Mozart a fraud?

[Guido]

Yes I may have heard some in the past at school - a clarinettist friend of mine played a lot of that repertoire. Not sure I could name names. Give me an example if you want.

[Brian]

Simple, right ? But Mozart was a 'genius'. Ah !!! That explains it, right ?  

I suppose Mr. Newman is so skeptical about the value of genius because he has so little familiarity with it himself.

[knight66]

There is a deal of misdirection going on here in the anti-Mozart camp......

1) Absence of proof is claimed as evidence, when it is merely, absence of proof.
2) Unproven allegations suddenly morph into facts that need then seemingly to be countered.
3) Other composer's compositions are sited as some kind of justification for claiming either that Mozart did not write what was attributed to him, or, that he was nothing special.
4) If repeated often enough, an allegation becomes a fact; however, what are claimed to be allegations long held by Mozart supporters seemingly cannot be facts!
5) Rules that may apply to those of modest talent are deployed as though they were universal and apply to genius.
6) Inconvenient parallels which are illustrated by other posters are ignored as though they were irrelevant.

It is like watching a card trick being performed in a different format. Entertaining, but not to be taken seriously.

One item please folks.....do watch the namecalling. This thread has been providing some much appreciated entertainment, but further personal abuse will endanger it.

Mike

[Guido]

There is a deal of misdirection going on here in the anti-Mozart camp......

1) Absence of proof is claimed as evidence, when it is merely, absence of proof.
2) Unproven allegations suddenly morph into facts that need then seemingly to be countered.
3) Other composer's compositions are sited as some kind of justification for claiming either that Mozart did not write what was attributed to him, or, that he was nothing special.
4) If repeated often enough, an allegation becomes a fact; however, what are claimed to be allegations long held by Mozart supporters seemingly cannot be facts!
5) Rules that may apply to those of modest talent are deployed as though they were universal and apply to genius.
6) Inconvenient parallels which are illustrated by other posters are ignored as though they were irrelevant.

It is like watching a card trick being performed in a different format. Entertaining, but not to be taken seriously.

One item please folks.....do watch the namecalling. This thread has been providing some much appreciated entertainment, but further personal abuse will endanger it.

Mike

Lets please not confuse ourselves and say it is anything like as dazzling and beguiling as a good card trick.

[knight66]

Where did I suggest it was a good card trick? My nephew performs those and I have no idea how they are done. As illustrated above, the misdirection here is rather easily detected.

Mike

[robnewman]

Well, let me introduce to you the person I believe is the true composer of both the Clarinet Quintet and also of the Clarinet Quintet attributed to Mozart.

Antonio Casimir Cartellieri (1772-1807).

I will finish here with an excerpt from sleeve notes to the first recording of his concertos and chamber music made in Germany in the last few years.

His works including 3 concertos for Clarinet, various Clarinet Quartets and many other works. Cartellieri is one of those composers whose extraordinary talents have been suppressed for almost 200 years. This same Cartellieri was also a colleague of Beethoven soon after his arrival in Vienna. In fact, Cartellieri shared the first concert in Vienna given by Beethoven in 1795.

Three quotes from sleevenotes to the above mentioned recordings by this great but little known composer  -

1. ''I know of numerous works by Cartellieri which would create a sensation with the modern public if they received proper treatment'.

2. 'Both these composers, Beethoven and Cartellieri had absolute mastery over their material'.

3. 'Our unfamiliarity with the so-called 'minor masters' is precisely the problem with which music scholarship is faced'.

Tomorrow evening I will post here as promised a short article arguing why Cartellieri is the true composer of these two works today attributed to Mozart.

Regards

Robert Newman

[knight66]

Antonio Casimir Cartellieri (1772-1807).

Three quotes from sleevenotes to the above mentioned recordings by this great but little known composer  -

1. ''I know of numerous works by Cartellieri which would create a sensation with the modern public if they received proper treatment'.

2. 'Both these composers, Beethoven and Cartellieri had absolute mastery over their material'.

3. 'Our unfamiliarity with the so-called 'minor masters' is precisely the problem with which music scholarship is faced'.

Tomorrow evening I will post here as promised a short article arguing why Cartellieri is the true composer of these two works today attributed to Mozart.

Regards

Robert Newman

What evidence is there that this man's work has been suppressed as against overlooked?

