why do some composers dismiss other composers?

[paulb]

Such as Brahms strong objections to Wagner.
And then of course the well known vehement attacks on the music of Beethoven from Debussy and Ravel.
Anyone care to share their ideas? I do not wish this topic to be locked, so please show your  virtues of restraint and tolerance. And kindness.
Another conflict of one composer upon another was that of Bartok upon his equally famous contemporary that of Shostakovich.

[Ephemerid]

I love Debussy, but he could also be wrong.  The again, he loved Bach very much, so I can't fault him there!    In Debussy's case, he was resisting the whole German/Austrian romantic tradition from Beethoven to Wagner ("music with sauerkraut" as he called it-- or was that Satie?).

In some cases, certain composers go through phases-- I don't recall the details now, but for a long time Stravinsky had a low opinion of Beethoven, but later in life came to appreciate him a lot.  And also remember how Stravinsky dismissed Schoenberg & serialism-- until after Schoenberg died!

I'd say composers, even brilliant ones, are just as suceptible to prejudices as anyone else. 

[71 dB]

In average, composers are just as narrow-minded as other people. Artists have strong opinions. Combine these two facts and you have composers disliking other composers

[ChamberNut]

In average, composers are just as narrow-minded as other people. Artists have strong opinions. Combine these two facts and you have composers disliking other composers

Very true.  Well said.

[ChamberNut]

Tchaikovsky and Brahms, born on the same day (not year, but same day), despised each other's music.

I find it interesting that Tchaikovsky's pupil, Taneyev, composed his Piano Quintet and Piano Trio, which have an unmistakable 'Brahmsian' flavour to them.  I wonder what Tchaikovsky's opinion of these works were?

[Ephemerid]

ME:

I'd say composers, even brilliant ones, are just as suceptible to prejudices as anyone else. 

71dB:

In average, composers are just as narrow-minded as other people. Artists have strong opinions. Combine these two facts and you have composers disliking other composers

I think your statement is actually closer to the truth than mine.

[paulb]

I love Debussy, but he could also be wrong.  The again, he loved Bach very much, so I can't fault him there!    In Debussy's case, he was resisting the whole German/Austrian romantic tradition from Beethoven to Wagner ("music with sauerkraut" as he called it-- or was that Satie?).

In some cases, certain composers go through phases-- I don't recall the details now, but for a long time Stravinsky had a low opinion of Beethoven, but later in life came to appreciate him a lot.  And also remember how Stravinsky dismissed Schoenberg & serialism-- until after Schoenberg died!

I'd say composers, even brilliant ones, are just as suceptible to prejudices as anyone else. 

But actually Debussy and ravel were very impressed, overwhelmed with some of Wagner. I believe i read something that Debussy remarked to Ravel "have you ever heard music as lovely as whats in Tristan?" As of  this month i made my journey into Tristan, and can understand why Debussy made that comment to Ravel, it definetly sweeps you away in luxurious textures.
I recall reading somewhere about when Bartok was composing CfO on the radio came Shostakovich's 5th, music that he felt was not all that pleasing "Where has gone the simple beauty?"
So Bartok at that point inserted a   most simply and lovely passage as rebuttal to Shostakovich's "crassness". The short passage is very beautiful.
I have always found that story amusing and humorous as one great reacts upon the other. In my collection I have placed my Barok cds right next to Shostakovich.

Debussy and ravel did acknowledge Beethoven's supreme genius in composition, just that his taste was somewhat off.
I was unaware that Stravinsky was not fond of Schonberg. I would suspect Sibelius did not care at all for scond viennese either.

Boulez says in a interview , can be seen on youtube, that Schonberg can be traced back to Brahms, Berg to ? , can't recall what Boulez said there, and that Webern in his opinion, has no obvious roots of influence, as though Webern was a  genre all unique to his style.
But obviously Webern can be traced to his teacher, Schonberg.

