Greatest composer of the 20th century?

[Mirror Image]

Yeah, I'm with you. I'm not much for this kind of thing really but it can be fun kicking it around.

Well, if I were to apply The Scale®, I think Bartók would definitely be a top contender and, for me, may very well end up winning, but then I would start thinking about Delius, Sibelius, RVW, Shostakovich, Schoenberg, etc. and would start feeling guilty all over again.

[Karl Henning]

To me it's pretty straight forward, although I'm certain the OP won't be happy with my answer.

Prokofiev is the man. Hands down. Why? Using the "Scale of Musical Prowess" Prokofiev rates at or near the top of a wide variety of mediums. Just as e.g. Mozart excelled at, well, everything (opera, symphonic/orchestral, chamber, concerto, solo piano, incidental music, choral, etc...), Prokofiev too excelled similarly. Hence "The Scale®".

Mozart/Prokofiev of course aren't the only composers to have attempted works in each of these mediums. Not to mention other composers can stake claims to greatness without ever going near any number of these mediums. But to rate highly on The Scale® medium-hopping with ease and producing consistent gold is requisite. Tough standards but since we're talking about the GREATEST of a particular century we gotta go big.

So applying The Scale® to Prokofiev:

√ opera
√ symphonic/orchestral
√ chamber
√ concerto
√ solo piano (Sarge likely will have words with me, here)
√ incidental music
√ choral

Checklist in good shape. Add to that a uniformly high standard of quality in each medium and The Scale® tops out in the 20th c. with the man Prokofiev.

Overall, I like the list, and the philosophy.  But . . .

What, a category for Incidental Music, but none for Solo Voice? 

[San Antone]

Mahler lived and completed most of his works in the 20th century. Why should he be excluded just because his style isn't exclusive to the century; excluded just because he wasn't post-war avant garde or a serialist or a neoclassical composer?
Sarge

So a composer who completed fewer than ten works and died in 1910 is greater than all the composers who lived and worked for the next 90 years. 

Sorry; no sell.

[Sergeant Rock]

So a composer who completed fewer than ten works and died in 1910 is greater than all the composers who lived and worked for the next 90 years. 

Greatness depends on the quality of the work, not the amount, or when it was composed, or how long the composer lived. I'm saying a composer who worked in the first decade of the century has just as much right to be in the running for this meaningless title as a composer who worked the middle or the end of the century in a different style. It's all the 20th century music because it was composed in the 20th century. If James wants to change the rules to Greatest Composer of the 20th Century Who Invented a Completely New Style or Worked Exclusively with a New Style and Who Lived After the First Decade...then yes, I'll consider taking Mahler out of the running 

Sarge

[San Antone]

Greatness depends on the quality of the work, not the amount, or when it was composed, or how long the composer lived. I'm saying a composer who worked in the first decade of the century has just as much right to be in the running for this meaningless title as a composer who worked the middle or the end of the century in a different style. It's all the 20th century music because it was composed in the 20th century. If James wants to change the rules to Greatest Composer of the 20th Century Who Invented a Completely New Style or Worked Exclusively with a New Style and Who Lived After the First Decade...then yes, I'll consider taking Mahler out of the running 

Sarge

Oh I never disagreed with Mahler being in the running, just the proposition that he was the greatest 20th century composer.  And I also agree that it is a meaningless title.

[Moonfish]

So a composer who completed fewer than ten works and died in 1910 is greater than all the composers who lived and worked for the next 90 years. 

Sorry; no sell.

*coughs loudly*   

1911

[San Antone]

*coughs loudly*   

1911

Sorry for that.   

Thanks for the correction.

[Jo498]

Mahler completed more than 10 works (think of all the Lieder as well as the two large scale vocal works), but not all of them in the 20th century.
(If you go by the sheer amount of music, Debussy's, Berg's and Webern's Oeuvre are probably fewer hours of music than Mahler's)

Of course, Mahler does not fare very well according to the diversity criterium. But there are many composers recognized as great who only wrote for one or two genres. Most prominently Wagner, but also Chopin, Bruckner, Verdi etc.

