Mozart a fraud?

[robnewman]

I know you prefer long posts only when they are authored by your esteemed self, but I really needed to do this, not least to save myself from having to research and type it all out myself. BTW, this is what the product of honest research is supposed to look like....



----------------
Listening to:
Collegium Musicum 90 / Standage - Marcello Concerto #3 in b for Violin La Cetra 3rd mvmt

Gurn Blanston,

In the middle of last year (2008) two Italian experts on 18th century musical operatic scores, Professor Luca Bianchini and Professor Anna Trombetta (both with decades of experience of working with operas of that period for public performance in Italy) and myself, Robert Newman, collaborated on a research project which was to last several months and which ended in us producing a book entitled 'Figaro - L'Aria della Contessa'. A book on the world famous opera, 'Le Nozze di Figaro'. Today attributed to W.A. Mozart. (Focusing in detail on the manuscript of the aria of the Countess from the actual score used at the premiere in May of 1786 in Vienna).

http://www.lulu.com/content/2710313

But this work, we are disappointed to learn, neither your goodself, nor your highly recommended colleague Gary Smith, nor even the highly respected Mozart catalogue editor Neil Zaslaw read in any detail  ! As an honest confession why not admit this fact ?  And a year later this still remains true. The Figaro book (which we have donated more copies of than we have sold commercially) contains amongst many things images of the music score used for rehearsals and for the actual premiere of May 1786 - the one used by Mozart himself - and is today held at the Austrian National Library in Vienna. We were able to microfiche the complete document.

For Prof. Zaslaw (as we saw in your post of yesterday) to imply that we, its 3 authors, have been 'liars' is bad enough. Since, as said, Zaslaw has not read the book nor ever examined its detailed analysis.  His loose comments do not even refer to a single page of it ! For Gary Smith to write for disciples of Mozart Forum as he did (not having read the book or studied its contents either) is almost as bizzare. And for you, Gurn, to write as you now do - this is the 'icing on the cake' of how the corporate face of the Mozart industry operates these days !

Gary Smith's articles in defence of Mozart's authorship of 'Figaro'  tried to condemn our work immediately after its publication but were almost laughably inaccurate. They are some of the funniest things ever written by a person who clearly does not know the contents of the book he is criticising !!!!!! And if you were fair enough to post my replies to Gary Smith's articles (which I sent to him in reply within a few days of him writing them) we could all see this fairly and clearly. Smith's posts against the Figaro book were a farce. So filled with generalisms and inaccuracies I'm surprised you remind us of this public relations disaster. Why not post my replies to Gary Smith right here on this thread, Gurn ?

The truth is 3 researchers made a remarkable series of discoveries on the history and the score of 'Figaro' which first of all exposed the truth that hardly anyone has studied that most famous opera score in almost 200 years.  A fact we see confirmed by detailed study of the NMA 'Critical Edition' of that same opera - a document made by 'Mozart experts' (so-called) which discusses Figaro at great length without ever examining the background to the score  ! And which does not say anything of the history of its text. Nor does the well known 'Critical Edition' of Figaro (editor Ulrich Leisinger) tell us of the association of this Vienna score with an early performance known at Donaueschingen, or its association with the early Figaro score today held at the Estense Library in Modena, Italy !  The glaring deficiencies in the NMA  'Critical Report' on Figaro are systematic and they are amazing. Needless to say, today, on the internet, we can buy what is today being called the 'Mozart autograph score of Le Nozze di Figaro' from Packard Institute - this for the Mozartean faithful -though THAT score was made much later than the premiere of that disastrous opera in Vienna and is (as can be proved) a composite later version and NOT an autograph at all ! This is further confirmed by the text we see in that online Packard score (being sold today at hundreds of dollars in hard copy to the Mozartean faithful) since it's NOT the score used by Mozart in Vienna in May of 1786 and is NOT therefore an 'autograph' at all !!  And all of this is being done in the name of musicological 'truthfulness and honesty' !!!! At the expense of calling us 'liars'.

