Mendelssohn vs. Schoenberg

[Josquin des Prez]

Be moved...

Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy - Der 42. Psalm
http://www.youtube.com/v/I0YjuWzmkqg&feature=related

I see that, and i'll raise you this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kW8wdpfkpM0

[Luke]

You want to tell me that you didn't watch the earth shattering monumental video of Bernstein discussing Beethoven's 7th?

http://www.youtube.com/v/wNi1_kGC9dg

It's pretty beautiful, that, Saul, and you've missed Bernstein's point. He's saying something similar to what I said - that there are things in Beethoven that if you look at them, and only them, seem to be flaws. Those big one-chord perorations, for instance. And then he says - the form, the inevitability of every note, that is what is perfect, that is what no other composer could ever do, in the context of the form all of these 'flaws' cease being flaws (so, for instance, in the context of a massive symphonic movement, a coda of one harmony, repeated many times, is the only right option, not a flaw at all).

The first part of Bernstein's talk, the bit you have latched onto, where he lists the things you could find wrong with Beethoven if you only looked at the small scale, is like an opening parenthesis which he forgets to close fully as he improvises his little talk. It's clear from the beginng that he is saying 'BUT' - he's saying 'you can find fault with x and y and z, but somehow the finished product is more perfect than any other music'. And indeed, at the end, he says the final pieces, after the compositional struggle, look as if they have been 'phoned in from God'.

[Teresa]

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

http://www.youtube.com/v/yOZGl5UmkvQ

Saul is better than Schoenberg IMHO, but that is saying nothing at all.  As a little kid banging random notes on a piano makes better music to my ears than the awful extremely UGLY atonal non-music Schoenberg composes. 

Some of you pointed to Schoenberg's early more tonal works such as Verklarte Nacht and these just sound boring IMHO.  I firmly believe he went the atonal route as he knew he was no good at tonal compositions. 

The fact that anyone is DARING to compare Schoenberg to the Mendelssohn is not only an insult to Mendelssohn but an affront real music!     And the fact that Schoenberg is winning in this poll tells me there are more intellectuals here and actual real music lovers. 

Of course this is all my humble opinion, but I do not understand the contrary opinion that not only apologizes for UGLINESS in music but actually supports it.  Maybe one needs special atonal ears?   

[Saul]

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

http://www.youtube.com/v/yOZGl5UmkvQ

Saul is better than Schoenberg IMHO, but that is saying nothing at all.  As a little kid banging random notes on a piano makes better music to my ears than the awful extremely UGLY atonal non-music Schoenberg composes. 

Some of you pointed to Schoenberg's early more tonal works such as Verklarte Nacht and these just sound boring IMHO.  I firmly believe he went the atonal route as he knew he was no good at tonal compositions. 

The fact that anyone is DARING to compare Schoenberg to the Mendelssohn is not only an insult to Mendelssohn but an affront real music!     And the fact that Schoenberg is winning in this poll tells me there are more intellectuals here and actual real music lovers. 

Of course this is all my humble opinion, but I do not understand the contrary opinion that not only apologizes for UGLINESS in music but actually supports it.  Maybe on needs special atonal ears?   

Intellectuality that gets you on the wrong path, is counterproductive.

Glad you understand this.

Cheers,

Saul

[Saul]

Luke,

Bernstein clearly said that Beethoven's flaws need to be adjusted by the conductor, listen carefully he said 'Balancing' the Orchestra so one instrument wouldn't swallow the others. If that's not a flaw in writing music, then what is?

[Elgarian]

Meanwhile, back at the farm....

Jack: The apple is far superior to the orange.
Jill: No, you're quite wrong. The orange is far more popular.
Jack: Popularity has nothing to do with it. The apple is intrinsically the finer fruit. Not only can it be eaten as it is, it can also be used to make apple sauce.
Jill: Pooh, that's nothing. The orange is not only superior in terms of taste and juiciness, it can be used to make marmalade.
Jack: I don't like marmalade, so that argument doesn't carry any weight with me.
Jill: Your personal taste has nothing to do with it. Marmalade  has a far more complex structure than your apple sauce. Marmalade is superior both sensually and intellectually.
Jack: But apple sauce widens our perceptions by taking us into the realm of complementary foods. An appreciation of apple sauce leads on to an appreciation of roast pork.
Jill: Just as marmalade leads on to the wider appreciation of toast.
Jack: Well it's not just my opinion. Newton said he'd never have discovered gravity if it hadn't been for the apple, and he was a Great Man so he should know.
Jill: You're just making that up.

Jack throws his apple at Jill.
Jill throws her orange at Jack.

[Saul]

Be enthralled...

http://www.youtube.com/v/M-r2JUXiMwA

[bhodges]

Meanwhile, back at the farm....

