Franz Liszt (1811-86)

[Josquin des Prez]

http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/genqtpg.html

"Next to possessing genius one's self is the power of appreciating it in others."

- Mark Twain

[karlhenning]

A pity, that your power supply is too weak to appreciate Liszt's genius!

[greg]

No, they are evident to a plethora of different people. Of course, such arguments being unacceptable in polite society their voice is rarely heard, which gives the impression only a rare few are capable of understanding certain ideas.

But what if someone prefers Liszt over Wagner? Are they wrong?

Wagner is, of course, much more loved than Liszt, but I don't think it really means anything more than that. Music isn't exactly a game where the composers score points, and the one with the most points is the most genius. If comparing genius in writing music means being "better" than someone at it, that doesn't make sense at all, because when composers write music, they're just trying to be themselves (hopefully in most cases). So, how are you comparing them- by saying that one composer is better at being themselves than the other composer? 

[greg]

douchebags ...

You have to admit, it can be kind of funny...

[George]

You have to admit, it can be kind of funny...

We could make a Black Comedy out of it. 

[Scarpia]

We could make a Black Comedy out of it. 

Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels?

[Scarpia]

Case & point .. Crapia ... musical ignoramus..

Hits too close to home, eh?   

[George]

Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels?

Nothing like a laugh right before bedtime. Thanks!

[snyprrr]

I need cool recitals, with all the dreary stuff, but without the Sonata. Are there more than two options for the late pieces? Anyone?

[snyprrr]

I need cool recitals, with all the dreary stuff, but without the Sonata. Are there more than two options for the late pieces? Anyone?

Sorry, I didn't know I posted in the middle of something. My quest still stands.

[Dax]

I need cool recitals, with all the dreary stuff, but without the Sonata. Are there more than two options for the late pieces? Anyone?

Sorry, but I don't quite understand the question. Are you after recommendations for late piano pieces or recordings of either piano music or the late music in general?

[karlhenning]

So, how are you comparing them- by saying that one composer is better at being themselves than the other composer? 

You're giving JdP too much credit.  Far too much.  It is simply that he has so little imagination, that all he can do in a thread which is devoted to the discussion of Liszt, is blather on about how Wagner was a suuuuupernal geeeenius.

[karlhenning]

Leslie Howard has recorded a boat-load of Liszt on Hyperion . . . I've no idea how the series is organized, though.

[jowcol]

I'm going to to something radical and talk about Liszt for a second.   

I've always found the following story rather inspirational-- but do any of you know it is an urban legend?  The version I'm reproducing is from somebody's sermon, so the language may be a bit weighted.


Over 100 years ago woman in small German town advertised a piano recital she was to give. The
posters falsely claimed she was a student of the famous Hungarian composer & pianist Franz
Liszt. To her utter dismay, Liszt visited that little village on vacation at the very time of her
recital. She knew she'd be labeled a liar and have her budding career ruined by scandal, so she
went to where Liszt was staying and asked to speak with him. Thru tears and humiliation she
confessed. He admitted it was terribly wrong of her, but noted that we all make mistakes. Only
thing he wanted was for her to be sorry. "Now, will you let me hear you play?" Several errors
because of nerves. He corrected her at certain points & made some suggestions at key places.
When finished, "My dear, you are now a pupil of Franz Liszt. I have instructed you this
afternoon. Tomorrow, go on with your concert, and the last number on the program will be
played not by the pupil, but by the teacher!"

I've always found this very admirable.  (Just hoping it is true...)

[Lethevich]

In the words of Francis Parker Yockey:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Parker_Yockey

I hadn't heard of him, but he sounds like a swell guy

[Josquin des Prez]

But what if someone prefers Liszt over Wagner? Are they wrong?

Yes. When i first begun listening to classical music, one could say that deep down i still preferred the metal artists of my youth to the new sounds i was perceiving. I have since corrected that flaw in the panorama of my artistic scope.

Wagner is, of course, much more loved than Liszt, but I don't think it really means anything more than that.

Neither have i ever inferred that he is a greater genius because he is more loved.

Music isn't exactly a game where the composers score points, and the one with the most points is the most genius.

All art is nothing more then a quest to achieve absolute truth. The very few who are successful in this goal make all other efforts essentially redundant. There is no fiercer competition.

