A nice piece in The Times last Saturday:
"Since World War II, Mr. Masur has fought to restore Mendelssohn's reputation. Mendelssohn, he said, should be given the same respect accorded Bach and Beethoven. As founder and chairman of the International Mendelssohn Foundation he has been involved in projects like restoring the composer's house in Leipzig, Germany, as a cultural center.
Mr. Masur suggests that inappropriate interpretations of Mendelssohn's music have also damaged his legacy. The "Scottish" Symphony, he said, is often played in a "harmless" manner, which "is a great mistake, as it's a very serious and dramatic piece"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/01/arts/music/01schw.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=mendelssohn&st=cse
******
Hear, hear!
:)
Quote
"Since World War II, Mr. Masur has fought to restore Mendelssohn's reputation. Mendelssohn, he said, should be given the same respect accorded Bach and Beethoven"
I knew there was a reason i never liked Masur. There's nothing serious or dramatic about Mendelssohn. There's nothing gay about him either for that matter. He was utterly incapable of genuine and original expression. He was a great counterfeiter though, much like his lesser brother in mischief, that one Joachim Raff. More proof that talent means nothing, as if there needed be more evidence.
Mendelssohn's place is well established where it's at: great, but second fiddle to genius.
[EDIT] Just noticed this article is ... unnecessary pejorative comment edited for human consumption. GB
I don't understand the need to defend or denigrate Mendelssohn. Either one likes him, or one doesn't. Or somewhere in-between.
Me; I think he's good, sometimes very good, always on top of the handicraft of musicmaking, but mostly without the intensity of the need to make music that distinguishes the very competent musician from the driven genius. Mendelssohn would never walk to Lubeck to hear greatness, or bite at the hand that feeds him because of rtistic differences. Always a nice listen, occasionally something more (like in op 80, where personal experience transcends his usual aloofness) but not something one NEEDS to listen to. Nothing wrong in that, most composers fall in this category.
Quote from: eyeresist on February 02, 2009, 11:15:54 PM
Insightful criticism at its best.
On one hand; yes. OTOH; if the point of the publication is, as the name implicates, its racial connection, this is exactly he kind of reaction they are inviting.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 02, 2009, 08:41:20 PM
There's nothing serious or dramatic about Mendelssohn.
Even if this were true, why should music always be serious and dramatic?
Quote from: erato on February 02, 2009, 11:27:30 PM
On one hand; yes. OTOH; if the point of the publication is, as the name implicates, its racial connection, this is exactly he kind of reaction they are inviting.
Nothing unexpected here. A lot of JdP's posts entail some form of racism, either covert & implied, or overtly such as here.
Quote from: Florestan on February 03, 2009, 12:02:36 AM
Even if this were true, why should music always be serious and dramatic?
True. And the other thing: why should Mendelssohn be compared to Bach and Beethoven? Because they're big German guys?
Wouldn't make much more sense to compare him in one way or another with Chopin and Schumann? And wouldn't it be a much better idea to liberate these three composers from being regarded as the little guys between giant Beethoven and giant Brahms?
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 02, 2009, 08:41:20 PM
I knew there was a reason i never liked Masur. There's nothing serious or dramatic about Mendelssohn. There's nothing gay about him either for that matter. He was utterly incapable of genuine and original expression. He was a great counterfeiter though, much like his lesser brother in mischief, that one Joachim Raff. More proof that talent means nothing, as if there needed be more evidence.
Mendelssohn's place is well established where it's at: great, but second fiddle to genius.
[EDIT] Just noticed this article
Wow, they're must be some extra starch in your brown shirt this morning.
Quote from: Florestan on February 03, 2009, 12:02:36 AM
Even if this were true, why should music always be serious and dramatic?
That wasn't my point, and i was just quoting the article. Like i said, his music is incapable of gaiety as well. A perfect imitation of gaiety, sure, but never the real thing.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 03, 2009, 05:35:40 AM
That wasn't my point
If I misunderstood you, I offer my apologies.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 03, 2009, 05:35:40 AM
Like i said, his music is incapable of gaiety as well. A perfect imitation of gaiety, sure, but never the real thing.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, but you should never forget that it is just that. Now, I don't claim Mendelssohn is a misunderstood and underrated genius, but it has always seemed to me that his music is, contrary to your claims, sincere: he was all through his life a happy, rich, gentle and well-balanced person and his music sounds just like that. He bordered on drama when his sister died and this shows in his op. 80 SQ. Had he lived longer, he might perhaps have become more introvert and his music might have perhaps darkened. But I think his music is a perfect example of the more sunny side of Romanticism.
Just my two cents, of course.
Quote from: Herman on February 03, 2009, 12:16:02 AM
Nothing unexpected here. A lot of JdP's posts entail some form of racism, either covert & implied, or overtly such as here.
I've been anything but covert, but in this case i was merely trolling.
Such gaiety as I find in Mendelssohn's music, is entirely genuine.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 03, 2009, 06:34:25 AM
I've been anything but covert...
True, you wear your racism like a badge of honor for all to see.
Quote...his music is incapable of gaiety as well. A perfect imitation of gaiety, sure, but never the real thing
Unfortunately, I don't have your keen ability to discern real from imitation gaiety. Mendelssohn-Bartholdy's music sounds delightfully sincere to me.
Sarge
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on February 03, 2009, 07:01:13 AM
True, you wear your racism like a badge of honor for all to see.
I may be a racist but i'm not prejudiced. That gives me moral empowerment to say whatever i please.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 03, 2009, 10:07:27 AM
I may be a racist but i'm not prejudiced. That gives me moral empowerment to say whatever i please.
I literally coughed and choked on "moral empowerment".
If you are a racist, you are by definition prejudiced. No further comment on "moral empowerment": I will currently empower myself to have dinner.
Quote from: Renfield on February 03, 2009, 10:20:55 AM
If you are a racist, you are by definition prejudiced.
I'm only a racist under the current definition of racism (I.E., one who believes in the biodiversity of the human races). I don't agree with that definition, but since that is the accepted view in our fine Orwellian society, then so be it. I know in my heart that i do not hold a single element of prejudice within myself, therefore my conscience is clear.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 02, 2009, 08:41:20 PMHe was utterly incapable of genuine and original expression. [/color]
Utterly incapable? Really?
Quote from: erato on February 02, 2009, 10:23:30 PM
I don't understand the need to defend or denigrate Mendelssohn. Either one likes him, or one doesn't. Or somewhere in-between.
Me; I think he's good, sometimes very good, always on top of the handicraft of musicmaking, but mostly without the intensity of the need to make music that distinguishes the very competent musician from the driven genius. Mendelssohn would never walk to Lubeck to hear greatness, or bite at the hand that feeds him because of rtistic differences. Always a nice listen, occasionally something more (like in op 80, where personal experience transcends his usual aloofness) but not something one NEEDS to listen to. Nothing wrong in that, most composers fall in this category.
