Deep thought in Classical Era Music?

[Mandryka]

Haydn officially did the "Laudon" symphony (Hob 69 in C) but intentionally left off the Finale, saying that it wouldn't work on a piano anyway. I don't know any others that he did himself, although everyone and their brother did piano reductions back them, most of them uncredited (hired by the publisher, so to say).

The reason I asked was that in Zaslaw's book on Mozart symphonies he seems to say (maybe I've misread)  that before 1786 (The Prague Symphony), the genre was really not very highly regarded.  A symphony was just something that happened while you were banqueting, or served as a way to open a cultural event of some kind, that sort of thing. A symphony was  for big public gestures, not  a vehicle for personal, deep utterances. And a symphony wasn't for connoisseurs.

So it seemed a bit surprising that anyone would want to take a symphony out of its context, and try to savor and study it privately via a piano score.

It must be said that 104 was 10 years after the Prague. I wonder what the  earliest published piano reduction of a symphony was.  I wonder if the trend only really took off after Mozart's final 4 symphonies were appreciated, or maybe it was Haydn, working under Mozart's influence after Mozart's death, who elevated the status of the symphony and so created the a fashion for playing them at home on a keyboard.  Or was it Haydn's work which somehow empowered Mozart to write big deep symphonies, rather than the other way round?

I'm not a historian by training, I could have this completely wrong. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing 

[kishnevi]

I didn't know that were piano reductions of Haydn symphonies?  Who made them?

I apologize for sowing some confusion.   I was writing a little too quickly and spoke too broadly.  What I had in mind was not really Haydn's symphonies:  in particular,  I was thinking of the piano reduction of the Seven Last Words, and Beethoven's arrangement of his own Second Symphony for piano trio.   I'm not actually aware of any piano reductions of Haydn's orchestral works made in his own lifetime: but arrangements for keyboard,  small chamber groups, and larger wind ensembles of music by well known composers or popular works were apparently par for the course well into the 19th century.  Witness Mozart's reference to the practice (and his own efforts to publish those sort of arrangements so that he could make some money form his music instead of others), especialy in reference to music from his operas.

But these arrangements/reductions were not for the purpose of private study;  they were meant to allow a wider audience hear in some form the music which was popular in the capitol:  to let the burghers of Lerchenau hear the music of Herr Salieri which Baron Ochs was privileged to hear live at the Court Opera  during the Vienna season.  The best 21st century equivalent would be a DJ remixing the latest pop hits at a dance club, or a newly formed rock band doing gigs at local clubs by performing covers of great rock songs while it was developing its own roster of songs.   The 'Study the score" did come, but not until the 19th century.

Your reading of Zaslow matches in general what I know about the development of the symphony, although I don't think the change can be linked to any specific work, by Mozart or anyone else, and reflects a general trend in which symphonies became something more than what the musicians played while their social superiors played cards or ate supper.     And even then I don't think it was meant as a vehicle for private utterances.  Perhaps Mozart in his very last symphonies, but he didn't really emphasize that function: the only real reason to think they were private utterances is the apparent lack of public perofrmances at the time of their composition, as if Mozart simply wanted to get something off his chest, whether or not it was performed in public.  And that motive could mean not that he had something personal to say as much as he wanted to prove what, in formal terms, a symphony could do.  I'd point to the Eroica Symphony as the first symphony in which a composer stood up (figuratively) and said,  "I've got something to tell you, so listen up!"

[Mandryka]

I apologize for sowing some confusion.   I was writing a little too quickly and spoke too broadly.  What I had in mind was not really Haydn's symphonies:  in particular,  I was thinking of the piano reduction of the Seven Last Words, and Beethoven's arrangement of his own Second Symphony for piano trio.   I'm not actually aware of any piano reductions of Haydn's orchestral works made in his own lifetime: but arrangements for keyboard,  small chamber groups, and larger wind ensembles of music by well known composers or popular works were apparently par for the course well into the 19th century.  Witness Mozart's reference to the practice (and his own efforts to publish those sort of arrangements so that he could make some money form his music instead of others), especialy in reference to music from his operas.