In almost 200 years this same score used in the premiere of Figaro and today held at the Austrian National Library has hardly been studied. This was said almost 20 years ago by leading musicologists themselves. Including Alan Tyson. Our book provides images of this score for general appreciation for almost the first time, together with detailed musical analysis of its musical and textual contents, and it provides little known background information to the premiere in Vienna of the opera on 1st May 1786. And you've never read it. It cost us dearly.

Please do this forum and music students a service. Give me an email address so I can post you 3 complimentary copies of the book in question without further delay. One for your goodself, one for Prof. Zaslaw, and one for Gary Smith. So that years will not pass with this hostility, this amazing ignorance, with even more insults and downright bending of facts being the main feature of 'Mozart research' (so-called) on 'Le Nozze di Figaro'. That opera by any fair analysis, is really a hastily made arrangement made for Vienna by May 1786 of Mozart/da Ponte made from ALREADY EXISTING music by other composer/s which had in its original form a German text.

The evidence overwhelming shows W.A. Mozart did NOT compose the music of 'Le Nozze di Figaro'. He, the falsely named 'Kapellmeister Mozart', (a scam which he continued to use throughout his Vienna career) was only its clumsy arranger from German into a new 4 act Italian form for Vienna from an already existing version. A verdict you can arrive at yourself by close study of the documentary evidence itself.

http://www.lulu.com/content/2710313


Regards

Robert Newman

[Herman]

Last year (2008) two Italian experts on 18th century operatic scores, Professor Luca Bianchini and Professor Anna Trombetta (both of which have decades of experience of working with operas of that period for performance in Italy) and myself, Robert Newman,

Looks like none of these folks (including the Tobago fellow) has any degree in musicology.

[robnewman]

Looks like none of these folks (including the Tobago fellow) has any degree in musicology.

And do you have enough honesty to read my last post Herman ?

[Herman]

Yes I did read your latest twaddle, making ever more clear here are a bunch of people with no training and expertise in musicology, and they're saying people who are trained in the methods and rigour of musicological historical research are wrong. You have zero credibility. And your constant refusal to come up with any substantiation speaks volumes. You're last chance was addressing Gurn's material in detail, and you didn't. I will continue to call upon people to ignore you.

STOP POSTING ON THIS THREAD

[robnewman]

I've already answered Gurn's last post in great detail. It's contained in replies to the series of nonsense articles by Gary Smith. Made over a year ago. But you've not read them also, have you ? Shall I post them here on this thread ? So readers can see for themselves and form their own honest judgement  ? Maybe Gurn himself will post them here. So readers can judge this fairly. The scale of dishonesty we see today in propping up the Mozart myth is becoming more and more well known to ordinary people.

[robnewman]

"Gary Smith is obviously blinded by the Mozart fabrication."

The opening sentence of Mr Newman's lengthy rebuttal.

This thread has been very useful in that it has made me want to listen to Mozart more closely. I think I'll give Figaro a spin again, this coming weekend.

Jezetha,

Can you please post us the link to Gary Smith's articles and my own replies to them - some of which you appear to have read ? So that readers can see both ? I do not have these links to hand, am not a member of Mozart forum, and it's only fair that people can form a fair judgement on this issue. I've already asked Gurn Blanston to do so without response.

Many thanks

Robert (Newman)

Johann Sebastian Bach
Opening Chorus
'Ich rif zu dir'
Cantata BWV 177/1

(Music of this kind makes every honest musician think seriously of taking up truck driving !!! LOL !!

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

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Jezetha,

Can you please post us the link to Gary Smith's articles and my own replies to them - some of which you appear to have read ? So that readers can see both ? I do not have these links to hand, am not a member of Mozart forum, and it's only fair that people can form a fair judgement on this issue. I've already asked Gurn Blanston to do so without response.

Many thanks

Robert (Newman)

Sorry, Mr Newman, can't help. My 'quote' was guesswork and is wholly fictitious. I simply assumed you would have said it and that you would have written a lenghty rebuttal. By the way - why would you need your links, where there is a book in statu nascendi? Why not simply plunder a chapter? If you're on the attack, you must have your ammunition ready, I would think.

