Weak (comparatively at least) 1st movements in otherwise good works

[SharpEleventh]

It's time for some negativity. "Weak" may be a bit too pseudo-objective but the title would get very long if I'd specify that this is all just opinions blah blah etc.

I tend to be heavily biased towards 1st movements and the only example I can think of is Bartok's 4th quartet.

[Maestro267]

Interesting thread.

Shostakovich 10 & 11. No. 10 has a bit too much post-climax rambling without really going anywhere, and No. 11's first movt. doesn't really have a lot going on at all, and the real action in both works doesn't kick off until their respective 2nd movements. Thankfully the rest of both symphonies more than makes up for their lacklustre beginnings.

[amw]

<___<

Mahler 9

>___>

I was never here *poof*

[Mandryka]

Götterdämmerung, I never want to sit through those fucking Norns again. That interminable bit shortly after with Gunter and Siegfried ain't much better.

[relm1]

I dislike the concept of this thread for the reason that context is omitted if you consider a weak first movement in an otherwise great work.  For example, Mahler Symphony No. 1 first movement is not great compared the symphony but is part of the substance of the whole work.  Additionally, Shostakovich's No. 11 has a weak first movement that drags on too long but is very important to what happens in the rest of the symphony.  The premise of this thread is flawed.

[GioCar]

Götterdämmerung, I never want to sit through those fucking Norns again. That interminable bit shortly after with Gunter and Siegfried ain't much better.

?

[Jo498]

I think the 1st movement of Mahler's 1st is great compared to the rest of the symphony, actually, it is my favorite movement of that piece , the 2nd one is not very interesting and the finale is quite effective but overlong and overblown.

I cannot think of a striking example as traditionally the first movement in classical/romantic sonata style works is almost always the most important. And obvious exception would be the "quasi una fantasia" LvB op.27/1 which is a rather simple and maybe weak movement but this seems to have been done on purpose (one might still debate the success of the experiment).
o.k., if I went through lots of early Mozart and Haydn, or even some of Haydn's later piano sonatas and trios one might also find a few pieces where the first movement is not all that interesting but that have a brilliant finale or so. But I am not going to do this and I do not have all this music in my head.

[GioCar]

All right, Mahlerians of the site, I'm ready for your scorn:

Mahler's 8 - Veni Creator Spiritu.

Perhaps the weakest point in all Mahler's production?


OK I said it

[ritter]

All right, Mahlerians of the site, I'm ready for your scorn:

Mahler's 8 - Veni Creator Spiritu.

Perhaps the weakest point in all Mahler's production?


OK I said it

No quibbles from me on that one...strange, isn't it, that the Eighth (IMHO, of course) has this relatively weak opening movement, and then proceeds (towards the end of part II, from Mater Gloriosa's "Komm! Hebe dich zu höhern Sphären!" onwards) to give us some of the most sublime music Mahler--or any composer known to me, for that matter--ever produced...

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

I agree about Mahler's 8th.

And in terms of Wagner I think it won't really be all that controversial to say that the first act of Tristan und Isolde is a tad less interesting than the next two acts!

[Mahlerian]

No quibbles from me on that one...strange, isn't it, that the Eighth (IMHO, of course) has this relatively weak opening movement, and then proceeds (towards the end of part II, from Mater Gloriosa's "Komm! Hebe dich zu höhern Sphären!" onwards) to give us some of the most sublime music Mahler--or any composer known to me, for that matter--ever produced...

Allow me to put in a good word for the opening movement of the Eighth.  Without it, the long trek of transfiguration in Part II wouldn't have the same impetus, because Part I acted as an exposition of its themes and continues to motivate much of the music throughout, as well as illuminate it in unexpected ways.  When the final climax of the work arrives, it is both a return to the opening and a development on it that fulfills the whole of Part II's drama.

The weakest movement in the output Mahler authorized for publication is the finale of the First, I feel...

[DaveF]

Now I don't object to a slightly "weak" first movement that leaves matters to be resolved or amplified later in the work.  I like Lutosławski's idea of a symphonic first movement that is deliberately unsatisfying.  Conversely, a first movement/act that is too self-contained or just too damn good undermines the rest of the structure, which Tristan und Isolde does for me - after the love-potion and those shattering "Heil Kornewall" fanfares, I've got no emotions left to feel.  Tchaikovsky symphonies might also be thought to suffer from this problem.

A movement that is sometimes cited as being structually weak (because first and second themes are so irreconcilably opposed) is the first of the Gothic symphony, but here I think Brian had it about right - OK, as the first movement of a 40-minute symphony it might not do, but as a prelude to a 2-hour setting of the Te Deum, its unresolved nature works fine.

Yes, I know there's a difference between a weak movement and a finely-judged one that leaves you wanting more.  Just rambling...

