Richard Wagner: The Greatest Influence on Western Music?

[PSmith08]

sorry you dont make much sense, and it doesnt apply at all. same goes for the shit floating in this thread that i addressed a few posts up. it's the sort-of of cluelessness not even worth wasting the time on actually, if it weren't for the finger exercise. 

I think - no, my conviction goes beyond mere thought: I know - that you've just outed yourself as either clueless or someone who's neither well-read nor in possession of a good sense of humor. Since I am a charitable sort, I will assume you're just clueless. Take the advice attributed to Mark Twain (and found even in Proverbs 17:28). It works and it will prevent the situation of having what was supposed to be a devastating barb turned back on its author in the future.

[PSmith08]

Again, Im sorry I have no fucking idea what you're talking about or how it relates. what country are you from, maybe it's a language/translation problem?

I hope it's not a translation problem. Language is like a power tool. You shouldn't use one unless you know how.

I'll put it as simply as possible: I made a joke, you missed it, and then you compounded the error by treating it like a serious comment.

Everything clear now?

[PSmith08]

Was this the "joke" 

Yes. It was.

[PSmith08]

boy, you got some advanced humour there

Apparently.

[mn dave]

boy, you got some advanced humour there

It's only funny to him and certain computers. 

[PSmith08]

It's only funny to him and certain computers. 

It only raises more questions than it answers.

[DavidRoss]

Yes.  Would you also say, one of the greatest influences in opera?  Or even....the greatest influence in opera?

Not really.  As Jo pointed out, Monteverdi.  There's also Gluck.  Mozart.  Unlikely as it may seem to some today, Rossini & Meyerbeer.  Then, of course, Verdi.

In fact, Wagner himself knew he wasn't much for opera, so he gave that up right quick and instead tried to develop a particularly grandiose form of musical theatre he called "music drama."  Unfortunately, the music wasn't very melodic and the drama tended toward turgid snoozefests, so it never caught on.  Luckily, both opera and musical theatre continued on their merry way almost as if he'd never existed. 

[PSmith08]

Not really.  As Jo pointed out, Monteverdi.  There's also Gluck.  Mozart.  Unlikely as it may seem to some today, Rossini & Meyerbeer.  Then, of course, Verdi.

In fact, Wagner himself knew he wasn't much for opera, so he gave that up right quick and instead tried to develop a particularly grandiose form of musical theatre he called "music drama."  Unfortunately, the music wasn't very melodic and the drama tended toward turgid snoozefests, so it never caught on.  Luckily, both opera and musical theatre continued on their merry way almost as if he'd never existed. 

And Debbie Downer ruins another perfectly irrelevant discussion about Doktor Faustus. Good job, chief. Good job.

[(poco) Sforzando]

In fact, Wagner himself knew he wasn't much for opera, so he gave that up right quick and instead tried to develop a particularly grandiose form of musical theatre he called "music drama."  Unfortunately, the music wasn't very melodic and the drama tended toward turgid snoozefests, so it never caught on.

Amusing, considering the enormous popularity of Wagner's works in their time and ours.

Luckily, both opera and musical theatre continued on their merry way almost as if he'd never existed.  

Richard Strauss, Berg, even Debussy are proof to the contrary.

[PSmith08]

Amusing, considering the enormous popularity of Wagner's works in their time and ours.

I think he thinks he's being funny. Apparently, he missed the day in school where they told you to finish what you start.

Such judgments, of course, are left to the individual reader.

[DavidRoss]

Amusing, considering the enormous popularity of Wagner's works in their time and ours.

You have a peculiar notion of what constitutes "enormous popularity." 

Richard Strauss, Berg, even Debussy are proof to the contrary.

And an equally peculiar notion as to what constitutes proof. 

[PSmith08]

And an equally peculiar notion as to what constitutes proof. 

I think your cute little mania vis-à-vis debunking Wagner (or at least going after those who admire his works) might have reached the point of a pathology if you're seriously arguing that Strauss' operas didn't take after Wagner's works in substantial ways, both formal and stylistic. Indeed, a work like Salome has more in common with the Wagnerian music-drama than does something like Wagner's own Rienzi or even Der fliegende Holländer.

