Mozart a fraud?

[c#minor]

This is the most entertaining thing i've seen in a while. People talking to themselves, creating alter-egos, bananas that can write concertos, what could be next?!?!?!?

[71 dB]

Speaking of death, isn't it a bit strange that all those ghost writers simply disappeared when the actual Mozart died? Maybe the conspirators killed them all to cover their traces.  

With all this violence and mystery this could become a hit movie. Tom Hanks starring, Ron Howard directing. "The Mozart Note."

[knight66]

Now, especially at the request of Lethe I have left this thread to run free until 10.00GMT today. I hope your sleep was a refreshing one Sarah.

Now I will explain how this is going to proceed.

To Newmans, Neumans all: THIS is the only thread on which these ideas about Mozart or Haydn will be discussed. Should it degenerate into any kind of flame war it will be locked and any new such thread deleted. There will be no rash of these ideas being allowed to spread across the board. It is evident from what happened on other boards ,that that way conflict lies, also banning. We don't like banning, so contain the theories and discussion thereof to this singular place and it might run and run.

Have a great day all.

I am currently listening to my new Salif Keita disc, and you can probably tell, I am somewhat chilled out and prone to generosity this morning.

Knight

[Holly]

Now, especially at the request of Lethe I have left this thread to run free until 10.00GMT today. I hope your sleep was a refreshing one Sarah.

Now I will explain how this is going to proceed.

To Newmans, Neumans all: THIS is the only thread on which these ideas about Mozart or Haydn will be discussed. Should it degenerate into any kind of flame war it will be locked and any new such thread deleted. There will be no rash of these ideas being allowed to spread across the board. It is evident from what happened on other boards ,that that way conflict lies, also banning. We don't like banning, so contain the theories and discussion thereof to this singular place and it might run and run.

Have a great day all.

I am currently listening to my new Salif Keita disc, and you can probably tell, I am somewhat chilled out and prone to generosity this morning.

Knight

Not bad as far as it goes, but what you have overlooked completely is that there is nothing to stop Newman and his "friend" from creating endless threads on the various composers whom he considers wrote material for Mozart and Haydn, e.g. Vanhal, Luchesi, Myslivicek, et al.  This is what he did on other Boards to get round similar limitations imposed upon him.  Very soon Mayhem breaks out.  Ask the Corkster.   Or if you like have a chat with Krummhorn at the Magle Forum (the last forum that banned him for overstepping the mark).

[robnewman]

Not bad as far as it goes, but what you have overlooked completely is that there is nothing to stop Newman and his "friend" from creating endless threads on the various composers whom he considers wrote material for Mozart and Haydn, e.g. Vanhal, Luchesi, Myslivicek, et al.  This is what he did on other Boards to get round similar limitations imposed upon him.  Very soon Mayhem breaks out.  Ask the Corkster.   Or if you like have a chat with Krummhorn at the Magle Forum (the last forum that banned him for overstepping the mark).

Holly,

You don't like the icon being closely examined, do you ? When presented with dozens, even hundreds of false attributions to Mozart you look at your watch, sigh, and have nothing to say. When it's pointed out to you that your hero did not spend a day at school and when it's pointed out that he never actually studied composition, harmony, orchestration (or any of the necessary techniques learned by each and every composer of merit in musical history) you are again stunned. For the plain fact is that such things are like water off a duck's back. When it is shown that literally dozens of 'Mozart' symphonies show no evidence of being attributable to Mozart, your reaction is the same. When it is demonstrated that entire concertos were attributed to him during his whole lifetime which are not, actually, his, this too has no impact. When it is shown that others were finally discovered in the 20th century to be based on works of others, this too the same. When it is shown that the Requiem is by other composers (something argued soon after its eventual publication) you are again reduced to silence. I mean, at what point do you concede that in the case of Mozart the myth and the reality are two very different things ?

Now, I can make a deal with you. If Mozart is your religion I promise not to criticise it any more. But if you are saying that his reputation is based on verifiable facts then, like all other areas of academic study, you must surely welcome its cross-examination. It seems to me that this is your choice.

