Past Purchases (CLOSED)

[Harry]

After all, why should good music always be elitist? What's wrong with composing music that can be enjoyed by the masses?

He dislikes Populism, well in a sense I also, although absolutely different!

[Florestan]

He dislikes Populism

Me too, but I can hardly associate it with opera!

[karlhenning]

My problem with many operas is the fact that opera is fundamentally a populistic form of music.
The music is often compromised. Easy music = more cash.

What, more than symphonies?

[PerfectWagnerite]

I bought just one CD in Berlin over the long Easter weekend: this one after the concert at the Philharmonie:



I was going to get it autographed by Barenboim but the line was long, it was late (besides the Seventh, Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen was also on the program, making for a very long evening), and we wanted to get to a restaurant to eat a late supper before they closed.

Sarge

Excellent choice my friend. That one and the Bertini are two of my favorite M7ths. Enjoy.

[karlhenning]

After all, why should good music always be elitist? What's wrong with composing music that can be enjoyed by the masses?

Yes, Mozart and Beethoven s o o o o o had the wrong idea with Magic Flute and Fidelio, eh?  

[Sergeant Rock]

Excellent choice my friend. That one and the Bertini are two of my favorite M7ths. Enjoy.

If Barenboim and the Staatskapelle's recording is anything like their performance I heard Sunday evening, then yes, I am going to be thrilled with this CD.

Sarge

[karlhenning]

As I have said earlier, for example Magic Flute is not my cup of tea. Mozart needed money.

This or that opera not being your cup of tea, is one thing.

But the idea that Mozart wrote Magic Flute the way he did "because he needed money" — in any way which distinguishes it from, say, the Requiem, which he wrote specifically because it came with handsome compensation — is poppycock.

[Florestan]

Yes, Mozart and Beethoven s o o o o o had the wrong idea with Magic Flute and Fidelio, eh?  

IMHO The Magic Flute is one of the least populist opera, given the Masonic symbolism and spirituality that permeates it and that is not accessible to many in its essence.

Also, I don't think that the heroic and sacrificial domestic love has ever been too popular.

[71 dB]

After all, why should good music always be elitist? What's wrong with composing music that can be enjoyed by the masses?

Masses enjoying music is not a problem, composers compromising their art for popularity is.

[Florestan]

composers compromising their art for popularity

Such as...?

[karlhenning]

Masses enjoying music is not a problem, composers compromising their art for popularity is.

I don't see that complaint much applying to either Mozart or Beethoven.

[71 dB]

What, more than symphonies?

People expect catchy tunes and easy music when they go to opera but the same people are repaired for more difficult music when they go to hear symphonies.

This or that opera not being your cup of tea, is one thing.

But the idea that Mozart wrote Magic Flute the way he did "because he needed money" — in any way which distinguishes it from, say, the Requiem, which he wrote specifically because it came with handsome compensation — is poppycock.

Requiem is not an opera. With requiem Mozart was musically ambitious, with operas he was ambitious about fame. Totally different.

IMHO The Magic Flute is one of the least populist opera, given the Masonic symbolism and spirituality that permeates it and that is not accessible to many in its essence.

Also, I don't think that the heroic and sacrificial domestic love has ever been too popular.

You are talking about libretto, I am talking about music.

[karlhenning]

Requiem is not an opera.

Thank heavens, at long last, you have explained this to me! 

With requiem Mozart was musically ambitious, with operas he was ambitious about fame.

Poppycock, again.  It isn't pretty when you flaunt historical ignorance like this.

[Florestan]

You are talking about libretto, I am talking about music.

For me opera means libretto plus music. If I want only music, I go chamber or symphonic.

[71 dB]

Thank heavens, at long last, you have explained this to me! 

You are welcome! 

Poppycock, again.  It isn't pretty when you flaunt historical ignorance like this.

I don't ignore history, I interpret it differently than you.

I don't base my opinions to brainwashing books with cumulative distortion, I rely on my own ears and ability to draw conclusions. Sometimes my conclusions agree with the books (and people who has read those books), sometimes not. Anyway I prefer having my own opinions instead of brainwashing.

[71 dB]

For me opera means libretto plus music. If I want only music, I go chamber or symphonic.

Same here but still I was talking about the music alone.

[karlhenning]

I don't ignore history, I interpret it differently than you.

I don't base my opinions to brainwashing books with cumulative distortion, I rely on my own ears and ability to draw conclusions. Sometimes my conclusions agree with the books (and people who has read those books), sometimes not. Anyway I prefer having my own opinions instead of brainwashing.

It isn't a matter of "different interpretation";  nor a matter of "relying on your own ears";  we've been down this road before, where your thinking is sloppy, but you flatter yourself that your sloppy thinking is "freethinking."

Now, to remind you of exactly what you said:

With requiem Mozart was musically ambitious, with operas he was ambitious about fame.

This is neither "history" nor "interpretation";  it is empty fantasy, and false dichotomy, as far as the eye can see.  Mozart was no less musically ambitious in his late operas, than he was in the Requiem;  nor could you make any intelligent claim that Mozart was less concerned about fame when writing his Requiem (which he wrote, knowing that it would be performed only after his death — but since you are not ignorant of history, you knew that already, although you write as though you know nothing of it) than when writing his operas.

Another false dichotomy you are luxuriating in (with ironic overtones, given that Mozart is part of the topic) is the implication that writing singable tunes is necessarily "cheap," but that symphonies are by nature "above all that" (what, and you can't sing all the tunes in Mozart's late symphonies?)

[ EDITS :: sundrie typos ]

[Florestan]

Same here but still I was talking about the music alone.

Ok, but I really don't see any compromise in the musical quality of The Magic Flute as compared to, say, Don Giovanni. Anyway, that's just me. You have the right to your own opinion and I respect it.

[Haffner]

Yes I rather am! And that is not for the music my friend, but rather the problem I have with sopranos and the High C's, and coloratura singing. All male singing is no problem with me, a good mezzo soprano is also acceptable, but sopranos that scream give me nightmares.

I'm wondering if there are non-soprano parts of Wagner's "Ring..." that you enjoy, Harry? Quite a bit of that work is Bass/Baritone/Tenor.

[Haffner]

What, more than symphonies?

Sooo, Opera is "populist"...does that mean it caters to those "loathsome, moronic masses"? If so, I'm glad to be one of those "moronic masses"!!!