Richard Wagner: The Greatest Influence on Western Music?

[BachQ]

Can we measure a composer's influence?  How can we assess the influences that one composer has (or has had) upon another?  Or is the exercise entirely subjective and beyond quantification and/or comparison?

FWIW, a university study dating from 2000 purports to measure and compare the relative "influence(s)" of composers (the study can be found here -- scroll down to the heading "The 111 Most Influential Composers").  Acccording to the site: "decisions as to which composers and which of their works should be included were based on objective criteria, not subjective preferences." The top 25 composers, in order of influence, are:

1. Wagner, Richard  1016. (++)
2. Bach, Johann Sebastian  975.
3. Debussy, Claude  874. (++)
4. Stravinsky, Igor  858. (++)
5. Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus  822. (-)
6. Beethoven, Ludwig van  756. (-)
7. Liszt, Franz  640. (+)
8. Schoenberg, Arnold  567. (+++)
9. Chopin, Fryderyk  500. (+)
10. Schumann, Robert  481.
11. Brahms, Johannes  456. (-)
12. Mendelssohn, Felix  383.
13. Strauss, Richard  381.
14. Haydn, Franz Joseph  347. (-)
15. Rossini, Gioachino  333. (+)
16. Ravel, Maurice  327.
17. Palestrina, Giovanni Pierluigi da  314. (++++)
18. Berlioz, Hector  309. (+)
19. Corelli, Arcangelo  299. (+++)
20. Gluck, Christoph W. R. von  295. (+++)
21. Tchaikovsky, Pyotr Il'yich  271. (-)
22. Bartók, Béla  265.
23. Mahler, Gustav  261.
24. Monteverdi, Claudio  257. (++)
25. Webern, Anton  256. (++)

There's a separate entry for each composer which highlights the composers upstream and downstream influences.  For example, Beethoven has supposedly influenced:

Alkan; ++Bartók; Berlioz; Berwald; +Bizet; ++Bloch; +Boito; +Borodin; +BRAHMS; BRUCKNER; Carulli; Chopin; Czerny; ++Dukas; +Dvorák; Franck; Giuliani; ++Honegger; +Indy; +Ives; +++Kagel; Lalo; Liszt; ++Mahler; ++Medtner; Mendelssohn; Mendelssohn-Hensel; Nicolai; Paganini; +Paine; ++Reger; Reicha; ++Schoenberg; SCHUBERT; C Schumann; R Schumann; ++Shostakovich; ++Sibelius; Spohr; ++Stenhammar; ++Tippett; +++Tower; WAGNER; Weber; ++Webern

[hornteacher]

Looks like somebody was trying to get a Doctorate.  I hope our tax money didn't fund this study!

[Steve]

I'd like to know their method. Was it simply a matter of surveying music in search of references or themes of other composers?

[Brian]

Like Charles Murray, in "Human Accomplishment", listing the greatest composers in order on a scale of 1-100 (1. Beethoven 2. Mozart 3. Wagner can't remember the rest). It was just dumb.

[quintett op.57]

pffffffffff!
How come there are no CPE Bach, Handel, Vivaldi or Paganini in that list?
this is ideological again.
Haydn had 2 or 3 times less influence than Mozart?
This you can't measure

[quintett op.57]

I'd like to know their method. Was it simply a matter of surveying music in search of references or themes of other composers?

here is their method :

It must of course be admitted that these scores and rankings are no better than our perceptions and knowledge of who really did have an influence on whom

[Bunny]

Why would anyone want to quantify the influence of composers?  How does it serve anyone?  Does it enhance anyone's enjoyment of music or deepen anyone's understanding?  This is one of those things that academic types waste time and research dollars on.

[oyasumi]

Why would anyone want to quantify the influence of composers?  How does it serve anyone?  Does it enhance anyone's enjoyment of music or deepen anyone's understanding?  This is one of those things that academic types waste time and research dollars on.