Regards

[knight66]

Holly, Thanks, we are able to delete the kinds of threads you warn about, as they start. As we are not endlessly at watch, folk can alert us to the spam as it arises.

Mike

[Herman]

When it's pointed out to you that your hero did not spend a day at school and when it's pointed out that he never actually studied composition, harmony, orchestration (or any of the necessary techniques learned by each and every composer of merit in musical history) you are again stunned.

Inaccurate. In return it is pointed out to you that Mozart was taught by his dad. Just like J. S. Bach, another rather successful composer who didn't go to Juilliard.

[robnewman]

Holly, Thanks, we are able to delete the kinds of threads you warn about, as they start. As we are not endlessly at watch, folk can alert us to the spam as it arises.

Mike

Thank you for this Mike. This may be the only forum which allows this subject to be fairly examined. As to Holly and her reply, this is much looked forward to. But, as to spam, I will immediately report on it myself.

Regards


Robert Newman

[robnewman]

Inaccurate. In return it is pointed out to you that Mozart was taught by his dad. Just like J. S. Bach, another rather successful composer who didn't go to Juilliard.

Nonsense !

Have you actually examined the musical entrance exam papers which the 14 year old Mozart wrote for entrance to the Academy at Bologna in Italy ? In October 1770 ?

Leopold Mozart was a violinist. He was awarded a token promotion to the rank of 'Vice Kapellmeister' only weeks before he left Salzburg on a 3 1/2 year absence !  It's nonsense to say he was a competent teacher of harmony, orchestration and composition. He was NOT. So let's deal with facts, not myths.

[Josquin des Prez]

I think it is pointless to really argue with Newman. He is using a typical propagandist technique. Pretend to have an open discussion but in reality ignore all dissenting opinions and keep repeating the same exact points over and over until they become branded into the minds of others. It's the famous "big lie" concept. Essentially, it's like talking to a bot. I think it won't be long until the mods are fed up with him.

[DavidRoss]

I think it is pointless to really argue with Newman. He is using a typical propagandist technique. Pretend to have an open discussion but in reality ignore all dissenting opinions and keep repeating the same exact points over and over until they become branded into the minds of others. It's the famous "big lie" concept. Essentially, it's like talking to a bot. I think it won't be long until the mods are fed up with him.

Well, he has nothing to contribute except for limited entertainment value, which he has already exhausted.  If mods restrict his idiocy to this thread, and if members ignore him, then eventually he might get tired of talking to himself--though with such a bona fide nut case, he could go on talking to himself for years.  Harmless, though--you'd have to be dumber than he is to buy his baloney.  Few qualify.

[robnewman]

Well, he has nothing to contribute except for limited entertainment value, which he has already exhausted.  If mods restrict his idiocy to this thread, and if members ignore him, then eventually he might get tired of talking to himself--though with such a bona fide nut case, he could go on talking to himself for years.  Harmless, though--you'd have to be dumber than he is to buy his baloney.  Few qualify.

David Ross is not interested in the subject of Mozart and his iconic status. If the mods intervene to stop his idoiocy on this thread, and if members ignore his personal insults, he might see the rags he is posting here, though with such a bona fide nut case he could no doubt go on talking to himself for years. etc. The genius of Mozart has made such a fool of you that you hardly know what a conversation is.

[Brian]

Mr. Newman's argument is this:

1. Mozart shouldn't have been able to write his music because he wasn't trained and/or because he was somehow limited in his faculties.
2. Therefore, Mozart didn't write his music.

By the same formula, I can cheerily disprove the legacies of Joaquin Rodrigo, Ludwig van Beethoven, Art Tatum, William Shakespeare, all of the Bronte sisters, that autistic kid who does architectural drawings, Francis Bacon, and roughly half of all the philosophers to have written anything worth reading between 1550 and 1900.

Rob Newman, if you choose to read my post, I eagerly await any kind of argument you may be able to present which is different from the one I've just outlined. Try using, for example, evidence. If you use concrete evidence, we might find that you are right and we are wrong! Who knows? Stranger things have happened!  

[DavidRoss]

Well, Brian, I don't know why you want to encourage this buffoon, but then I cannot understand why some here encourage Sean and his ilk as well.  See ya!

