i am going to be honest here. i guess i need a hell of lot more education to understand his work.
or
the man is not worth the money i have paid. his works remind me some modern art crap: ugly, chaotic, hard to swallow, self-indulgence and overrated no talent. yet people are afraid to admit it for fear of being looked down upon.
educate me please!
give your thoughts.
i just did a topic search and found none.
please give me some directions. thanks.
Check out my thread "I'm lost in Mahler/Bruckner's music". Many recommendations there.
What set did you get? What label, who's the conductor, what orchestra?
I suggest that you start with the 1st symphony...it's the most melodic and beginner-friendly. :)
geez, what's wrong with people nowadays? they are not ready, yet they force them selves to listen to music of Bruckner and Mahler, of course you don't like it, I suggest you drop mahler for a while, change your direction, do Beethoven and Schubert (Complete works).
Quote from: D Minor on May 26, 2007, 03:39:47 PM
Do you have any idea how many current Mahler threads are actively discussing this very topic?
Hey, you sound like our very own Moderator Uffeviking.
Give the guy a break, Man he's a newbie.
How about telling him "welcome to the forum"?
Well pchuang you won't do that again, will you? Yeah we all do that, don't worry about it.
As for the adjectives-- I think you're trying to come up with words to describe your revulsion, but can't find them. Your rant lacks focus. It's all right, we get the point, you don't like Mahler. :)
Quote from: AnthonyAthletic on May 26, 2007, 03:57:24 PM
How about telling him "welcome to the forum"?
I thought the Introductions section was for that purpose.
Quote from: DavidW on May 26, 2007, 04:24:39 PM
Well pchuang you won't do that again, will you? Yeah we all do that, don't worry about it.
As for the adjectives-- I think you're trying to come up with words to describe your revulsion, but can't find them. Your rant lacks focus. It's all right, we get the point, you don't like Mahler. :)
Just needs a bit of encouragement, needs to buy 12 sets (2 on dvd) and 400 other cds like any normal person would and take it from there ;D He will learn to love Mahler. Me thinks he is a newbie to Mahler....I was like that with Bruckner on first hearing...now he is a demi God LOL
Quote from: Kullervo on May 26, 2007, 04:30:59 PM
I thought the Introductions section was for that purpose.
LOL, but it costs nothing to be friendly to a new fish within any thread. D just answered the person's question with a question which is a shame.
Quote from: AnthonyAthletic on May 26, 2007, 04:33:08 PM
Just needs a bit of encouragement, needs to buy 12 sets (2 on dvd) and 400 other cds like any normal person would and take it from there ;D He will learn to love Mahler. Me thinks he is a newbie to Mahler....I was like that with Bruckner on first hearing...now he is a demi God LOL
You know I think is also how Scientology works... ;)
My only reservations with Mahler are his often exaggerated orchestration and out of place nationalistic passages.
Other then that he is an excellent composer and one of the best symphonist in the repertory. You don't have to force yourself but don't write him off either. BTW, i think a good performance is crucial for this composer and if the set you bought remains unsatisfactory you might want to try something else. I'm not a Mahler specialist myself but the good folks here might be able to help you...
Quote from: pchuang on May 26, 2007, 03:29:20 PM
i am going to be honest here. i guess i need a hell of lot more education to understand his work.
or
the man is not worth the money i have paid. his works remind me some modern art crap: ugly, chaotic, hard to swallow, self-indulgence and overrated no talent. yet people are afraid to admit it for fear of being looked down upon.
educate me please!
give your thoughts.
I think Dittersdorf and Bruhns is more for you. Simple music for simple minds.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on May 26, 2007, 05:06:43 PM
My only reservations with Mahler are his often exaggerated orchestration and out of place nationalistic passages.
"nationalistic" passages? for a man who said he was three times homeless, i fail to see which nationality he is trying to glorify.
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on May 26, 2007, 05:50:28 PM
I think Dittersdorf and Bruhns is more for you. Simple music for simple minds.
I suppose you are familiar with the works of Dittersdorf and Bruhns PerfectWagnerite?
Quote from: MahlerTitan on May 26, 2007, 05:53:12 PM
"nationalistic" passages? for a man who said he was three times homeless, i fail to see which nationality he is trying to glorify.
Fair enough, may i should shut my mouth regarding composers i'm still somewhat unfamiliar with.
Either way, i'm referring to all the folk references and marching band like passages, which i took to be an attempt at imbuing his music with nationalistic passages, much like most other composers of the time...
Quote from: 71 dB on May 26, 2007, 07:01:53 PM
I suppose you are familiar with the works of Dittersdorf and Bruhns PerfectWagnerite?
