Composers That Are Linked To Your Soul

[Josquin des Prez]

Anonymous? In general or "the anonymous" of a particular work? 

There is this myth about early music where people actually believe the greatest contributor to this repertory is "anonymous". The idea is psychologically satisfying because of the anti-individualistic, herd mentality promoted today among intellectuals (the same mentality that balks at the idea of genius). Truth be told, i have literally hundreds of CDs focused on early music and the number of anonymous compositions i own is microscopic, and generally inferior to the works attributed to the masters of those respective eras.

[Hattoff]

Prokofiev
Stravinsky
Havergal Brian
Elgar
Sibelius
There are many others.
I would  love to have been able to include a living composer but I suppose that describes the nature of choice.

[karlhenning]

Prokofiev
Stravinsky
Havergal Brian
Elgar
Sibelius
There are many others.
I would  love to have been able to include a living composer but I suppose that describes the nature of choice.

It's also the nature of a living art.  With the past masters, we have the benefit of their entire oeuvres.  Living composers are yet at work, and may have their greatest work ahead of them (and us)!

[jowcol]

There is this myth about early music where people actually believe the greatest contributor to this repertory is "anonymous". The idea is psychologically satisfying because of the anti-individualistic, herd mentality promoted today among intellectuals (the same mentality that balks at the idea of genius). Truth be told, i have literally hundreds of CDs focused on early music and the number of anonymous compositions i own is microscopic, and generally inferior to the works attributed to the masters of those respective eras.

Although the massive revisionist conspiracy by the anti-genius psuedo-intellectual taste-makers may be one explanation, wouldn't it also make sense that the more gifted composers from that period were  more likely to have their names recorded by posterity?

And even  though the tentacles of the anti-genius, pan-cultural, relativist conspiracy may reach further than the Illumninati (all hail discordia!), I'm not sure if they have solved the time travel problem so that they could retroactively anonymize the better composers in the past.   Although, I have it on good authority that they are working on it, and will soon have Dittersdorf more widely revered than Beethoven...  But I'd better not say more, or I might get into trouble with the members of my local cell.  Oops-- I said too much.


Okay, silliness aside, there as a lot of borrowing of themes  in early music- it was common for the writers of religious music to borrow from popular commercial tunes to help "sell the product.  Los Gotxs is a fave of mine, and it widely suspected of being lifted from the "pop" world of its time.  There is a possibility that the true originator of the work may still be Mr. Anonymous.

I'd certainly agree, however, that the the fact that a work is by  an anonymous author would not necessarily make it better.  What we don't know is how much of the early music repertoire hasn't survived, and what its relative worth is.  It's pretty sad to think from that period how much was not written down or preserved...

[DavidRoss]

the anti-individualistic, herd mentality promoted today among intellectuals (the same mentality that balks at the idea of genius).

Though I recognize the "intellectual herd mentality" of which you speak (and alternately laugh and weep about it), I don't recall those folks balking at the idea of genius.  Here at GMG, for instance, where the mentality is commonplace, I can't recall anyone balking at the idea of genius, but only at the idea that you are qualified to define it. 

[prémont]

There is this myth about early music where people actually believe the greatest contributor to this repertory is "anonymous".

I have never claimed that "anonymous" ia a "better" composer than the known named ones. I just meant to say, that a number of anonymous works from the medieval (and to some extent from the renaissance) ages are very close to my heart. E. g. Llibre Vermell de Montserrat or the Royal Estampie´s  from le Manuscrit du Roy.

[Guido]

Can't say I'm an expert on any composer, but if I had to make a list...

Mahler
Prokofiev
Brahms
Xenakis
Takemitsu

although I've probably read the most about Prokofiev. I include these five basically all (except for Mahler) have a considerably large output, and I've collected waaaaaaaaaay more of each than most fans of them would- all intentionally because I like all of them and am interested in everything that they write.

Even Prokofiev? He's so maddeningly inconsistant!

I think the wanting to hear everything by a composer is a very valid criterion for talking about what we're talking about here. There are some composers where I love virtually every piece in their oeuvre, and the ones I don't I still try to get along with, and am fascinated enough to keep trying.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I think the wanting to hear everything by a composer is a very valid criterion for talking about what we're talking about here. There are some composers where I love virtually every piece in their oeuvre, and the ones I don't I still try to get along with, and am fascinated enough to keep trying.

That's the essence of the 'soul-link', I think. You put it very well.

[DavidRoss]

That's the essence of the 'soul-link', I think. You put it very well.

At least that may be strong evidence of it--one reaction to it.  That's why I went wild over Sibelius, collecting recordings of damned near everything he wrote, and multiples of most.  Likewise with Beethoven and Mahler, and to a lesser extent Bach and Mozart and a few others.

[karlhenning]

Even Prokofiev? He's so maddeningly inconsistant!

Really? : )

[Mirror Image]

Even Prokofiev? He's so maddeningly inconsistant!

