Brits revealed as Classically Clueless

[False_Dmitry]

Perfectly refuted!  The piece did not become a condemnation of Buonaparte until Beethoven made what adjustment? Striking out the dedication!

So in your opinion, neither Beethoven nor Shostakovich had any businesss writing about dictators at all?

Even though tyrants are, in both cases, what caused them to pick up the pen?

You're clearly unfamiliar with "The Legendary" and its meaning for Shostakovich.

I know people who think Pachelbel's Canon is about penguins, and CARMINA BURANA is about an Australian beer.  Perhaps you are one of them.

[Florestan]

Even though tyrants are, in both cases, what caused them to pick up the pen?

I will state it again: in the case of "Eroica", Beethoven picked the pen to glorify the exploits of a man which he perceived as a champion of liberty. When Napoleon disappointed his expectations, he only striked out the original dedication, replacing it with another. In the symphony as such he did not change a iota.

"Eroica" has absolutely nothing to do with a "passionately-considered condemnation of real & actual acts of tyranny", period.

You're clearly unfamiliar with "The Legendary" and its meaning for Shostakovich.

For the time being, it is you who are obviously unfamiliar with "Eroica" and its meaning for Beethoven.

I know people who think Pachelbel's Canon is about penguins, and CARMINA BURANA is about an Australian beer.  Perhaps you are one of them.

Being sarcastic without any grounds will not make your false ideas come true.

[karlhenning]

Being sarcastic without any grounds will not make your false ideas come true.

But it is a concession that he has no substantive argument ; )

[False_Dmitry]

I will state it again: in the case of "Eroica", Beethoven picked the pen to glorify the exploits of a man

Exactly,  He didn't get up and write a symphony because it had been 200 years since the last one.

He was impelled to write about what was going on in the world around.

For the time being, it is you who are obviously unfamiliar with "Eroica" and its meaning for Beethoven.

I doubt you'd recognise a note of EROICA, frankly.  You're an utterly ignorant man.

But it is a concession that he has no substantive argument ; )

One day you'll grow up, Henning.  Perhaps.  Meantime, stay in the gutter where you and your paucity of ideas belong.

[karlhenning]

I doubt you'd recognise a note of EROICA, frankly.  You're an utterly ignorant man.

One day you'll grow up, Henning.  Perhaps.  Meantime, stay in the gutter where you and your paucity of ideas belong.

Actually, it's the fellow whose "argument" is little more than ad hominem snarls, who suffers from a paucity of ideas, isn't it?

Thanks for the laugh!

[PaulThomas]

I don't think Shostakovich woke up one morning, looked in his diary, and found a note saying "150 years after Eroica, must write new groundbreaking symphony for own age!".

Nor was Beethoven overwhelmed with creative guilt when he noticed he'd not yet thrown down the glove to Monteverdi's works of 200 years previously.

But both DSCH #7 and Beethoven #3 are passionately-considered condemnations of real & actual acts of tyranny.

Trying to "catch out" the general public on a "look-how-clever-I-am" test about musical styles in different periods is exactly the kind of know-all elitism which has alienated people from classical music for years.   It teaches nothing that is worth knowing, or that reveals anything at all about the music or its  creation...  it's merely there to prop-up our own egos as "the clever people who know".

I dare say cartographers clasp their hands over their foreheads in frustration when laymen fail to recognise elementary differences in map projections too.   But does it advance general understanding of geography?  No, it certainly doesn't

I didnt pick the 'Leningrad' and 'Eroica' deliberately, just the works that had previously been cited, could be any 2 pieces that are substantially different in styles, and besides the 'Leningrad' isnt a 'groundbreaking symphony' anyway.

Anyway the whole point of my argument was that the original survey was flawed because simply knowing names of composers is of no use in musical appreciation, and the ability of knowing x and y piece and composer is one of those 'look how clever I am' things that I agree puts people off, far more than identifying types or styles.

For example I own very little Vivaldi, so I wouldn't recognise every Vivaldi concerto, but I probably would recognise the composer and certainly recognise the style.

Replacing the 'knowing composer names' quiz with a very general ability to recognise musical styles is less elitist as it requires no in depth or prior knowledge, just a general appreciation of classical ie 'art' music.

While I am all for people just enjoying 'classical' music as it is, the poll was established to find out how much people know about it, not just whether they like it or not.

[Florestan]

I doubt you'd recognise a note of EROICA, frankly.  You're an utterly ignorant man.

That's true, I am --- I just put you on my "ignore' list.

[Philoctetes]

That's true, I am --- I just put you on my "ignore' list.

Well I think that's pretty petty.

You'll miss butt loads of fun by doing that.

[karlhenning]

I am sure you would recognize a note of the Eroica, Andrei. (I mean, fellow whackjob.)

[Philoctetes]

I am sure you would recognize a note of the Eroica, Andrei. (I mean, fellow whackjob.)

I listen to a fair amount of classical, and have a sizeable but limited knowledge base in it, but I doublt I could recognize the Eroica or most pieces, outside of the truly famous and the composers I simply adore.

[Florestan]

I am sure you would recognize a note of the Eroica, Andrei. (I mean, fellow whackjob.)

I really don't get the whole kerfuffle. 

[karlhenning]

Expert use of the newly gained vocabulary word! : )

[Harry]

Blimey what a interesting thread this is, missed that totally. What a original this False Dimitri is, fire in his mouth, venom in his conviction, he clearly was out to hurt someone. Did not succeed though

[Harry]

Well I think that's pretty petty.

You'll miss butt loads of fun by doing that.

In this case, agreed!

[Gurn Blanston]

I am sure you would recognize a note of the Eroica, Andrei. (I mean, fellow whackjob.)

The E flat is very distinctive...

[PaulThomas]

I didnt pick the 'Leningrad' and 'Eroica' deliberately, just the works that had previously been cited, could be any 2 pieces that are substantially different in styles, and besides the 'Leningrad' isnt a 'groundbreaking symphony' anyway.

Anyway the whole point of my argument was that the original survey was flawed because simply knowing names of composers is of no use in musical appreciation, and the ability of knowing x and y piece and composer is one of those 'look how clever I am' things that I agree puts people off, far more than identifying types or styles.

For example I own very little Vivaldi, so I wouldn't recognise every Vivaldi concerto, but I probably would recognise the composer and certainly recognise the style.

Replacing the 'knowing composer names' quiz with a very general ability to recognise musical styles is less elitist as it requires no in depth or prior knowledge, just a general appreciation of classical ie 'art' music.

While I am all for people just enjoying 'classical' music as it is, the poll was established to find out how much people know about it, not just whether they like it or not.

I posted this, I then I saw that False_Dmitry has now left the board... does that mean I win the argument by default?

Only just joined and im already driving people away -great 

[MN Dave]

Only just joined and im already driving people away -great 

No, it was Forum Bully Karl Henning that drove him away.

[karlhenning]

Could be a character in your next novel, Dave!

(Dave?)

[MN Dave]

Could be a character in your next novel, Dave!

(Dave?)

Dave isn't here.

[PaulThomas]

No, it was Forum Bully Karl Henning that drove him away.

Well he's not getting my lunch money