How do people know....

[dylanesque]

what particular movements in symphonies  are supposed to be about? I ask this because I have noted a few people comment about various movements and seem to know what the composer was evoking. Example , in my introduction thread whilst stating I had only heard the obvious movement in the 5 th by Mahler ,someone joked along the lines of you mean the funeral march in the first bit. Also in Eroica I noticed people talk about the Second movement being a funeral march . I just wondered A) how people know and b) are there any resources to find out ( Wikepedia)
Regards Darren

[Karl Henning]

That is an excellent question, Darren.  And I am sure the ensuing discussion will be of interest.

I shall start with just one bit from your post:  the second movement of the Sinfonia eroica is marked in the score, Marcia funebre (Adagio assai).

[Sergeant Rock]

That is an excellent question, Darren.  And I am sure the ensuing discussion will be of interest.

I shall start with just one bit from your post:  the second movement of the Sinfonia eroica is marked in the score, Marcia funebre (Adagio assai).

Likewise, the first movement of Mahler 5 is marked Trauermarsch.

Sarge

[Karl Henning]

Thanks, Sarge.  If I had been better caught up in my Mahler survey, I might have known that! : )

[Florestan]

There is only one way of knowing it: if the composer himself assigned a particular meaning to a particular movement. Otherwise, it's just conjecture at best and wishful thinking at worst. 

That is an excellent question, Darren.  And I am sure the ensuing discussion will be of interest.

Agreed on both accounts, looking forward for future replies.

[dylanesque]

That is an excellent question, Darren.  And I am sure the ensuing discussion will be of interest.

I shall start with just one bit from your post:  the second movement of the Sinfonia eroica is marked in the score, Marcia funebre (Adagio assai).

Ah I see and the translation is Funeral March. Many thanks for the reply. I can't speak German but I looked up on Google

[dylanesque]

Likewise, the first movement of Mahler 5 is marked Trauermarsch.

Sarge

Thanks too Sarge

[TheGSMoeller]

Look at these symphonies of Berlioz (Symphonie Fantastique; Herold in Italy; Romeo et Juliette) all of their movements are marked with brief descriptions, mainly because they are telling a story.

[Florestan]

Look at these symphonies of Berlioz (Symphonie Fantastique; Herold in Italy; Romeo et Juliette) all of their movements are marked with brief descriptions, mainly because they are telling a story.

Exactly. An interesting experiment would be to play those symphonies to someone without showing him the descriptions and then asking him what the music is about. I'd bet 100 to 1 that virtually nobody would answer  Harold en Italie or Romeo et Juliette

[Sergeant Rock]

There is only one way of knowing it: if the composer himself assigned a particular meaning to a particular movement.

For example, although the first movement of Mahler's Second is only marked Allegro maestoso we know it's meant as a funeral march because 1) it began life as a standalone symphonic poem called Totenfeier (Funeral Rites) and because Mahler wrote of the movement, "We stand by the coffin of a person well loved. His whole life, his struggles, his passions, his sufferings and his accomplishments on earth once more for the last time pass before us."

Sarge

[Karl Henning]

Composers need to write the explanations at such length, because (naturally) the music cannot express that, clearly, all on its own : )

[Florestan]

Composers need to write the explanations at such length, because (naturally) the music cannot express that, clearly, all on its own : )

Hah! On second thought I concede Stravinsky might have been right, after all... 

[Fafner]

Another example of a funeral march in a symphony is Shostakovich's Symphony No. 11, 3rd movement. It is entitled "In Memoriam" and it directly quotes a famous revolutionary funeral march "You fell as victims".

http://www.youtube.com/v/Pr7XU_x1Vy8

As a side note, although the symphony is subtitled "The year 1905", and it allegedly depicts the events of the Russian 1905 revolution, another parallel can be drawn to the much more recent (and failed) anti-communist uprising in Hungary in 1956.  (The symphony was written in 1957.) That is not something the composer could openly declare. Parallels like that just require that listeners be aware of certain historical contexts.

[Karl Henning]

Hah! On second thought I concede Stravinsky might have been right, after all... 

(* chortle *)

[Florestan]

Let's take one of the most famous symphonic movements, the first from Mozart's G minor Symphony --- there is not a single hint Mozart left us about its meaning. Still, I ask you all: what is it about? I am very curious about your thoughts, gentlemen. TIA.

[Karl Henning]

As a side note, although the symphony is subtitled "The year 1905", and it allegedly depicts the events of the Russian 1905 revolution, another parallel can be drawn to the much more recent (and failed) anti-communist uprising in Hungary in 1956.  (The symphony was written in 1957.) That is not something the composer could openly declare. Parallels like that just require that listeners be aware of certain historical contexts.

Thank you for bringing us to this (potential) can of worms! : )

Such a parallel is certainly "not something the composer could openly declare";  and your post invites me to go back to such sources as I have, to see how plausible the theory may be . . . one need only invoke Ian MacDonald's The New Shostakovich to recall the fictionalizing lengths to which the "musico-cryptography" can be taken.

Part of the trouble in Shostakovich Studies these days being, that since many of the tall tales (a) are at least plausible and (b) make for good story, a certain amount of it has already been "absorbed" as Washington-confessed-to-chopping-down-the-cherry-tree 'fact' by enough program note writers, that the waters may already be rather muddied.

(Of course, the citation of the Revolutionary funerary song is incontrovertible.)

[Karl Henning]

Let's take one of the most famous symphonic movements, the first from Mozart's G minor Symphony --- there is not a single hint Mozart left us about its meaning. Still, I ask you all: what is it about? I am very curious about your thoughts, gentlemen. TIA.

Potentially easy: Did Wagner record an opinion as to its True Meaning? ; )

[Florestan]

musico-cryptography

I hate it. Music that requires a thorough knowledge of history and of a composer's biography in order to be understood is not music at all, but a kind of whodunnit in sounds. 

Potentially easy: Did Wagner record an opinion as to its True Meaning? ; )

If he did, then I confess I am shamefully ignorant of it.

[Opus106]

Let's take one of the most famous symphonic movements, the first from Mozart's G minor Symphony --- there is not a single hint Mozart left us about its meaning. Still, I ask you all: what is it about? I am very curious about your thoughts, gentlemen. TIA.

Deep, sad and Profound thoughts, no doubt.

When I first heard it (I don't remember where, exactly, but surely somewhere in commercials, rip-offs or ringtones), I thought it was a 'happy' tune. I then had to learn that G minor is supposed to be sad. (I concede that those ringtones may not have been in G minor at all, or any minor key for that matter.)

[Florestan]

Deep, sad and Profound thoughts,

About what?

no doubt.

Not even the slightest?