The sort of music you dislike

[Florestan]

It's really all right, even if you do. I know from having "talked' with you for 8 years or so what music you like, and your feelings about it. And I respect that. "Classical" music is at a far remove from Late Romantic (if I may use that catchall for the Wagnerians), and it would be an unusual taste that encompassed 2 styles so far apart from each other in purpose and structure. I haven't managed it, really, so can't expect anyone else to have done.

I like both Mozart and Mahler. Does this count? 

[Gurn Blanston]

I like both Mozart and Mahler. Does this count? 

Sure, whatever makes you feel satisfied. I don't like Mahler though, or Wagner either. Just sayin', that's why I can empathize with those who don't like everything equally. You really like Mahler as much as Mozart?

[jowcol]

I must admit something that bugs me about a lot of the 19th Century symphonic works is how many of them end in unison on the tonic in, what seems to be my ears, the same way.  For all of the variety in openings, it's amazing how many end with and extremely predictable  "taaa-daaaa".

Scarpia- I'll have to agree about virtuosity for it's own sake.  There are a lot of concerti where it seems that putting the soloist through a workout is more important than the themes and structure of the piece.  (the ones that do both at the same time, I adore!) 

As far as the questions do I tire of another fugue-- It's funny that there are some basic music forms I never tire of.  A good fugue, and Indian Raga, and a 12/8 minor key blues progression can always pull me in....

Liking different styles of music?  Lord yes!  I need something for every mood I have!   It's not that I love ALL music, but I've dug deep into many radically different styles that addressed a need that I may not have known I had before.   Much of it depends on the mood and setting, and what you hope to get out of the listening experience.

Could you only go to one restaurant the rest of your life?  I love Thai food-- but once in a while I need a Gyro, or a big greasy cheeseburger. 

Or, in the words of a famous Zen Koan:

When Baizhang was walking about the marketplace, he heard a talk between a buyer and a butcher: "Give me the best piece of meat" - the buyer said. "All that I have in my shop is the best" - butcher replied - "You cannot find a piece of meat, which is not the best". With those words Baizhang became enlightened...

[Sergeant Rock]

You really like Mahler as much as Mozart?

Why not? Mahler loved Mozart! Why the extreme surprise? Don't you read members' posts? Haven't you seen our lists of Top Ten this and that?    Quite a few of us like many styles and genres. (Hey, Que even owns Wagner operas!) I haven't met a musical genre I haven't liked. You, Gurn, are actually one of the odd men out. Your taste is surprisingly narrow. Most of us are more open. I own one of the largest Wagner and Mahler collections here but my CDs of Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven utterly dwarf  those composers. I can't imagine life without Classical and Romantic music...and Baroque, Renaissance, Medieval, 20th Century, and Henning. 

Sarge

[Florestan]

You really like Mahler as much as Mozart?

Yes. See the text under my avatar.

Of the great Late Romantic triad, I like Mahler the best, Bruckner so-and-so and Wagner only in small doses.

Why are you so shocked? I see no reason why I can't enjoy both Boccherini and Bruch.

[DavidRoss]

Sure, whatever makes you feel satisfied. I don't like Mahler though, or Wagner either. Just sayin', that's why I can empathize with those who don't like everything equally. You really like Mahler as much as Mozart?

Why not? Mahler loved Mozart! Why the extreme surprise? Don't you read members' posts? Haven't you seen our lists of Top Ten this and that?    Quite a few of us like many styles and genres. (Hey, Que even owns Wagner operas!) I haven't met a musical genre I haven't liked. You, Gurn, are actually one of the odd men out. Your taste is surprisingly narrow. Most of us are more open. I own one of the largest Wagner and Mahler collections here but my CDs of Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven utterly dwarf  those composers. I can't imagine life without Classical and Romantic music...and Baroque, Renaissance, Medieval, 20th Century, and Henning. 

I like Mahler as much as Mozart.  (Thank God I don't have to choose between them!  Cosi...or DLVDE?  Arrggggh!) Bach, too (JS). And Sibelius.  Beethoven, of course.  Debussy.  Stravinsky & Prokofiev are darned close, along with two or three others.  I even respect Wagner...though with the exception of some bleeding chunks, I can't say I really like his music, and I'm flabbergasted by those who regard his dreadfully flawed "music dramas" among the great works of art.  But maybe there's something there that I'm missing, so I keep trying, year after year, offering the music an opportunity to slap me upside the head with one hand clapping and convince me that this meat really is best.

