Most Intelligent Composers

[karlhenning]

Not sure if I can follow the definition of 'intelligent' used in the original posting.

Nor the methodology in "measuring" it.

[ChamberNut]

JS Bach
Beethoven
Brahms
Mozart

Dm, please limit your choices to 1 intelligent composer who happens to be German-speaking only.  0:)

[ChamberNut]

Wagner and DeBussy immediately come to mind.

[BachQ]

Dm, please limit your choices to 1 intelligent composer who happens to be German-speaking only.  0:)

  I choose Brahmshoven .........

[(poco) Sforzando]

I wasn't referring to his music here as much as to his bristling intellect as displayed in his writings - and believe me, he speaks like that in real life! 

I know! I've heard him speak. But I think our friend Rappy was trying to eliminate music that he felt is complex for its own sake. Whether Brian's music is guilty of that, is a personal decision.

[karlhenning]

So it's largely a question of who we feel is 'the most intelligent composer', or 'most intellectual composer', yes?  Selecting Wagner for this designation, is in part because we have the great benefit of his announcing himself, and repeatedly, that he is, right? 

[karlhenning]

But I think our friend Rappy was trying to eliminate music that he felt is complex for its own sake. Whether Brian's music is guilty of that, is a personal decision.

Good point.  Hardly any artist (no artist?) engages in "complexity for its own sake."  For someone in the audience to claim that this damning phrase applies to this or that piece of music, is essentially a confession that he does not perceive the artistic intent of the composer.

Determining some external 'scale' against which we can determine such an 'imbalance' is problematical.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Good point.  Hardly any artist (no artist?) engages in "complexity for its own sake."  For someone in the audience to claim that this damning phrase applies to this or that piece of music, is essentially a confession that he does not perceive the artistic intent of the composer.

Determining some external 'scale' against which we can determine such an 'imbalance' is problematical.

Sure. But given the complexities of Ferneyhough's meters and tuplets, I'm sure I'm not the only one who has thought he could achieve the same or similar musical ends with different notational means.

[BachQ]

So it's largely a question of who we feel is 'the most intelligent composer', or 'most intellectual composer', yes? 

Lalo

[(poco) Sforzando]

Lalo

Why didn't I think of that?

[karlhenning]

Sure. But given the complexities of Ferneyhough's meters and tuplets, I'm sure I'm not the only one who has thought he could achieve the same or similar musical ends with different notational means.

Point well taken;  but then, it seems to me that your concern is logistical (simplifying the notation), rather than aesthetic (discounting the music because of the complexity).

[karlhenning]

Dittersdorf.

[ChamberNut]

So it's largely a question of who we feel[/i] is 'the most intelligent composer', or 'most intellectual composer', yes?  Selecting Wagner for this designation, is in part because we have the great benefit of his announcing himself, and repeatedly, that he is, right? 

Yes, that's my opinion.  Someone who conceived something as monumental as The Ring certainly had to have a lot of intelligence.   0:)

[marvinbrown]

Yes, that's my opinion.  Someone who conceived something as monumental as The Ring certainly had to have a lot of intelligence.   0:)

  No argument here  .

  marvin

[Haffner]

So it's largely a question of who we feel is 'the most intelligent composer', or 'most intellectual composer', yes?  Selecting Wagner for this designation, is in part because we have the great benefit of his announcing himself, and repeatedly, that he is, right? 

This is a good point. As far as musical composition, Wagner was obviously intelligent. But as a person, it's tough to judge him that way. Most intelligent people don't repeatedly make the astoundingly bad decisions in personal and social life Wagner made. And Wagner persisted in these outrageous decisions, which reflects even worse on him.

I guess what really astounds me about him is the fact that he wrote both the music and libretti for the last six operas. It's truly awe-inspiring (at least to a basically dumb person like me) that he had such a force of concentration. The man really had sense of range and scope...it's just me, but I really don't find such a sustained, intensely focused, power of creative effort in any other form of art. Anywhere. Again, this is just me.

I mean, let's not forget Elgar here (hello, Dmitri!).

Verdi was certainly no joke intellectually. These days I find it impossible to be interested in reading Othello without hearing Verdi's setting to as an opera. The music is, in my opinion, so tremendously inspiring and enhancing it tends to supercede the story. For me, Otello trumps and makes (at least in this instance) superfluous Shakespeare's hand.