I know you are suggesting that tomorrow is proof day, but as far as I am concerned, the quotes above fall under my misdirection list number 3. Musicologists  have reevaluated and rediscovered music sitting in libraries and cathedrals, it has helped to expand our options for listening and our understanding of the organic movements within music; but no one has to my knowledge come forward with a body of 'missing' music that throws any composer into any kind of top rank position. I would be very happy for it to happen; but what is in this thread is merely a sophisticated version of the Wagner V Beethoven kind of thread we so often have, where to praise one, the other has to be denigrated. A cheap way of arguing on behalf of a talent.

But as we have suggested, all competing composers have to be discussed here, no individual threads thank you.

Knight

[Lethevich]

Tomorrow evening I will post here as promised a short article arguing why Cartellieri is the true composer of these two works today attributed to Mozart.

Thanks, should be a fun read.

My problem with a lot of these obscure classical era composers often claimed as undiscovered masters is that when I listen to them, they tend to bore me in a way Mozart or Haydn would not (and I find the stylistic fingerprints of these two to be quite distinctive throughout many of their mature works). For example, even Vanhal's very fine minor key symphonies just can't keep up with the scope of Haydn's similar works. There is much of the surface effect, but slightly less of the extensive invention which I can find nowhere else in the period. While I am less keen personally on Mozart, I feel similar when compaing him to others too...

[robnewman]

What evidence is there that this man's work has been suppressed as against overlooked?

I know you are suggesting that tomorrow is proof day, but as far as I am concerned, the quotes above fall under my misdirection list number 3. Musicologists  have reevaluated and rediscovered music sitting in libraries and cathedrals, it has helped to expand our options for listening and our understanding of the organic movements within music; but no one has to my knowledge come forward with a body of 'missing' music that throws any composer into any kind of top rank position. I would be very happy for it to happen; but what is in this thread is merely a sophisticated version of the Wagner V Beethoven kind of thread we so often have, where to praise one, the other has to be denigrated. A cheap way of arguing on behalf of a talent.

But as we have suggested, all competing composers have to be discussed here, no individual threads thank you.

Knight

Well, Knight, I think my article will make a credible case for this scandalously little known Cartellieri being the true composer of both KV581 and also the Concerto KV622. The fact that he requires 'rediscovery' speaks for itself. As does his music. Anyway, thanks.

[Herman]

It's pretty obvious what you're going to do. You're going to "argue why" rather than present evidence that Cart. should have composed these Mozart works. And basically the argument will be you like Cartellieri better than you like Mozart.

[Holly]

My problem with a lot of these obscure classical era composers often claimed as undiscovered masters is that when I listen to them, they tend to bore me in a way Mozart or Haydn would not (and I find the stylistic fingerprints of these two to be quite distinctive throughout many of their mature works). For example, even Vanhal's very fine minor key symphonies just can't keep up with the scope of Haydn's similar works. There is much of the surface effect, but slightly less of the extensive invention which I can find nowhere else in the period. While I am less keen personally on Mozart, I feel similar when compaing him to others too...

Yes but the catch is that Newman will say that the works you take for granted are by Haydn, and which you reckon are better than Vanhal's, are not in fact by Haydn at all but by another composer.  He won't concede that Haydn or Mozart wrote anything that was decent, so we have no reliable benchmarks at all.  It's a sort of clever way of arguing which has plagued discussion for a long time now.

[robnewman]

It's pretty obvious what you're going to do. You're going to "argue why" rather than present evidence that Cart. should have composed these Mozart works. And basically the argument will be you like Cartellieri better than you like Mozart.

No, I am going to introduce you to a composer you don't know. I will try to show why he (Cartellieri) is the true composer of the two 'Mozart' works selected by Guido (and not me). And not simply on the grounds that his music is of great quality. A fact which I hope to show also.

Since we're discussing this, you know of course there is no documentary evidence that Mozart is the composer of either the Quintet or the Concerto, since the 'autographs' of both have mysteriously vanished ! How unfortunate !!

[robnewman]

Yes but the catch is that Newman will say that the works you take for granted are by Haydn, and which you reckon are better than Vanhal's, are not in fact by Haydn at all but by another composer.  He won't concede that Haydn or Mozart wrote anything that was decent, so we have no reliable benchmarks at all.  It's a sort of clever way of arguing which has plagued discussion for a long time now.