[greg]

I think after awhile, almost half of us end up liking all of the most famous ones. I'm liking Sibelius and Haydn more, for example, the more I listen. Hey, maybe I'll end up liking Mozart- the only reason I don't now is probably just because I haven't dedicated time to listening to a bunch of his stuff yet- but that'll be in the future.
I even listened to some Corelli today and very much enjoyed it.

[Chaszz]

I like Mahler as much as Mozart.  (Thank God I don't have to choose between them!  Cosi...or DLVDE?  Arrggggh!) Bach, too (JS). And Sibelius.  Beethoven, of course.  Debussy.  Stravinsky & Prokofiev are darned close, along with two or three others.  I even respect Wagner...though with the exception of some bleeding chunks, I can't say I really like his music, and I'm flabbergasted by those who regard his dreadfully flawed "music dramas" among the great works of art.  But maybe there's something there that I'm missing, so I keep trying, year after year, offering the music an opportunity to slap me upside the head with one hand clapping and convince me that this meat really is best.

Although not necessary for a Wagnerphile like me, in some cases experiencing the full artwork as the mad master conceived it can be the key.  I would suggest the next time the Met mounts its current Parsifal, you suspend disbelief and buy a ticket, if that's at all possible. That is, if in the meantime Peter Gelb does not replace this magical experience with a Eurotrash production.

[Chaszz]

I think after awhile, almost half of us end up liking all of the most famous ones. I'm liking Sibelius and Haydn more, for example, the more I listen. Hey, maybe I'll end up liking Mozart- the only reason I don't now is probably just because I haven't dedicated time to listening to a bunch of his stuff yet- but that'll be in the future.
I even listened to some Corelli today and very much enjoyed it.

Mozart's chamber music is often more thoughtful and profound than his non-symphony works for orchestra, such as the divertimentos. IMO, anyway.

 

[Sergeant Rock]

I even respect Wagner...though with the exception of some bleeding chunks, I can't say I really like his music, and I'm flabbergasted by those who regard his dreadfully flawed "music dramas" among the great works of art.  But maybe there's something there that I'm missing....

Ya think? 

Sarge

[Sergeant Rock]

Although not necessary for a Wagnerphile like me, in some cases experiencing the full artwork as the mad master conceived it can be the key.  I would suggest the next time the Met mounts its current Parsifal, you suspend disbelief and buy a ticket, if that's at all possible. That is, if in the meantime Peter Gelb does not replace this magical experience with a Eurotrash production.

My suggestion to David in this vein would have been to attend the Seattle Ring last year. A good, traditional production, and David lives in northern Cali so he's a lot closer to Washington state than NYC. But you know, I dont think that would have worked either. For years I've been praying daily for a conversion, hoping both Karl and David would finally see the light    ...but so far the gods of music have remained silent. I think David is doomed    The basic problem is, David thinks the dramas are "dreadfully flawed." He's starting from an extreme negative position. It's very hard to change somene's mind when they've already decided the music isn't worth it.

Sarge

[Scarpia]

The basic problem is, David thinks the dramas are "dreadfully flawed." He's starting from an extreme negative position. It's very hard to change somene's mind when they've already decided the music isn't worth it.

I also think the dramas, particularly those making up the ring are "dreadfully flawed."  The Norse legends had the distilled wisdom of a culture in them but Wagner's mash-up of them is the work of a self-deluded egomaniac.  Also, Wagner becomes so enthralled with his own philosophical musings that he ignores any common sense rules of drama, giving us extended scenes of self-obsessed characters telling each other what they and we already know, multiple times.  But he wrote glorious music, and a fair fraction of the scenes that make up the ring are well developed, despite the mess he made of the structure as a whole.  So, in the end, I'd say it's worth it (the Ring).   I think Wagner was more successful in earlier works.  I think Tannhauser is my favorite piece.
 

[Sergeant Rock]

I also think the dramas, particularly those making up the ring are "dreadfully flawed."  The Norse legends had the distilled wisdom of a culture in them but Wagner's mash-up of them is the work of a self-deluded egomaniac.

