Mozart a fraud?

Started by Todd, February 08, 2009, 07:01:01 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

karlhenning

Quote from: Rod Corkin on May 27, 2009, 01:07:07 AM
You should surely be aware from my site, to name but one, that Rob believes Luchesi composed a number of Beethoven's early works too!

Out of his mind. (Newman, I mean.)

karlhenning

Quote from: Herman on May 27, 2009, 01:57:25 AM
My alarm bells start ringing when I hear the phrase "independent scholar". This usually means a guy who cannot cut it in the standard procedure of peer review and sometimes it just means whack job. Sometimes it means both.

Someone, please: send Rob Newman to school!

karlhenning

Quote from: robnewman on May 27, 2009, 02:26:11 AM
But your posts are littered with errors. I am not the only person who is working in this field, as you yourself must surely realise. There are various others. And that's because the field of classical music is so filled with exaggerations, falsehoods, idolatry and downright errors.

Someone, please: send Rob Newman to school!

karlhenning

The only real question on this thread is: is Rob's game flat-out chicanery, or has he fallen prey to his own kool-aid?

Someone, please: send Rob Newman to school!

robnewman

#564
Quote from: Herman on May 27, 2009, 03:45:27 AM
The irony seems to elude you. You claim indepedence from academic musicology is where it's at. And yet the central tenet of your attack on Mozart is he was self-taught (which he wasn't, but that's beyond you) and thus incapable of composing the Mozart works.

Intellectual indepedence in academic life is vouchsafed by tenure. Not by opting out. And certainly not by autodidacticism. Academic research in the humanities is an unglamorous incremental business in which very few researchers can claim big discoveries. Generations build on each other's incremental progress. This is something autodidacts typically have no patience for. They want to make a big splash, also to show up academics, who took the long hard road. The stuff in the Modena library looks interesting, and, as I said, maybe it has already been researched by bonafide scholars (you wouldn't tell us if they had). However it's likely this material will fit into the mainstream corpus, rather than totally reverse what we know so far.

You can be an independent scholar and still submit to peer review. However, addressing a 'musicological' paper to a math dept is rather different.

I claim independence as a writer on music and its history (as do others) from the mainstream Mozart industry, if that is what you are refering to. But the work of independent researchers (as, for example, independent journalists) is made no easier by lectures from you on what it consists of and what it does not. I have not 'opted' out of anything, other than to maintain my integrity in an area of research which is basically a paradigm. A circular argument that 'Mozart was a musical genius....and therefore'. When, in fact, a paradigm consists of a circular argument whose believers never question the assumption on which their views are based. The living proof of which are claims that 'everything you've seen is true' in the film 'Amadeus', when, in fact, the image presented is the product of the industry itself.
The independent researcher is far more familiar with books in print and works that have appeared, than you may suppose. He/she is continually teaching others, because he/she is continually asking questions and getting answers. He is not dictated to by anyone. And his/her material is able to be examined, criticised and assessed on the same terms as the Mozart industry.

It seems (with respect) that your knowledge of Mozart and his career comes almost entirely from the corporate image of Mozart. One you have never really questioned, at any time. And that you accept it because others accept it. And they accepted it because others before them accepted it. And so it goes on. So that your knowledge is derived almost entirely from sources which were busy in the promotion of his reputation. To the point where exaggerations became myths, and where myths became 'facts' and where a bubble was created, which grew in size as more and more 'facts' were added to it, until the bubble came to be of enormous size and fascination - an icon, the basis of which is never questioned or cross-examined. This industry bears so little resemblance to the real world that when its teachings are questioned or cross-examined you witness stupidity, aggression, anger, foolish posts, and all the evidence of vested interests defending the things they learned themselves. Mozart studies, so-called, are a classic example of never seeing the wood for the trees. Of a hero being constructed and supported by money, half-educated men, and by the sheer weight of tradition. So that the corruption of music and its history becomes as true of those studies as it does of banking, commerce, politics or any other area of human activity. When do you suppose the case is different in 'Mozart studies' ? For, here too, there is a big industry, big bucks, elitism and cultural control. On a scale equal to the icon himself. All of which is an indisputable feature of the music industry we see today at a corporate level.