But these arrangements/reductions were not for the purpose of private study;  they were meant to allow a wider audience hear in some form the music which was popular in the capitol:  to let the burghers of Lerchenau hear the music of Herr Salieri which Baron Ochs was privileged to hear live at the Court Opera  during the Vienna season.  The best 21st century equivalent would be a DJ remixing the latest pop hits at a dance club, or a newly formed rock band doing gigs at local clubs by performing covers of great rock songs while it was developing its own roster of songs.   The 'Study the score" did come, but not until the 19th century.

Your reading of Zaslow matches in general what I know about the development of the symphony, although I don't think the change can be linked to any specific work, by Mozart or anyone else, and reflects a general trend in which symphonies became something more than what the musicians played while their social superiors played cards or ate supper.     And even then I don't think it was meant as a vehicle for private utterances.  Perhaps Mozart in his very last symphonies, but he didn't really emphasize that function: the only real reason to think they were private utterances is the apparent lack of public perofrmances at the time of their composition, as if Mozart simply wanted to get something off his chest, whether or not it was performed in public.  And that motive could mean not that he had something personal to say as much as he wanted to prove what, in formal terms, a symphony could do.  I'd point to the Eroica Symphony as the first symphony in which a composer stood up (figuratively) and said,  "I've got something to tell you, so listen up!"

Zaslow's book argues that the Jupiter is meaningful in that sense.

In his chapter on ascribing meanings to Mozart's music he draws on a paper by Rose Subotnik called "Evidence of a Critical World View in Mozart's Last Three Symphonies", published in a book of essays called Music and Civilization: Essays in Honour of Paul Henry Lang. I'm a bit irritated because I can't get hold of this essay and I really don't want to buy the book (it's quite expensive and I'm not sure how interesting I'll find the rest.) I'm not a member of a university library. Does anyone have a scan of it they could let me have?

I'm very interested in assigning meaning to music. But Zaslow's book has started to make me interested in Mozart more generally, particularly his political and religious views. I've just ordered H Robbins Landon's book on Mozart and freemasonry.


By the way, looking back on my previous post, I can see that I was assuming that the existence of piano reductions was a sign that the music was being taken seriously as something to savour and study and listen to repeatedly. That's clearly a major assumption which I can't justify, and you were right to pick me up on it. Also I think it would have been better to just have said that the Prague  heralds a new era of expression and complexity in symphonic music. 

I was also confusing the Loudon with the London. I would quite like to hear Haydn's reduction of it.

[kishnevi]

Zaslow's book argues that the Jupiter is meaningful in that sense.

In his chapter on ascribing meanings to Mozart's music he draws on a paper by Rose Subotnik called "Evidence of a Critical World View in Mozart's Last Three Symphonies", published in a book of essays called Music and Civilization: Essays in Honour of Paul Henry Lang. I'm a bit irritated because I can't get hold of this essay and I really don't want to buy the book (it's quite expensive and I'm not sure how interesting I'll find the rest.) I'm not a member of a university library. Does anyone have a scan of it they could let me have?

I'm very interested in assigning meaning to music. But Zaslow's book has started to make me interested in Mozart more generally, particularly his political and religious views. I've just ordered H Robbins Landon's book on Mozart and freemasonry.

My understanding (which may be nothing more than a repetition of the Commonly Received Wisdom) is that there's a dearth of evidence regarding the circumstances in which Mozart wrote his last symphonies, and where/when/before whom he intended them to be performed, which allows people to read almost anything they want into those works.  But I too have no access to Ms. Subotnik's paper.....

I don't think that Mozart was necessarily making a personal statement in his later symphonies, in the way that (for instance) Mahler did in his symphonies, but I would agree with Zaslow that the Prague Symphony does mark a change in how the symphony was viewed--that it marked the point at which the symphony became a musical form meant to be heard fully and in its own right,  and not just as background music or music to be played while people found their seats at the opera.  I'm hazy on dates at the moment:  when did Haydn's Paris symphonies get written, before or after the Prague.   If they were written first,  they would be the standard bearer for the general change.  At the very least (to return this discussion back to Papa and not Papa's best known disciple) they mark the point at which Haydn stopped writing for the Esterhazy clan and the other members of the Vienna elite, and began composing works meant to stand on their own in public performances.

