Mendelssohn vs. Schoenberg

[Saul]

This really shows the danger of your constant need to appeal to authority. Van Bulow was a respected critic. Wagner was a genius. Whom would you rather trust, according to your own logic? Wagner had a very high of opinion of Mendelssohn from an individual point of view. His views on the music of the latter however have been made more then plain.

I do trust Wagner when he said that 'Mendelssohn was the greatest musical genius the world has had since Mozart'.

[Josquin des Prez]

I don't really know where this is getting us. It was agreed some while back that lots of highly thought of composers detested the music of other equally fine composers.

Sometimes, its the other way around. Composers and critics may have held an higher opinion of some of their contemporaries because their contributions were felt more deeply within the confines of their specific era, where as when put into context with the entire canon of western art music, an harsher evaluation may result. Another danger of using contemporary opinions about long dead composers which may or may not hold any relevance today.

[Luke]

The point is that its not us to determine who was the greatest composer between the two. But to look onto the greats and see what they would have said:


1. Schumann adored Mendelssohn, and considered him a first rate composer, A class, and he wrote many enthusiastic articles about Mendelssohn and even was influenced in some degree with Mendelssohn' music.

2. His wife considered Mendelssohn to be one of the greatest pianists, musicians and composers of the day.

3. Chopin admired Mendelssohn's Genius and sought his assistance in getting his music known in Europe.

4. Liszt did the same as Chopin.

5. Wagner held that Mendelssohn was the greatest musical genius the world has ever had since Mozart.

6. Goethe, the famous German poet considered Mendelssohn to be the greatest child prodigy composer that music has ever seen, even compared to Mozart.

The thing about this funy little list is, that it doesn't emphasize what a small timescale Saul is working within. All this 'since Mozart' and '....of his day'... Between Mozart and Mendelssohn there are only a small number of great composers - Beethoven, Schumann, Liszt, Chopin, Berlioz, Alkan (some would say), and Mendelssohn himself. A little later Wagner and Verdi. Years to go till Brahms. Of course Mendelssohn's contemporaries counted him among the best in those years, and the Schumanns, and Brahms, and other opponenets of the 'New Germans' continued to hold him in deserved high respect. But critical consensus moved on as new composers appeared, as the picture becmae larger. Brahms, Bruckner, Faure, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, not to mention the next generation, Janacek, Mahler, Strauss, Sibelius, Elgar, Debussy....these are all composers opinions of whom are automatically ruled out of the narrow timescale Saul's quoted composers draw on, and all composers of arguably equal or greater stature.

.....all of which is pretty much on the same lines as what JDP has just posted, whilst I was writing this

[Josquin des Prez]

Jews don't have skin heads

ORLY?

http://www.rickross.com/reference/skinheads/skinheads87.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/13/nyregion/13punk.html

(sorry, couldn't resist).

[knight66]

Get and keep back on the subject please and drop the extraneous sideissues.

Knight

[Josquin des Prez]

Alban Berg talks about Schoenberg:

http://www.schoenberg.at/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=478&Itemid=706&lang=en

Might be of interest here.

[Franco]

I don't consider Schoenberg's music hard to comprehend.  But, I am several decades down the road, I suppose.

[karlhenning]

I don't consider Schoenberg's music hard to comprehend.  But, I am several decades down the road, I suppose.

Hear, hear.

A friend of mine is in his 70s, and only started to study composition perhaps three years ago.  His musical experience reaches back much longer;  he once served for a spell as choir director in a small Anglcan parish in southern Ontario.  I don't know why, but he's having rough sledding getting into atonality. (I don't know why, partly because I took a liking to it right away.)  But his mind and ears are open, and he's trying manfully.  We talk a lot about atonality over P.E.I. oysters every month or so.

[Saul]

The thing about this funy little list is, that it doesn't emphasize what a small timescale Saul is working within. All this 'since Mozart' and '....of his day'... Between Mozart and Mendelssohn there are only a small number of great composers - Beethoven, Schumann, Liszt, Chopin, Berlioz, Alkan (some would say), and Mendelssohn himself. A little later Wagner and Verdi. Years to go till Brahms. Of course Mendelssohn's contemporaries counted him among the best in those years, and the Schumanns, and Brahms, and other opponenets of the 'New Germans' continued to hold him in deserved high respect. But critical consensus moved on as new composers appeared, as the picture becmae larger. Brahms, Bruckner, Faure, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, not to mention the next generation, Janacek, Mahler, Strauss, Sibelius, Elgar, Debussy....these are all composers opinions of whom are automatically ruled out of the narrow timescale Saul's quoted composers draw on, and all composers of arguably equal or greater stature.

.....all of which is pretty much on the same lines as what JDP has just posted, whilst I was writing this

Luke,

Apparently, the famous quote by Brahms had slipped your attention.

He Said:

'I would have given up all my compositions just so I could have composed Mendelssohn's Hebrides overture'.

I guess Brahms who openly acknowledges Mendelssohn's superiority and was willing to give up all his compositions just to have the talent of Mendelssohn in writing one Single work, didn't know what he was talking about.

And Brahms was no contemporary of Mendelssohn.