The dumbing down of student's education, the fiction of his 'genius' - these are used as a credit card to gloss over the glaring defects in the official story. So that the average man in the street believes the propaganda and is never encouraged to examine the basis on which the myth was constructed.

I have had dozens, even hundreds of contacts with musicians and musicologists, archivists and teachers, most of whom are very open to a fair, honest and open re-assessment of Mozart's life, career and status. But the exceptions are those who think they know it all and who base their views on nothing more than sweeping generalisations.

Why not make yourself familiar with music history, rather than the myth of Mozart ? Since the two things are as different as they can possibly be. And one of them is being ignored, consistently, by those who should know better. Mozart IS the FOX news of classical music. The living proof of which is the attitude of those who criticise his modern re-assessment.




J.Z. Herrenberg

Quote from: DavidRoss on May 27, 2009, 04:19:36 AM
Nope, Jezetha, recognizing that "Newman" is a nutcase is the point.

The poor fellow needs to be helped, not humored.

I know what you are saying. But everyone is responsible for his or her own actions, so I'm neither helping nor humouring. I am simply giving Mr Newman the benefit of the doubt, without wasting huge amounts of time and energy at refuting and/or ridiculing his convictions. If Mr Newman wants to use the years still left to him in undermining the Mozart edifice (to coin a phrase), who am I to stop him?

As I said, I won't be reacting to any of his posts again. I don't want piecemeal revelation, I want the whole meal, ergo: that damned book!
Music gives a soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination and life to everything. -- Plato

robnewman

Quote from: DavidRoss on May 27, 2009, 04:19:36 AM
Nope, Jezetha, recognizing that "Newman" is a nutcase is the point.  If he were not, this thread would not even exist.  If he were not, intelligent discussion of his thesis would be possible.  He would recognize that extraordinary claims contradicting well-established facts require extraordinary evidence.  He would offer verifiable evidence to support his claims.

However, he offers no evidence.  He does not even respond directly with answers to reasonable questions raised by his claims, but raises smokescreens of childish rhetorical tricks in pathetic attempts to evade accountability.  Instead of publishing his "findings" in legitimate journals that would require real evidence and sources, he skulks internet bulletin boards in a desperate bid for attention, where he has a history of making himself so obnoxious that he gets banned time and again.

Those who are slow to recognize that "Newman" is a nut are apt to be drawn in by him and to expect reasonable behavior.  He is not reasonable and it is a mistake to expect him to be...and foolish to demand it of him.  His command of language is adequate to suggest he's not stupid, but deranged.  Knowing that he's a nutcase--and not a normal human being attempting to be rational within the limits of his aptitude and training--is essential to knowing what to expect of him and how to deal with him.  The poor fellow needs to be helped, not humored.

David Ross has a career on this thread which speaks for itself. Let's read what he has written. It's a series of insults, of childish insults. And it's nothing more than that. This man seems to have a lot to lose if the reputation of Mozart is questioned. This may explain his hostility. Can you imagine a mature person acting in this way, post after post ? On a thread which is examining the question of whether Mozart was a fraud ? What has he contributed to this thread ? Nothing at all.

You say I 'need to be helped, not humoured'. Let others be the judge of that. But, in the meantime, let us have from you some constructive posts here on this thread, addressing yourself to the main issue, the subject of this thread. So that we can all agree about your views. Since, so far, you have contributed nothing. And it shows.




karlhenning

All that verbiage, so little substance!

Quote from: robnewman on May 27, 2009, 04:35:00 AM
. . . the mainstream Mozart industry . . . .

That's propagandist talk, of course.

Quote from: Jezetha on May 27, 2009, 04:44:29 AM
. . . As I said, I won't be reacting to any of his posts again. I don't want piecemeal revelation, I want the whole meal, ergo: that damned book!