[Gurn Blanston]

The reason I asked was that in Zaslaw's book on Mozart symphonies he seems to say (maybe I've misread)  that before 1786 (The Prague Symphony), the genre was really not very highly regarded.  A symphony was just something that happened while you were banqueting, or served as a way to open a cultural event of some kind, that sort of thing. A symphony was  for big public gestures, not  a vehicle for personal, deep utterances. And a symphony wasn't for connoisseurs.

So it seemed a bit surprising that anyone would want to take a symphony out of its context, and try to savor and study it privately via a piano score.

It must be said that 104 was 10 years after the Prague. I wonder what the  earliest published piano reduction of a symphony was.  I wonder if the trend only really took off after Mozart's final 4 symphonies were appreciated, or maybe it was Haydn, working under Mozart's influence after Mozart's death, who elevated the status of the symphony and so created the a fashion for playing them at home on a keyboard.  Or was it Haydn's work which somehow empowered Mozart to write big deep symphonies, rather than the other way round?

I'm not a historian by training, I could have this completely wrong. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing 

You hit on a lot of points there, I don't know enough to address them all, but I've looked at some of them. Regarding your later post, yes, Laudon, not London. Something I picked up though along the way is the fact that serious amateur pianists did their own reductions. You may recall that Haydn became very close friends with a lady in Vienna named Marianne Genzinger. Well, the way that he met her is that she (an amateur pianist) had made a piano reduction of one of Haydn's symphonies for her own use, and she sent a copy to him to ask him to correct any errors in it. One thing led to another.... but in any case, that is another source.

Generally speaking, publishers hired 'nameless' composition students or low grade professionals to create reductions for sale. Not just symphonies, but even entire operas! Things like German Dances from the annual Carnival dance season, always composed by name professionals, were invariably reduced by publishers, so Mandryka could buy a copy this afternoon and be home playing for his sweetie this evening. Or more likely, Mandryka's sister would be playing for her sweetie, because that's how the market went.

Vis-a-vis the growth of the symphony from time filler to centerpiece, there are surely books that tell no other story than that one. I have picked up most of my knowledge from books like your Zaslaw Mozart book. But don't mistake our retrospective view of the genre as only coming to this point with a certain work (like the Linz Symphony of Mozart or any or a dozen of Haydn's earlier works that were weighty enough to carry the burden). The trend started far earlier than any of those, back in the early 1760's even. The fact the the works themselves may not have yet been up to it is not indicative of whether the cultural climate was under way yet or not. It clearly was, else the focus would not have shifted to the symphony at all. Which is to say, the Prague or Jupiter or any of those were the mature result of a trend that was a long time in the making. 

[Karl Henning]

The four-subject counterpoint in the finale of the K.551 is certainly not the stuff of background pleasantry.

[Mandryka]

You hit on a lot of points there, I don't know enough to address them all, but I've looked at some of them. Regarding your later post, yes, Laudon, not London. Something I picked up though along the way is the fact that serious amateur pianists did their own reductions. You may recall that Haydn became very close friends with a lady in Vienna named Marianne Genzinger. Well, the way that he met her is that she (an amateur pianist) had made a piano reduction of one of Haydn's symphonies for her own use, and she sent a copy to him to ask him to correct any errors in it. One thing led to another.... but in any case, that is another source.

Generally speaking, publishers hired 'nameless' composition students or low grade professionals to create reductions for sale. Not just symphonies, but even entire operas! Things like German Dances from the annual Carnival dance season, always composed by name professionals, were invariably reduced by publishers, so Mandryka could buy a copy this afternoon and be home playing for his sweetie this evening. Or more likely, Mandryka's sister would be playing for her sweetie, because that's how the market went.

