Richard Wagner: The Greatest Influence on Western Music?

[quintett op.57]

And Haydn himself stated that his major symphonic influence was J. Stamitz (although it was more likely Sammartini: Haydn was nationalistic, after all).

Do you know when he said that? This could make a big difference.
It's like Beethoven saying his mass was his greatest work. Not to forget he's composed his last symphonies, quartets and sonatas AFTER saying it. And this makes a big difference.

I think it can be said fairly that Liszt was in some small way influential on Wagner... or not.

One could argue that Liszt's influence is the greatest in the past 2 centuries : Wagner - Strauss - Schönberg - Ravel - Debussy....

[karlhenning]

One could argue that Liszt's influence is the greatest in the past 2 centuries : Wagner - Strauss - Schönberg - Ravel - Debussy....

And you have forgotten Saint-Saëns!

[karlhenning]

It seems paradoxical to me that a composer who worked near the linear end of the time scale of music could be more influential than one who worked near its beginning. The illogic of this POV boggles the mind.

Josh Lilly is far more correct to introduce names like Sammartini, and I would add Jomelli there too, and Johann Stamitz. And that's just for "Classical" music. Fux was one of the most influential musicians ever, and only people with a real interest in the early 18th century know much about him. I submit that the real "most influential" were names that most of are quite unfamiliar with. Or else we sell them short (like Salieri and Albrechtsberger, to name just two).

Another thing that occurs to me is that the "influence" of Beethoven is really the influence of Haydn, who was his major role model during his early years. When he got into the French School, as has been mentioned, you run square into Cherubini and Mèhul. So, whose influence is it then, Beethoven's or theirs? And Haydn himself stated that his major symphonic influence was J. Stamitz (although it was more likely Sammartini: Haydn was nationalistic, after all).

The premise of the survey is that there is an inherent linearity to music. But really, there isn't. A more apt metaphor would be something woven, with parts touching in places and then moving off. An example of this is Reicha. He and Beethoven grew up together and studied music in Bonn. They separated for several years, then Reicha came to Vienna, and he and Beethoven shared Albrechtsberger as a teacher. Then he went to France, and until his death in 1831 he was a teacher of, among others, Liszt. I think it can be said fairly that Liszt was in some small way influential on Wagner... or not.

And anyway, how much of Wagner's influence is really Weber, Mozart or Beethoven's? If one wouldn't be what one is without these influences, then what, quantifiably, is one's OWN influence?   

What a pleasure to read this post!

[marvinbrown]

Can we measure a composer's influence?  How can we assess the influences that one composer has (or has had) upon another?  Or is the exercise entirely subjective and beyond quantification and/or comparison?

FWIW, a university study dating from 2000 purports to measure and compare the relative "influence(s)" of composers (the study can be found here -- scroll down to the heading "The 111 Most Influential Composers").  Acccording to the site: "decisions as to which composers and which of their works should be included were based on objective criteria, not subjective preferences." The top 25 composers, in order of influence, are:

1. Wagner, Richard  1016. (++)
2. Bach, Johann Sebastian  975.
3. Debussy, Claude  874. (++)
4. Stravinsky, Igor  858. (++)
5. Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus  822. (-)
6. Beethoven, Ludwig van  756. (-)
7. Liszt, Franz  640. (+)
8. Schoenberg, Arnold  567. (+++)
9. Chopin, Fryderyk  500. (+)
10. Schumann, Robert  481.
11. Brahms, Johannes  456. (-)
12. Mendelssohn, Felix  383.
13. Strauss, Richard  381.
14. Haydn, Franz Joseph  347. (-)
15. Rossini, Gioachino  333. (+)
16. Ravel, Maurice  327.
17. Palestrina, Giovanni Pierluigi da  314. (++++)
18. Berlioz, Hector  309. (+)
19. Corelli, Arcangelo  299. (+++)
20. Gluck, Christoph W. R. von  295. (+++)
21. Tchaikovsky, Pyotr Il'yich  271. (-)
22. Bartók, Béla  265.
23. Mahler, Gustav  261.
24. Monteverdi, Claudio  257. (++)
25. Webern, Anton  256. (++)