The above is a perfect commentary on Mendelssohn. Being one of the most well-known classical composers of the 19th century, there's no reason to defend the man. There's also no good reason to compare him to Bach or Beethoven; just about every other composer would come up short in such comparisions.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 03, 2009, 10:32:07 AM
I'm only a racist under the current definition of racism (I.E., one who believes in the biodiversity of the human races). I don't agree with that definition, but since that is the accepted view in our fine Orwellian society, then so be it. I know in my heart that i do not hold a single element of prejudice within myself, therefore my conscience is clear.
As a general rule, someone who claims that racism is not prejudice is probably best served by avoiding references to Orwell. "Ignorance is Strength" was not intended to be taken literally. :(
ah, well. Let's talk Mendelssohn, rather than turn this into a Diner topic.
Quote from: Herman on February 03, 2009, 10:43:21 AM
ah, well. Let's talk Mendelssohn, rather than turn this into a Diner topic.
Good thought. Any opinions on Mendelssohn's piano music? I've listened to his Songs Without Words, but a few days ago I saw a new Arte Nova CD of his piano sonatas, which I didn't even know existed. Did he write extensively for the piano, and are there any particularly recommendable recordings?
Quote from: jwinter on February 03, 2009, 10:39:50 AM
As a general rule, someone who claims that racism is not prejudice is probably best served by avoiding references to Orwell. "Ignorance is Strength" was not intended to be taken literally. :(
Ignorance? Do you think it was due to
ignorance that James Watson claimed there was a link between race and intelligence? Who's the real bigot here? The one who expresses an opinion, or the one who condemns said opinion based on prejudice, without examining the argument presented? Notice of course that Watson was punished for his claims, and he has been forced to recant his position (in public at least). Wanna talk about Orwellian?
Quote from: jwinter on February 03, 2009, 10:50:06 AM
Good thought. Any opinions on Mendelssohn's piano music? I've listened to his Songs Without Words, but a few days ago I saw a new Arte Nova CD of his piano sonatas, which I didn't even know existed.
That's exactly my case as well, never knew he wrote any piano sonata. If their quality is on a par with the best moments of
Songs Without Words then then that CD would be a worthy acquisition, methinks.
Quote from: Florestan on February 03, 2009, 11:15:31 AM
never knew he wrote any piano sonata.
He wrote three to be exact. I used to own the complete recording of his piano works, but i sold it a while back. Wasn't really impressed with his output in this field.
(Re: race and racism
I think that it all boils down to answering three questions:
1. Do human races exist as a biological reality?
2. If yes, are there specific and intrinsic traits that are to be found predominantly in this or that race and not in others?
3. If yes again, should this fact bear political and social implications?)
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 03, 2009, 11:17:54 AM
He wrote three to be exact.
I suppose they are early works from his
enfant prodige years.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 03, 2009, 11:15:12 AM
Ignorance? Do you think it was due to ignorance that James Watson claimed there was a link between race and intelligence?
No, it was based on Watson's bigoted mindset.
Quote from: Florestan on February 03, 2009, 11:24:39 AM
I suppose they are early works from his enfant prodige years.
I don't know actually. His sonatas are tagged as opus 6, 102 and 106 respectively, but with Mendelssohn opus numbers don't always reflect order of composition. It shouldn't be too hard to find out about it on the net though.
Quote from: Bulldog on February 03, 2009, 11:27:23 AM
No, it was based on Watson's bigoted mindset.
Prove it. Prove to me that racial differences between the races are a result of prejudice and are not based on heredity. Surely, since you know so well that Watson was a racist, you must have a perfect understanding of the subject and conclusive proof his statements were wrong, right?
Here's what Watson has to say on the matter, for those interested:
"I have always fiercely defended the position that we should base our view of the world on the state of our knowledge, on fact, and not on what we would like it to be. This is why genetics is so important. For it will lead us to answers to many of the big and difficult questions that have troubled people for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.
...Since 1978, when a pail of water was dumped over my Harvard friend E O Wilson for saying that genes influence human behaviour, the assault against human behavioural genetics by wishful thinking has remained vigorous.
But irrationality must soon recede ... science is not here to make us feel good. It is to answer questions in the service of knowledge and greater understanding.
...We do not yet adequately understand the way in which the different environments in the world have selected over time the genes which determine our capacity to do different things. The overwhelming desire of society today is to assume that equal powers of reason are a universal heritage of humanity. It may well be. But simply wanting this to be the case is not enough. This is not science.
To question this is not to give in to racism. This is not a discussion about superiority or inferiority, it is about seeking to understand differences, about why some of us are great musicians and others great engineers."
Quote from: Florestan on February 03, 2009, 11:15:31 AM
That's exactly my case as well, never knew he wrote any piano sonata. If their quality is on a par with the best moments of Songs Without Words then then that CD would be a worthy acquisition, methinks.
He composed 7 sonatas for piano.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 03, 2009, 11:29:44 AM
I don't know actually. His sonatas are tagged as opus 6, 102 and 106 respectively, but with Mendelssohn opus numbers don't always reflect order of composition. It shouldn't be too hard to find out about it on the net though.
Wikipedia lists them as following:
Op. 6, Piano Sonata No. 1 in E major (1826)
Op. 105, Piano Sonata No. 2 in G minor (1821)
Op. 106, Piano Sonata No. 3 in B-flat major (1827)
So apparently they were composed at 17, 12 and 18 years respectively.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 03, 2009, 11:32:54 AM
Prove it. Prove to me that racial differences between the races are a result of prejudice and are not based on heredity. Surely, since you know so well that Watson was a racist, you must have a perfect understanding of the subject and conclusive proof his statements were wrong, right?
Why don't you prove that Watson is not a bigot? It's a shame that he's your hero.
Quote from: Bulldog on February 03, 2009, 11:37:04 AM
He composed 7 sonatas for piano.
What are the opus numbers for the other four?
Quote from: Florestan on February 03, 2009, 11:38:22 AM
Wikipedia lists them as following:
Op. 6, Piano Sonata No. 1 in E major (1826)
Op. 105, Piano Sonata No. 2 in G minor (1821)
Op. 106, Piano Sonata No. 3 in B-flat major (1827)
So apparently they were composed at 17, 12 and 18 years respectively.
He wrote four others - no opus numbers and composed in 1820.
Quote from: Bulldog on February 03, 2009, 11:41:30 AM
He wrote four others - no opus numbers and composed in 1820.
Thank you. Very early works, then. Were they recorded, I wonder?
Happy Birthday, Mendelssohn!
[/b]
Little Essay on the Composer for his Birthday. (And recording recommendations, too, of course.)
