Extremely Long Piano Compositions - What's Their Point?

[Florestan]

Can somebody please explain me what is the point of such works as Sorabji's Opus Clavicembalisticum, which takes five hours to perform and listen to, or Symphonic Variations for Piano, ditto nine hours? I personally fail to see any at all and honestly, I regard such monstrosities as a sign of the composer's not entirely healthy mental state. I mean, what normal person can imagine that another normal person will have the physical stamina to play the piano for five or nine hours uninterruptedly and yet another normal person will have the mental stamina to listen for five or nine hours uninterruptedly? But then again maybe I'm a philistine, so please enlighten me.

[Jo498]

Sorabji was apparently a megalomaniac. I am not aware of many other compositions of this kind. The longest standard repertoire piece is probably the Goldberg variations with all repeats (around 80 min) and often some repeats will be skipped (and it's doubtful if it was intended for complete public performance). Late Schubert sonatas, Beethoven's op.106 & 120, Ives' Sonata, Reger's variations are usually well under one hour.

[Florestan]

Sorabji was apparently a megalomaniac.

That's exactly my impression, but he was not alone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest_non-repetitive_piano_pieces

[DavidW]

It must be incredibly difficult to master the playing the piece if it would take most of a work day to just play it once.

[Atriod]

If anyone is looking for my Schumann CDs they'll be in my recycling because I can only listen to music from composers in a "healthy mental state." By modern medical standards I guess that includes major depression as well, I might just go into a not so "healthy mental state" with the loss of both Schumann and Rachmaninoff 🙁

But then again maybe I'm a philistine, so please enlighten me.

Please, I wasn't born yesterday, it's your usual surface level trolling.

[Florestan]

It must be incredibly difficult to master the playing the piece if it would take most of a work day to just play it once.

Hence my question: what's the point of that, other than musical megalomania? (not to say general insanity). 

[Jo498]

It's a bit like performing double or triple Ironman distance triathlon.
You get to do something quite difficult and special but not that many people are interested in it, so it's actually far less competitive than standard Ironman triathlon (which in turn is less competitive than standard marathon or professional bike racing).

Similarly, when composing or performing a 20-30 min piece you compete with 100s of pieces by great composers but by writing or performing 3-8 hour pieces you create something special by its sheer length and the stamina needed to perform it.

[Florestan]

It's a bit like performing double or triple Ironman distance triathlon.
You get to do something quite difficult and special but not that many people are interested in it, so it's actually far less competitive than standard Ironman triathlon (which in turn is less competitive than standard marathon or professional bike racing).

Similarly, when composing or performing a 20-30 min piece you compete with 100s of pieces by great composers but by writing or performing 3-8 hour pieces you create something special by its sheer length and the stamina needed to perform it.

Yes, but this very fact more often than not precludes performance and recording, so actually your music will be heard by pretty much nobody. I should have thought a composer's purpose was to have his music performed in order that people can listen to it and presumably enjoy it. What purpose does writing a 9-hour-long piano piece that nobody will ever perform, let alone listen to, serves?

[Jo498]

Supposedly Schönberg said "Kunst kommt nicht von Können, sondern von Müssen" (Art does not derive from being able to but from being compelled to). There was a similar saying in German directed against incompetent ambitious art, that Art comes from being capable not from wanting something (Kunst kommt von Können, wenn es von Wollen käme, hieße es Wunst).
So I'd guess these artists really felt compelled to write such huge pieces, despite having hardly any chance of performance.
Many others have written "normal sized pieces" with hardly any chance of performance...

[Florestan]

So I'd guess these artists really felt compelled to write such huge pieces, despite having hardly any chance of performance.

The typical ivory tower artist, then. They write music because they can and they must, not because they have something to say about human life and experience that they want to share with their audience.

[springrite]

Sorabji prohibited the playing of his works. He was essentially composing them for himself and for its own sake. Since that is the case, it's not anybody's business as to "why" or "what's the point".

[Mandryka]

Can somebody please explain me what is the point of such works as Sorabji's Opus Clavicembalisticum, which takes five hours to perform and listen to, or Symphonic Variations for Piano, ditto nine hours? I personally fail to see any at all and honestly, I regard such monstrosities as a sign of the composer's not entirely healthy mental state. I mean, what normal person can imagine that another normal person will have the physical stamina to play the piano for five or nine hours uninterruptedly and yet another normal person will have the mental stamina to listen for five or nine hours uninterruptedly? But then again maybe I'm a philistine, so please enlighten me.