May not happen;  for anarcho-opportunists, it's the journey, not the destination.

Someone, please: send Rob Newman to school!

karlhenning

Quote from: robnewman on May 27, 2009, 04:45:46 AM
David Ross . . . seems to have a lot to lose if the reputation of Mozart is questioned.

This is but one of your own myriad exaggerations, falsehoods and downright errors.

Someone, please: send Rob Newman to school!

J.Z. Herrenberg

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 27, 2009, 04:47:32 AM
May not happen;  for anarcho-opportunists, it's the journey, not the destination.

Schoenberg said that (iirc)!
Music gives a soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination and life to everything. -- Plato

karlhenning

Quote from: Jezetha on May 27, 2009, 04:53:06 AM
Schoenberg said that (iirc)!

:D

I do like Schoenberg;  and I enjoy perusing Style & Idea, which is often thought-provoking, even if one does not always quite agree. Like Mozart, Arnold is value-added to culture.

robnewman

Quote from: Jezetha on May 27, 2009, 03:38:18 AM
I think I'm reaching a conclusion here - I think, Mr Newman, you'll simply have to write your book and publish it. GMG is not the right forum, and that's why I won't be reacting anymore, if only to keep you chained to the desk where you ought to be writing your magnum opus.

I am not interested in the question whether you are a 'crank', 'nutcase' or what have you. Those epithets are meaningless and beside the point. You think you (and a few others) have discovered something of major importance. Okay. Give us the definitive proof in a book that will shock the musical establishment.

It's your life, it's your conviction, it's your endeavour. And you are nothing if not tenacious.

I wish you luck and await your revolutionary book.

Ciao!

Thank you. And yes, one must persevere to see the book to its completion. As I shall.

Regards and best wishes

R. Newman



Florestan

Mr. Newman, just in case it slipped your attention:

Quote from: robnewman on May 27, 2009, 03:14:18 AM
The motives of those involved (patrons and other composers) ranged from person to person.

Please give us the motives of just two persons out of many:

1. Luchesi
2. Cartellieri

It shouldn't be difficult since you've studied them extensively.
Every kind of music is good, except the boring kind. — Rossini

robnewman

#573
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 27, 2009, 04:48:48 AM
This is but one of your own myriad exaggerations, falsehoods and downright errors.

Someone, please: send Rob Newman to school!

Karl Henning,

In my independent research (and that of various others) we have discovered a mass of evidence in support of the thesis that Mozart's career and iconic status has been manufactured. I don't expect you to agree in internet posts. But I don't expect you to disagree also, since you have to hand only standard textbooks, themselves based on other standard textbooks, derived from those writers whose creation of Mozart's status was the motivation for their own works.

But I can tell you that in these exchanges I have been honest. Why, just today, I learned of the existence here in London of several letters which refer to Mozart and his father during their visit to London in 1764 which have never, to my knowledge, ever been published, and which are unknown to Mozart researchers themselves. Further proof that, contrary to your views, the best proof of anything is to read it, to understand it, and to check it yourself against what you have learned.


J.Z. Herrenberg

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 27, 2009, 05:00:43 AM
I do like Schoenberg;  and I enjoy perusing Style & Idea, which is often thought-provoking, even if one does not always quite agree. Like Mozart, Arnold is value-added to culture.

Yes, that's excellent! I have it on my bookshelf, a Faber and Faber paperback, its spine almost unreadable, completely bleached by the sun, so that the green has turned yellow...
Music gives a soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination and life to everything. -- Plato

karlhenning

Quote from: robnewman
. . . Further proof that, contrary to your views, the best proof of anything is to read it, to understand it, and to check it yourself against what you have learned.

Your gratiuitous insertion of the phrase "contrary to your views" is but one more of your own myriad exaggerations, falsehoods and downright errors.