Felix Mendelssohn B. (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=476)
Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy was born today, 200 years ago, in Hamburg, to Abraham Mendelssohn and Lea Salomon, grandson to Moses Mendelssohn, the famous philosopher, scholar, and model for Lessing's "Nathan the Wise". Felix' father, who converted to Lutheranism for convenience' sake ("If you don't believe in any one Religion as the right one, why burden your children with Judaism"), and added "Bartholdy" to the family name.
....
Quote from: Florestan on February 03, 2009, 11:43:22 AM
Thank you. Very early works, then. Were they recorded, I wonder?
A Roberto Prosseda recorded them for Decca. I thought that Chiu might have for Harmonia Mundi, but I can't find any listing for it.
Quote from: Herman on February 03, 2009, 10:43:21 AM
ah, well. Let's talk Mendelssohn, rather than turn this into a Diner topic.
Exactly so, thanks Herman. I also see some here struggling to discuss Mendelssohn around the off-topic interjections. These were started in a barefaced way too by our self proclaimed racist troll.
Josquin, here is the position. Any further leading up the garden path towards racist comments will be deleted. It hardly needs to be spelt out, but for clarity; explicitly racist comments will be deleted also. Finally; posts will not be amended they will be deleted in their entirety, along with any that quote the offending remarks.
Posters who struggle in a well meaning way with Josquin's remarks, please instead report the posts.
Now, Mendelssohn; since Saul is no longer present, we really oughht to be able to discuss him in a pleasant and interesting way....for once. I hope you can find that way to divert us back onto the topic.
Cheers,
Knight
I find Mendelssohn's chamber works to be serious, deep works, especially the string quintets and quartets. His choral works are also deep. It's unfortunate for him that his image is associated with his popular works which are on the exuberant side, and many people don't appreciate the full emotional range seen across his entire repertoire. It would be like judging Haydn solely on the basis of his Surprise symphony... oh wait that happens. ::)
I believe Mendelssohn's place in musical history is well secured. $:)
Now I'm back home, I can revisit some Mendelssohn sacred choral music . . . .
Quote from: Bulldog on February 03, 2009, 02:09:21 PM
A Roberto Prosseda recorded them for Decca. I thought that Chiu might have for Harmonia Mundi, but I can't find any listing for it.
No, unfortunately Chiu didn't appear to record them. I do have his disk of the sonatas mentioned though, and it is commendable. One wouldn't have suspected that Op 106 actually WAS an early work. :)
8)
----------------
Listening to:
Friedrich Gulda - Op 109 Sonata in E 1st mvmt - Andante, molto cantabile ed espressivo
Mendelssohn's music is simple and melodically beautiful, and it's hard to criticize him for his music other than its lack of complexity. I love listening to his music. But Mendelssohn's talent is top of the bottom shelf.
Quote from: op.110 on February 03, 2009, 05:53:21 PM
Mendelssohn's music is simple and melodically beautiful, and it's hard to criticize him for his music other than its lack of complexity. I love listening to his music. But Mendelssohn's talent is top of the bottom shelf.
Whew! Finally, I know where to put it. I foolishly had it sharing the upper shelf with some stuff I like a lot. My bad :-[
8)
----------------
Listening to:
Friedrich Gulda - Op 111 Sonata in c 2nd mvmt - Arietta: Adagio molto semplice e cantabile
Haven't listened to much Mendelssohn, but the Fingal's Cave Overture is something that really caught my attention. Heck, I could've mistaken it for early Wagner that I've never heard before. Any recommendations for me given this preference?
Quote from: G$ on February 03, 2009, 06:22:05 PM
Haven't listened to much Mendelssohn, but the Fingal's Cave Overture is something that really caught my attention. Heck, I could've mistaken it for early Wagner that I've never heard before. Any recommendations for me given this preference?
Greg!!! First you have the audacity to spend years on gmg and never listen to Mendelssohn, but then you compare him to Wagner!!!! You will be punished for your insolence! >:D
I've listened to a little. Random youtube stuff and radio stuff- but I doubt I own any CDs. I've listened to the Violin Concerto a few times, and now that I turn on the Italian symphony, the main theme sounds familiar. Not much more than that.
Quote from: G$ on February 03, 2009, 06:22:05 PM
Haven't listened to much Mendelssohn, but the Fingal's Cave Overture is something that really caught my attention. Heck, I could've mistaken it for early Wagner that I've never heard before. Any recommendations for me given this preference?
Greg,
If you liked the Hebrides Overture, then I strongly recommend the Scottish Symphony (#3 in a). Check out this link (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,9637.60.html) to see a discussion of many recordings of it. :)
BTW, Mendelssohn and Wagner... nah! :D
8)
----------------
Listening to:
Tafelmusik \ Weil - Idomeneo, Rè di Creta, K.366
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 03, 2009, 06:29:48 PM
Greg,
If you liked the Hebrides Overture, then I strongly recommend the Scottish Symphony (#3 in a). Check out this link (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,9637.60.html) to see a discussion of many recordings of it. :)
BTW, Mendelssohn and Wagner... nah! :D
8)
----------------
Listening to:
Tafelmusik \ Weil - Idomeneo, Rè di Creta, K.366
Thanks, I'll check that out. :)
I'll start off with youtube for now, though.
Hm, I thought a lot of it sounded like it could've fit right into The Flying Dutchman, at least at first.
Quote from: G$ on February 03, 2009, 06:39:29 PM
Thanks, I'll check that out. :)
I'll start off with youtube for now, though.
Hm, I thought a lot of it sounded like it could've fit right into The Flying Dutchman, at least at first.
Well, Wagner did draw his inspiration from a variety of sources. And there is no question that he would have been more than familiar with Mendelssohn's music (Felix was a STAR back then, no matter what he is thought of now). But I don't know what he thought of it, even if he didn't like it, he might have liked a theme or two. :)
8)
----------------
Listening to:
Tafelmusik \ Weil - Overture to Don Giovanni, K.527
I'm listening to the 3rd now, and hearing a long chromatic part at the end of the first movement that sounds like a Wagner signature moment or something. So that makes sense- I suppose it's just a matter of hearing little similarities, nothing more than that.
On my local classical station today they played some of his recent 'unpublished' works, including his correct version of the Italian. I have to say after listening to that. I have seriously reconsidered him.
Quote from: op.110 on February 03, 2009, 05:53:21 PM
Mendelssohn's music is simple
Not all the time. He may be lacking in technical daring but some of his works are definitely not skim in technical profusion. He's not Brahms, but he sure gets close sometimes. Take his opus 44 for instance.
Quote from: karlhenning on February 03, 2009, 06:34:50 AM
Such gaiety as I find in Mendelssohn's music, is entirely genuine.