I saw some things in the theatre this length and longer  - Peter Brook's Mahabahrata and a production of Dostoevsky's Idiots from St Petersburg were both nine hours, and I think Faust I and II took a while.  Parsifal and Tristan and  Gotterdammerung are long hauls, you arrive at about 5:30 and leave about 11 - though you've had some dinner in the process, admittedly. All these things are broken up into three sections. I know nothing about Sorabji - is his stuff broken up too?

[Mookalafalas]

Sorabji prohibited the playing of his works. He was essentially composing them for himself and for its own sake. Since that is the case, it's not anybody's business as to "why" or "what's the point".

  If that's the case, it certainly reframes the whole situation. Perhaps it's just his way of meditation, like knitting a giant comforter...

[springrite]

If that's the case, it certainly reframes the whole situation. Perhaps it's just his way of meditation, like knitting a giant comforter...

Yes. Every if he does have a mental illness, it is certainly the best way to live with the illness, isn't it?

[relm1]

Can somebody please explain me what is the point of such works as Sorabji's Opus Clavicembalisticum, which takes five hours to perform and listen to, or Symphonic Variations for Piano, ditto nine hours? I personally fail to see any at all and honestly, I regard such monstrosities as a sign of the composer's not entirely healthy mental state. I mean, what normal person can imagine that another normal person will have the physical stamina to play the piano for five or nine hours uninterruptedly and yet another normal person will have the mental stamina to listen for five or nine hours uninterruptedly? But then again maybe I'm a philistine, so please enlighten me.

Maybe he wasn't writing it for you and people who ask what's the point but for those future audiences who might better get it.  For example, same question can be asked 100 years ago about what was the point of Mahler's gigantic symphonies that were never played back then because of the insane level of demands on audience and performers where today they are played all the time by a wide range of orchestras.

[Maestro267]

What's the point of anything being as long as it is? Most opera plots can be basically summed up in a few sentences so why do they take as long as they do? Salome. Bloke gets a girl to dance for him. Other bloke has his head chopped off. Bish bash bosh, everyone go home and thanks for your thirty quid or whatever.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Supposedly Schönberg said "Kunst kommt nicht von Können, sondern von Müssen"

I have this slogan on a T-shirt that I bought at the Schoenberg Center in Vienna.

Sorabji prohibited the playing of his works. He was essentially composing them for himself and for its own sake. Since that is the case, it's not anybody's business as to "why" or "what's the point".

I can think of a number of artists like this, who were mostly doing art for their own amusement (Charles Ives, Emily Dickinson, various "outsider" artists). The difference is, they didn't prohibit dissemination of their works; they just weren't interested in promoting themselves. I do find the phenomenon of an artist who doesn't want others to experience his art very odd; it's like a chef who eats all the food he cooks.

[Florestan]

I saw some things in the theatre this length and longer  - Peter Brook's Mahabahrata and a production of Dostoevsky's Idiots from St Petersburg were both nine hours, Parsifal takes a long time, you arrive at about 5:30 and leave about 11 - though you've had some dinner in the process, admittedly. All these things are broken up into three sections.

I'm not talking about opera or drama, where there is --- presumably --- enough action and extra-musical elements such as costumes and stage design to keep one's interest alive for a few hours with a few breaks, including for refreshment. That is a different matter altogether from a few hours of interrupted piano playing which someone is supposed to listen to.

[Florestan]

Maybe he wasn't writing it for you and people who ask what's the point but for those future audiences who might better get it.  For example, same question can be asked 100 years ago about what was the point of Mahler's gigantic symphonies that were never played back then because of the insane level of demands on audience and performers where today they are played all the time by a wide range of orchestras.

Mahler's longest symphony is shorter than an average opera, so your comparison is moot. And I don't know what you mean by "they were never played back then". Then, when? Certainly not during Mahler's own time, he alone conducted The Third 15 times. As for future audiences, I doubt that in 100 years the physiological and psychological constitution of the humans will change as drastically as to enable them to sit stiff and still in a concert hall for five hours listening to some bloke playing the piano all that time, or to do the same with a recording in the privacy of their home.

[Florestan]

I do find the phenomenon of an artist who doesn't want others to experience his art very odd

Of course.

I'm not even sure that we can talk about genuine art in such cases.