[paulb]

In average, composers are just as narrow-minded as other people. Artists have strong opinions. Combine these two facts and you have composers disliking other composers

True. but i always find it more interesting when one genius reacts, negatively at times, to another genius in the arts of equal calibre.  Moreso of interest than any opinion of 'average man'. With high genius composers, its like A  clash of titans

[ChamberNut]

Brahms expressed his opinion of a Liszt work without using words.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz........... 

[karlhenning]

In average, composers are just as narrow-minded as other people.

Oh, speak for yourself.  Much on the contrary, composers and artists in general make a point, in their training, of making the engaged acquaintance of a great variety of artwork, which is simply not true of the great majority of the general public.

On behalf of self-taught composers, obviously, I cannot presume to speak.

Artists have strong opinions.

That is true enough.

Paul, I dismiss the superfluous hyphen in your subject header 

[paulb]

Tchaikovsky and Brahms, born on the same day (not year, but same day), despised each other's music.

I find it interesting that Tchaikovsky's pupil, Taneyev, composed his Piano Quintet and Piano Trio, which have an unmistakable 'Brahmsian' flavour to them.  I wonder what Tchaikovsky's opinion of these works were?

Maybe Tchaikovsky said of Taneyev after hearing the Brahms influence "didn't I teach that boy to stay away from bad influences?" .
I wonder what it was that Brahms and Tchaikovsky had qualms with on each others music, neither's music seems to be offensive in any way, but actually compliments each others styles, beautiful melodies in both composers.

[paulb]

Oh, speak for yourself.  Much on the contrary, composers and artists in general make a point, in their training, of making the engaged acquaintance of a great variety of artwork, which is simply not true of the great majority of the general public.

On behalf of self-taught composers, obviously, I cannot presume to speak.

That is true enough.

Paul, I dismiss the superfluous hyphen in your subject header 

I think what 71 was trying to get across was that composers can be just like real people, they are not gods , so beyond reproach.

The hypen does not belong there. Poor gramar, but good topic...ahh thats grammar, just looked it up

[(poco) Sforzando]

First of all, Brahms did admire Wagner (although the feeling was not reciprocated, except in a grudging way: when Wagner heard Brahms's Haydn Variations, he offered the left-handed compliment that "there are still things to be done with the old forms in the hands of someone who knows how to use them"). But the point is not that "composers are just as narrow-minded as other people." Composers, especially strong composers, are not just "other people." They are impelled by an inner fire to pursue their own artistic visions, and if other composers get in their way, watch out! The ability of a strong composer to be a critic is sharply circumscribed by the composer's primary need to forge their own styles. Hence the antipathy of a Debussy to Beethoven. Debussy wasn't stupid, and he knew perfectly well that Beethoven was a mighty creative figure. But the firm Austro-Germanic logic of Beethoven's sonata forms, and their enormous influence on 19th-century composition from Schubert to Mendelssohn to Brahms to Wagner to Mahler and more, represented exactly the antithesis of the more fluid and sensuous style Debussy was forging for the first time in musical history. Hence Debussy not only wasn't fair to Beethoven, he couldn't be fair to Beethoven while being true to himself. We as mere listeners are not similarly obligated; we have the luxury of being as fair as we can to a wide variety of deserving composers.

[paulb]

This is the article i recently came upon that awakened me to this unusual sense of competition and actaul resentment of one composer upon another. With each side actually forming groups. Though I suspect Wagner had few composer friends. He stood alone.

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

[paulb]

First of all, Brahms did admire Wagner (although the feeling was not reciprocated, except in a grudging way: when Wagner heard Brahms's Haydn Variations, he offered the left-handed compliment that "there are still things to be done with the old forms in the hands of someone who knows how to use them"). But the point is not that "composers are just as narrow-minded as other people." Composers, especially strong composers, are not just "other people." They are impelled by an inner fire to pursue their own artistic visions, and if other composers get in their way, watch out! The ability of a strong composer to be a critic is sharply circumscribed by the composer's primary need to forge their own styles. Hence the antipathy of a Debussy to Beethoven. Debussy wasn't stupid, and he knew perfectly well that Beethoven was a mighty creative figure. But the firm Austro-Germanic logic of Beethoven's sonata forms, and their enormous influence on 19th-century composition from Schubert to Mendelssohn to Brahms to Wagner to Mahler and more, represented exactly the antithesis of the more fluid and sensuous style Debussy was forging for the first time in musical history. Hence Debussy not only wasn't fair to Beethoven, he couldn't be fair to Beethoven while being true to himself. We as mere listeners are not similarly obligated; we have the luxury of being as fair as we can to a wide variety of deserving composers.