I just got back from a live performance of Mendelssohn's
Octet, maybe my all-time favorite chamber work, with Cho-Liang Lin in the first violin spot. Amazing! :o It was standing-room only, and I had to stand, but it was electrifying. What a joyous work - the pure joy I felt was matched only by the desperate sadness of the fact that most of us will never, ever in our lives achieve something as purely glorious, as beautifully triumphant, as the work this guy wrote when he was only 16 years old. :( :( :) :)
In fact, one could argue that Mendelssohn himself never again attained the heights of his
Octet; I also got to hear both of his quintets, and the finales of each seemed to be efforts to "recapture the magic" of the Octet, but without the success.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 03, 2009, 08:44:47 PM
He may be lacking in technical daring but some of his works are definitely not skim in technical profusion. He's not Brahms, but he sure gets close sometimes. Take his opus 44 for instance.
I think that is a fair assessment.
Quote from: G$ on February 03, 2009, 06:39:29 PM
Hm, I thought a lot of it sounded like it could've fit right into The Flying Dutchman, at least at first.
I read somewhere that Wagner acknowledged the influence of the Hebrides overture on his Flying Dutchman. Apparently at a concert including the overture he joked, "What a thief I was in my youth!"
Mendelssohn was more respected in the 19th century, it seems to me. I detect traces of him in Dvorak, Elgar and even in Brahms. Also, the other day I was listening to Magnard's 3rd symphony (cond. Ansermet), and it seemed to me his most overt influences were Schumann and ... Mendelssohn. (Magnard's period was Late Romantic, but from what I've heard I would describe him as a French Brahms.)
Quote from: Florestan on February 03, 2009, 11:43:22 AM
Thank you. Very early works, then. Were they recorded, I wonder?
The complete piano works have been recorded by Benjamin Frith for Naxos (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00000140U/goodmusicguide-20) and by Dana Protopopescu (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B001AR0U4I/goodmusicguide-20) (love that name) for Haenssler. Neither include ALL the rarities Roberto Prosseda (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000F9TCHS/goodmusicguide-20) offers on his two discs, but they (unlike Martin Jones, on Nimbus) do include most works without opus numbers that FMB wrote.
Happy Birthday, Mendelssohn!
Little Essay on the Composer for his Birthday. (And recording recommendations, too, of course.)
Felix Mendelssohn B. (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=476)
Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy was born today, 200 years ago, in Hamburg, to Abraham Mendelssohn and Lea Salomon, grandson to Moses Mendelssohn, the famous philosopher, scholar, and model for Lessing's "Nathan the Wise". Felix' father, who converted to Lutheranism for convenience' sake ("If you don't believe in any one Religion as the right one, why burden your children with Judaism"), and added "Bartholdy" to the family name.
....
He's not Brahms, and why need he be?
One day late, but anyway... Happy 200th birthday, Mendelssohn!
For me, some of his music is among the most extraordinary produced in the 19th century. Even if it will sound "cliché", the overture to A Midsummer Night's Dream is an incredible achievement for such a young person and one of my favorite works in all classical repertoire. His chamber music is often not just correct, but astonishing (I think of the A minor, D major and F minor string quartets, the string octet or the piano trios). The overture to Paulus has never ceased to move me deeply. His 3rd symphony is admirably crafted, and what is left from his oratorio Christus is so magnificent that I cannot but feel, simultaneously, a deep gratitude for having those fragments and a deep sorrow for not having more of it.
I think that the problem with Mendelssohn was to be too fond of "good taste" while composing (and probably while living), a concept that has been always dismissed when thinking of the period when he was active. While I appreciate and admire works written under the concept of evident, straight and sometimes excessive "romanticism", I do not forget that a different approach is not just possible, but also needed; in Mendelssohn's works you can feel tension, suffering and drama, but with a delicacy that is not always easy to grasp and with a remarkable sense of form and balance. I will probably never consider Mendelssohn the greatest composer ever, but he is for me one of the truly great ones.
Quote from: karlhenning on February 04, 2009, 02:51:24 AM
He's not Brahms, and why need he be?
Because any composer being Brahms, would belong in the top ten!
Quote from: erato on February 04, 2009, 03:53:46 AM
Because any composer being Brahms, would belong in the top ten!
That's Casey Kasem talking!
(http://user.pa.net/~ejjeff/KBO%20CaseyKasem1975.jpg)
Quote from: Gabriel on February 04, 2009, 03:13:02 AM
I think that the problem with Mendelssohn was to be too fond of "good taste" while composing (and probably while living), a concept that has been always dismissed when thinking of the period when he was active. While I appreciate and admire works written under the concept of evident, straight and sometimes excessive "romanticism", I do not forget that a different approach is not just possible, but also needed; in Mendelssohn's works you can feel tension, suffering and drama, but with a delicacy that is not always easy to grasp and with a remarkable sense of form and balance. I will probably never consider Mendelssohn the greatest composer ever, but he is for me one of the truly great ones.
Excellent post.
Quote from: karlhenning on February 04, 2009, 04:49:38 AM
That's Casey Kasem talking!
(http://user.pa.net/~ejjeff/KBO%20CaseyKasem1975.jpg)
Eek! The resounding voice from my youth "..and now, Bruce Springsteen talks about how he came
up with the idea for 'Blinded by the Light'..."
It's interesting to me, that there would be a thread positing a "defense of the composer of
Elijah, as well as one of the most awe-inspiring Violin Concertos ever, string quartets, und so weiter. I won't attempt to spell his name, I always get it wrong (laughing).
Quote from: Brian on February 03, 2009, 08:59:09 PM
I just got back from a live performance of Mendelssohn's Octet, maybe my all-time favorite chamber work, with Cho-Liang Lin in the first violin spot. Amazing! :o It was standing-room only, and I had to stand, but it was electrifying. What a joyous work - the pure joy I felt was matched only by the desperate sadness of the fact that most of us will never, ever in our lives achieve something as purely glorious, as beautifully triumphant, as the work this guy wrote when he was only 16 years old. :( :( :) :)
In fact, one could argue that Mendelssohn himself never again attained the heights of his Octet; I also got to hear both of his quintets, and the finales of each seemed to be efforts to "recapture the magic" of the Octet, but without the success.
Brian,
Last year, two of the most enjoyable of all live chamber music performances I've attended (on separate occasions) were a) The Octet WOW! :) and b) String Quartet No. 2 in A minor, Op. 13.
The Octet performed live was incredibly electrifying (to borrow your words, Brian ;)). While the cellists were seated during the performance, the other 6 string players were all standing. You could really tell all 8 performers were really, really into the piece, were passionate about playing it and it showed so much in the performance. :)
Quote from: karlhenning on February 04, 2009, 02:51:24 AM
He's not Brahms, and why need he be?