I hope you are not trying to argue Mahler isn't more complex then either of those, because he is.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on May 26, 2007, 07:08:40 PM
I hope you are not trying to argue Mahler isn't more complex then either of those, because he is.
Lol, I certainly hope he won't start all that E L G A R vs Mahler complexity rant again.
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on May 26, 2007, 05:50:28 PM
I think Dittersdorf and Bruhns is more for you. Simple music for simple minds.
Why do you lump Bruhns in with Dittersdorf?
i am very impressed. thank you all for help.
it was not my intention to offend any Mahler-lovers as i said that i needed a hell of lot more education on the subject.
here is my confession:
this is what i bought: grammophon mahler/sinopoli the complete recordings philharmonia orchestra 15 cd set (the guy in the store told me this is the top of the range, you know what i mean.)
this is why i bought it: i heard his Adagietto from symphony 5 in C-sharp minor and i thought to myself, the man is so sensitive and exquisite, yet with such great power and energy. the most impressive part is that he is different.
by all means, send the poor, offending discs to me and i shall give them a caring home ! ;)
welcome aboard.
dj
Quote from: pchuang on May 26, 2007, 10:11:59 PM
i am very impressed. thank you all for help.
it was not my intention to offend any Mahler-lovers as i said that i needed a hell of lot more education on the subject.
Just listen.
Listen to Mahler and all the music you can find. You'll find your education in Palestrina, Fescobaldi, Corelli, Vivaldi, Bach, Handel, Haydn, Beethoven, Bruckner, Berlioz, Liszt, Wagner ...... and even a later composer like Shostakovich.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on May 26, 2007, 07:08:40 PM
I hope you are not trying to argue Mahler isn't more complex then either of those, because he is.
No, I am not saying Dittersdorf and Bruhns are more complex. It's not only complexity that matters.
Hey, Pchuang, welcome to the forum. These threads will answer some of your questions:
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1000.0.html
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1037.0.html
Perhaps at this point you might want to concentrate on separate movements rather than entire symphonies with their often violent and seemingly chaotic structures. Since you were captivated by the Adagietto, you might try similiar movements:
Symphony #6 - III Andante moderato
Symphony #3 - VI Langsam. Ruhevoll. Empfunden.
Symphony #4 - III Ruhevoll
Or some of the lighter movements:
Symphony #2 - II Andante Moderato
Symphony #3 - II Tempo di Menuetto
Symphony #7 - IV Nachtmusik. Andante amoroso
Sarge
Quote from: 71 dB on May 27, 2007, 03:53:02 AM
No, I am not saying Dittersdorf and Bruhns are more complex. It's not only complexity that matters.
You are right. Did i forget to mention that Mahler is a better composer all around?
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on May 26, 2007, 07:06:53 PM
Either way, i'm referring to all the folk references and marching band like passages, which i took to be an attempt at imbuing his music with nationalistic passages, much like most other composers of the time...
You're not the first with this problem. One instance I can think of was Varèse saying 'The orchestration is good, but the material is so bad, so vulgar.'
With Mahler, I think it's less about the material itself and more about what he does with it. The symphonies are built from such tiny material. Even the folk songs and marches that you've heard are built from the same source - say the peasant dance in the first symphony was constructed from the same descending perfect fourth as was audible in nearly every other facet of the piece.
A reason for the recurrence of marches and the regular contrast of sublime and banal in his music was actually put to Mahler by Sigmund Freud: during his childhood, Mahler witnessed (if memory serves) a fight between his parents. He ran into the street in tears, and the local barracks (Mahler lived only a little way away) was rehearsing a march at the time. These two events apparently had a great effect on his future music.
As for the folk themes...I'm sure there's a reason, but I can't remember it right now :-[
It certainly wasn't nationalistic, though.
Quote from: MahlerTitan on May 26, 2007, 03:55:19 PM
geez, what's wrong with people nowadays? they are not ready, yet they force them selves to listen to music of Bruckner and Mahler, of course you don't like it, I suggest you drop mahler for a while, change your direction, do Beethoven and Schubert (Complete works).
This advice has alot going for it. Try diving into Mozart's last six or seven Symphonies as well. Maybe Haydn's "Creation"...
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on May 27, 2007, 04:24:51 AM
You are right. Did i forget to mention that Mahler is a better composer all around?
No matter how good Mahler is I still enjoy Dittersdorf and Bruhns.
Quote from: Don on May 26, 2007, 09:11:27 PM
Why do you lump Bruhns in with Dittersdorf?