So, I repeat, and for the last time - history is your forum, not GMG. Finish your tome and let Mozart scholarship (around which you undoubtedly would put quotation marks) react. Personally, I found Gary Smith's piece well-argued, reasonable and cogent. I can live with you feeling sorry for my incurable blindness. But you haven't yet made me see the light.

Regards. And good luck.

Johan

[robnewman]

Sorry, Mr Newman, can't help. My 'quote' was guesswork and is wholly fictitious. I simply assumed you would have said it and that you would have written a lenghty rebuttal. By the way - why would you need your links, where there is a book in statu nascendi? Why not simply plunder a chapter? If you're on the attack, you must have your ammunition ready, I would think.

So, I repeat, and for the last time - history is your forum, not GMG. Finish your tome and let Mozart scholarship (around which you undoubtedly would put quotation marks) react. Personally, I found Gary Smith's piece well-argued, reasonable and cogent. I can live with you feeling sorry for my incurable blindness. But you haven't yet made me see the light.

Regards. And good luck.

Johan

Guesswork and fictitious 'quotes' ? Well, read both sides. I 'simply assumed' Mozart was a musical genius. These guys are a bunch of jesuitical con men.

Thanks for the time here.

[Herman]

These guys are a bunch of jesuitical con men.

who just happen to have solid qualifications in musicology and historical research, whereas you and your Italian "professores" have none.

STOP POSTING ON THIS THREAD

[karlhenning]

These guys are a bunch of jesuitical con men.

As ever, a propagandist's hot air.  Da Vinci Code re-retread.  Yawn.

Someone, please: send Rob Newman to school!

[Cato]

There is a scoundrel Congressman from Massachusetts: one of his favorite techniques for avoiding the truth is to shout that the opponent is not listening, and that the opponent is interrupting him, when in fact nobody, including the Truth, can get a word in edgewise, up, down, over, or under while this character keeps lisping his lies.

I am reminded of this character from Congress as I read The Mozart Conspiracy, whose author keeps insisting that people have not read his posts, or read them carefully, or that they believe lies from his opponents instead of his unproven and unprovable fantasies, etc.

The ultimate question for you: why would a group of composers with Mozartean Talent hide their talents under the basket of a Mozart Fraud, and then put their own names on works of demonstrably second or third rank ?

[Cato]

I will not post any longer under this topic: it is time to starve the beast!   0:)

[Gurn Blanston]

Jezetha,

Can you please post us the link to Gary Smith's articles and my own replies to them - some of which you appear to have read ? So that readers can see both ? I do not have these links to hand, am not a member of Mozart forum, and it's only fair that people can form a fair judgement on this issue. I've already asked Gurn Blanston to do so without response.

Many thanks

Robert (Newman)

Johann Sebastian Bach
Opening Chorus
'Ich rif zu dir'
Cantata BWV 177/1

(Music of this kind makes every honest musician think seriously of taking up truck driving !!! LOL !!

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

Well, even the Gurnatron has to sleep sometimes, Robert, I don't live in the Greenwich time zone.

I'll be honest with you, I never saw a response by you, either at the time they were written nor when I went back and looked for them last night. But I'll look again, there are only 112 posts in that thread so it shouldn't be too hard to find. You might hint to me what user name you were using at the time...

In any case, I can scarcely see how these rebuttals to that book are unfair in any way. Gary Smith DID have a copy of the book, which he quotes from liberally. But I want to point out to you that it isn't even the musicological facts or anything to do with Mozart that is under attack here, it is the method that is used to make the case and convey it to the public. If it can't bear scrutiny of even the casual amateur, how would it stand up to true peer review?  Good Lord, Robert, you can't take an end product and then work backwards picking out of context items and calling it evidence. You may be dealing with people who aren't Mozart specialists, but they aren't idiots either. Most of us have been to school, and many even learned the scientific method.

I am at work right now, and can do no more than check back for the occasional reply, which I will do. Please don't say anything mean about me until I get back.

[DavidRoss]

Am I the only one who immediately thought of Nabokov's Pale Fire on reading this?

Yes.  I thought of Borges. 

