Richard Wagner: The Greatest Influence on Western Music?

[Josquin des Prez]

You're subjective.

Could you define what you call depth?
You're a Bach fan. So you can see Bach everywhere.

Can you just talk about what he invented that you can find in any composer after him?
And then compare with his contemporaries and predecessors?

You don't know enough, like everyone of us.
You have just a vague impression because you like it.

From 1799:



http://www.secm.org/misc/sun/sun.html#sun

"Our worthy Haydn is supposed to have
seen this sheet. It is said that he
was not displeased by it, was also
not ashamed to be in the vicinity
of Handel and Graun, and considered it
even less of an injustice that Joh. Seb.
Bach should be the center of the sun,
hence the man from whom all musical wisdom
streams."

It seems some people at the time already recognized the influence of J. S. Bach. And that's even before his 'revival'.

Surely, there must be something about this man that always lands him into this type of praise, wouldn't you say?

[BachQ]

It seems I read that Wagner was influential at the time he was alive at least.  But I would contend that it was Debussy whose influence we are feeling now.  And I am clearly not limiting that influence to classical music alone.  Jazz and various popular music also own Claude a lot of gratitude. Wagner seems now to have been kind of the summation of German romantic classical music, especially opera.  Debussy offered a new direction.

But Debussy's tonal modernism and harmonic revolutions have often been traced to Tristan und Isolde.  More important, Debussy was one of a vocal handful of composers, including, e.g.,  Tchaikovsky, who felt the pressing need to diverge from Wagner in large measure because Wagner's influence was so pervasive (and, perhaps, suffocating) at that time.

[JoshLilly]

If we've learned one thing from this sprawling thread, it's that all these composers did not die from their heads imploding.

[Guido]

I had forgotten about this bizarre thread. It smells of Asperger's. I can't believe that grown adults who claim to know anythng about art could seriously discuss this...

and besides Mozart above Beethoven, the man who started romanticism? Pish posh! (That was a joke, before people start pointing out to me that I've contradicted myself...)

[Haffner]

But Debussy's tonal modernism and harmonic revolutions have often been traced to Tristan und Isolde.  More important, Debussy was one of a vocal handful of composers, including, e.g.,  Tchaikovsky, who felt the pressing need to diverge from Wagner in large measure because Wagner's influence was so pervasive (and, perhaps, suffocating) at that time.

This is a well made point. Mahler is another name whom springs to mind. The "Tristan Chord" impacted so many composers...

[greg]

I would have to question that.  In terms of actual music composed, Arnold Schoenberg is more influential than Debussy or Stravinsky.  And this is not a slam at Claude or Igor, whose music I dearly love; merely a recognition that the methods Schoenberg developed have had a deeper influence than the styles of Stravinsky or Debussy.

yeah, i agree.
if you had to choose ONE composer who was able to change everything DRASTICALLY and then get TONS of composers to follow in their footsteps, it was Schoenberg. If there ever was a composer who could be called "most influential", it'd be him. All of atonality was pioneered by him, and most composers in the 20th century have written atonal music, so you could say that Schoenberg influenced them, i guess.

All the others have done smaller things (you might find a hint of Debussy or Mozart here and there), but not as many have actually pioneered something as "big" as writing completely atonal music. I would say Stravinsky's irregular meters are really big, too, but the rhythm in Schoenberg's music is at least as complex, even if the time signature isn't changing every bar.

[quintett op.57]

yeah, i agree.
if you had to choose ONE composer who was able to change everything DRASTICALLY and then get TONS of composers to follow in their footsteps, it was Schoenberg. If there ever was a composer who could be called "most influential", it'd be him. All of atonality was pioneered by him

Not really.
Liszt is a precursor for atonal music, both in his orchestral and piano music. He's considered to be the one who abandoned tonal music. He didn't use Schonberg's 12-tones technique but his 12-tones theme in his Faust-symphony is regarded by many as a step in the evolution of music.
If you remember how influential Liszt was on Wagner & Strauss romanticism and Debussy & Ravel impressionism, you'll guess this guy can compares with Schoenberg in terms of influence.
But, again, none of us know enough to say who had the greatest influence.

[DavidW]

But Debussy's tonal modernism and harmonic revolutions have often been traced to Tristan und Isolde.  More important, Debussy was one of a vocal handful of composers, including, e.g.,  Tchaikovsky, who felt the pressing need to diverge from Wagner in large measure because Wagner's influence was so pervasive (and, perhaps, suffocating) at that time.