There's a separate entry for each composer which highlights the composers upstream and downstream influences.  For example, Beethoven has supposedly influenced:

Alkan; ++Bartók; Berlioz; Berwald; +Bizet; ++Bloch; +Boito; +Borodin; +BRAHMS; BRUCKNER; Carulli; Chopin; Czerny; ++Dukas; +Dvorák; Franck; Giuliani; ++Honegger; +Indy; +Ives; +++Kagel; Lalo; Liszt; ++Mahler; ++Medtner; Mendelssohn; Mendelssohn-Hensel; Nicolai; Paganini; +Paine; ++Reger; Reicha; ++Schoenberg; SCHUBERT; C Schumann; R Schumann; ++Shostakovich; ++Sibelius; Spohr; ++Stenhammar; ++Tippett; +++Tower; WAGNER; Weber; ++Webern

  Brilliant post D minor  ! As a great admirer of Wagner's music (who am I kidding I am a diehard fan) you certianly put a smile on my face (whether that was your intention or not).  All I have to say in response is that the Ring Cyle will be performed in London this coming fall.  Tickets went on sale last November and have been sold out since...a testament to Wagner's Greatness  0:)! 

  marvin   

[knight66]

Marvin, Yours is also in its way a wonderful post. It succeeds in ignoring all the posts between the opening one and your own. It is like a new start to the topic and we can demolish the absurdity of the concepts all over again. Groundhog day starts here folks.

Mike

[Gurn Blanston]

The Fux of Gradus ad Parnassum?  But is it his compositions that carried the influence, or the aforementioned counterpoint text?

Good points all, Gurn.

Jo,
Yes, that Fux. He actually did compose quite a bit, but his influence is felt mainly through his writing, it was the standard textbook on counterpoint for the next 100+ years. Nearly every composer (and there were thousands back then) learned the techniques and principles of composition & counterpoint from Fux. That's influence...

[Gurn Blanston]

Do you know he's said that? This could make a big difference.
It's like Beethoven saying his mass was his greatest work. Not to forget he's composed his last symphonies, quartets and sonatas AFTER saying it. And this makes a big difference. One could argue that Liszt's influence is the greatest in the past 2 centuries : Wagner - Strauss - Schönberg - Ravel - Debussy....

5tet,
Yes, I know he said it. I'll find you a cit tonight.

Yes, I was intentionally downplaying Liszt, in favor of trying to show the line of descent.

[Gurn Blanston]

What a pleasure to read this post!

Thank you, Karl!

Always trying to see the big picture...

[PerfectWagnerite]

And anyway, how much of Wagner's influence is really Weber, Mozart or Beethoven's? If one wouldn't be what one is without these influences, then what, quantifiably, is one's OWN influence?   

True. But composers like Chabrier didn't lock themselves up, cry and proclaim: there is music there for the next 100 years after listening to Weber, or Mozart, but rather after Tristan.

[Gurn Blanston]

True. But composers like Chabrier didn't lock themselves up, cry and proclaim: there is music there for the next 100 years after listening to Weber, or Mozart, but rather after Tristan.

You miss my point, to wit: there probably wouldn't have been a Tristan if Wagner hadn't been influenced by Weber or Mozart. He wasn't sui generis. I'm not denigrating Wagner because the same is true of anyone else in the music business. I was and am supporting my argument that influences are longstanding and often subtle, so claiming someone to be "most influential" is a futile exercise.

[marvinbrown]

Marvin, Yours is also in its way a wonderful post. It succeeds in ignoring all the posts between the opening one and your own. It is like a new start to the topic and we can demolish the absurdity of the concepts all over again. Groundhog day starts here folks.