[DavidRoss]

There is a scoundrel Congressman from Massachusetts: one of his favorite techniques for avoiding the truth is to shout that the opponent is not listening, and that the opponent is interrupting him, when in fact nobody, including the Truth, can get a word in edgewise, up, down, over, or under while this character keeps lisping his lies.

That's the second mention of the Dis-Honorable Barney Frank in comparison to this Newman character, whose tactics and disdain for the truth are quite similar, but who is of no more consequence than a pimple on a gnat's bum, whereas the scoundrel Congressman was a major player in causing the financial services meltdown and thus has helped bring misery and suffering to millions. 

[robnewman]

Neil Zaslaw, USA, Music Editor and well known author of many books on Mozart -  Again Spills the Beans on the Deceptions of the Cult of Mozart -

''Because of Mozart's status as an archetypal "original genius," those who write about his music have been squeamish about facing up to the not inconsiderable totality of his musical borrowings. It has long been comfortably accepted that Mozart quoted from, paraphrased or alluded to earlier music of his own. The categories that have been proposed to deal with his borrowings from other sources have, however, tended to be restricted to explanations which can be harmonized with notions of originality, autonomy and genius: common coinages, programmatic references, emulation of or tributes to mentors, or clever in-jokes aimed at friends, patrons and colleagues. Consideration of a host of other potentially embarrassing possibilities has generally been avoided (one might even say suppressed); among them are theft, fraud, laziness, failure of inspiration, mockery of colleagues, or an ill-concealed competitive desire to - as Mozart said of Giuseppe Cambini in 1778 - "die Augen ... ausgelöscht." Mozart is a 'genius', geniuses create masterpieces, masterpieces are "perfect". Many of Mozart's admirers, who seem to want not only his music but his person to be "perfect," have exercised damage control in their naming of possible motivations for his borrowings. In establishing the extent and nature of Mozart's borrowings, my talk will necessarily speculate about both his psychology and the psychologies of those who have been too eager to sanitize his character ''

Neal Zaslaw - (Koechel Catalogue Editor) - A remarkable Lecture which stunned audiences of the Mozart Cult - given at the British Library Conference Centre, London, 'Mozart the Borrower' in January 2006

[Dr. Dread]

[robnewman]

Neal Zaslaw, USA, Music Editor and well known author of many books on Mozart -  Again Spills the Beans on the Deceptions of the Cult of Mozart -

''Because of Mozart's status as an archetypal "original genius," those who write about his music have been squeamish about facing up to the not inconsiderable totality of his musical borrowings. It has long been comfortably accepted that Mozart quoted from, paraphrased or alluded to earlier music of his own. The categories that have been proposed to deal with his borrowings from other sources have, however, tended to be restricted to explanations which can be harmonized with notions of originality, autonomy and genius: common coinages, programmatic references, emulation of or tributes to mentors, or clever in-jokes aimed at friends, patrons and colleagues. Consideration of a host of other potentially embarrassing possibilities has generally been avoided (one might even say suppressed); among them are theft, fraud, laziness, failure of inspiration, mockery of colleagues, or an ill-concealed competitive desire to - as Mozart said of Giuseppe Cambini in 1778 - "die Augen ... ausgelöscht." Mozart is a 'genius', geniuses create masterpieces, masterpieces are "perfect". Many of Mozart's admirers, who seem to want not only his music but his person to be "perfect," have exercised damage control in their naming of possible motivations for his borrowings. In establishing the extent and nature of Mozart's borrowings, my talk will necessarily speculate about both his psychology and the psychologies of those who have been too eager to sanitize his character ''

Neal Zaslaw - (Koechel Catalogue Editor) - A remarkable lecture which stunned adoring audiences of the jesuitical Mozart Cult - given at the British Library Conference Centre, London, 'Mozart the Borrower' in January 2006

Let's pretend the above statements mean differently from what they mean !!  