But of 20th century candidates like Bartok, Ravel, Berg, Schoenberg, Hindemith, Stravinsky etc. all wrote masterpieces in many genres. (Stravinsky is rather weak in chamber and solo piano, though), Prokofiev is not the only versatile one.

[Karl Henning]

(Stravinsky is rather weak in chamber and solo piano, though)

Not if we consider (for instance) the Symphonies d'instruments à vent a chamber work!  Also the Concerto per due pianoforti soli.  And although technically a stage work, chamber music hardly comes any stronger than L'histoire du soldat.

[San Antone]

Mahler completed more than 10 works (think of all the Lieder as well as the two large scale vocal works), but not all of them in the 20th century.
(If you go by the sheer amount of music, Debussy's, Berg's and Webern's Oeuvre are probably fewer hours of music than Mahler's)

Of course, Mahler does not fare very well according to the diversity criterium. But there are many composers recognized as great who only wrote for one or two genres. Most prominently Wagner, but also Chopin, Bruckner, Verdi etc.

But of 20th century candidates like Bartok, Ravel, Berg, Schoenberg, Hindemith, Stravinsky etc. all wrote masterpieces in many genres. (Stravinsky is rather weak in chamber and solo piano, though), Prokofiev is not the only versatile one.

If your post was in response to mine, I was counting only those works completed after 1900.  I hardly think Stravinsky is weak in chamber music considering the Octet, Historie du soldat, Ragtime for 11 instruments, Septet, I could go on, but you get the idea.  The complete box has a double disc devoted to miniatures and chamber music most of which are my favorite works he wrote.

[Jo498]

I don't really count L'histoire du soldat as chamber but maybe it is (technically I think it is a stage work).
Octet, ragtime etc. are IMO several notches below both Stravinsky's best and the best chamber music of the century like Debussy's late sonatas, Lyric Suite or Bartok quartets. But he is stronger in chamber music than Mahler

[Karl Henning]

The Ragtime I should agree is a minor work.

The Three Pieces for clarinet unaccompanied make for another minor work, but excellent.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Overall, I like the list, and the philosophy.  But . . .

What, a category for Incidental Music, but none for Solo Voice? 

I would say in my defense that solo voice makes a showing in my "etc...". That's my story and I'm sticking to it...

[San Antone]

I don't really count L'histoire du soldat as chamber but maybe it is (technically I think it is a stage work).
Octet, ragtime etc. are IMO several notches below both Stravinsky's best and the best chamber music of the century like Debussy's late sonatas, Lyric Suite or Bartok quartets. But he is stronger in chamber music than Mahler

Au contraire mon ami, the Octet is Stravinsky at (or close to) his best, and Ragtime is an excellent confection.  Soldat did start out life as a "stage" work - really a traveling troupe work - but for a long time now it has been performed as a chamber work, but for sure the Suite is a chamber work.  More to the point even in his large ensemble works and ballets, e.g Agon - the ensemble writing is very chamber like with small groups of instruments being played off each other. 

Mahler does this too, btw.

[ritter]

The Ragtime I should agree is a minor work.

The Three Pieces for clarinet unaccompanied make for another minor work, but excellent.

Another really wonderful "minor" work is the Septet, IMHO... This kind of "transitional" Stravinsky I find fascniating (except for the Cantata, which bores me to tears  )...

[Karl Henning]

Oh, I really like the Cantata!   

[San Antone]

Another really wonderful "minor" work is the Septet, IMHO... This kind of "transitional" Stravinsky I find fascniating (except for the Cantata, which bores me to tears  )...

I listed the Septet in my original post.

[Ken B]

Oh, I really like the Cantata!   

C'mon Karl! Out of the closet! Vote for Igor! It's good for the soul.

[Karl Henning]

No, a firm no!