Originally posted by Bonn1827
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Musical Genius of Haydn
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Originally posted by gprengel View PostAgain, Philipp, we see that we both have a very different approach to music. If you can't perceive the kind of spirituality I am talking about, if they are just a "gestural content" and Romantic nonsense then it's up to you. For me it is very real and prescious.
You ask "Is it the music per se, or is it the text that accompanies it?" - It is the combination of text and music, when music is ignited by the words - especially when the text is directly from the Bible like in Mendelssohns Oratorios and Psalms!
Your question regarding Arvo Pärt and Olivier Messiaen I cannot
answer for I don't know them. I hardly know music beyond Gustav Mahler.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bonn1827 View PostEspecially if sung in the Hofburg by the Vienna Boys' Choir. Philip, we agree at last!!
Comment
-
I also love Haydn's masses, probably more than Mozart's. Like his operas, they are unjustly neglected, especially compared to Mozart. I was just listening to the Harmoniemesse today, one of my favorites. Here's a bit from the Gloria:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6OwdsWWuMU
Comment
-
Originally posted by Philip View PostHello Gerd. I don't think calling Haydn "an amoeba" is an exaggeration, as that does rather tend to belittle old "Papa Joseph". That said, Baldaniel's effusive comments concerning "the divine", the "transcendent", the "higher truth" and all that Romantic nonsense does find, in my view, an echo in your thread about "spiritual" music (or sacred, or religious, or whatever ...). Whilst refusing to enter the debate you have launched elsewhere, I do wonder what your position might be regarding so-called "spiritual" composers such as Arvo Pärt, Olivier Messiaen et al.
As a recovering formalist, I wonder where exactly in the score this "spirituality" (or divinity, or whatever) resides. Is it the music per se, or is it the text that accompanies it? Can the combination of any set of given notes and its instrumentation embody "spirituality"? I do accept (reluctantly) of course that music, if it is to have any meaning at all, has to function on some supra-structural platform (to coin a phrase; I like that one : it is original), but I will need considerable persuasion to accept your position. For example, you recently posted a Cherubini extract (Requiem). You asked us to listen specifically to a section around the 3-minute mark. I listened. The words got rather in the way. It then occured to me that its "gestural content" (another original phrase of mine), that is to say, high scoring, thinned out textures, high register voices etc are simply "learned reactions". This is to say that what you call "spirituality" in music is culturally conditioned. There is nothing "inherently spiritual" in its sonic combinations.
Then again, we have been mislead by linguistic obfuscation : "spiritual", "religious", or "sacred"; to which of course, we may add the catch-all term "transendence", which is a particular pet-hate of mine. I intend to address this (for me, nauseous) term later in a relevant thread.
I think the whole argument is a non-starter, a wild goose-chase, and a relic of 19th-century romanticism that continues up to our present day and serves to undermine a more generally positive reception of "classical" music (or as Bonn would term it, "art music").'Man know thyself'
Comment
-
Originally posted by Philip View PostThat said, Baldaniel's effusive comments concerning "the divine", the "transcendent", the "higher truth" and all that Romantic nonsense does find, in my view, an echo in your thread about "spiritual" music (or sacred, or religious, or whatever ...).
Originally posted by Peter View PostPersonally I hear and feel more in music than the mere notes and I think the problem with the world today is this soulless attitude that strips everything of value - it is a clinical almost robotic response to art that leaves you wondering, why bother? I would like to know what you feel the purpose of art is? I think it does enlighten us, I think it does enrich us and I think it educates us.
This soulless attitude, which you speak of, is as disgusting as it is repulsive. Quite sad, too.
Also, the greatest geniuses who have ever lived, found their sanctity in true art. That is what to them to the sacred, sublime, profound, etc. That is what they dwelt in.- I hope, or I could not live. - written by H.G. Wells
Comment
-
Originally posted by gprengel View PostThis is one of the biggest exaggerations I have read for quite some time. In contrast to Mozart and Beethoven there is not much of the Divine in his music.- I hope, or I could not live. - written by H.G. Wells
Comment
-
Originally posted by Philip View PostI have played (as 'cellist) Mendelssohn's "Elias" oratorio - it was sheer hard work, and never did the word "spiritual" enter my mind (or my ears) : 2 hours (more!) of sheer string plodding. Nothing in the music reminded me of anything "spiritual", only the words sung by the soloists and choir (which for me might as well have been Tra la la ding dooh dooh in extremis ouw ouw...).
Comment
-
Originally posted by Preston View PostGerd, I do agree with you. Haydn was clearly a musical genius, and I imagine he took spirituality as serious as he could. Though, when it comes to depth, sacrifice, spirituality, etc.- I do not believe he was a man who focused heavily on the sacred.
However we already have a thread for spirituality in music so let's try to continue this topic in that one! Any responses to points made here would be best in the thread on spirituality (sorry Philip, but you may have to appear there!). I think it probably best to close this thread as it has merged with the other and there is some controversy surrounding the original post of this thread in any case.'Man know thyself'
Comment
Comment