Nonsense...but I don't proselytize so I won't argue 

Also, Wagner becomes so enthralled with his own philosophical musings that he ignores any common sense rules of drama, giving us extended scenes of self-obsessed characters telling each other what they and we already know, multiple times.

Of course the characters are self-obsessed. Most characters in dramas are (Oedipus, Hamlet, Macbeth, Elektra, Willy Loman). The retelling of the basic story several times has a purpose. Each time it's told it gives us a different perspective. It's like Rashômon...but I suppose you think that's dreadfully flawed also, thinking, Dammit, Akira, you already told us that three times already. Enough! 

Glad you like Tannhäuser. Most of the forum's Wagerites don't give it much respect.

Sarge

[DavidRoss]

Ya think? 

Not really, but I'm open to the possibility.  I am wrong from time to time and welcome learning about it and having an opportunity to correct the error. 

My suggestion to David in this vein would have been to attend the Seattle Ring last year. A good, traditional production, and David lives in northern Cali so he's a lot closer to Washington state than NYC. But you know, I dont think that would have worked either. For years I've been praying daily for a conversion, hoping both Karl and David would finally see the light    ...but so far the gods of music have remained silent. I think David is doomed    The basic problem is, David thinks the dramas are "dreadfully flawed." He's starting from an extreme negative position. It's very hard to change somene's mind when they've already decided the music isn't worth it.

I certainly agree with your last point, Sarge.  But I did not start with the preconception that they were flawed.  Quite the opposite.  My introduction to Wagner was through bleeding chunks played for me by a man I greatly respected who was a big Wagner fan--and I liked the music I heard.  That favorable impression was reinforced by a colleague (selector for the dramatic arts collections of Stanford University Libraries) who adored the Ring and damn near convinced me to attend performances at SFO in the mid-eighties...but then my prejudices against opera had yet to be overcome and I did not go (only one of many regrets!).

When I did begin to enjoy opera years later, thanks to my wife's love of Puccini's music and my "discover" of the great Mozart-da Ponte operas, I dug into Wagner enthusiastically, expecting to be thrilled.  I was not.  I found little musical substance and much that was simply boringly repetitive in the recordings I heard.  So I read up a bit, got copies of the text in both German and in translation, sought out other recordings and videos of staged productions.  Still no magic, however, and growing despair that such horribly dramatically flawed works (simply dreadful!) should be so revered.  They're much too long, with far too little dramatic action or movement, constantly brought to a halt by interminably repetitive tuneless shrieking of indulgent soliloquies babbling on about sophomoric commonplaces as if they were great profundities.  (Well, that may be a bit over the top...but you get the idea, I trust.  )

Yes, some of the music is beautiful and the ambition--especially of the Ring--is admirable.  But little Dickie's reach far exceeded his grasp, and the result is a monument to one man's obsessive grandiosity--sort of like Heaven's Gate...or The Postman. 

Still, despite all that, I still give it the old college try now and again, and I don't doubt that you are right in surmising that I would probably enjoy it more if I were to immerse myself in Wagner's world by attending a first-rate production of the Ring in Seattle or San Francisco--and I might, someday, though at present the $2000+ price tag for such an indulgence is more than my wife and I can afford.  I can certainly imagine the possibility of loving it not only in spite of its flaws, but to some extent because of them...yet no matter what, it seems doubtful that I would ever take such leave of my senses as to imagine that fifteen minutes' worth of drama spread out over more than an hour in the first act of Die Walküre somehow embodies the acme of dramatic art.

But...if I do...you will be the first to know!

[Scarpia]

Of course the characters are self-obsessed. Most characters in dramas are (Oedipus, Hamlet, Macbeth, Elektra, Willy Loman). The retelling of the basic story several times has a purpose. Each time it's told it gives us a different perspective. It's like Rashômon...but I suppose you think that's dreadfully flawed also, thinking, Dammit, Akira, you already told us that three times already. Enough! 

There's also an X-files where the story is told several times by different characters.  It is a question of how long it goes on, and how interesting the story is.   

In any case, I won't be foolish enough to try and convince you that you shouldn't like Wagner. 