Jack: The apple is far superior to the orange.
Jill: No, you're quite wrong. The orange is far more popular.
Jack: Popularity has nothing to do with it. The apple is intrinsically the finer fruit. Not only can it be eaten as it is, it can also be used to make apple sauce.
Jill: Pooh, that's nothing. The orange is not only superior in terms of taste and juiciness, it can be used to make marmalade.
Jack: I don't like marmalade, so that argument doesn't carry any weight with me.
Jill: Your personal taste has nothing to do with it. Marmalade  has a far more complex structure than your apple sauce. Marmalade is superior both sensually and intellectually.
Jack: But apple sauce widens our perceptions by taking us into the realm of complementary foods. An appreciation of apple sauce leads on to an appreciation of roast pork.
Jill: Just as marmalade leads on to the wider appreciation of toast.
Jack: Well it's not just my opinion. Newton said he'd never have discovered gravity if it hadn't been for the apple, and he was a Great Man so he should know.
Jill: You're just making that up.

Jack throws his apple at Jill.
Jill throws her orange at Jack.

   

--Bruce

[Elgarian]

   

--Bruce

Just don't get me started on plums, Bruce.

[Luke]

Yes, in a sense it is a flaw, Saul - but it's one that conductors spend their lives dealing with, in all music, Mendelssohn's included. Play in an orchestra, you'll find them rebalancing things left right and centre. Have one of your pieces played by an orchestra, and you'll see it practice a great deal. It's how things work.

There are a million reasons for a conductor to need to do this - the misjudgement of the composer is only one, the players themselves, the acoustics, the instruments used are among the others.... And re the last one of these - Beethoven's orchestration sounds very different played on the instuments he was used to as opposed to their modern descendants, and I suspect Bernstein is refering to inbalances that occur when the music is played on the latter, so that's not entirely fair, in itself. In Mendelssohn's case, too, (for instance) the Midsummer Night's Dream overture sounds so much more evocative and better balanced, too, I think, when the orchestra uses the ophicleide he asked for and not the tuba he usually gets.

Beethoven had a kind of orchestral aesthetic that he followed in his orchestration - it seemed to include vague notions toward the idea that, if there are to be brass in a chord, and if they can play a note of it, they should, even if that means that from chord to chord there are different numbers of brass playing. I can see why a conductor might have to work on this, but I don't see something so integral to his conception of orchestral practice as really being a flaw so much as a Beethovenian idiosyncrasy that needs to be played with sensitivity. It certainly adds to the character of his scoring, I think.

[Saul]

Be Amazed...

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

[bhodges]

But aren't plums superior to both apples and oranges? 

(I promise not to encourage future scripts...but that little sequence cracked me up.)

--Bruce

[petrarch]

I firmly believe he [Schoenberg] went the atonal route as he knew he was no good at tonal compositions. 

To say this is to deny, ignore or totally misunderstand the history of music.

[Elgarian]

But aren't plums superior to both apples and oranges? 

Yes, but the most important thing is to realise that they come somewhere between Mendelssohn and Schoenberg.

[bhodges]

To say this is to deny, ignore or totally misunderstand the history of music.

Or perhaps, all three.

Yes, but the most important thing is to realise that they come somewhere between Mendelssohn and Schoenberg.

More     

--Bruce

[Luke]

To say this is to deny, ignore or totally misunderstand the history of music.

or all three?

[Saul]

To say this is to deny, ignore or totally misunderstand the history of music.

Doesn't makes a difference why he did it.

A cake that tastes and looks bad will stay that way even if it was baked in a 5 Star hotel...

I promise you, even if you'll take the ugliest and vicious thing in the world, the Intellectuals will find reasons to justify it if they chose to.
Just look at the theory of evolution, but that's a totally different discussion that I don't want to go into here ever.

Intelligent people decided that there is nothing wrong with the idea that they might of come from the Apes, and the Baboons, and the rest of the 'Jungle Creed'. They have decided, therefore they must be right no?
And anyone who dares think differently, is branded an ignoramus.

This is precisely what's going on here.

Schoenberg's music and atonal music in general, is very poor and not pleasing, and no 'excuses' and no 'intellectuality' can confuse this fact.

[petrarch]

or all three?

I was trying to be polite .

[Teresa]

To say this is to deny, ignore or totally misunderstand the history of music.

When one realizes their tonal compositions are considerably worse than what come before then one needs either a new way or an new line of work.  Schoenberg's new way was atonal. 

I choose to ignore that which is not relevant to the music I enjoy.  I do firmly acknowledge Schoenberg's destructive influence on classical music.   However modern composers beginning with neo-romantic composers such Howard Hanson have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the negative influences of Schoenberg and his followers can be overcome. 

[Franco]

Schoenberg's music and atonal music in general, is very poor and not pleasing, and no 'excuses' and no 'intellectuality' can confuse this fact.

Okay, let's say I agree with you that M is a greater composer than S.  But, I still think S is a good composer.  You say he is "very poor and not pleasing" and that this is a fact.

Explain to me, i.e. provide some kind of objective factual basis, why S is not only not as good as M but actually a bad composer.