Someone, please: send Rob Newman to school!

karlhenning

Quote from: Florestan on May 27, 2009, 01:53:14 AM
If this were true, this would be the only conspiracy in the world about which those involved in it or having knowledge of it kept absolute silence.

I reiterate my still unanswered questions: how come that not a single one of the composers whose careers have been sacrificed for the sake of Mozart never ever spoke about that even to the closest relatives or acquaintances; not a single one of them made any mention of that in their diaries; not a single one of them confessed taking part in a giant fraud even on their deathbed?

Actually, how come that you seem to be the only person in the world aware of this conspiracy?

Quote from: Florestan on May 27, 2009, 05:04:47 AM
Mr. Newman, just in case it slipped your attention:

Please give us the motives of just two persons out of many:

1. Luchesi
2. Cartellieri

It shouldn't be difficult since you've studied them extensively.

Buona fortuna, amico!

Someone, please: send Rob Newman to school!

karlhenning

Quote from: Florestan on May 27, 2009, 01:53:14 AM
I reiterate my still unanswered questions: how come that not a single one of the composers whose careers have been sacrificed for the sake of Mozart never ever spoke about that even to the closest relatives or acquaintances; not a single one of them made any mention of that in their diaries; not a single one of them confessed taking part in a giant fraud even on their deathbed?

Actually, how come that you seem to be the only person in the world aware of this conspiracy?

Characteristically, you got no reply regarding the first paragraph there.

And all you got for response to the second query was, there are really scads of us, as you must know!  Without any names.

Naturally.

Someone, please: send Rob Newman to school!

robnewman

Quote from: Florestan on May 27, 2009, 05:04:47 AM
Mr. Newman, just in case it slipped your attention:

Please give us the motives of just two persons out of many:

1. Luchesi
2. Cartellieri

It shouldn't be difficult since you've studied them extensively.

Florestan,

I'm about to start major work on the book so I can't post in much detail after today. You will just have to read the book on its completion. I can offer you this. 

1. The question of Luchesi's motivation (in assisting the career of Mozart) is certainly not clear and it would be a lie to suggest otherwise. But we are able to say with certainty his career (i.e. the career of Luchesi) was enabled by the fact that he and his family alredy had strong connections in Italy with elites in Italy. That his recruitment by the Austrian/Hungarian Empire to be Kapellmeister at Bonn was (as was the case with various major posts at this time) as much due to politics and to fraternal influence as it was of his musical abilities. His employment at Bonn being, in effect, on several different grounds. One of which was, for sure, his great musical abilities. Luchesi had studied composition and music theory assiduously in Italy. He was familiar with the latest trends. His concertos were known to the Mozart family. In fact copies of several keyboard concertos were given to the Mozart's during their tours in Italy and they remained in the Mozart repertoire right up to the 1780's. As we see confirmed in correspondence of the Mozart family. Secondly, Luchesi married locally. A woman of influence and status. And he restored the status of the Bonn Hofkapelle, where the young Beethoven was a student. The fact that his name has largely been removed or marginalised in books (even those dealing with early Beethoven) strongly suggests there are aspects of his career which would be inconvenient for the official history we have of Mozart. Since it was of course Luchesi's post of Kapellmeister which was threatened by a promise of Max Franz to make him, Mozart, the Kapellmeister. These events came to a head in 1784 when Max Franz (after a delay of many years) finally became Elector at Bonn. The moment arrived when, it seemed, Mozart was finally to get the long-promised job. (A job promised and refered to in Mozart's correspondence of 1782). But the deal never happened. It didn't happen because Luchesi was firmly in his post and could not be fired. All that could happen would be that he fell ill, or was persuaded to retire. And neither happened. So that Luchesi remained. And he was to be the last, and probably the best Kapellmeister ever at Bonn.

