Here is my long awaited comparison everyone wants
The Hero and Fate Meet
An understanding of Beethoven’s Third and Fifth symphonies must first begin in an analysis of their respective background. The purpose of the Third symphony was to celebrate a military hero, and thus electrifying chords and thunderous climaxes enhanced the image of an honored war veteran. On the other hand, the Fifth Symphony was commissioned by the Count Oppersdoff to demonstrate Beethoven’s command of the classic symphony, and the first four notes of the first movement were immediately recognized from the classical era. However, despite their difference in history, the powerful Third and the almost frightening Fifth were most similar in their opening and ending movements, while their second and third movements displayed their symphony’s unique brilliance.
The introduction of each symphony was classic Beethoven as he captured the audience with huge, impacting chords. The first two E- chords of the Third were simply striking, and foreshadowed the strong and climactic first movement. Similarly, the first four notes of the Fifth symphony boldly announced the sense of doom that pervaded throughout the first movement. Both first movements were in Allegro con brio, which meant “enthusiastic and vigor”, and this form was successful in highlighting the ideas of a hero gallanting through battles in triumph of the Third, or the rising, awakening feeling of fear combating it’s fate as in the Fifth. The coda in first movement of the Third was a thunderous, dominating finish that surged and climaxed, as if Beethoven had saved the best for last for his hero. Comparably, the joining of the full orchestra in the coda of the Fifth, with a brief re-entrance of C-major before being destroyed, conveyed the sentiment that Fate had actually conquered fear. Beethoven excelled in showing the battle and victory in each movement, and thus set the stage for the dynamic, individual second and third movements.
The contrasting second movements simply distinguished the symphonies from each other. The second movement of the Third was surprisingly sad and somber, and has since been known as the “Funeral March”, for the listener could vividly imagine streams of people walking toward the cemetery carrying the casket of their hero. Two very strong chords evoked the idea of a last goodbye, and the oboe in the background established the mood of wailing and sorrow of the martyrdom of the hero. Furthermore, Beethoven included a double fugue that added the quality that someone had ultimately given their final salutation, and the world would never be the same. A softer episode began, showing tenderness and sentimentality, before a chord change and a last minute triumph signaling that not all was lost.
In complete contrast, the second movement of the Fifth, Andante con moto, was free, uninhibited music that seemed to prance around with one existing theme, but a plethora of variations. Where the Funeral March of the Third expressed sadness, the once original theme of Fear combating Fate shifted to an exploring, improvisatory demonstration of flowing joy. The oppressive fear was replaced with abundant liberty, and the listener received a short relief by the pleasant freedom before being interrupted three times by powerful chords of C-major. These interruptions served as a reminder of the lurking Fear that must still be resolved in the Third movement. Thus, the second movement of each symphony further progressed their respective theme by their independency of attitude and tone, and was overall, the most glaring difference between these two masterpieces.
The fourth movements were awesome in greatness, undeniably similar, and yet completely individual. The Third’s finale, Allegro molto, had an alarming opening with great speed, which was followed by a theme with a diversity of variations. Each variation seemed to relate an event with an attitude until reaching climax after climax. The changing of chords, coupled with the cycle of soft to loud climaxes, magnified and glorified the hero posthumously, and then the coda’s forceful ending declared with authority the end of the Hero’s story. Similarly, the Fifth’s finale had no break from the third movement’s scherzo with a giant crescendo, and these long held notes surprised the listener as they bursted into C major. The piccolo and trombones induced a lighter and happier feeling, and the fear from the first movement had become only a memory. The coda was very emphatic and triumphant, an incredible celebration of the will to overcome, and the ending could be only comparable to the Third’s finale. Beethoven’s prowess as a composer was clearly evident through these two symphonies, whose similarities identified their author, while their uniqueness brandished their genius.
An understanding of Beethoven’s Third and Fifth symphonies must first begin in an analysis of their respective background. The purpose of the Third symphony was to celebrate a military hero, and thus electrifying chords and thunderous climaxes enhanced the image of an honored war veteran. On the other hand, the Fifth Symphony was commissioned by the Count Oppersdoff to demonstrate Beethoven’s command of the classic symphony, and the first four notes of the first movement were immediately recognized from the classical era. However, despite their difference in history, the powerful Third and the almost frightening Fifth were most similar in their opening and ending movements, while their second and third movements displayed their symphony’s unique brilliance.
The introduction of each symphony was classic Beethoven as he captured the audience with huge, impacting chords. The first two E- chords of the Third were simply striking, and foreshadowed the strong and climactic first movement. Similarly, the first four notes of the Fifth symphony boldly announced the sense of doom that pervaded throughout the first movement. Both first movements were in Allegro con brio, which meant “enthusiastic and vigor”, and this form was successful in highlighting the ideas of a hero gallanting through battles in triumph of the Third, or the rising, awakening feeling of fear combating it’s fate as in the Fifth. The coda in first movement of the Third was a thunderous, dominating finish that surged and climaxed, as if Beethoven had saved the best for last for his hero. Comparably, the joining of the full orchestra in the coda of the Fifth, with a brief re-entrance of C-major before being destroyed, conveyed the sentiment that Fate had actually conquered fear. Beethoven excelled in showing the battle and victory in each movement, and thus set the stage for the dynamic, individual second and third movements.
The contrasting second movements simply distinguished the symphonies from each other. The second movement of the Third was surprisingly sad and somber, and has since been known as the “Funeral March”, for the listener could vividly imagine streams of people walking toward the cemetery carrying the casket of their hero. Two very strong chords evoked the idea of a last goodbye, and the oboe in the background established the mood of wailing and sorrow of the martyrdom of the hero. Furthermore, Beethoven included a double fugue that added the quality that someone had ultimately given their final salutation, and the world would never be the same. A softer episode began, showing tenderness and sentimentality, before a chord change and a last minute triumph signaling that not all was lost.
In complete contrast, the second movement of the Fifth, Andante con moto, was free, uninhibited music that seemed to prance around with one existing theme, but a plethora of variations. Where the Funeral March of the Third expressed sadness, the once original theme of Fear combating Fate shifted to an exploring, improvisatory demonstration of flowing joy. The oppressive fear was replaced with abundant liberty, and the listener received a short relief by the pleasant freedom before being interrupted three times by powerful chords of C-major. These interruptions served as a reminder of the lurking Fear that must still be resolved in the Third movement. Thus, the second movement of each symphony further progressed their respective theme by their independency of attitude and tone, and was overall, the most glaring difference between these two masterpieces.
The fourth movements were awesome in greatness, undeniably similar, and yet completely individual. The Third’s finale, Allegro molto, had an alarming opening with great speed, which was followed by a theme with a diversity of variations. Each variation seemed to relate an event with an attitude until reaching climax after climax. The changing of chords, coupled with the cycle of soft to loud climaxes, magnified and glorified the hero posthumously, and then the coda’s forceful ending declared with authority the end of the Hero’s story. Similarly, the Fifth’s finale had no break from the third movement’s scherzo with a giant crescendo, and these long held notes surprised the listener as they bursted into C major. The piccolo and trombones induced a lighter and happier feeling, and the fear from the first movement had become only a memory. The coda was very emphatic and triumphant, an incredible celebration of the will to overcome, and the ending could be only comparable to the Third’s finale. Beethoven’s prowess as a composer was clearly evident through these two symphonies, whose similarities identified their author, while their uniqueness brandished their genius.
Comment