I took creative writing as one of my majors at University of Central Florida, and to this day I would pick the Verdi opera over Shakespeare's play when teaching Othello. It's a far more powerful, inspirational beast.

Again, that's just me, and whadda I know.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Point well taken;  but then, it seems to me that your concern is logistical (simplifying the notation), rather than aesthetic (discounting the music because of the complexity).

Perhaps so. But the notation can be a barrier to performers who lack the patience or skill to decipher these 2/10 measures with syncopated tuplets across the barline. And therefore the written text can get so much in the way that the performer who might otherwise have no trouble handling Ferneyhough's technical complexities is going to discount the music - will not perform it, therefore listeners won't hear it - because he/she can't figure out how to play his rhythms:

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,3125.msg178093.html#msg178093

I expect however that Luke might rise in defense of the rhythmic notation of The New Complexity.

[karlhenning]

Yes, that's my opinion.  Someone who conceived something as monumental as The Ring certainly had to have a lot of intelligence.

Yes, so in your opinion, the intelligence behind this particular accomplishment outweighs the intelligence of other composers.  Which is one of the more eccentric means of "measuring" intelligence.

(Incidentally, I do not contest either (a) that the Ring is a mighty accomplishment, nor (b) that part of what went into making it was some degree of intelligence.)

[karlhenning]

Perhaps so. But the notation can be a barrier to performers who lack the patience or skill to decipher these 2/10 measures with syncopated tuplets across the barline.

But, of course, the composer may be entirely content that this 'notational barrier' effectively restricts performances of the piece to professionals of a certain degree of notational fluency.

Similarly, while I have written a number of choral pieces which could be sung by practically any choir which has a pulse, there are other pieces which demand a certain level of rhythmic capability.

I don't see the Ferneyhough affair as differing in kind from most composer's choices, only in degree.

[Cato]

As a teacher I sizzle and fry whenever the subject of I.Q. comes up and attempts to place a number onto intelligence.

Check the theories on "multiple intelligences" these days!

Ultimately it is futile and stupid to say: "This person's I.Q. is 131 and that one's is 133, so I guess the latter is just a little bit smarter!"

Was Wagner intelligent?  Sure: but he was also a moron.  Check his assorted essays and his adulterous behavior.  Sex can negate intelligence on any given day!

To use Karl's idea: I have always felt that Prokofiev was extremely intelligent in various ways, not just musically.

[(poco) Sforzando]

(1) This is a good point. As far as musical composition, Wagner was obviously intelligent. But as a person, it's tough to judge him that way. Most intelligent people don't repeatedly make the astoundingly bad decisions in personal and social life Wagner made. And Wagner persisted in these outrageous decisions, which reflects even worse on him.

(2) I guess what really astounds me about him is the fact that he wrote both the music and libretti for the last six operas. It's truly awe-inspiring (at least to a basically dumb person like me) that he had such a force of concentration. The man really had sense of range and scope...it's just me, but I really don't find such a sustained, intensely focused, power of creative effort in any other form of art. Anywhere. Again, this is just me.

(3) I mean, let's not forget Elgar here (hello, Dmitri!).

(4) Verdi was certainly no joke intellectually. These days I find it impossible to be interested in reading Othello without hearing Verdi's setting to as an opera. The music is, in my opinion, so tremendously inspiring and enhancing it tends to supercede the story. For me, Otello trumps and makes (at least in this instance) superfluous Shakespeare's hand.

I took creative writing as one of my majors at University of Central Florida, and to this day I would pick the Verdi opera over Shakespeare's play when teaching Othello. It's a far more powerful, inspirational beast.

Again, that's just me, and whadda I know.

(1) Wagner was not the only composer to make bad personal and social decisions. Beethoven ranks up there, too - with his unethical business dealings with publishers, his failed attempts at relating to women, his obsessive and possessive treatment of his nephew, etc. And let's not forget Bruckner, Stravinsky, no doubt others . . .

(2) I think there's enough that's dramatically muddled and inconsistent about The Ring as to call into question how great an intellect Wagner really was (taking cover from the inevitable attacks from The Faithful).

(3) Yeah, right.

(4) Well, I can't read Act III:iii in Shakespeare without hearing Si pel ciel thundering in my mind either. But I would question whether Verdi supersedes Shakespeare; both play and opera to my mind work extraordinarily well in their different ways.