Out of a sense of debt to Mozart the new elector, Max Franz (brother of Joseph 2nd) the career of Mozart was 'embellished' by the supply to him by Luchesi and by others, of a stream of works. These with the full knowledge of Max Franz, since Max Franz and others were part of the project, to create his status. And from around 1784 onwards the theatrical group at Bonn (under Grossmann) began their independent status, touring widely across Germany. Performing, eventually, 'Mozart' operas. This too further helping to build the status of Mozart.

The terms and conditions of a Kapellmeister's employment made it illegal for a Kapellmeister to sell his own music to others. But in this case the obligation was real. And Luchesi seems to have conformed. The result being that several works by Luchesi (very probably the 'Paris' Symphony and also the 'Haffner') are today 'Mozart' symphonies although, in fact, detailed investigation indicates differently. Luchesi's other output (covering this vast period of more than 20 years in Bonn included numerous operas, though these too have disappeared, even although they were written using a pen-name. That of 'D'Anthoine'.

So the case of Luchesi is one of many. And it has its own story. Bonn remained of huge importance to the Mozart story although the truth of it is largely obscured by later textbooks. Here too, in Bonn, was the publisher Simrock, whose part in the story is little known. We know, for sure, that the score of the Magic Flute came here, to Bonn, even before its premiere in Vienna, and that the role of the fraternities were of major importance in the final years of 'Mozart's' career.

I know this is not a detailed answer but, for the time being, that is a general overview. The motivations of men who enjoy high status are, of course, often hidden. I think it is fair to say that he knew he was part of a much bigger project. And conformed with it dutifully.

CARTELLIERI

The case of Cartellieri is rather different. He, according to different accounts, ran away from home after the divorce of his parents. (Similar, in fact, to the case of Anton Reicha, another composer associated with Mozart's career - and who came to Bonn, then to the professorship in Paris). But Cartellieri ended up as a student to Albrechtsberger and to Salieri in Vienna before his career was publicly launched after the death of Mozart. He and Beethoven. Cartellieri's talents were used by several patrons, the most important of which was Prince Lobkowitz. A central character (with his father) in the career and reputation of Mozart. Cartellieri was well paid. His career was assured after the concert in Vienna of 1795, at which time he started working in both Vienna and then Bohemia. At the location where much of Mozart's posthumously published music was under revision, prior to its first publication. And Cartellieri married and had his mother staying with him, in Bohemia. His tragic and sudden death was a great loss to music. So in his case Cartellieri's motive was, simply, to serve in a privileged position. There is some evidence of him disagreeing with a colleague shortly before his death. The colleague being Anton Wranitsky, another major person in the manufacture of Mozart's reputation.

So, as I see it, Cartellieri was in deep with all this intrigue that was the sitatution at that time.  A time when there was no real copyright, and a time when the chance for such employment was exactly what he needed. The exploitation, of course, of a remarkable talent. And one which, I hope, music lovers will come to appreciate as they hear his own concertos and other music.

Again, I realise this is no real answer to the subject of motivation. We know that in other cases religious beliefs, conservatism, debts of gratitude, fraternity membership and many other factors all account for motivations. 

It's all I can do here. Take it or leave it. Fine.

///

robnewman

#579
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 27, 2009, 05:37:36 AM
Characteristically, you got no reply regarding the first paragraph there.

And all you got for response to the second query was, there are really scads of us, as you must know!  Without any names.

Naturally.

Someone, please: send Rob Newman to school!

Frankly, I don't have much more time for these hostile exchanges. You believe as you do. Fine. Believe it. Others don't and they have their reasons. There ARE, today, musicologists and music writers who are not wasting their time with people like you, 'educated people' who are so close minded that you can't realise that everything, even the iconic status of Mozart, can and must be cross-examined in the light of modern discoveries. A process far more advanced than you seem to realise. But that's your choice. Your attitude pays your bills. And yet it's empty rhetoric. The others producing documentary evidence and reasoned argument. Which is a feature of independent, honest, and straightforward hard work.

Defend Mozart if you must. But don't tell us that you do so with any evidence when, in fact, you are saying nothing more than a badly behaved high school student.