Mozart - the FOX News of Classical Music

[robnewman]

Gurn Blanston has today quoted Gary Smith who 'defended' the official version of 'Le Nozze di Figaro's' history against the findings of modern documentary research.  Here is the first reply I wrote to Smith last year after he posted his attack on Bianchini/Trombetta/Newmans book  -

//

Gary Smith of Mozart Forum has just posted a long work on his home site designed for the consumption of the gullible Mozartean faithful. It is entitled - ''FIGARO L'Aria della Contessa UNADORNED SIMPLE FACTS'' and in his post he tries to defend the standard story of Mozart composing the opera 'Le Nozze di Figaro'. You will not be surprised to learn that although this subject obviously involves such things as history, texts and music Gary Smith has no time for any of these. Not a single musical example or analysis of documents that are studied/reproduced in detail by Bianchini and Trombetta in their book is refered to. The contents of the German Figaro Singspiel and its relationship to the May 1786 conductor's score (on which Mozart worked before the premiere) play no part also in Gary Smith's post !!  The music we find in the score used in Vienna is now an irrelevance !!  Smith now joins Hansen as another Mozartean who cannot, will not, actually examine in any detail what has just been published. And yet he recommends nobody reads Bianchini and Trombetta's book !!!

I would not usually bother to reply to such stupidity.  I simply ask you to read Bianchini and Trombetta's book. ('Figaro - l'Aria della Contessa'). But Gary Smith has now been encouraged by the applause of his fellow cultists and has even produced a Part 2. So some sort of reply is required. Here goes -

Dear Gary Smith,

The most striking feature of your two posts on Bianchini and Trombetta's book is that you do not discuss the powerful musical proofs they provided from no less than 3 early Figaro manuscripts ! One of which is the actual score used at the premiere on 1st May 1786 !! They've provided orchestral transcriptions of all 3 versions and literally dozens of pictures, with musical analysis. Proofs which include dozens of pictures from scores almost unkown to Mozart researchers. And so you make all kinds of silly errors. Once again you refuse to examine the actual documentary evidence. Such is the standard of your posts.

Let me start with your Part 1.

1. At the Vienna National Library is the score of a German Singspiel of Figaro. Will you, Gary Smith, finally provide the name of any published study on its musical and textual contents made over the past 20 years or more ? We have found none at all.

2. You insist this German Figaro Singspiel in KT315 at the Austrian National Library in Vienna was "looked over" by NMA, ''and from various internal evidence ascribed a date of 1798''. At the eleventh consecutive time of asking Gary (ELEVENTH !) will you please provide a list of the evidences which justify such a date of '1798' and provide details of its NMA study or that by anyone else ? Anyone at all ? We don't seem to be getting an answer from you. Perhaps I should ask this again -

Gary, on what internal evidence is the German Figaro Singspiel score held at the Austrian National Library being given a date of '1798' ? For it does not come from 1798 but is shown by musical analysis to have been used to create the conductors score of May 1786 itself . ?

Gary, on what textual evidence is the text of this German Singspiel today being attributed to von Knigge, since, in fact, the published German text of Knigge's Figaro first appeared the year after von Knigge's death (1797) in Bonn (published by Simrock) and is actually very different in that text in dozens, even hundreds of ways  ?

Shall we continue to ask such very basic questions a hundred times ? At what point do you concede you are showing just how silly and how absurd this subject has become in your hands ? We are STILL waiting for your answer.

3. You ask where the 'irrefutable' proof is this Figaro Singspiel predates the May 1786 premiere of Le Nozze di Figaro. Well, since you are not interested in musical analysis you will not be interested in the musical analysis/proofs contained in Bianchini and Trombetta's book, will you ? You're a musicologist who never reads music, right ? Why not grow up and actually read Bianchini and Trombetta's detailed argument ?

4. Regarding the file KT319, you clearly have not read these posts. The reference 'KT319' was used by us (the book writers) solely as an internal reference during the time we wrote the book - to distinguish it from the other Vienna score. In fact (as you see in the book itself), we merely call these 3 documents MS 'A', 'B' and 'C'. Two of them come from KT315 in Vienna and the third comes from Modena. This fact has twice been explained here - so that even a Mozartean can understand it. If he/she wants to. It's rather simple, yes ?

PART 2

1. Your juvenile understanding becomes even more clear where you write in Part 2 of your post -

In a nutshell, Chapter 18 looks at the many changes (large and small) the opera Figaro was subjected to early on in its life. Naturally, we have Mozart's autograph as the basis of what constitutes "Figaro". However, as Alan Tyson points out, this is only the starting point of this journey. For, once Mozart "turned in" Figaro to the Court theater, a series of near-inevitable changes were bound to occur.