[SharpEleventh]

And in terms of Wagner I think it won't really be all that controversial to say that the first act of Tristan und Isolde is a tad less interesting than the next two acts!

Conversely, a first movement/act that is too self-contained or just too damn good undermines the rest of the structure, which Tristan und Isolde does for me - after the love-potion and those shattering "Heil Kornewall" fanfares, I've got no emotions left to feel.

Quite a  contrasting opinion there! Personally my favorite act of Tristan is quite clearly (though maybe not overwhelmingly) is the 2nd and I find the 1st act pretty solid overall. The third act actually probably has the most boring moments for me - it gets great in the end of course but in the beginning there's somewhat dull stuff like the long-winded oboe thing.

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Quite a  contrasting opinion there! Personally my favorite act of Tristan is quite clearly (though maybe not overwhelmingly) is the 2nd and I find the 1st act pretty solid overall. The third act actually probably has the most boring moments for me - it gets great in the end of course but in the beginning there's somewhat dull stuff like the long-winded oboe thing.

I find the third act the most tense actually, in both the music and the action. The most tense, and also the most satisfying music resolution to the underlying tension (dramatic AND harmonic) in the work overall.

I wouldn't call act 1 'weak' exactly though, perhaps it's just that I find the backstory a little tedious.

[SharpEleventh]

Now I don't object to a slightly "weak" first movement that leaves matters to be resolved or amplified later in the work.  I like Lutosławski's idea of a symphonic first movement that is deliberately unsatisfying.  Conversely, a first movement/act that is too self-contained or just too damn good undermines the rest of the structure, which Tristan und Isolde does for me - after the love-potion and those shattering "Heil Kornewall" fanfares, I've got no emotions left to feel.  Tchaikovsky symphonies might also be thought to suffer from this problem.

A movement that is sometimes cited as being structually weak (because first and second themes are so irreconcilably opposed) is the first of the Gothic symphony, but here I think Brian had it about right - OK, as the first movement of a 40-minute symphony it might not do, but as a prelude to a 2-hour setting of the Te Deum, its unresolved nature works fine.

Yes, I know there's a difference between a weak movement and a finely-judged one that leaves you wanting more.  Just rambling...

I think you are onto something here - if we think of a multi-movement work as some kind of inseparable whole, then the first movement shouldn't be the most interesting one - a bit like something would be a bit wrong if the first 1/3 of a movie would be clearly the most interesting part of it. Among classical fans, I've noticed both a tendency to find the first movement the best and most substantial part of a multi-movement work (although for most it's not as strong a tendency as it is for me) but also the insistence that the individual movements cannot be thought separately from the whole work. To me that's a strange combination.

[SharpEleventh]

I find the third act the most tense actually, in both the music and the action. The most tense, and also the most satisfying music resolution to the underlying tension (dramatic AND harmonic) in the work overall.

I wouldn't call act 1 'weak' exactly though, perhaps it's just that I find the backstory a little tedious.

I see - personally for me the non-music aspect is a non-issue and the stories of operas can go.... well there's no polite expression for what I think of them.

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

I see - personally for me the non-music aspect is a non-issue and the stories of operas can go.... well there's no polite expression for what I think of them.

Can go fuck themselves?

Actually I do believe that with anything that includes music, the music should be able to stand alone as something worth listening to. Just like how some people enjoy listening to things like the Clannad soundtrack without watching/playing it......................................................................

[SharpEleventh]

Even the comparatively boring parts of Tristan are good compared to the recitative(-esque) parts of other operas and do not sound "jarring" the same way. For other operas you'd presumably have to follow the plot to make those parts more interesting.... except the plots always suck so much that it actually makes them even worse.

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Even the comparatively boring parts of Tristan are good compared to the recitative(-esque) parts of other operas and do not sound "jarring" the same way. For other operas you'd presumably have to follow the plot to make those parts more interesting.... except the plots always suck so much that it actually makes them even worse.

Mm that's just Lohengrin's problem

[Marc]

All right, Mahlerians of the site, I'm ready for your scorn:

Mahler's 8 - Veni Creator Spiritu.

Perhaps the weakest point in all Mahler's production?


OK I said it

Disagreed.

To me, the first movement is the highlight of the piece.
A tight and very well structured movement, a great giant motet.
I like it and find it better than the 2nd movement.
Yes, there are truly wonderful episodes in that 2nd movement, but, as a whole, I tend to lose concentration.

The 'weakest' points in Mahler's oeuvre are, IMHO, the Finale of 1 (I find it too hollow and superficial), the first movements of 3 ( too long to keep me interested) and 6 (the thematic material doesn't really appeal to me), and probably the Finale of 7 (compared to the other movements, and compared to f.i. the Finale of 5, in which Mahler somehow tried to create the same effect).

I know, I'm a dud.