I think the wanting to hear everything by a composer is a very valid criterion for talking about what we're talking about here. There are some composers where I love virtually every piece in their oeuvre, and the ones I don't I still try to get along with, and am fascinated enough to keep trying.

Prokofiev is inconsistent? Maybe in your mind he was, but I strongly disagree.

[some guy]

Here at GMG, for instance, ... I can't recall anyone balking at the idea of genius, but only at the idea that you are qualified to define it. 

Oh, I think I might be willing to. Not at the idea that there's no such thing so much as whether that idea gets anyone any forrader whilst listening to music.

Otherwise, I'm with you on the who's qualified to define it thing. Yes indeedy.

Otherotherwise, I wonder how many people contributing to this thread even believe in things like souls! But I digress. The composers I feel the most kinship with I can probably deal with:

Berlioz
Varèse
Prokofiev
Cage
Kagel
Lachenmann
Bokanowski
Tetreault and Otomo (they connect with me more when they perform together than when they perform or compose separately)

As for Prokofiev's putative inconsistency, I do think he wrote some stinkers. And I do think he could mix it up pretty well even from measure to measure, with appallingly banal stuff cheek by jowl with transcendant stuff. But I'm good with that.

[Mirror Image]

Varèse

I really enjoy Varese. Not all of his music, mind you, but I do simply adore Tuning Up, Ameriques, Arcana, and both versions of Un grand sommeil noir.

[Josquin des Prez]

wouldn't it also make sense that the more gifted composers from that period were  more likely to have their names recorded by posterity?

Of course it makes sense, that's precisely my point. I don't think you read what i said very carefully. The idea here is that somehow that didn't happen, thus, this incessant need from the aforementioned anti-individualists to tout the exploits of this ubiquitous "anonymous" entity when early music is actually extremely thoroughly documented. Like i said, this has nothing to do with historical accuracy and has everything to do about maintaining this illusion of safe egalitarianism and comfortable uniformity where the idea that art is actually about strong and dangerous personalities is something to be afraid of. And there is no "conspiracy", this is a basic psychological issue, the same basic psychological issue that leads people to equating second rate artists to the first rate masters.

[karlhenning]

I really enjoy Varese. Not all of his music, mind you, but I do simply adore Tuning Up, Ameriques, Arcana, and both versions of Un grand sommeil noir.

FWIW, I do enjoy every note of Varèse.

[PaulSC]

FWIW, I do enjoy every note of Varèse.

Even the tape interludes in Déserts? 

[zamyrabyrd]

Of course it makes sense, that's precisely my point. I don't think you read what i said very carefully. The idea here is that somehow that didn't happen, thus, this incessant need from the aforementioned anti-individualists to tout the exploits of this ubiquitous "anonymous" entity when early music is actually extremely thoroughly documented.

Who are the anti-individualists who are promoting an "anonymous" entity? This sounds like a conspiracy conjured up by the likes of an Ayn Rand (who used the example of "anonymous" masons building the Cathedral of Notre Dame).

Oral tradition in music is much older than the written one that took several centuries to implement.  Instead, works that had been transmitted orally or copied over by hand may have had the names of the original authors lost. But one assumes there were authors as in the opus of Gregorian Chant.

Like i said, this has nothing to do with historical accuracy and has everything to do about maintaining this illusion of safe egalitarianism and comfortable uniformity where the idea that art is actually about strong and dangerous personalities is something to be afraid of. And there is no "conspiracy", this is a basic psychological issue, the same basic psychological issue that leads people to equating second rate artists to the first rate masters.

"Strong and dangerous personalities", yes, I would say THAT is a psychological issue. Who should be afraid of Schubert? And who is equating him with Dittersdorf?

ZB

[Antoine Marchand]

At first I also considered Binchois or Landini instead of DuFay, because they have written some works which touch my soul at least as much as DuFay´s greatest works, but the difference is, that DuFay has written more great music than these two - or at least more great music  by him survive. 

My acquaintance with that repertoire is minimal, so I would appreciate two or three recommendations of DuFay or Binchois, especially works of intimate, introspective character... I mean if that has any sense here. 

[Marc]

I'm not an 'expert' in any composer.
Apart from that, I think I read the most about Bach, Mozart, Schubert and Mahler.

I'm also not sure if I have a soul, but, anyway, let's try to open it.

I guess the only composer with whom I immediately had a soul affair, is named ....

Johann Sebastian Bach.

I'm very happy he's been on this planet for a while, and left behind some stuff he wrote.

[prémont]

My acquaintance with that repertoire is minimal, so I would appreciate two or three recommendations of DuFay or Binchois, especially works of intimate, introspective character... I mean if that has any sense here. 

Very few CDs are dedicated exclusively to these two composers, certainly most true of Binchois. I will go through my collection to find the most rewarding interpretations, but I can not promise, that all of them are available at the moment.