Fine post.
Where you say that Debussy had of inner necessity to be true to his own inner creative self, thus the music of Beethoven would have stifled that creative process. Debussy did acknowledge the genius of Beethoven, neither could Ravel deny. I do believe both french genius were so impacted by Wagner, so much so, that  new possibilities were opened to both composers imaginations. I hear Wagner as the first modernist, though Debussy's Prelude to a Afternoon of a   Fawn is usually cited as the beginnings of modernism.

[Ephemerid]

Oh, speak for yourself.  Much on the contrary, composers and artists in general make a point, in their training, of making the engaged acquaintance of a great variety of artwork, which is simply not true of the great majority of the general public.

But even being well acquainted with other composers' works (and with art in general) there is still some surprising dismissals or at least some strong disparagment of other composers.  

But then, I didn't think about what Sforzando is saying-- basically something like Harold Bloom's "anxiety of influence."  

~~~~~~~~~~~~

p.s. to add: should be "But even being well acquainted with other composers' works (and with art in general) there are still some surprising dismissals or at least some strong disparagment of other composers."   

[karlhenning]

I think what 71 was trying to get across was that composers can be just like real people, they are not gods, so beyond reproach.

No one is calling them gods, or beyond reproach, Paul.  But the fact is, that a composer ought to have (a) more knowledge and (b) more curiosity of music, than The Listener in the Street.

[karlhenning]

But even being well acquainted with other composers' works (and with art in general) there is still some surprising dismissals or at least some strong disparagment of other composers.  

Oh, to be sure. Many artists take part of their departure from, the art they do not want to make.

[Ephemerid]

I do believe both french genius were so impacted by Wagner, so much so, that  new possibilities were opened to both composers imaginations. I hear Wagner as the first modernist, though Debussy's Prelude to a Afternoon of a   Fawn is usually cited as the beginnings of modernism.

What was it Debussy said about Wagner being a sunset being mistaken for a new dawn?  

Debussy's relationship to Wagner's music is peculiar-- Pelleas et Melisande doesn't sound like Wagner, but it could not have existed without Wagner's influence.  Debussy later came to dislike Wagner and claimed to not owe him anything.  

Wagner took tonal chromaticism as far as it could go.  Schoenberg took it to the next logical step.  Debussy opted instead for modes, all sorts of parallel fifths, "exotic" scales, etc.  Wagner was the crossroads in a way-- Debussy and Stravinsky (up to around 1950) taking the modified "tonal" route while Schoenberg, Berg & Webern started to push toward a lack of key centre.  That's the short version & there's a lot more nuance to that of course...

[paulb]

What was it Debussy said about Wagner being a sunset being mistaken for a new dawn?  

Debussy's relationship to Wagner's music is peculiar-- Pelleas et Melisande doesn't sound like Wagner, but it could not have existed without Wagner's influence.  Debussy later came to dislike Wagner and claimed to not owe him anything.  

Wagner took tonal chromaticism as far as it could go.  Schoenberg took it to the next logical step.  Debussy opted instead for modes, all sorts of parallel fifths, "exotic" scales, etc.  Wagner was the crossroads in a way-- Debussy and Stravinsky (up to around 1950) taking the modified "tonal" route while Schoenberg, Berg & Webern started to push toward a lack of key centre.  That's the short version & there's a lot more nuance to that of course...

Excellent post, much to ponder But   the last tech part is abit out my reach.