Let's play a little game

[mozartsneighbor]

Schubert is perhaps my favorite composer. I have often rued the fact that he died at the young age of 31. It is amazing he managed to produce so many incredible masterpieces in that short time -- and it is also thrilling to think what he might have produced had he lived into his 50s like Beethoven, 60s like Bach, or even 70s like Haydn.
On the other hand one might speculate that were it not for the hanging sword of death that his disease held over him in his final years he might not have produce works of such depth.
Another question is also whether a composer's life span should be computed in determining his or her greatness: for example comparing what Mozart produced in 35 years versus Haydn's 76. Since the 19th century composers' lifespans have increased steadily, and many like Sibelius lived long lives, and now we are at the point where one of the foremost contemporary composers, Elliott Carter is about to hit 100. What does all this mean in relation to what they produce and how we look at their achievements, also in relation to past achievements? Your thoughts on these questions, please!
And to finish a little game: if you had sudden power to retroactively add 20 years to any composer(s) life, how would you distribute those years?
I would give Schubert 12, Mozart 5, and Schummann 3.

[mn dave]

Beethoven 10

Chopin 10

[PerfectWagnerite]

if you had sudden power to retroactively add 20 years to any composer(s) life, how would you distribute those years?

Give Wagner 20.

[71 dB]

5 years to Elgar to Finish the 3rd Symphony, Piano Concerto and Spanish Lady Opera.

15 years to Nikolaus Bruhns because he simply died so too soon. 

[mahler10th]

Gustav Mahler 10
Jean Sibelius 0

Eduard Tubin 10
William Havergal Brian 0

[Joe_Campbell]

Scriabin: 30 years - to finish Mysterium
Mahler:  5 years - to finish his 10th symphony
Ornstein: (-15) years or maybe Carter? Surely these fellows would sacrifice for an unjustly axed composer?

edit - I didn't read the rules correctly

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Gustav Mahler 10
Jean Sibelius 0

Eduard Tubin 10
William Havergal Brian 0

Fair enough... 

[Sergeant Rock]

Mahler 12

Webern 4.5 (it would be interesting to hear post-war works)

Bruckner 2 (enough time to rassle with and solve the puzzle he'd given himself with the finale to the 9th)

Elgar 1 (time enough to complete the Third Symphony)

Mozart 6 months (to complete his Requiem...he worked faster than Elgar )

Sarge

[Renfield]

Bruckner: 1

Should likely be enough to wrap up the 9th.


Mahler: 19

As many as possible. Between more symphonies, and recordings of his existing works (or anything at all), he'd use them well.


(Although so would Schubert and Mozart, at the very least. Still, maximum years for Gustav is my pick.)

[eyeresist]

This game would court more controversy if those extra years had to be taken from someone else...


I'd love to give Schubert all 20, because I'd love to hear what he did after figuring out his mature symphonic style.
But I'd give 4 to Rachmaninov, because I reckon he had another good symphony left in him.
And 3 for Bruckner to finish the 9th, and more if I thought he could do another one.

But if we look under the mattress (i.e. Sibelius), we'd probably get two extra decades for Mahler, with change to spare!

[Lethevich]

To be some kind of musical troll, I would give Brahms the full 20. I don't think he'd stop producing superb, refined music, and it'd be fascinating to see what he made of early modernism (and how he would react).

[scarpia]

To be some kind of musical troll, I would give Brahms the full 20. I don't think he'd stop producing superb, refined music, and it'd be fascinating to see what he made of early modernism (and how he would react).

I'm skeptical of Brahms.  Brahms had declared himself retired, and with the exception of the works for clarinet (quintet, trio, sonatas) Brahms didn't produce anything of substance for the last 12 years of his life (after the 4th symphony).  I think we could only expect more pining away of Clara Schumann if we could give him more time.

Now Sibelius spend the last 30 years of his life getting stone drunk and throwing manuscripts on the fire.  If we took 30 years from Sibelius we'd have his 8th symphony.

Anyway, I'd love to hear what Mozart would have produced if he had lived lived longer.  He composed so many brilliant symphonies in an era when music was expected to be an elegant trifle to be twittering in the background as some nobleman nibbles on sweetmeats.  I think he might have produced something truly remarkable if he had lived into he era of Beethoven, when a symphony came to be regarded as a weighty work of art.   Even a trip to London, which would have prompted him to write a series of symphonies such as Haydn's "London" series would have been.

Mahler, well, I think he was starting to go over the hill.  I quite think 10 symphonies was a sufficient allotment, although I'd give him a year to finish that final fragment.

[zamyrabyrd]

My first impulse is to give George Gershwin at least 20 years.
(Can we have more?)

ZB

[prémont]

Bach at least five years to complete the Art of Fugue and to revise other works.

[Chrone]

5 each to:

Kurt Weill
Scott Joplin
Vassily Kalinnikov
Franz Schubert

[(poco) Sforzando]

Berg needed more years, at least to finish Lulu.

[greg]

Bruckner: 1

Should likely be enough to wrap up the 9th.


Mahler: 19

As many as possible. Between more symphonies, and recordings of his existing works (or anything at all), he'd use them well.


(Although so would Schubert and Mozart, at the very least. Still, maximum years for Gustav is my pick.)

Heck yeah 

[marvinbrown]

  I'd give the 20 to Verdi  .  That would make him 108 years old! That's like pouring water on a drowning man! But you have to admit that guy's operas just get better the older he gets Don Carlo, Aida, Otello, Falstaff were all written in Verdi's later years.

  marvin

[Bonehelm]

I don't know...Mahler is among my favourites but I don't want to give him any more years because he might come up with atonal stuff, following Webern and Schoenberg's footsteps. I like my Mahler tonal, please...  0:)

[dirkronk]

10 extra years to Beethoven. What if he'd given us 5 more piano sonatas...another two symphonies...another violin concerto...2 more piano concertos or string quartets?

5 extra years to Mozart. The reasons should be obvious.

5 extra years...perhaps to Mendelssohn. Or Chopin. Either might have given us some extraordinary chamber and/or piano work.

Or...here's an idea...give 5 extra years to ANYONE who could have kicked Rossini's butt and made him use the last 20 years of his life giving us music to the same level of wit and beauty that he provided early in his career.

Dirk