These 'large changes' that Figaro was subjected to 'early on its life'. Let's start with them. The work that was performed 9 times consecutively at Vienna in May 1786 is, beyond doubt, the music he wrote for Le Nozze di Figaro. Yet you do not examine it, Gary Smith !  It forms no part of your posts. It's THIS very music which Bianchini and Trombetta have studied in detail in their newly published book. So they know lots more about it than you do. Right ? This music is compared to that of the German Singspiel (the one you are going to date for us, right ?). And they discovered the latter document was used by Mozart to create that premiere conductor's score for Vienna. Such facts are the basis of their book. Right, Gary ? Get it now ? Since the date of the conductor's score is not under dispute we are able to say the German Singspiel was in existence PRIOR TO May of 1786. Simple, right ? And until you can provide evidence to the contrary we ask you to examine the musicological arguments that have just been produced by Bianchini and Trombetta. This too is simple enough for even a cultist of the Mozart myth to understand. The so-called 'autograph' of Mozart cannot possibly have existed in May 1786. Its musical content is massively different from that which we actually see here in the conductor's score. That is how we know, for 100% sure, what was performed in Vienna at that time. And what was not. The autograph was clearly made later.

2. You admit that -

Alan Tyson reviewed only the Italian copies of Figaro, a true reading of this chapter shows that he was in the end only interested in what changes Mozart brought to the table

Yes, that's right. He did NOT study the German Singspiel. As we have repeatedly told you.

3. Tyson did NOT study the German Singspiel.

Yes Gary. I believe you've finally got it !!!!

But Bianchini and Trombetta DID study the German Singspiel - Are you getting the picture now


4. You write -

IT ALL HINGES ON DATING. ALL OF IT. Disrupt their dating timeline, and this tract is nothing but a house of cards that collapses with the flick of one's little finger.

In reply, yes, of course. It all hinges on dating. The dating of the conductor's score IS indisputably May 1786. There is simply no doubt about it Gary. And the conductor's score is a true and faithful record of what music was performed as 'Le Nozze di Figaro' in Vienna, isn't it ? And what was not. The entire world realises this Gary. It cannot be hidden. Why not examine its music ? Why not read Bianchini and Trombetta's book properly to see the recitative and aria Dove Sono is clearly derived from pre-existing music contained in the German Singspiel ?

5. Of course the German Singspiel at the Austrian National Library is a copy of the original. If this was an original we would all see it's a pastiche work by various composers. This singspiel copy now at the Austrian National Library was used by Mozart to create the conductors score for the Vienna premiere of May 1786. In his own botched arrangement. So says all the evidence.

May I recommend you learn to read music ? And that you study the historical and textual aspects of Bianchini and Trombetta's book, without which you will forever remain hopelessly misinformed and the source of such nonsense as you have just posted ? Oh, and please don't forget to answer the basic questions, will you ?

Figaro - Aria della Contessa
Prof. Luca Bianchini and Prof. Anna Trombetta
http://www.lulu.com/content/2710313

(June 2008 - R.E. Newman to Gary Smith)

- end -
//

This, Gurn, is an example of the rubbish Gary Smith used to attack the newly published book on Figaro last year. And within days of posting it he was being praised for brilliantly defending the 'status quo' !!!! Mozart Forum sang his praises as a champion of truth !  


If anybody asks how the fraudlent career of Mozart was achieved, let them look at the actions of various posters here on this thread, who pervert information, who are willing to play the fool, and who never actually read the published works of their critics. And if you, Gurn, are motivated by fairness, why read only the incompetent and laughably inept posts of Gary Smith ? I again repeat my offer to send you and your colleagues, free of charge, copies of the Figaro book by Bianchini/Trombetta. With compliments and a hope that you too will not contribute to this 'dumbing down' and downgrading of plain fact.

Thanks

Robert Newman

[c#minor]

What about my Chopin ghost theory Mr. Newman? You never addressed it. I say it's valid!