Come on now, don't get disagreeable for the sake of being disagreeable. Surely, i would think that something like "technical profusion" is a value that can be objectively measured.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 04, 2009, 05:40:05 AM
Come on now, don't get disagreeable for the sake of being disagreeable. Surely, i would think that something like "technical profusion" is a value that can be objectively measured.
You very sensibly cast that gibberish in scare-quotes. Which, naturally, makes your remark about the gibberish being "objectively measured" even funnier.
Thank you for being amusing for the sake of being amusing!
If Mozart's biography reads as though the timpani-strokes from his Requiem are already sounding faintly in the background, Mendelssohn's has the soundtrack of his Midsummer Night's Dream running through it: Happy, lovely, pleasant, well mannered. Mozart, apart from his few innocent Wunderkind-years, was crude, reckless, annoying, broke, borderline delusional—and always at the brink of failure. Mendelssohn was refined, polite, prudent, affable, ever prosperous, level-headed, and successful. Based on stereotypes and expectations, Mozart would have made the better Romantic composer, Mendelssohn the better Classical. When it comes to fulfilling that Beethoven-Schumann-Chopin set romantic ideal of the troubled, struggling artist, Mendelssohn did only one thing right: He died early.
But premature death—at 38, only six months after his beloved sister Fanny died aged 41—wasn't enough for a romantic reputation. Partly due to the nature of his compositions, partly due to his biography and personality, he has been treated—though never entirely dismissed—as a lightweight composer. In that sense, it wasn't helpful that he wrote two of his most enduring and charming (always that word coming up with matters Mendelssohn) works at the ages of 16 and 17: The Octet for Strings op.20 and the above mentioned Midsummer Night's Overture op.21, respectively. This contributed to the image of a sort of Benjamin Button of composers—a young man who starts out at perfection (much more accomplished, at that age, than Mozart) but then regressed at a high level, never again to push the boundaries of his craft.
This view is correct only in its high estimate of the Octet and the Overture—they are indeed among the best works any composer that age has put out, including Korngold and Bridge. But it is wrong in many other ways. The works did not come out of nowhere, they were the process of a steady development of his talent backed with a thorough—and unlike Mozart, very broad—education. Nor are these works masterpieces in a bygone style, isolated from the development in music. If Louis Spohr wrote his octets as doubled barreled string quartet arrangements, Mendelssohn introduced a new style: eight instruments and as many voices, wholly integrated in the work blurring the lines between chamber- and symphonic music. (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=476)
Quote(much more accomplished, at that age, than Mozart)
He also had much better influences during his formative years. Mozart was nurtured on the low classical composers of his era, the best of which was the early Haydn, while Mendelssohn was raised on the mature Haydn, as well as Mozart himself, Beethoven and Bach! No wonder he matured earlier. Mozart had to develop genius out of thin air, Mendelssohn had genius all around him from which to draw from.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 04, 2009, 06:18:26 AM
He also had much better influences during his formative years. Mozart was nurtured on the low classical composers of his era, the best of which was the early Haydn, while Mendelssohn was raised on the mature Haydn, as well as Mozart himself, Beethoven and Bach! No wonder he matured earlier. Mozart had to develop genius out of thin air, Mendelssohn had genius all around him from which to draw from.
True... but that's an advantage that every composer
since has enjoyed, too. Mendelssohn made something of it. Many others did apparently not. Or Korngold, who was just about as prematurely-splendid, didn't seem to copy those composers of his time and place, when he was a kid... but went well beyond the common musical language of his time and certainly of his household. So it must be something more than just famous examples.
Quote from: jlaurson on February 03, 2009, 01:03:06 PM
Happy Birthday, Mendelssohn!
Little Essay on the Composer for his Birthday. (And recording recommendations, too, of course.)
Felix Mendelssohn B. (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=476)
Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy was born today, 200 years ago, in Hamburg, to Abraham Mendelssohn and Lea Salomon, grandson to Moses Mendelssohn, the famous philosopher, scholar, and model for Lessing's "Nathan the Wise". Felix' father, who converted to Lutheranism for convenience' sake ("If you don't believe in any one Religion as the right one, why burden your children with Judaism"), and added "Bartholdy" to the family name.
....
Thank you very much, I found the article quite informative.
Quote from: jlaurson on February 04, 2009, 06:37:44 AM
Many others did apparently not.
Many others weren't prodigies. Don't forget that people like Mozart or Mendelssohn are a rarity.
Quote from: eyeresist on February 03, 2009, 10:29:52 PM
I read somewhere that Wagner acknowledged the influence of the Hebrides overture on his Flying Dutchman. Apparently at a concert including the overture he joked, "What a thief I was in my youth!"
Really? :D
Ha, so I guess I'm not delusional if Wagner admitted it himself. ;D
Quote from: jlaurson on February 04, 2009, 06:00:46 AM
Based on stereotypes and expectations, Mozart would have made the better Romantic composer, Mendelssohn the better Classical.
This is a very interesting comment.
It also bears pointing out that Mendelssohn's last 3 purely orchestral symphonies,
if taken in the order in which they were composed rather than numbered, indicate he was certainly improving as an "adult" symphonist, becoming comfortable with the larger forms.
Quote from: ChamberNut on February 04, 2009, 05:04:38 AMWhile the cellists were seated during the performance, the other 6 string players were all standing. You could really tell all 8 performers were really, really into the piece, were passionate about playing it and it showed so much in the performance. :)
All eight of our players were seated, but that did not stop Cho-Liang Lin, in the violin first chair, from coming
very close to standing in his enthusiastic gesticulations! :D
Quote from: eyeresist on February 04, 2009, 04:27:57 PM
This is a very interesting comment.
It also bears pointing out that Mendelssohn's last 3 purely orchestral symphonies, if taken in the order in which they were composed rather than numbered, indicate he was certainly improving as an "adult" symphonist, becoming comfortable with the larger forms.
Nearly everything in Mozart's work points to him continuously improving.
Here's another Mendelssohn anecdote that didn't fit into the article (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=476):
FMB gave the British premiere of Beethoven's E-flat Major Piano Concerto in 1829 in London. On July 13th he conducted a benefit concert which included Mendelssohn's Concerto for Two Pianos & Orchestra. Apparently Mendelssohn was not averse to pandering a little to the audience, and the rehearsals were adjusted, accordingly. He reports to his sister: "The last piece is played incredibly brilliantly by Moscheles, he just purls the runs off as if they were nothing. When that was over, everyone said that it was too bad that we had not included a cadenza and so I immediately culled a section in the last tutti of the first piece where the orchestra has a fermata... and Moscheles had no choice but to agree, on the spot, to compose a grand cadenza for it. We now calculated, with much merriment, whether the last little solo could still remain, since it should now be drowned out by applause. "We need a piece of tutti between the cadenza and the final solo passages", I said. "How long should they applaud?", asked Moscheles. "Zehn Minuten, I dare say", I answered. Moscheles haggled me down to five minutes. I promised to deliver the tutti--and so we took measure and stitched and turned and quilted, put in the sleeves à la mameluke and tailored a brilliant concerto. Today we have rehearsals again; we'll have a music-pot-luck: Moscheles brings the cadenza, and I the tutti."