Cheers,

Saul

[Josquin des Prez]

I understood Schoenberg before i actually understood Mozart, or Brahms. It funny to think about it, but when i started to listening to classical music my first tries were Schoenberg, Ligeti, Bartok and Beethoven. The last two because they were listed as an influence to Robert Fripp, King Crimson being at the time my favored band. Then i moved to Ligeti because of Bartok, and then i went straight to Schoenberg because of Ligeti.

[karlhenning]

Luke,

Apparently, the famous quote by Brahms had slipped your attention.

He Said:

'I would have given up all my compositions just so I could have composed Mendelssohn's Hebrides overture'.

I guess Brahms who openly acknowledges Mendelssohn's superiority and was willing to give up all his compositions just to have the talent of Mendelssohn in writing one Single work, didn't know what he was talking about.

And Brahms was no contemporary of Mendelssohn.

Cheers,

Saul

Saul, you are too funny, the way you read things the way you want to read them;  this citation is not the slam-dunk "Mendelssohn is superior to Brahms" which you are fond to imagine.  Brahms was famously generous in his (sincere) praise of the music of others.  He said quite similar things about Joh. Strauss, Jr & Dvořák . . . how should we sort out which of the three (all of them "superior" to Brahms, the way you seem to read it) is greatest?

Anyway, we really haven't gotten around Mike's cogent remark earlier:

I don't really know where this is getting us. It was agreed some while back that lots of highly thought of composers detested the music of other equally fine composers.

Writers, poets, painters, a few were generous, a lot will stick the boot in at any opportunity. You have to sift genuine critique from jealousy, insecurity, dislike etc. Even when you have done that sifting, it would still be a matter of treating with caution the remaining comment.

Where Mike has the wisdom to speak of "treating with caution the remaining comment," Saul barges in with, "Look! Clearly Mendelssohn is superior to Brahms! Didn't Brahms just say so?!"

[Saul]

Karl,

I'm sure you know the difference between been :" generous in his (sincere) praise of the music of others:" and saying that he would have given up all his composition in order to have the ability to compose music like Mendelssohn".

Examples of been generous in his (sincere) praise:

1. He was a fine composer
2. He was a great composer
3. He was a monumental composer
4. He was an astonishing composer
5.He was a phenomenal composer.
6.He was an earth shattering composer.
7. He was an amazing composer

But 'I would have given up all my works to compose like him' is not one of those 'generous praises', it cant be and will never be, its totally illogical.

Best,

Saul

[knight66]

Saul, You fight a good rearguard action; but basically, you have no understanding of the man that was Brahms. That quote you throw up needs to be set into the context of who he was and how he behaved.

Mike

[karlhenning]

I shan't bother to create the poll, but the great majority of listeners here on GMG would confirm that Brahms is far the greater symphonist.  The only question would be, by how great a margin Mendelssohn would be embarrassed in the poll.

But wait!  This thread is about the superiority of Schoenberg to M.!

The composer himself conducting some of Pierrot Lunaire:

http://www.youtube.com/v/utm1HH16uwM

[Saul]

I shan't bother to create the poll, but the great majority of listeners here on GMG would confirm that Brahms is far the greater symphonist.  The only question would be, by how great a margin Mendelssohn would be embarrassed in the poll.

But wait!  This thread is about the superiority of Schoenberg to M.!

The composer himself conducting some of Pierrot Lunaire:

http://www.youtube.com/v/utm1HH16uwM

I think that if one gives a testimony about himself, and admits to such an overwhelming statement such as Brahms had made, you should take him at his word. Brahms was a good man, and there is no reason in the world to assume that he didn't mean what he said, and dismiss it as been 'generous in praise'.

At the same token what would I say if Mendelssohn would have said the same thing, that he would have given up all his compositions just to compose Bach's D minor Toccata and Fugue?

I would have taken him at his word, I respect the man enough to believe that he really meant it. Had he said something of a lesser magnitude I would have dismissed it as 'praise' but serious people don't throw out such astronomical statements like that, and no one should take them lightly.

Therefore I conclude that if Mendelssohn had said the same thing on Bach or any other composer, I would have considered that composer superior then Mendelssohn.

[karlhenning]

Say, here's a composer quote to throw into the mix!

Said Stravinsky of Schoenberg's Pierrot Lunaire:  It is the solar plexus of twentieth-century music.

Who ever said any comparable thing of any work of Mendelssohn's?

(Rhetorical question, that.)

[Luke]

Brahms said these things, frequently, as Karl points out. A great example, and probably more indicative of his real feelings, since he could have picked any composer out to make this off-the-cuff remark:

Somone making a toast of Brahms (Hanslick or Bulow or someone, I forget who) - Ladies and Gentleman, the world's greatest composer

Brahms - hear hear, let's toast Mozart.

or words to that effect. Pretty unequivocal statement of views, though, that, even if thrown off at a party.

[karlhenning]

Brahms had a character of most becoming modesty. No wonder his motivations are so impenetrable to some ; )

[Saul]

Say, here's a composer quote to throw into the mix!

Said Stravinsky of Schoenberg's Pierrot Lunaire:  It is the solar plexus of twentieth-century music.

Who ever said any comparable thing of any work of Mendelssohn's?

(Rhetorical question, that.)

LOL two bad composers prasing each other.

[Saul]

Catch the Brilliance of Mendelssohn at the age of 13...

A young little boy composing such music can you handle it?

http://www.youtube.com/v/zUWm1Xy39rs&feature=related