Of course, I don't expect you to be satisfied by this, any more than I would expect a secular humanist to be satisfied by any number of clever arguments for a supreme deity. However, idiotic assertions are idiotic assertions - no matter what the motivation is - and some correction is occasionally required.

[Josquin des Prez]

In fact, Wagner himself knew he wasn't much for opera, so he gave that up right quick and instead tried to develop a particularly grandiose form of musical theatre he called "music drama."  Unfortunately, the music wasn't very melodic and the drama tended toward turgid snoozefests, so it never caught on.  Luckily, both opera and musical theatre continued on their merry way almost as if he'd never existed. 

Tsk, and to think the pot was calling the kettle black a mere moment ago. Figures.

Not really.  As Jo pointed out, Monteverdi.  There's also Gluck.  Mozart.  Unlikely as it may seem to some today, Rossini & Meyerbeer.  Then, of course, Verdi.

Funny how the development of opera reaches an abrupt halt in terms of quality of genius the moment we reach Wagner's age. Meyerbeer? For the love of god. You could have at least mentioned Auber, or even, i don't know, Weber.

[Josquin des Prez]

man, you spend wayyyyy too much time shoveling shit...

Yes, my hatred for Stockhausen has now reached cultish proportions. 

[(poco) Sforzando]

You have a peculiar notion of what constitutes "enormous popularity." 

Sell-out crowds, for one. Ever tried to get tickets to Bayreuth?

[Don]

Obviously, Wagner is one of the most well-known and popular classical music composers.  Although he isn't exactly my cup of tea currently, the highly negative comments about him that I'm reading on this thread should be taken with a "grain of salt".  Why we dump on some of the most well-known composers who wrote classical music is rather odd.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Sure, although even considering just the realm of opera, time has rolled on.  If someone wrote a Wagnerian opera today, it would seem a period piece, an affectation, rather than 'a living influence', I should think.

Nonetheless, Wagnerian ideas of musical continuity, the use of leitmotivs, the emphasis on the orchestra, the turning away from vocal virtuosity of the bel canto type, the stronger integration of music and libretto, and probably more, have continued to inform opera since Wagner's time. Wagner is responsible for a good deal of this, and every one of these features is found in operas of composers as disparate as Berg, Janacek, and Britten. A number opera like The Rake's Progress is more an exception than the rule in 20th-century operatic style. Of course none of these composers was writing "today," but I would not call any of them "dated" or "affected" either.

[DavidRoss]

Sell-out crowds, for one. Ever tried to get tickets to Bayreuth?

You make my point.  Attending performances at Bayreuth is, for Wagner worshippers, much like visiting Mecca during al hajj for muslims.  It is a religious rite. 

The vastly greater number of annual performances of operas by Puccini, Verdi, Mozart, even Rossini & Bizet, puts the lie to exaggerated claims of Wagner's popularity and influence. 

[(poco) Sforzando]

You make my point.  Attending performances at Bayreuth is, for Wagner worshippers, much like visiting Mecca during al hajj for muslims.  It is a religious rite. 

The vastly greater number of annual performances of operas by Puccini, Verdi, Mozart, even Rossini & Bizet, puts the lie to exaggerated claims of Wagner's popularity and influence. 

I don't make your point at all, and you overlook the vastly greater problems of casting and producing Wagner than exist for most other operatic composers. Obviously all the composers you mention are enormously popular. But if one takes a look at (say) the annals of the Metropolitan Opera House, one finds that even though there have been many more Bohemes, Aidas, and Carmens performed than the most popular Wagner opera (Lohengrin), six of Wagner's works figure in the 25 most frequently performed operas in the company's history. That's six works out of the ten that are still performed regularly today. Accusing attendees at Wagnerian performances of quasi-religious worship begs the question. There's no reason not to grant them a genuine love of the composer's music. (And Bayreuth is not the only venue where it is extremely difficult to get tickets to Ring cycles. They're hard to get at the Met, at Seattle, and at the production in - I think it was - Toronto just this past year or two.)

The fact that you don't like Wagner doesn't make the enthusiasm of Wagner-lovers suspect.

http://66.187.153.86/archives/frame.htm

[(poco) Sforzando]

Yes, my hatred for Stockhausen has now reached cultish proportions. 

Have you ever heard Gruppen or the Gesang der Jünglinde?