Without a doubt,Mendelssohn is a very fine composer; his music is elegant,impeccably crafted and melodious. However, compared to some other great composers. such as Beethoven, Wagner, and his contemporary Schumann,his music is a little on the bland side.
Yet I still enjoy works such as the Italian and Scottish symphonies, the violin concerto, Misummer Night's Dream overture etc.
I also like the Calm Sea and Prosperous Voyage overture,which isn't heard all that often,and the Lobgesang symphony, and Elijah.
I listened to the Variations Sérieuses for piano today, played by Sofronitsky. I don't know the piece all that well, and will give it a couple more listens.
It's interesting how he uses fragments from Schumann's Carnaval (or is it the other way around?).
We're used to the dogma that the Romantics stressed originality above everything, but Schumann and Brahms borrowed themes all the time, too.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 03, 2009, 08:44:47 PM
Not all the time. He may be lacking in technical daring but some of his works are definitely not skim in technical profusion. He's not Brahms, but he sure gets close sometimes. Take his opus 44 for instance.
I've never listened to Op. 44; but from the few works I've listened to and performed by the composer, I've never felt challenged in both performance and listening settings.
Quote from: op.110 on February 05, 2009, 01:49:53 PM
I've never listened to Op. 44; but from the few works I've listened to and performed by the composer, I've never felt challenged in both performance and listening settings.
Well, don't expect late Beethoven, or anything like that, but some of his works are not exactly skimpy in technicalities. A lot of hidden contrapuntal devices and some of his formal developments are impeccable. Perhaps i went too far in comparing him with Brahms, but i wouldn't consider his works
simplistic. In fact, his technique is so damn assured one wonders if he couldn't have done more if he had been possessed by a more daring personality. Also, if you believe his expression is artificial, like a i do, you kinda have to stand in awe at the intelligence required to create such a lifelike counterfeit. :P
Quote from: jlaurson on February 04, 2009, 11:20:51 PM
Nearly everything in Mozart's work points to him continuously improving.
I said Mendelssohn, not Mozart.
Re My earlier anecdote about Wagner, I think the overture in question was actually the Calm Sea, Prosperous Voyage, not the Hebrides. As for my source for this memory, I think it is in a liner note at the bottom of a sealed box (which is under some other boxes). Surely someone here has read a couple of Wagner biographies and can confirm or deny my assertions?
Quote from: eyeresist on February 05, 2009, 05:31:16 PM
I said Mendelssohn, not Mozart.
Re My earlier anecdote about Wagner, I think the overture in question was actually the Calm Sea, Prosperous Voyage, not the Hebrides. As for my source for this memory, I think it is in a liner note at the bottom of a sealed box (which is under some other boxes). Surely someone here has read a couple of Wagner biographies and can confirm or deny my assertions?
I read Wagner's own biography, and he doesn't mention anything there. ;D He does talk about Mendelssohn on occasion, and his opinion of Felix isn't very great, though he seemed to respect the composer on a personal level. Just to show the type of situations described by Wagner, there is an interesting anecdote in the book where he talks about a rehearsal of Beethoven's 8th symphony in which both he and Mendelssohn were present. Outraged by the ineptitude of the conductor, Wagner walks to the podium and begins to discuss the work at length, pointing out mistakes in tempo and correcting interpretative issues. Back to Mendelssohn, he explains what he had just done. On the next attempt, the conductor decides to stubbornly stick to his own interpretation, but Mendelssohn, believing the performance was following the new directives, nods and congratulates the gaping Wagner for his interpretative skills. This story is obviously meant to show how Mendelssohn didn't really understand the music. Clever chap this Wagner, or so he thought. 8)
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 05, 2009, 05:54:12 PM
I read Wagner's own biography, and he doesn't mention anything there. ;D He does talk about Mendelssohn on occasion, and his opinion of Felix isn't very great, though he seemed to respect the composer on a personal level. Just to show the type of situations described by Wagner, there is an interesting anecdote in the book where he talks about a rehearsal of Beethoven's 8th symphony in which both he and Mendelssohn were present. Outraged by the ineptitude of the conductor, Wagner walks to the podium and begins to discuss the work at length, pointing out mistakes in tempo and correcting interpretative issues. Back to Mendelssohn, he explains what he had just done. On the next attempt, the conductor decides to stubbornly stick to his own interpretation, but Mendelssohn, believing the performance was following the new directives, nods and congratulates the gaping Wagner for his interpretative skills. This story is obviously meant to show how Mendelssohn didn't really understand the music. Clever chap this Wagner, or so he thought. 8)
I think I recall that story in Wagner's essay
On Conducting, the only writing of his I've read. I find the story a little difficult to credit as Wagner tells it, though. The man who revived the St Matthew Passion and introduced Schubert's Great C major must surely have had some solid grounding of knowledge and taste!
From Wagner's complaints about kapellmeister traditions of his time, it sounds like the 19th century was a mirror image of the 20th century, going backwards from Norrington to Furtwangler :)
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 05, 2009, 05:54:12 PM
This story is obviously meant to show how Mendelssohn didn't really understand the music. Clever chap this Wagner, or so he thought. 8)
Indeed this story may have been intended this way, and you're naively assuming it is true.
It's just an egomaniac complimenting himself, and by that time Mendelssohn wasn't around anymore to correct the account (apart from te fact that he probably had been too nice to do so) .
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 05, 2009, 03:17:18 PM
Well, don't expect late Beethoven, or anything like that, but some of his works are not exactly skimpy in technicalities. A lot of hidden contrapuntal devices and some of his formal developments are impeccable. Perhaps i went too far in comparing him with Brahms, but i wouldn't consider his works simplistic. In fact, his technique is so damn assured one wonders if he couldn't have done more if he had been possessed by a more daring personality. Also, if you believe his expression is artificial, like a i do, you kinda have to stand in awe at the intelligence required to create such a lifelike counterfeit. :P
I don't find it artificial. I just think he was a happy person.
Quote from: Herman on February 05, 2009, 07:09:14 PM
It's just an egomaniac complimenting himself
Sure sure, we all know what a rotten person Wagner was. Except he also turned out to be one of
the most expressive composers in western history. Egomaniac or not, it's kinda hard to dismiss him.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 05, 2009, 07:30:49 PM
Sure sure, we all know what a rotten person Wagner was. Except he also turned out to be one of the most expressive composers in western history. Egomaniac or not, it's kinda hard to dismiss him.