It can be fun, and certainly accomplishes more than complaining about it does. A lot of my peers were surprised to learn that Wagner was perhaps the most written about composer; he's not someone many people think of when asked to name a composer. That he's number one on this list is interesting, subjective or objective or whatever.

[quintett op.57]

Why would anyone want to quantify the influence of composers?  How does it serve anyone?  Does it enhance anyone's enjoyment of music or deepen anyone's understanding?  This is one of those things that academic types waste time and research dollars on.

Why would anyone want to talk about music?

[Bunny]

Why would anyone want to talk about music?

Talking about music is one thing.  Measuring the unmeasurable is another.  It's enough to recognize that certain composers have been more influential than others.  Quantifying how influential any composer was serves no useful purpose, nor does ranking the composers by how influential they are believed to be. 

[The Mad Hatter]

Wagner above Bach?! Seriously?

[Grazioso]

It's not a foolish or futile exercise, unless one wants to arrive at an end result with mathematical exactitude. To some extent, you can indeed measure--or at least note--influence, based on the writings and recorded conversations of composers and of course similarities in their work and the adoption by a bunch of composers of a new style or genre opened up by another. Studying all that would probably be a very illuminating musico-historical exercise.

[MishaK]

This thread is starting to remind me of the page that was ripped out of the textbook in "Dead Poets Society".

[karlhenning]

This thread is starting to remind me of the page that was ripped out of the textbook in "Dead Poets Society".

Word.

Great thread, D Minor!

[knight66]

I wonder if 'influence' included where certain composers disliked another's works so intently that they worked away from the detested style...Debussy and Wagner are one such where the younger composer reviled the composition of the older and attempted to produce work that was different as against 'the school of'.

Mike

[Steve]

I simply cannot comprehend the relative positioning of Stravinski over Mozart! It is certinly possible to debate, to taste and preference, the greatness of Mozart, but slandering his name by presuming Igor Stravinski to have had more influence of the Western Tradition of Classical Music! Mozart transformed absolutely every musical formed he touched! He has maintained his influence on society for hundreds of years! Wagner over Bach! Blasphemy!

[BachQ]

[Steve]

I just noticed this- Debussy over Mozart! Slander! Slander! Ok, I'm finished now. I can't imagine anyone here ascribing any validity to this survey. But, might I propose another, for our more philosophically savy? Perhaps a thread on objective standards of aesthetics in music. Now that would be a mighty thread. 

[Bunny]

I couldn't understand how they arrived at their ratings either.  If you change any one of the criteria or add another that whole system will fall apart.  The thing about statistical analysis is that it is so easy to manipulate the results by adding or discarding criteria which is why the whole exercise is meaningless.  If you really consider things, the earlier a composer lived, the more other composers he will have influenced either directly or indirectly.  Although Bach may not have changed the course of Western music the way Beethoven did, his influence is so deep and pervasive that it's silly to say that he has had less influence or less important influence on other composers.  Also, we have to consider that Bach's influence was more deeply felt by those who came after him than his contemporaries who probably regarded his music as "old fashioned."

[jochanaan]

I simply cannot comprehend the relative positioning of Stravinski over Mozart! It is certinly possible to debate, to taste and preference, the greatness of Mozart, but slandering his name by presuming Igor Stravinski to have had more influence of the Western Tradition of Classical Music! Mozart transformed absolutely every musical formed he touched! He has maintained his influence on society for hundreds of years! Wagner over Bach! Blasphemy!

I just noticed this- Debussy over Mozart! Slander! Slander! Ok, I'm finished now. I can't imagine anyone here ascribing any validity to this survey. But, might I propose another, for our more philosophically savy? Perhaps a thread on objective standards of aesthetics in music. Now that would be a mighty thread. 

Have you considered that the influence of the Bachs, Haydn and Mozart has had nearly three centuries to grow, while that of Debussy and Stravinsky has had only one?  Given this, I'd say that the latter composers' achievements are at least as impressive as the former ones'.

A case could be made for Philip Glass being one of the most influential composers of the last half-century.

Of course, we must make sure our personal prejudices don't get in the way of our recognition of influence.