Vis-a-vis the growth of the symphony from time filler to centerpiece, there are surely books that tell no other story than that one. I have picked up most of my knowledge from books like your Zaslaw Mozart book. But don't mistake our retrospective view of the genre as only coming to this point with a certain work (like the Linz Symphony of Mozart or any or a dozen of Haydn's earlier works that were weighty enough to carry the burden). The trend started far earlier than any of those, back in the early 1760's even. The fact the the works themselves may not have yet been up to it is not indicative of whether the cultural climate was under way yet or not. It clearly was, else the focus would not have shifted to the symphony at all. Which is to say, the Prague or Jupiter or any of those were the mature result of a trend that was a long time in the making. 

I'm not sure I understand this, One  view is that we see in Mozart's final symphonies a gestalt shift, a revolution.

Re meanings, hunting for inter-textual references to assign complex meanings to the Jupiter (Zaslaw style)  is kind of attractive, because it looks like Mozart was interested in new political and religious ideas. So it's not surprising that his music should represent his thoughts at a non-surface level .

I've never really studied Haydn's life. Was he involved in new (non musical)  ideas too?

[Gurn Blanston]

I'm not sure I understand this, One  view is that we see in Mozart's final symphonies a gestalt shift, a revolution.

Re meanings, hunting for inter-textual references to assign complex meanings to the Jupiter (Zaslaw style)  is kind of attractive, because it looks like Mozart was interested in new political and religious ideas. So it's not surprising that his music should represent his thoughts at a non-surface level .

I've never really studied Haydn's life. Was he involved in new (non musical)  ideas too?

No, I truly believe that you have cause and effect reversed here. The shift wasn't a result of the quality of the works, the quality of the works was a result of the shift in taste towards heavier instrumental music and away from light instrumental and all sorts of vocal.

Mozart, contrary to the popular depiction of him as a freaking moron who composed by Divine Automatic writing  (and yes, I am seriously contending that this view prevailed for a long time!!), was an intelligent viewer, commentator and participant in the social and political life of his time. Unlike some other composers (Haydn and Beethoven among them) he didn't care a bit for nature or long walks on the beach at sunset, but he knew all the players on the political front and spent long hours speculating on their motives and plans. He was also intensely interested in all sorts of sciences of his day (he was friends with the famous Dr. Mesmer, for example, and smart enough to know what was bullshit). His interest in Freemasonry appears to have been philosophical, not revolutionary. His outlook was a product of Enlightenment thinking. Musically he was a genius. There is no other way to describe it. And of people who were alive when he was and knew him well, the only one who could appreciate him at his true level was Haydn. Another genius, but of a different flavor.

Haydn was also a Freemason. Despite the fact that he joined in Vienna, and his name doesn't appear on the rolls again (he is listed always as 'out of town'), I have recently come across some fairly convincing evidence that Prince Esterházy (whose family were also Freemasons) may well have had a Temple at Eisenstadt or Esterháza. In any case, the breadth  and quality of Haydn's library as inventoried after his death is amazing. He was intensely interested in the world, and very well read about it too. There is an in-depth article on the library in Haydn and His World edited by Elaine Sisman (readily available and well worthwhile). You might give that a scan.

In any case, these were two men who could readily sense what way the wind was blowing. The symphony was destined to be the centerpiece of the future, and they wasted no time in concentrating their art on it. But just a pointer for you; Zaslaw is writing a book on Mozart. He was editor-in-chief of the "New Mozart Workslist" (Neue Mozart Ausgabe). So when he says that Mozart was The Man, one needs to balance that out with his personal motivations. Mozart, great as he was, was One of The Men.....   

[Karl Henning]

... Mozart, contrary to the popular depiction of him as a freaking moron who composed by Divine Automatic writing  (and yes, I am seriously contending that this view prevailed for a long time!!)....

Well, there was the Romantic Era which lieth between Mozart's day, and our'n. A lot of wonderful music-making, but some frankly weird ideas about Art, which we've not completely shaken off even now.