[bhodges]

When presented with dozens, even hundreds of false attributions to Mozart you look at your watch, sigh, and have nothing to say. When it's pointed out to you that your hero did not spend a day at school and when it's pointed out that he never actually studied composition, harmony, orchestration (or any of the necessary techniques learned by each and every composer of merit in musical history) you are again stunned. For the plain fact is that such things are like water off a duck's back. When it is shown that literally dozens of 'Mozart' symphonies show no evidence of being attributable to Mozart, your reaction is the same. When it is demonstrated that entire concertos were attributed to him during his whole lifetime which are not, actually, his, this too has no impact. When it is shown that others were finally discovered in the 20th century to be based on works of others, this too the same. When it is shown that the Requiem is by other composers (something argued soon after its eventual publication) you are again reduced to silence. I mean, at what point do you concede that in the case of Mozart the myth and the reality are two very different things ?

"When presented...when it's pointed out to you...when it is shown...when it is demonstrated..."

Yes, yes, very good: we're all waiting for this grand presentation and demonstration.  (Personally, I would imagine evidence of such enormous import would leak out, all but bursting through anything holding it in.)

--Bruce

[robnewman]

Mr. Newman's argument is this:

1. Mozart shouldn't have been able to write his music because he wasn't trained and/or because he was somehow limited in his faculties.
2. Therefore, Mozart didn't write his music.

By the same formula, I can cheerily disprove the legacies of Joaquin Rodrigo, Ludwig van Beethoven, Art Tatum, William Shakespeare, all of the Bronte sisters, that autistic kid who does architectural drawings, Francis Bacon, and roughly half of all the philosophers to have written anything worth reading between 1550 and 1900.

Rob Newman, if you choose to read my post, I eagerly await any kind of argument you may be able to present which is different from the one I've just outlined. Try using, for example, evidence. If you use concrete evidence, we might find that you are right and we are wrong! Who knows? Stranger things have happened!  

Brian,

No. Mozart did not write the music attributed to him for a hundred other reasons. Far more than the fact that he had no musical education. But we start at the beginning and find this is so. Consider the implications of that one fact alone. And then you might see that from this fact all others flow. A whole bookload.

Regards

[robnewman]

"When presented...when it's pointed out to you...when it is shown...when it is demonstrated..."

Yes, yes, very good: we're all waiting for this grand presentation and demonstration.  (Personally, I would imagine evidence of such enormous import would leak out, all but bursting through anything holding it in.)

--Bruce

And you are right. If you were prepared to trawl through the footnotes, loose admissions, acts of blatant fraud, misattribution, mythology, P.R., fiction, folklore, fraternal exaggeration, etc. etc. you would see reason enough to agree that the career of W.A. Mozart really was manufactured. This beyond reasonable doubt. The net result being the colossus we know today.

[robnewman]

Well, Brian, I don't know why you want to encourage this buffoon, but then I cannot understand why some here encourage Sean and his ilk as well.  See ya!

David,

Please feel free to be as much of a buffoon as you please, right here on this thread. We will then see the scope and scale of the opposition.

[Holly]

Mr Newman

Do you have any documetary evidence of payments made by Mozart for any of the works you allege were written by other composers?

What was the motivation of these other composers to sacrifice their own careers for the sake of someone else?  What exactly did they get out of it?

[Brian]

No. Mozart did not write the music attributed to him for a hundred other reasons.

What are those reasons?

If you were prepared to trawl through the footnotes, loose admissions, acts of blatant fraud, misattribution, mythology, P.R., fiction, folklore, fraternal exaggeration, etc. etc.

If you were prepared to lead the way, you would have by now. We are willing to listen if you are willing to actually divulge any data. It's not too late, of course; you could start by giving Holly a direct, factual answer.

Well, Brian, I don't know why you want to encourage this buffoon, but then I cannot understand why some here encourage Sean and his ilk as well.  See ya!

David, I am encouraging this man because the more he's pressed for facts the less likely he is to supply any. Even the friendly caricature Neuman has been utterly unable to get any reply from this man. I think it is because Rob Newman is afraid of him.