If comparing genius in writing music means being "better" than someone at it, that doesn't make sense at all, because when composers write music, they're just trying to be themselves (hopefully in most cases). So, how are you comparing them- by saying that one composer is better at being themselves than the other composer? 

Essentially, yes:

The man of genius is he who understands incomparably more other beings than the average man. Goethe is said to have said of himself that there was no vice or crime of which he could not trace the tendency in himself, and that at some period of his life he could not have understood fully. The genius, therefore, is a more complicated, more richly endowed, more varied man; and a man is the closer to being a genius the more men he has in his personality, and the more really and strongly he has these others within him[/b[. If comprehension of those about him only flickers in him like a poor candle, then he is unable, like the great poet, to kindle a mighty flame in his heroes, to give distinction and character to his creations. The ideal of an artistic genius is to live in all men, to lose himself in all men, to reveal himself in multitudes; and so also the aim of the philosopher is to discover all others in himself, to fuse them into a unit which is his own unit.

- Otto Weininger 

[jowcol]

All art is nothing more then a quest to achieve absolute truth. The very few who are successful in this goal make all other efforts essentially redundant. There is no fiercer competition.

I think the that competition to pigeon-hole the multifaceted contributions of complex, gifted, and often often inconsistent artists  into a simplistic, pass-fail , binary model is a pretty fierce competition as well.

It is my personal opinion  is that we lose a lot or our understanding of great artists by bleaching them of their humanness and oversimplifying how we view them, forcing them to conform to standards we define long after they are dead.   I've made this point in other threads, but I personally find it hysterical how we mythologize the creative processes of Shakespeare and Dickens (both of whom I adore), while both were essentially hacks, cranking out materials to support an immediate audience.  Was the stage direction "Exit, pursued by Bear" from the Winter's Tale a lasting insight into the relationship between man, nature, and fate?  Or was it a quick hack to remove a character that was no longer needed?   IMO, it is their empathy with the human condition that made Dickens and Shakespeare so successful, and made the initially transitory nature of their art into something of lasting value. 

Likewise, I adore Bach.  (And yes, will gladly call him a genius).  But do we owe the huge amount of cantatas he wrote to a sublime search for absolute truth, or the fact he needed music for performing each Sunday?  Did he sit down each day to make a lasting monument to civilization, or to write something for someone to play?  Let us hope for Bach's sake that he never prostituted his need to capture ABSOLUTE TRUTH by writing  exercises for music pupils to play.  If he did, I'd guess that we would need to pull him off the pedestal.  (Oops... he did, didn't he?  Too bad.  I liked him. )

One of the themes that shows up a lot in the fiction by Vladimir Nabokov (and, unfortunately, in too many of the  Biographies I've read) is that the biographer takes over the story, uses it to address some personal agenda  and the purported "subject" of the biography becomes an afterthought. I've always found this approach to be quite onanistic, and lacking in respect that the artist deserves.

Of course, this is all my silly opinion-- I don't want to conflate it to anything more than that.   In my own personal musical hierarchy, I wouldn't put Liszt or Wagner in my "genius" category, just in the "awfully damn good" category, but that is just based on my personal reaction to what my ears tell me.  And if someone wants to tell me that I'm lacking in musical taste, they are probably right....

[Josquin des Prez]

I personally find it hysterical how we mythologize the creative processes of Shakespeare and Dickens (both of whom I adore), while both were essentially hacks, cranking out materials to support an immediate audience.

Only a moron would confuse the inner pulse that drive a creative artist with the immediate circumstances that lead to the creation of their work. Shakespeare was a genius because of who was. He couldn't have helped being a genius even if he tried to. The only thing that is hysterical here is your own stupidity. I always strived not to insult anybody here but i can no longer tolerate this level of thick headedness.

Refraining from ad hominem attacks is the best possible way to maintain your posting privileges. Good thing to remember.
GB

IMO, it is their empathy with the human condition that made Shakespeare so successful

Which is a characteristic of genius.

[springrite]

Certain hijacked threads should have subjects changed to "JdP'ed thread". This way I'd know not to visit it again.

[Scarpia]

Certain hijacked threads should have subjects changed to "JdP'ed thread". This way I'd know not to visit it again.

That would be giving the JdP's of the world too much power.  Best to scroll past and resume the discussion.