Unpopular Opinions

[Karl Henning]

Janacek does indeed come about as a master.
(Mladi, Capriccio, Concertino, Sinfonietta,  etc.)

Carl Nielsen is also a great writer for the wind instruments; the Flute and Clarinet Concertos are a part of a projected series of 5 wind concertos, btw.

Yes!

[Madiel]

And yet, I cannot help feeling that the thread draws out opinions as advertised. Not sure I'd go so far as to advocate for a "Safe Space," but here, especially, a little "live and let live" is called for, I think.

I thought you of all people would understand the humorously excessive outrage, Karl.

[Karl Henning]

I thought you of all people would understand the humorously excessive outrage, Karl.

Oh, I did enjoy the post, rest easy!

[Florestan]

This opinion of Beethoven:

"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy."

besides being highly spurious is absolutely bullshit.

[Jo498]

It's an odd comparison. If Beethoven said it, it was not an entirely original idea at the time.
But I think that the idea behind it was shared both by some religious traditions and romantic philosophers.
In any case one can find similarly pointed statements, e.g. Martin Luther was clearly more fond of music than of philosophy, or take Dryden's poem (From harmony, from heavenly harmony) set by Handel as Ode for St. Cecilia's: The heavenly music was before and will be after this material world ("As from the power of sacred lays the spheres began to move... when the last and dreadful hour this crumbling pagean shall devour, the dead shall live, the living die and music shall uptune the sky"). And earthly music is a shadow of the heavenly harmony etc.
Or Schopenhauer's claim that music was a more direct expression of the "Will" than anything else.

[Florestan]

It's an odd comparison.

What comparison? I did not compare anything to anything. 

If Beethoven said it, it was not an entirely original idea at the time.

There is no evidence that Beethoven ever said it other than the rhapsodic, ex post facto prose of Bettina von Arnim, a notoriously untrustworthy source for anything --- and even she qualifies it with quoting Beethoven's afterthough that "Did I really say that? I must have had a rapture". 

In all probabilty Beethoven never uttered those words.

the idea behind it was shared both by some religious traditions and romantic philosophers.
In any case one can find similarly pointed statements, e.g. Martin Luther was clearly more fond of music than of philosophy, or take Dryden's poem (From harmony, from heavenly harmony) set by Handel as Ode for St. Cecilia's: The heavenly music was before and will be after this material world ("As from the power of sacred lays the spheres began to move... when the last and dreadful hour this crumbling pagean shall devour, the dead shall live, the living die and music shall uptune the sky"). And earthly music is a shadow of the heavenly harmony etc.
Or Schopenhauer's claim that music was a more direct expression of the "Will" than anything else.

Whoever said it first, in whatever form, it is still bullshit. 

Schopenhauer first and foremost, who offered as the greatest example of music which was a more direct expression of the "Will" than anything else the music of, well, Rossini... 

[Madiel]

Beethoven's comparison. Not yours.

[Florestan]

Beethoven's comparison. Not yours.

Yes, I got it now. My bad.

[Jo498]

Yes, but I found the comparison odd probably because of a too narrow understanding of "revelation". Because in the usual Western theological/philosophical tradition (divine) revelation is different from philosophy anyway. Probably the romantics put the opposition more between any scholarly/scientific knowledge including sacred books and intuitive insight/"revelation".

In any case, I think it fits rather well with romanticism and as I said there could be a christian tradition construed for a similar idea. Although the medievals and early moderns would have totally rejected Schopenhauer's idea that music was an expression of the (non-rational) will, to the contrary the harmony of the spheres is supremely rational (as the harmonies are literally based on ratios of sounding strings.

I cannot help but like the general idea; it was probably popular also because while sound waves are material and need a material medium, music seems closer than the other arts, in fact closer than anything but abstract maths, logics etc. to the immaterial, therefore "heavenly".

[Florestan]

Certainly the idea that exceptionally creative persons should be freed of
ordinary responsibilities to pursue their work unimpeded by worldly concerns
is of long standing. It was behind the more enlightened aspects of the
patronage given by the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages, by Renaissance
princes, by Orthodox Jewish communities to Talmudic scholars, and by the
Princeton Institute for Advanced Study and other modern think tanks and
artist colonies. To Romantic minds, a gifted composer was not a highly skilled
craftsman but an inspired genius to whom society owed something – and
who would, in return, elevate culture by creating "masterpieces" for
posterity. Mozart probably would have laughed at this. He was certainly well
aware of his worth and had some sense that his music might have
importance beyond the immediate occasions for which it was created. But the
Romantic attitude would have astonished him, as he bent his every effort to
craft pieces for the here and now, carefully calculated to fit the performers,
suit the occasion, have an effect upon the listeners, and earn himself further
commissions.