[Karl Henning]

The reason I asked was that in Zaslaw's book on Mozart symphonies he seems to say (maybe I've misread)  that before 1786 (The Prague Symphony), the genre was really not very highly regarded.  A symphony was just something that happened while you were banqueting, or served as a way to open a cultural event of some kind, that sort of thing. A symphony was  for big public gestures, not a vehicle for personal, deep utterances.

And, from the days of the style galant to 1786, what were the vehicles for personal, deep utterances, in Zaslaw's view?

[Florestan]

And, from the days of the style galant to 1786, what were the vehicles for personal, deep utterances, in Zaslaw's view?

The better question would be: during that time, did the concept of (musical) personal, deep utterances exist? 

[Karl Henning]

The better question would be: during that time, did the concept of (musical) personal, deep utterances exist? 

Indeed.

[Gurn Blanston]

The better question would be: during that time, did the concept of (musical) personal, deep utterances exist? 

Agreed. I personally don't think it did.

[mszczuj]

Agreed. I personally don't think it did.

Music was interesting as the common language not as the star system. Even when Beethoven spoke about the highest revelation (let's assume for a while that these words are authentic) it was about revelation of the God and the Nature and in no sense the revelation of Beethoven spirit  or his thoughts, passions, torments.

[Gurn Blanston]

All true, and applies to me too. But I think that maybe the original premise of Deep Thoughts, although a Romantic construct, was made possible in part because instrumental music (specifically and for very good reasons) had reached a point (unintentionally) where it could be used as a talisman, so to speak. Makes sense?

[Mandryka]

The better question would be: during that time, did the concept of (musical) personal, deep utterances exist? 

As a preliminary to answering your question, are  we agreed that baroque  music was a vehicle for the expression of deep ideas? In Brandenburg 5/i for example.

And do we agree that dramatic music was a vehicle for expressing deep ideas personally held, even in Mozart's time? In Don Giovanni for example.

[Karl Henning]

Don Giovanni, from the year following the "Prague" Symphony, right? ; )

No, I don't quite think that "the expression of deep thoughts" was at all the goal of Baroque composers.

[mszczuj]

No, I don't quite think that "the expression of deep thoughts" was at all the goal of Baroque composers.

I must say that I am absolutely convinced that for Bach music was a discourse. And we can find what was the discourse for him in his letters. I mean syntax. And he probably had nothing against making his thoughts as deep as it is possible. But I don't believe he believed that these thoughts could be personal.

[kishnevi]

As a preliminary to answering your question, are  we agreed that baroque  music was a vehicle for the expression of deep ideas? In Brandenburg 5/i for example.

Musical language could be used as a symbolic language---"Oh, we're talking about the Trinity, so let's put in some thirds"--but I don't think music in the baroque was used by composers to express their own ideas (excepting deep ideas about how the harpsichord could be played, or some other musical topic) in that way that Romantic  composers, for instance, might try to express themselves.  The text for a cantata or other vocal work might be chosen because the composer agreed with the ideas it expressed, or otherwise found it meaningful, but the music itself, beyond generally recognized symbols or text,  was not used in the way I think you mean. 

Which is a long way of saying, "no, I am not in agreement with you".

And do we agree that dramatic music was a vehicle for expressing deep ideas personally held, even in Mozart's time? In Don Giovanni for example.

Expressing emotion and deep ideas, but not necessarily personally held.   

[Florestan]

As a preliminary to answering your question, are  we agreed that baroque  music was a vehicle for the expression of deep ideas? In Brandenburg 5/i for example.

No we aren't. The idea (pun intended) that music is some sort of, and even much more than, philosophy or religion is a Romantic fabrication. It is completely alien to the Baroque mentality. Bach himself defined his music as being composed

Dem höchsten Gott allein zu Ehren,
Dem Nächsten draus sich zu belehren.

that is

To the glory of the most high God, and that my neighbour may be benefited thereby.

I am curious: exactly what deep ideas do you find in Brandenburg 5?

And do we agree that dramatic music was a vehicle for expressing deep ideas personally held, even in Mozart's time? In Don Giovanni for example.

No we don't. Most of dramatic music in Mozart's time was clearly meant for entertainment. Same question: what deep ideas do you find in Don Giovanni?