I was just busting 71DB's chops. Anyone who can write music is far from "simple" already.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on May 26, 2007, 07:06:53 PM
Fair enough, may i should shut my mouth regarding composers i'm still somewhat unfamiliar with.
Either way, i'm referring to all the folk references and marching band like passages, which i took to be an attempt at imbuing his music with nationalistic passages, much like most other composers of the time...
Most of Mahler's folk music references are to Klezmer (Jewish) music and a reference to the culture of his youth that he left behind. The principal reason he left it behind was in order to advance his career in Imperial Vienna, although his dysfunctional family life must have contributed to his willingness to sever connections to the religious beliefs of his youth. When it is done right, those folk tunes always have a sleazy, sinister undertone. Mahler was forced to convert to Roman Catholicism in order to become director of the Staatsoper in Vienna where antisemitism was actually a part of the law. He gets full credits for trying to make his conversion more than just a "Paris vaut bien une messe" conversion; once committing to the conversion, he became even more Catholic than those who grew up in the religion. The marching band music is always something that is referring to death or tragedy rather than to nationalist fervor. For instance, in his first symphony he makes the nursery song Frère Jacques in to a funeral march. Marching bands in Mahler are never triumphant. He uses them to express anxiety, anger, presage death, or for various ironic purposes. The biggest thing about Mahler's music is that it functions on more than one level. It's not just the luxurious sound and overwhelming orchestral effects but also the story it tells if you have the patience to learn the "language" and the sources of his musical quotes.
As for Mahler being "ugly, chaotic, hard to swallow," well, that sounds just like the criticisms leveled at the Fauves and even Picasso, and so many other artists from his time. Mahler didn't function in a vacuum. Take a look at the art and literature being produced in his lifetime and you will get a better idea of his aesthetic.
Quote from: Bunny on May 27, 2007, 06:30:49 AM
Most of Mahler's folk music references are to Klezmer (Jewish) music and a reference to the culture of his youth that he left behind. The principal reason he left it behind was in order to advance his career in Imperial Vienna, although his dysfunctional family life must have contributed to his willingness to sever connections to the religious beliefs of his youth. When it is done right, those folk tunes always have a sleazy, sinister undertone. Mahler was forced to convert to Roman Catholicism in order to become director of the Staatsoper in Vienna where antisemitism was actually a part of the law. He gets full credits for trying to make his conversion more than just a "Paris vaut bien une messe" conversion; once committing to the conversion, he became even more Catholic than those who grew up in the religion. The marching band music is always something that is referring to death or tragedy rather than to nationalist fervor. For instance, in his first symphony he makes the nursery song Frère Jacques in to a funeral march. Marching bands in Mahler are never triumphant. He uses them to express anxiety, anger, presage death, or for various ironic purposes. The biggest thing about Mahler's music is that it functions on more than one level. It's not just the luxurious sound and overwhelming orchestral effects but also the story it tells if you have the patience to learn the "language" and the sources of his musical quotes.
As for Mahler being "ugly, chaotic, hard to swallow," well, that sounds just like the criticisms leveled at the Fauves and even Picasso, and so many other artists from his time. Mahler didn't function in a vacuum. Take a look at the art and literature being produced in his lifetime and you will get a better idea of his aesthetic.
well said.
Quote from: pchuang on May 26, 2007, 10:11:59 PM
i am very impressed. thank you all for help.
it was not my intention to offend any Mahler-lovers as i said that i needed a hell of lot more education on the subject.
here is my confession:
this is what i bought: grammophon mahler/sinopoli the complete recordings philharmonia orchestra 15 cd set (the guy in the store told me this is the top of the range, you know what i mean.)
this is why i bought it: i heard his Adagietto from symphony 5 in C-sharp minor and i thought to myself, the man is so sensitive and exquisite, yet with such great power and energy. the most impressive part is that he is different.
Sinopoli's Mahler is something best listened to after you have a strong grounding in the music. It's not beginner's Mahler (if something like that can be said to exist). I suspect that the clerk in the store was looking to move a set that doesn't sell so well and you were the unlucky recipient of all of his skill as a salesman. For a starter set of Mahler you would have been much better of with either Raphael Kubelik's set on DG or Gary Bertini's set. Both of those are much less expensive and moreover, the interpretations have greater structural clarity. They are the easiest way, imo, to ease into the composer. Btw, they also move the symphonies along at a faster clip, which is also helpful for a newbie; Sinopoli tended to s t r e t c h things out where he wished, which is why there are 15 cds in his set.