Wagner is not the source of chromaticism, both composers lived in the late Romantic era where music had been gradually becoming more and more chromatic.  No one composer was responsible for the change in harmonies across the 19th century.  Wagner's influence on what?  And suffocating?  All of his ideas were about the approach of how to do opera, and most composers did not start writing operas his way, they continued doing it the Verdi way.  Wagner was more like Bach, doing his own thing, being met by praise from some and scorn by others.

[Haffner]

But, again, none of us know enough to say who had the greatest influence.

Very true.



You know, I might be wrong, but couldn't a person assert that Beethoven's Grosse Fuge was pretty much the landmark for atonal/serial (etc) music?

[greg]

Not really.
Liszt is a precursor for atonal music, both in his orchestral and piano music. He's considered to be the one who abandoned tonal music. He didn't use Schonberg's 12-tones technique but his 12-tones theme in his Faust-symphony is regarded by many as a step in the evolution of music.
If you remember how influential Liszt was on Wagner & Strauss romanticism and Debussy & Ravel impressionism, you'll guess this guy can compares with Schoenberg in terms of influence.
But, again, none of us know enough to say who had the greatest influence.

i'd put Liszt right after Schoenberg, if I HAD to.
but of course, such lists are just retarded (though fun)

[BachQ]

Both Beethoven and Wagner are 'epic' as regards nature, philosophy, the existential and within the latter, myth, psychology and our most potent ideals.

I think Mahler had this in common with Wagner that he was not interested in music for music's sake but wished to incorporate - like a philosopher or poet would - these 'value-added' aspects within their own geodesic, in this case not words but sounds.

For these composers, sound became extramural. Mahler, as quoted, consciously or not, included himself as the 3rd member in the triumvirate.

To these composers, it was not so much the singular aspect of music but the Vision Quest which counted as reiterated through music.

These composers, and a few which Mahler did not name, had more on their minds than writing music only. That talent would have been only the beginning! Mahler's 1st symphony is already a brilliant departure from any 'Categorical Imperative' of music.

You make two points:

(1) Beethoven, Wagner and Mahler had much more in mind than just conveying musical ideas.  They had epic visions that they wanted to convey in music ..... and they succeeded.

I agree with this.

(2) But your point that Mahler and Wagner were "not interested in music for music's sake" is too strong.  For both, their primary interest was musical perfection ....... Music was not "just the beginning" for them: it was their ultimate concern.

[BachQ]

BYW, happy birthday, Wagner ........

[DavidW]

(2) But your point that Mahler and Wagner were "not interested in music for music's sake" is too strong.  For both, their primary interest was musical perfection ....... Music was not "just the beginning" for them: it was their ultimate concern.

Wagner elevated the opera to musical drama where the music was put first above other considerations, it was no longer a background, but a full integral part of the experience.  In that sense indeed music was Wagner's ultimate concern, I totally agree with you.

[BachQ]

Wagner elevated the opera to musical drama where the music was put first above other considerations, it was no longer a background, but a full integral part of the experience.  In that sense indeed music was Wagner's ultimate concern, I totally agree with you.

Good point: you're exactly correct.  I also point out that, even though Mahler and Wagner had epic, extramusical ideas they wanted to convey, and that their music was "larger than life" and resided "outside the musical box," none of that superseded the central importance of musical "perfection." 

Even Wagner's sprawling 4-hour operas can boast of unified, cohesive musical core that is "perfect" down to every last note (at least in Wagner's mind).  In Wagner's mind, there were no longueurs or wubba wubba! 

And Mahler was every bit the musical perfectionist that Brahms and Beethoven were ......

[karlhenning]

In Wagner's mind, there were no longueurs or wubba wubba! 

His mind was wubba-wubba! 

[BachQ]

What is Wagner's influence on Schoenberg? 

I'm curious about this too ....... I think a starting point is Schoenberg's opera Moses und Aron


But as Luke pointed out, Brahms was, by far, the most influential force upon Schoenberg ........

[BachQ]

His mind was wubba-wubba! 

And his ego was longueurs ........

[Haffner]

But as Luke pointed out, Brahms was, by far, the most influential force upon Schoenberg ........

Agreed. But do you agree that both Mahler and Wagner seemed to become progressively more important as Schoenberg matured?

[JoshLilly]

Uh, Salieri's Tarare, anyone? Considering this was written before Wagner was even born, I can't fathom how anyone could make some of the statements being made here concerning Wagner and "music drama".

[BachQ]

Agreed. But do you agree that both Mahler and Wagner seemed to become progressively more important as Schoenberg matured?

Well, that's what DavidW and I are wondering: what was Wagner's influence on Schoenberg, and how was this reflected in Schoenberg's music?