Doen't mean he couldn't be wrong. In fact, most biographies of him shows that he was mostly wrong when he ventured outside his own music.
Quote from: eyeresist on February 05, 2009, 05:31:16 PM
Re My earlier anecdote about Wagner, I think the overture in question was actually the Calm Sea, Prosperous Voyage, not the Hebrides. As for my source for this memory, I think it is in a liner note at the bottom of a sealed box (which is under some other boxes). Surely someone here has read a couple of Wagner biographies and can confirm or deny my assertions?
Unfortunately my Wagner Biography is by Houston Chamberlain... so whatever there wold be in it about Mendelssoh, I'm afraid to look it up. :)
However, Wagner had a few kind things to say about Mendelssohn (mainly when FMB was still alive). After hearing a performance of "Paulus" in Dresden, he said: "MB has shown us in this way, in utter refinement, a work that is proof of the highest achievement in the arts...". He conducted the 42nd Psalm and the "Scottish" Sy. a year after FMB had died, and called the Hebrides overture (If anything inspired the Dutchman, than this, not "Calm Sea") "one of the most beautiful masterpieces we have". (According to Cosima's Diary entries.) Certainly the choirs in Wagner's early operas show more than just a hint of the Mendelssohn oratorios... and that's not even bringing up Wagner's own cantata.
Obsessively listening to my favorite Mendelssohn Symphony, meanwhile:
(http://www.carus-verlag.com/images-intern/medien/80/8321300/8321300c.180.jpg)
ALL sacred, vocal Mendelssohn from Carus 14 CDs [half of them SACDs] for just E 179.- (http://www.carus-verlag.com/index.php3?selSprache=1&BLink=Gesamteinspielung)
Quote from: erato on February 05, 2009, 11:11:48 PM
Doen't mean he couldn't be wrong. In fact, most biographies of him shows that he was mostly wrong when he ventured outside his own music.
Wouldn't it be funny to read a letter of FMB's to his sister on that event... something along the lines of:
"Saw that obnoxious but talented Wagner-chap in rehearsal today. Butzenweiller conducted the Beethoven 8th and made a right hash of it. Wagner saw it fit to jump on stage, pontificate about Beethoven in general and tempi specifically--not without merit or justification, I should hasten to add, and then instructed Butzenweiller how to adapt to his instructions. The players were confused, and Butzenweiller conducted exactly the same way he had before, incapable of as little as a controlled ritard. Wagner, however, gloated next to me, beaming with joy how he had just helped the great master (Beethoven) to his due right. I didn't want to point out that nothing at all had changed in the performance and nodded at him friendly. He's a blustery chap, but I think he'll surprise us yet."
Quote from: jlaurson on February 06, 2009, 12:38:58 AM
Wouldn't it be funny to read a letter of FMB's to his sister on that event... something along the lines of:
"Saw that obnoxious but talented Wagner-chap in rehearsal today. Butzenweiller conducted the Beethoven 8th and made a right hash of it. Wagner saw it fit to jump on stage, pontificate about Beethoven in general and tempi specifically--not without merit or justification, I should hasten to add, and then instructed Butzenweiller how to adapt to his instructions. The players were confused, and Butzenweiller conducted exactly the same way he had before, incapable of as little as a controlled ritard. Wagner, however, gloated next to me, beaming with joy how he had just helped the great master (Beethoven) to his due right. I didn't want to point out that nothing at all had changed in the performance and nodded at him friendly. He's a blustery chap, but I think he'll surprise us yet."
This is extremely clever and imaginative.
Bravo!
QuoteExcept he also turned out to be one of the most expressive composers in western history.
"Expressive composers in Western history" is no small set, of course.
Mendelssohn is one of music's great geniuses. Anyone who asserts otherwise can't be taken seriously.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 05, 2009, 03:17:18 PM
Also, if you believe his expression is artificial, like a i do, you kinda have to stand in awe at the intelligence required to create such a lifelike counterfeit. :P
Agreed. Well put.
Daniel Barenboim chimes in:
"There are some composers who have written masterpieces that have contributed to the development of music, and others who have written masterpieces that have not had this kind of historical importance. For example, Mendelssohn. If he had not come on this earth, we would be so much the poorer for it. But music would have developed exactly the same way...."
http://www.metoperafamily.org/metopera/news/interviews/detail.aspx?id=6066
Quote from: The Unrepentant Pelleastrian on February 10, 2009, 06:35:02 PM
Daniel Barenboim chimes in:
"...For example, Mendelssohn. If he had not come on this earth, we would be so much the poorer for it. But music would have developed exactly the same way...."
I'm not sure that's true. My listening experience tells me that the symphonies of Schumann and Mendelssohn together set the mode for the mid-19th century Romantic symphony. I can hear them both in minor figures like Gernsheim and Reinecke, as well as masters like Brahms and Dvorak (and of course the earlier mentioned Wagner connection). Schumann's influence was more structural and thus easier to calculate, whereas Mendelssohn pioneered the more nebulous areas of orchestral colour and national flavour, particularly in the Scottish and Italian symphonies and the best known overtures, which we might also call important pregenitors of the later symphonic poem. I believe Nationalistic Romantic music might have been very different without Mendelssohn's example - certainly the Russians Borodin and Rimsky are indebted to him for his examples in colour and mood. I'd say Grieg is as well.
There is a kind of scherzo in 1845 - 1880 music, from Brahms to Tchaikovsky, which would not have had that same whispy elfin shape if Mendelssohn hadn't been around.
Quote from: The Unrepentant Pelleastrian on February 10, 2009, 06:35:02 PMIf Mendelssohn had not come on this earth, we would be so much the poorer for it. But music would have developed exactly the same way...."
Well, that's the stereotype--and measured against Beethoven, Haydn, or Wagner, it's not wrong--as far as stereotypes go.
These generalizations are very useful, because they allow us to compress complex facts into a few words... without them, we'd be very helplessly lost in a sea of information-overflow.
But if we wanted to pick it apart, we could do that, of course.
1.) Mendelssohn the conductor and orchestra builder had--in this "passive" role--a HUGE influence on how music developed. He created repertoire and thus made it more difficult for contemporary composers to stand out; style-wise and quality-wise. If that didn't affect the development of compositions, I don't know what did.
2.) Mendelssohn, the composer, influenced composition most lastingly in the field of the concert overture (as I wrote in my little appreciation (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=476))... which can be seen as the precursor to the Symphonic Poems of Liszt and even the Tone Poems of Strauss.