(http://content.vcommerce.com/products/fullsize/84/8566084.jpg) (http://cover6.cduniverse.com/MuzeAudioArt/Large/67/680267.jpg)
Quote from: Bunny on May 27, 2007, 06:42:28 AM
Sinopoli's Mahler is something best listened to after you have a strong grounding in the music. It's not beginner's Mahler (if something like that can be said to exist). I suspect that the clerk in the store was looking to move a set that doesn't sell so well and you were the unlucky recipient of all of his skill as a salesman. For a starter set of Mahler you would have been much better of with either Raphael Kubelik's set on DG or Gary Bertini's set. Both of those are much less expensive and moreover, the interpretations have greater structural clarity. They are the easiest way, imo, to ease into the composer. Btw, they also move the symphonies along at a faster clip, which is also helpful for a newbie; Sinopoli tended to s t r e t c h things out where he wished, which is why there are 15 cds in his set.
(http://content.vcommerce.com/products/fullsize/84/8566084.jpg) (http://cover6.cduniverse.com/MuzeAudioArt/Large/67/680267.jpg)
also try Solti/chicago
Quote from: pchuang on May 26, 2007, 10:11:59 PM
i am very impressed. thank you all for help.
it was not my intention to offend any Mahler-lovers as i said that i needed a hell of lot more education on the subject.
here is my confession:
this is what i bought: grammophon mahler/sinopoli the complete recordings philharmonia orchestra 15 cd set (the guy in the store told me this is the top of the range, you know what i mean.)
this is why i bought it: i heard his Adagietto from symphony 5 in C-sharp minor and i thought to myself, the man is so sensitive and exquisite, yet with such great power and energy. the most impressive part is that he is different.
Weclome to GMG. Try Das Lied von Der Erde and symphony no 4 first. Enjoy
Off topic a bit. Was Mahler "forced" to convert? I guess in a way, b/c he knew he would not get the job if he did not.
I'm having a ........ déjà vu ......... moment ..........
Hi, p, and welcome to GMG. This IS the best place on the web for the sort of information and advice you seek. Be warned that some Mahler devotees are thin-skinned and brook no unfavorable criticism of the man. By suggesting that his music, and "some modern art crap," are "ugly, chaotic, hard to swallow, self-indulgence and overrated no talent," you may have invited more retribution in kind than kindly advice.
The Adagietto from #5 is one of the first things that attracts many people to Mahler. It is indeed "sensitive and exquisite." Sergeant Rock, above, has graciously listed several other movements you might find similarly appealing.
Other passages in his work are indeed, as you note, "ugly, chaotic, hard to swallow, [and] self-indulgent." To some extent I believe this is due to one of his shortcomings as an artist—a tendency to fall into the imitative fallacy. But it is also largely due to the point of his music, to give expression to his soul's journey in life and to interpret the spiritual crises of his time and place on earth. He is, for me, the perfect artistic embodiment of the Zeitgeist of fin de siecle Vienna at the decadent zenith of the Hapsburg Empire and the dawn of Modernism.
His was an age when industrialization was rending the fabric of the ancien régime. His birth origins and the circumstances of his life made him especially sensitive to the angst of being poised between worlds. A Bohemian jew, he had transcended humble provincial origins to become one of the leading artistic figures in all of Europe. He was deeply spiritual, yet found little solace in religion. His complex, sprawling, sophisticated yet folksy (cowbells!), bombastic and serene, brilliant but (yes!) self-indulgent music embodies all the contradictions of his time and place and personal life as well.
I don't know the Sinopoli set, but one of our erstwhile more musically sophisticated members praised it. There are different approaches to Mahler, from the overwrought emotionalism of Bernstein to the understated clarity of Boulez. Don't give up, and don't reject Mahler out of hand, but take him in small doses and keep coming back to him. Be warned that you must be willing to forgive his excesses—see them as a feature of the aesthetic of his age, the last gasp of mawkishly self-indulgent late Romanticism. And recognize that just because he is so over-rated by some whose admiration borders on blind hero worship, that does not mean that he was not one of the greatest symphonists and songwriters who ever lived.
Hope to see you around more frequently, p...that is if I decide to put up with the juvenile incivility and stick around myself!
geez, no need to make subtle personal attacks here!
Quote from: MahlerTitan on May 27, 2007, 08:58:36 AM
geez, no need to make subtle personal attacks here!
:D
I'm a huge admirer of Mahler as well, so don't feel alone,
MT!
Quote from: Haffner on May 27, 2007, 09:04:12 AM
:D
I'm a huge admirer of Mahler as well, so don't feel alone, MT!