Holly, the fact is that the field of Haydn attribution is as dogged by error and falsehood as that of Mozart himself (as anyone who has examined both will tell you). No, there are various composers you've never heard and Cartellieri has come up (thanks to the request made by Guido himself). But people can form their own judgement from the evidence. That's how we are supposed to form a considered judgement on these issues, isn't it ?

[DavidRoss]

Yes but the catch is that Newman will say that the works you take for granted are by Haydn, and which you reckon are better than Vanhal's, are not in fact by Haydn at all but by another composer.  He won't concede that Haydn or Mozart wrote anything that was decent, so we have no reliable benchmarks at all.  It's a sort of clever way of arguing which has plagued discussion for a long time now.

Sorry, Holly, but there's nothing remotely clever about it.  It's just plain inane.

[not edward]

Leopold Mozart was a failed student of philosophy at the University of Salzburg

Reasonably accurate--he did get his bachelor's degree before being expelled for non-attendance.

who was falsely attributed with writing a violin treatise in 1756, stolen from an Italian virtoso violinist.

Evidence, please?

[Holly]

Sorry, Holly, but there's nothing remotely clever about it.  It's just plain inane.

Well you're right of course.  I was trying my utmost to show my sweeter side.

[robnewman]

Here is the 3rd Movement of a Flute Concerto in G Major by this same A.C. Cartellieri -

Antonio Casimir Cartellieri (1772-1807)
Flute Concerto in G Major
3rd Movement
c.1789

Just a sample of a truly remarkable musical talent. Cartellieri also died young.

http://www.mediafire.com/?vznzct1htmm

[Catison]

Reading through these posts has been educational.  The funny thing is that if there were really some great conspiracy and the true authorship of Mozart's music was being suppressed, then such shenanigans as are being played out in this thread would be the result.  If what Newman claims is actually true, then he would be up against a almost insurmountable force to strike down his thesis and Newman can claim that any of his dissenters are a part of this great conspiracy.

And yet, why is Mr. Newman wasting his time of music forums?  Isn't there a great conspiracy to uncover?  Just supposing that all of this is true, what does it matter if such-and-such a forum agrees with you?  In the grand scheme of music history, has anything ever been established on the internet?  Are you here to settle this great mystery?

And what is this?  You are supposed to have a book done by the end of the summer, and you don't have a chapter or section or paragraph on the Clarinet Concerto?  You have to go away and write an article?  Lets hope this is a minor gap in your book, because if it isn't, then good luck.

Let me also suggest you take the comments on this thread seriously, because it is just the internet, it is no doubt a foreshadowing of the ridicule you will receive for anyone professionally associated with the historical Mozart.  If you can't answer the questions here, then I hate to see what questions are going to be thrown at you once your book unleashed to the world.  

[Catison]

Here is the 3rd Movement of a Flute Concerto in G Major by this same A.C. Cartellieri -

Antonio Casimir Cartellieri (1772-1807)
Flute Concerto in G Major
3rd Movement
c.1789

Just a sample of a truly remarkable musical talent. Cartellieri also died young.

http://www.mediafire.com/?vznzct1htmm

Just listened and I agree it is very good.  But then again so is Mozart...

[Holly]

Holly, the fact is that the field of Haydn attribution is as dogged by error and falsehood as that of Mozart himself (as anyone who has examined both will tell you). No, there are various composers you've never heard and Cartellieri has come up (thanks to the request made by Guido himself). But people can form their own judgement from the evidence. That's how we are supposed to form a considered judgement on these issues, isn't it ?

Regards Haydn, yes I know I've heard it all before.  

Regards Cartellieri, you certainly pull out of the bag of the long-since forgotten some weird and wonderful characters.  I must admit that I thought you were going to come up with Carl Stamitz who apparently misplaced a few of his clarinet works.  I assume he lost these works somewhere, right?  Tut tut, these silly people should take better car of their property, shouldn't they? If not, and the works were kindly produced to order for Mozart, presumably you will provide a motive and proof of purchase and all that?  Yes, of course you will.  

Anyway I hope we get the full story from you  in one instalment tomorrow, and not spread out over 3 like the last time you attempted such a story.