being accused as a plagiarist if the theme were not of his own. It is very unlikely and it would be a very foolish attempt to sign those beautiful notes as of his, !In a set of Sonatas dedicated to Haydn¡

And we all know that the set of Sonatas Op. 2 was very well received by the public and their popularity was out of question.

I do not know if you have had the opportunity to listen to the fragment of the Violin Concerto WoO 5 in C. This work it is a proof of Beethoven’s skills and capabilities as a composer before his arrival to Vienna. More promising than the Ritterballet; of course, this statement it is just based on my taste.

About the Cantatas and the “Witt” Symphony, I am afraid that I won’t be able to provide facts or evidences, so I prefer to remain silent on these issues, lacking of first hand documents or testimonies. Besides that, not being objective it would be obvious that for me, Beethoven is the best composer ever existed; and that is a very vulnerable position to get into a healthy and worthy exchange of impressions with your impressive intellect.

With all my respect
Luis Mariano

The points you make about WoO36 have bounced on Robert many times already.

I have on CD a realisation of the Violin fragment that is not particularly a good one (ie lots of invented material thrown in by the composer) but the Beethoven material is promising.

Concerning the Joseph cantata you need have no doubts either, it contains one of Beethoven's best known tunes - the theme to 'O welch ein Augenblick' in the Finale of Fidelio comes note for note from the Cantata

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


[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 04-29-2006).]

[robert newman]

Dear Cetto,

I regret you did not read what I wrote very carefully. I was actually refering to the cult of Mozart when I said, 'THE CULT OF MOZART is not so much history but pseudo-history'.

But anyway, back to the thread -

This question on Anna Magdelena Bach is great news. If Johann Sebastian composed these cello sonatas (as we should accept until proof is given to the contrary) his love for her is demonstrated in his wife being allowed to witness their musical creation and to record such creation in her own hand. If Anna Magdelena composed these works we can see that true genius, like healing virtue, can be touched, and can even be experienced through love. Either way, we are reminded that the love of Anna Magelena for her husband, he for her, and the genius of Johann Sebastian Bach are mysteries only hidden by irreverence.

[robert newman]

Dear Agnes Selby,

If scientists and academics had the power to make in their laboratories, 'think tanks' and learned journals a single blade of grass, or a sun that shone in the sky, such things would not be proved true until they were available for all to see.

These conversations are not hidden in journals or inaccessible to ordinary people but are taking place in the light of day. The signature and comments written on the first page of 'Mozart's' Requiem are a forgery and are one example of the farrago of lies that surround the true story of that piece.

For you to publicly accept this fact would demonstrate a committment to turn your academic learning in to useful knowledge that students and ordinary readers can see/understand for themselves. But you deny them despite multiple requests.

There is really no excuse for such an attitude - it separates you from those whom you claim to be serving. It immediately invalidates your claims to expertise or integrity. Grass will grow around slabs of concrete. Your attitude towards such a simple thing causes you to live in denial and to attack Taboga, myself and anyone else. A straight answer (this so often asked) is therefore impossible for you.



[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-29-2006).]