Mike

    Thanks Mike for this wonderful response.  I do not want to get academic here but As I posted in Wagner's Valhalla (opera and vocal) Wagner was a master at combining the following elements :

   1) Leitmotifs
   2) Unltra Romantic music with remarkable hypnotic power to keep the listener coming back for more
   3) Drama and stage performance par excellence
   
    Even his only comedy Meistersingers is a joy to listen to.  Yes Wagner was the ultimate musical dramatist.  All the Hollywood movies (Star Wars, Jaws, Lord of the Rings etc.) with their musical scores (leitmotifs) pay tribute to Wagner's legacy.   I believe that Beethoven would have been proud of Wagner, but thats just my opinion.


   marvin

   PS:  My Levine  Ring cycle on dvd has just arrived in the post, I am on cloud nine. 

         

   

[knight66]

Marvin, I really was just pulling your leg.

Cheers,

Mike

[Danny]

You miss my point, to wit: there probably wouldn't have been a Tristan if Wagner hadn't been influenced by Weber or Mozart. He wasn't sui generis. I'm not denigrating Wagner because the same is true of anyone else in the music business. I was and am supporting my argument that influences are longstanding and often subtle, so claiming someone to be "most influential" is a futile exercise.

Well said again, big guy.  "We stand on the shoulders of Giants" or something like that.

[knight66]

Actually, I don't think that was the point that Gurn was making. Rather that there are often relatively obscure composers who have innovated, but then the master composers have taken the idea and made gold from it. That along with basically blood lines where the genes go a long way back through the most famous composers.

The first time I heard a major piece by Mehul I was shocked. There before me was basically Berlioz sound and orchestration....by a composer who taught him. Who listens much to Mehul now....but there is no denying his original voice, adopted and heightened by Berlioz. Berlioz was also inspired by others, Gluck for example.

Mike

[Danny]

Actually, I don't think that was the point that Gurn was making. Rather that there are often relatively obscure composers who have innovated, but then the master composers have taken the idea and made gold from it. That along with basically blood lines where the genes go a long way back through the most famous composers.

The first time I heard a major piece by Mehul I was shocked. There before me was basically Berlioz sound and orchestration....by a composer who taught him. Who listens much to Mehul now....but there is no denying his original voice, adopted and heightened by Berlioz. Berlioz was also inspired by others, Gluck for example.

Mike

Well, yes, I would agree that's what his initial point was making.  I guess "standing on the shoulders of giants" means you're on a foundation that others have built (famous and not so famous).  I shoulda clarified that, Mike.

[karlhenning]

The first time I heard a major piece by Mehul I was shocked. There before me was basically Berlioz sound and orchestration....by a composer who taught him. Who listens much to Mehul now....but there is no denying his original voice, adopted and heightened by Berlioz.

So, Wagner received the spirit of Méhul from the hands of Berlioz, eh, Mike? 

[lukeottevanger]

Nearly every composer (and there were thousands back then) learned the techniques and principles of composition & counterpoint from Fux. That's influence...

What do you mean 'back then'?    They still do it now, in some reactionary strongholds  I should know....    And Palestrina, too....I had, shall we say, 'traditional' counterpoint training from this guy:



So, using Palestrina and Fux now - that's really influence!

[Gurn Blanston]

What do you mean 'back then'?    They still do it now, in some reactionary strongholds  I should know....    And Palestrina, too....I had, shall we say, 'traditional' counterpoint training from this guy:



So, using Palestrina and Fux now - that's really influence!

     Who could know?   

So, yes, there you are then.

[jochanaan]

...The first time I heard a major piece by Mehul I was shocked. There before me was basically Berlioz sound and orchestration....by a composer who taught him. Who listens much to Mehul now....but there is no denying his original voice, adopted and heightened by Berlioz. Berlioz was also inspired by others, Gluck for example.

So, Wagner received the spirit of Méhul from the hands of Berlioz, eh, Mike? 

Very interesting!  I confess I know nothing, or at least next-to-nothing, of Méhul's music; I think I may have to rectify that omission ASAP!  Any recommendations?

[BachQ]

Looks like somebody was trying to get a Doctorate.  I hope our tax money didn't fund this study!

Fodder for discussion, my friend . . . . . . Not the Holy Grail . . . . .