Quote from: The Unrepentant Pelleastrian on February 02, 2009, 08:37:51 PM
A nice piece in The Times last Saturday:
"Since World War II, Mr. Masur has fought to restore Mendelssohn's reputation. Mendelssohn, he said, should be given the same respect accorded Bach and Beethoven. As founder and chairman of the International Mendelssohn Foundation he has been involved in projects like restoring the composer's house in Leipzig, Germany, as a cultural center.
Mr. Masur suggests that inappropriate interpretations of Mendelssohn's music have also damaged his legacy. The "Scottish" Symphony, he said, is often played in a "harmless" manner, which "is a great mistake, as it's a very serious and dramatic piece"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/01/arts/music/01schw.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=mendelssohn&st=cse
******
Hear, hear!
:)
quote]
Did Mendelssohn really compose his first symphony at the age of 12?
Quote from: jlaurson on February 12, 2009, 01:18:14 AM
2.) Mendelssohn, the composer, influenced composition most lastingly in the field of the concert overture (as I wrote in my little appreciation)... which can be seen as the precursor to the Symphonic Poems of Liszt and even the Tone Poems of Strauss.
Mmmh, not really. Berlioz was the precursor to the Symphonic Poems of Liszt, and the precursor of Berlioz was Beethoven.
More of an argument to be made for Mendelssohn influencing Tchaikovsky, than Liszt, I think.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on October 21, 2009, 06:02:41 AM
Mmmh, not really. Barlioz was the precursor to the Symphonic Poems of Liszt, and the precursor of Berlioz was Beethoven.
"Mmmh, not really" is inadequate as a response to any statement, much less one that is backed up by a reasonably discriminating explanation in the text (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=476) you evidently couldn't be bothered reading.
Quote from: jlaurson on October 21, 2009, 07:12:36 AM
"Mmmh, not really" is inadequate as a response to any statement, much less one that is backed up by a reasonably discriminating explanation in the text (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=476) you evidently couldn't be bothered reading.
Ho well, its in the article. That means it
must be true. ::)
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on October 21, 2009, 07:17:45 AM
Ho well, its in the article. That means it must be true. ::)
Sometimes I wonder if curiosity and self-righteousness are in the proper balance...
I am really tired of the superficial, "fine composer, but no genius", attitude often expressed regarding Mendelssohn. IMO, people who say this kind of thing don't really listen to and love music as much as they use music as the vehicle for expressing opinions.
Quote from: Franco on October 21, 2009, 07:25:45 AM
I am really tired of the superficial, "fine composer, but no genius", attitude often expressed regarding Mendelssohn. IMO, people who say this kind of thing don't really listen to and love music as much as they use music as the vehicle for expressing opinions.
Or maybe they actually believe that Mendelssohn was a great composer, but not a genius. Hey, everything is possible, right?
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on October 21, 2009, 07:36:55 AM
Or maybe they actually believe that Mendelssohn was a great composer, but not a genius. Hey, everything is possible, right?
Sure, but why bother expressing that opinion other than to leave a t*rd in the punch bowl.
Quote from: Franco on October 21, 2009, 07:44:17 AM
Sure, but why bother expressing that opinion other than to leave a t*rd in the punch bowl.
Because that was the topic.
Quote from: Franco on October 21, 2009, 07:44:17 AM
Sure, but why bother expressing that opinion other than to leave a t*rd in the punch bowl.
Because that tidbit belongs in the same paragraph with the name "Mendelssohn" with the same imperative necessity and certainty, as you won't be able to read anything about "Le Sacre du Printemps" without also reading a reference to the premiere's riot. ;)
Horse-Carriage
LeSacre-Riot
Mendelssohn-notagenius
Wagner-antiSemite
Mozart-Wunderkind
Yes, the topic is Mendelssohn, not the idea of genius - which seems to be your obsession and one you trot out no matter who or what is the topic.
Well, and what else would he do with all those turds he's been stockpiling his whole life through?
Quote from: Franco on October 21, 2009, 07:50:29 AM
Yes, the topic is Mendelssohn, not the idea of genius - which seems to be your obsession and one you trot out no matter who or what is the topic.
No, the topic is whether Mendelssohn should be placed next to Bach or Beethoven (that is, whether he should be considered a genius) or not.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on October 21, 2009, 07:57:30 AM
No, the topic is whether Mendelssohn should be placed next to Bach or Beethoven (that is, whether he should be considered a genius) or not.
Ah, I stand corrected. I went back and read the opening post, and see what you mean. A rather pointless way to talk about Mendelssohn, IMO. You still flog the genius thing too much for my taste, but don't let that stop you and I am 100% confident it wouldn't.
Quote from: Franco on October 21, 2009, 08:07:15 AM
You still flog the genius thing too much for my taste
Its the only thing that matters as far as i'm concerned. Everything else is just window dressing.
(http://www.the-romans.co.uk/gallery3/bigimages/04.gladiators.jpg)
Quote from: MN Dave on October 21, 2009, 08:08:34 AM
(http://www.the-romans.co.uk/gallery3/bigimages/04.gladiators.jpg)
I recognized Mendelssohn in that picture right away!
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on October 21, 2009, 08:08:24 AM
Its the only thing that matters as far as i'm concerned.
Your obsession with it has not improved your understanding of it. Nor is everyone in the world interested in your myopic tunnel-vision. (Just saying.)
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on October 21, 2009, 08:08:24 AM
Its the only thing that matters as far as i'm concerned. Everything else is just window dressing.
Then you don't matter?
He doesn't look much in the window, either.
Everytime I return to Mendelssohn's music, I love it more. My recent listening to his solo piano work, Piano Trio in D minor, and his symphonies (via Karajan's set) only confirms this again. There is a quality to Mendelssohn that draws me, but I cannot put into words.
8)
Although of course he later surpassed Mendelssohn, I think Felix's early compositions are superior to Wolfgang's. He was the superior child prodigy.
Quite a bit of outstanding music from Mendelssohn!!!! :)
Quote from: Scion7 on April 28, 2012, 03:05:22 PM
Although of course he later surpassed Mendelssohn, I think Felix's early compositions are superior to Wolfgang's. He was the superior child prodigy.
Quite a bit of outstanding music from Mendelssohn!!!! :)
I don't know about that.
http://www.youtube.com/v/RS73OQPipkw
Well, Mendelssohn is one of my favourite composers (neither Bach nor Beethoven are), so in my own little subjective world of theoretical illiteracy, his music has far more emotional intensity and intrigue than the others.
i used to lump mendelssohn with mozart in the 'highly polished geniuses who leave me cold'
but recently ive been finding the humanity in both
The ouverture Wagner was inspired by (and might have taken some motives from for Rheingold although they are kind of "naturally" used for representing flowing water) was "Die schöne Melusine" (the fair Melusina). Brahms is supposed to have said about the "Hebrides" that he was incapable of writing anything as beautiful as this.