I don't know what's up with Longears, but i haven't seen one person who fanatically worships Mahler, and believes that Mahler=Greatest
I know that i don't, don't let the login name fool you, but, Schubert and Bruckner is more of my cup of tea.
Quote from: longears on May 27, 2007, 08:42:29 AM
... He was deeply spiritual, yet found little solace in religion. His complex, sprawling, sophisticated yet folksy (cowbells!), bombastic and serene, brilliant but (yes!) self-indulgent music embodies all the contradictions of his time and place and personal life as well.
... forgive his excesses—see them as a feature of the aesthetic of his age, the last gasp of mawkishly self-indulgent late Romanticism.
Ooooh! Someone who sees Mahler as I do, broadly speaking. :)
Quote from: MahlerTitan on May 27, 2007, 09:07:13 AM
I don't know what's up with Longears, but i haven't seen one person who fanatically worships Mahler, and believes that Mahler=Greatest
I know that i don't, don't let the login name fool you, but, Schubert and Bruckner is more of my cup of tea.
I'm a fanatic of the music of the men in my signature. But Mahler is so incredible as a symphonist/orchestrator and songwriter...listening to much of his music can often make me feel a bit snoopy...they get
that personal!
Quote from: Haffner on May 27, 2007, 09:12:59 AM
I'm a fanatic of the music of the men in my signature. But Mahler is so incredible as a symphonist/orchestrator and songwriter...listening to much of his music can often make me feel a bit snoopy...they get that personal!
That's why Mahler works so well for the 20th and 21st centuries. His music is so deeply personal as no other composer since Beethoven was. If Beethoven was the triumphant hero then Mahler was the flawed hero, using his music to reflect the darker side of the human personality. In a world consumed with existential angst, consumerism and ambitious materialism, Mahler's music reveals the greatness of such a life as well as the failures. It's music for the realities of modern society where everyone does everything in front of either a real audience or a cyber audience, with every gesture magnified. Is it self-indulgent? No more than any other art form of the last 150 years. Is it mawkish? Only in the wrong hands.
Quote from: longears on May 27, 2007, 08:42:29 AM
Hi, p, and welcome to GMG. This IS the best place on the web for the sort of information and advice you seek. Be warned that some Mahler devotees are thin-skinned and brook no unfavorable criticism of the man. By suggesting that his music, and "some modern art crap," are "ugly, chaotic, hard to swallow, self-indulgence and overrated no talent," you may have invited more retribution in kind than kindly advice.
The Adagietto from #5 is one of the first things that attracts many people to Mahler. It is indeed "sensitive and exquisite." Sergeant Rock, above, has graciously listed several other movements you might find similarly appealing.
Other passages in his work are indeed, as you note, "ugly, chaotic, hard to swallow, [and] self-indulgent." To some extent I believe this is due to one of his shortcomings as an artist—a tendency to fall into the imitative fallacy. But it is also largely due to the point of his music, to give expression to his soul's journey in life and to interpret the spiritual crises of his time and place on earth. He is, for me, the perfect artistic embodiment of the Zeitgeist of fin de siecle Vienna at the decadent zenith of the Hapsburg Empire and the dawn of Modernism.
His was an age when industrialization was rending the fabric of the ancien régime. His birth origins and the circumstances of his life made him especially sensitive to the angst of being poised between worlds. A Bohemian jew, he had transcended humble provincial origins to become one of the leading artistic figures in all of Europe. He was deeply spiritual, yet found little solace in religion. His complex, sprawling, sophisticated yet folksy (cowbells!), bombastic and serene, brilliant but (yes!) self-indulgent music embodies all the contradictions of his time and place and personal life as well.
I don't know the Sinopoli set, but one of our erstwhile more musically sophisticated members praised it. There are different approaches to Mahler, from the overwrought emotionalism of Bernstein to the understated clarity of Boulez. Don't give up, and don't reject Mahler out of hand, but take him in small doses and keep coming back to him. Be warned that you must be willing to forgive his excesses—see them as a feature of the aesthetic of his age, the last gasp of mawkishly self-indulgent late Romanticism. And recognize that just because he is so over-rated by some whose admiration borders on blind hero worship, that does not mean that he was not one of the greatest symphonists and songwriters who ever lived.
Hope to see you around more frequently, p...that is if I decide to put up with the juvenile incivility and stick around myself!
now that is what i called informative and educational. thanks longear, you have made my day. i start to have some grip on the subject. intelligent and well written with scholarly objectivity, you comment is the best so far. and also thanks to Sergeant Rock, whose suggestion is very thoughtful.