[Chaszz]

... I can certainly imagine the possibility of loving it not only in spite of its flaws, but to some extent because of them...yet no matter what, it seems doubtful that I would ever take such leave of my senses as to imagine that fifteen minutes' worth of drama spread out over more than an hour in the first act of Die Walküre somehow embodies the acme of dramatic art.

But...if I do...you will be the first to know!

What I myself get out of Wagner is an art experience so strong it is almost religion to me... yet I also feel that the dramas are markedly lacking and certainly do not measure up to the music. I have had numerous fist fights on this issue with the denizens of a certain Wagner discussion site, who think that the drama and the music are such a metaphysical whole that they cannot even be spoken of separately, and that he is one of the great dramatists of history, and so on and so on. I do not bother with them any more. IMO, the problems of the dramas are the problems of much trite Victorian melodrama in general. They are overdone, motivationally illogical and sometimes ridiculous, the social and philosophical ideas are run-of-the-mill, they have long boring stretches, and usually everybody dies in the end no matter what, even if they are forced to just expire from a broken heart without a physical cause. Without the quality of the music these works would have faded from posterity within ten minutes.

However, when seen in a good opera house in a good production, they have a magic which transcends both the limitations of the drama and the great music; the whole comes out greater than the parts. I've experienced this several times. It could be because I'm a visual artist and am sensitive to the sets, costumes, and the architectural space in the theatre working along with the music to create this experience... there is something about the complete art work which does work, something important. One can only get this overriding experience from opera, in my opinion, in keeping with the intents of the early creators of opera, of Gluck, and of Wagner to produce a total artistic experience along the lines of the ancient Athenian music-dramas. So there is some there there after all, in spite of "little Dickie's" real limitations.

However, I find it least in The Ring. This obsessive pastiche has the largest measure of boredom in it of any of his major works, IMO, in spite of its limited collection of great bleeding chunks. And when one hears the same ideas and backstories presented over and over again, there must be some dramatic novelty in it, which is often not present here. To make matters worse, during these soliloquies he is often just musically running up and down the scales without inspiration, like a second-rate bebop soloist. Five hours is enough for a work of Wagner's.  Tannhauser, Lohengrin, Tristan, Meistersinger and Parsifal are much more rewarding than this constant harping that one gets, in Wagner discussions, on The Ring. Those who would like to try to appreciate an opera of his in a good house would be well advised to avoid the Ring at least for awhile. This is not his best work. I would like to see some substantive general Wagner discussions where, for a change, The Ring was left out.

[greg]

It's like Rashômon...but I suppose you think that's dreadfully flawed also, thinking, Dammit, Akira, you already told us that three times already. Enough! 

I think I he would hang himself if he had to watch Higurashi... 

(let's just say it repeats itself a bit more than Rashoumon)

[DavidRoss]

Rashômon...but I suppose you think that's dreadfully flawed also, thinking, Dammit, Akira, you already told us that three times already. Enough! 

Rashômon--great filmic storytelling (though I might think otherwise if it went on for five hours!)

[drogulus]

     Music I don't like is usually uninteresting rather than dislikeable. I also find that it's very hard not to like at least a little anything that does interest me, though "interesting" can't get me all the way there without some higher level affinity of an emotional/intellectual nature. Uninteresting then represents something along the lines of musical damnation. Sometimes active dislike can lose the "dis" as happened with Scriabin a few years back, though I've not become a Scriabin-ophile by any means. Uninteresting OTOH is forever, I guess.

     Actual dislike takes the form of annoyance and is usually reserved for various forms of sonic pollution like when people on public transportation play their headphones (buds, usually) so loud that you can hear them over the ambient noise. It wouldn't matter if they were playing anything good because all you can hear is the spillover from those buds. Do you know how loud these things must be to be heard on a bus from 20 feet away?

[Lethevich]

     Actual dislike takes the form of annoyance and is usually reserved for various forms of sonic pollution like when people on public transportation play their headphones (buds, usually) so loud that you can hear them over the ambient noise. It wouldn't matter if they were playing anything good because all you can hear is the spillover from those buds. Do you know how loud these things must be to be heard on a bus from 20 feet away?

Embrace the dark side, my friend - comfort yourself with thoughts of their premature deafness