Mozart did write more than once that a reason for desiring financial
security was that he found it hard to compose when he was upset and could
therefore be more productive if he did not have to worry about money. This
perfectly sensible and understandable sentiment was, however, expressed in
the context of his being unable to imagine a time when he would not have to
compose to support himself, and so wishing to make that process as painless
and as successful as possible.

Under ideal circumstances – with a commission that appealed to him, with
prospects for an excellent and prestigious performance, with the promise of
adequate compensation – Mozart doubtless got intense pleasure from
composing. It was probably not merely to fend off his father's criticisms of
laziness in one of their interminable tiffs during his adolescence that Mozart
called composing his "sole delight and passion." Nonetheless, we do not
know, nor will we ever know, whether Mozart would have gone on composing
at his usual rate or even at all – had he become wealthy and no longer
needed to sell his music to put bread on the table.

(RTWTH: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274195289_Mozart_as_a_Working_Stiff)

The last sentence of the last paragraph fits Rossini to a tee.

[Karl Henning]

Music doesn't put bread on our table, yet I composed a good deal. I know: more fool me. Probably a large part of why I presently feel so very little motivation to do any more creative work.

[Florestan]

Music doesn't put bread on our table, yet I composed a good deal. I know: more fool me. Probably a large part of why I presently feel so very little motivation to do any more creative work.

Well, in Mozart's time it put bread on the table of all composers. It's Romanticism that took it off their table all the while pretending they were liberated from servitude. Something akin to Frantz Fanon bon mot about the independence of the former African colonies: You want independence? Take it --- and die! 

[Madiel]

Music doesn't put bread on our table, yet I composed a good deal. I know: more fool me. Probably a large part of why I presently feel so very little motivation to do any more creative work.

There's a whole exploration to be had here of the notion of a hobby...

[SimonNZ]

Well, in Mozart's time it put bread on the table of all composers. It's Romanticism that took it off their table all the while pretending they were liberated from servitude. Something akin to Frantz Fanon bon mot about the independence of the former African colonies: You want independence? Take it --- and die! 

Where does Fanon say that?

[Jo498]

While I have myself in discussions when they were extrapolated as uber-composers if living longer  entertained the idea that Mozart (or Schubert) might have "pulled a Rossini" had they lived 20 or 30 years longer, I don't think Zaslaw has a good argument here. As he rightly says, we don't know and the immense dedication and creativity Mozart showed when he was on fire for a project seems to strongly indicate that it's rather unlikely he would have gone down the Rossini road.

As his examples at the beginning show, to "liberate" someone from the trouble for the daily bread for special creative tasks is by no means a purely romantic notion but actually present in many cultures.

More importantly, Rossini (or Sibelius) are noteworthy because they are exceptions. Rossini suffered from depression and Sibelius also had health and probably drinking problems and neither completely stopped composing; Rossini wrote sacred works and piano pieces, just no more operas.

We have many examples for composers who kept writing music when they didn't have to or music they didn't have to compose. Bach or Haydn had many more years of drudgery behind them than Mozart but continued to write music they were not obliged to write (Nobody told Bach in the 1740s to write WTC II or AoF, similarly with Haydn's "Seasons" or the last bunch of string quartets).
Handel, Brahms, Verdi, R. Strauss and others were comfortably well off in their (late) middle age and could easily have taken an earlyish retirement and some did "slow down" quite a bit but all kept writing music, sometimes for several decades.

[Florestan]

Where does Fanon say that?

IIRC, it is quoted as such in Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber's Le défi mondial. I might be wrong, though, it's been decades since I've encountered the quote.

[Brian]

The first movement of Mahler 3 should be playable and programmed as an independent work, without the other five movements. It could fit into the normal "symphony" slot of a concert program after overture, concerto, and intermission, and its epic span as a single movement forms a satisfying whole. Though of course I love the whole piece, it is sprawling and difficult for many smaller orchestras to put on more than once a decade or so. And it does have some central bits that aren't as inspired as the beginning and finale.

[Karl Henning]

The first movement of Mahler 3 should be playable and programmed as an independent work, without the other five movements. It could fit into the normal "symphony" slot of a concert program after overture, concerto, and intermission, and its epic span as a single movement forms a satisfying whole.

OT Tangent: I guess I need to revisit the Mahler Third 

[Brian]

OT Tangent: I guess I need to revisit the Mahler Third 

No matter how many angry replies there are later, I'll feel good for inspiring you! 

[Todd]

The first movement of Mahler 3 should be playable and programmed as an independent work, without the other five movements.

I'd nominate the final movement for such treatment.

Also, more pianists could start performing transcriptions of Mahler symphony movements.  Kazakevich, Berrut, and now Levit (among others) have recorded such pieces.  They could make for a meaty half-program.