Classical Music Forum banner

Franz Liszt

56K views 218 replies 85 participants last post by  Open Lane 
#1 ·


Liszt was the only contemporary whose music Richard Wagner gratefully acknowledged as an influence upon his own. His lasting fame was an alchemy of extraordinary digital ability -- the greatest in the history of keyboard playing -- an unmatched instinct for showmanship, and one of the most progressive musical imaginations of his time. Hailed by some as a visionary, reviled by others as a symbol of empty Romantic excess, Franz Liszt wrote his name across music history in a truly inimitable manner.

From his youth, Liszt demonstrated a natural facility at the keyboard that placed him among the top performing prodigies of his day. Though contemporary accounts describe his improvisational skill as dazzling, his talent as a composer emerged only in his adulthood. Still, he was at the age of eleven the youngest contributor to publisher Anton Diabelli's famous variation commissioning project, best remembered as the inspiration for Beethoven's final piano masterpiece. An oft-repeated anecdote -- first recounted by Liszt himself decades later, and possibly fanciful -- has Beethoven attending a recital given by the youngster and bestowing a kiss of benediction upon him.

Though already a veteran of the stage by his teens, Liszt recognized the necessity of further musical tuition. He studied for a time with Czerny and Salieri in Vienna, and later sought acceptance to the Paris Conservatory. When he was turned down there -- foreigners were not then admitted -- he instead studied privately with Anton Reicha. Ultimately, his Hungarian origins proved a great asset to his career, enhancing his aura of mystery and exoticism and inspiring an extensive body of works, none more famous than the Hungarian Rhapsodies (1846-1885).

Liszt soon became a prominent figure in Parisian society, his romantic entanglements providing much material for gossip. Still, not even the juiciest accounts of his amorous exploits could compete with the stories about his wizardry at the keyboard. Inspired by the superhuman technique -- and, indeed, diabolical stage presence -- of the violinist Paganini, Liszt set out to translate these qualities to the piano. As his career as a touring performer, conductor, and teacher burgeoned, he began to devote an increasing amount of time to composition. He wrote most of his hundreds of original piano works for his own use; accordingly, they are frequently characterized by technical demands that push performers -- and in Liszt's own day, the instrument itself -- to their limits. The "transcendence" of his Transcendental Etudes (1851), for example, is not a reference to the writings of Emerson and Thoreau, but an indication of the works' level of difficulty. Liszt was well into his thirties before he mastered the rudiments of orchestration -- works like the Piano Concerto No. 1 (1849) were orchestrated by talented students -- but made up for lost time in the production of two "literary" symphonies (Faust, 1854-1857, and Dante, 1855-1856) and a series of orchestral essays (including Les préludes, 1848-1854) that marks the genesis of the tone poem as a distinct genre.

After a lifetime of near-constant sensation, Liszt settled down somewhat in his later years. In his final decade he joined the Catholic Church and devoted much of his creative effort to the production of sacred works. The complexion of his music darkened; the flash that had characterized his previous efforts gave way to a peculiar introspection, manifested in strikingly original, forward-looking efforts like Nuages gris (1881). Liszt died in Bayreuth, Germany, on July 31, 1886, having outlived Wagner, his son-in-law and greatest creative beneficiary.

(Article taken from All Music Guide)

What do you all think of this wonderful composer? His orchestral works and piano concertos are just amazing.
 
See less See more
1
  • Like
Reactions: Klassik
#172 ·
Diana Damrau's Liszt lieder album = A1 sauce... you guys must hear her!
 
#175 ·
It's funny how our minds can sometimes allow us to go months and months or even years without listening to a certain composer and almost forgetting the magic that can be found in their music. Listening to Liszt's Annees de Pelerinage the last couple days and I'm spellbound by it. If you asked me 3 days ago my impression of Liszt, I might have given a "meh", but now I've done a 180. I guess it's a lesson to not get stuck in listening ruts or trust the criticizing mind that humans seem to wield too often.
 
#176 · (Edited)
Liszt is my second favourite piano composer...I fell in love with his Sospiro (Three Concert Etudes, no.3) while watching the movie Shine. Then I decided to listen to other pieces and I discovered him as a brilliant composer whose music ever don't bore me. I bought also a biography, but I haven't time to read it yet...I have to find the time, but I already know a lot about his life.
I definitely love :

-his First Piano Concerto
-Sonata in B Minor, HIS masterpiece IMO
- Annèes de Pelegrinage: Italie, Suisse (particularly Au bord d'une sorce, Les cloches de Geneve, Il Penseroso and the sublime Apres une lecture de Dante)
- Etudes d'execution trascendentale (particularly Paysage, Feux follets, Harmonies du soir, Chasse-neige)
-Grandes Etudes de Paganini (no. 5 and 6)
-Dante's Symphony, one of his beautiful masterpieces
-Deux Legendes, Saint Francois de Paule marchant sur les flots
-Romance oublieè
-Schlaflos! Frage und Antwort, one of his last pieces

His music is really evocative, romantic and brilliantly composed. Its music has also variety, he can be powerful at one time, and tormenting at another time, but he never loose his magic.
 
#177 · (Edited)
May I jump into your conversation on Liszt?
A big part of Liszt's works is transcriptions. I would add the transcriptions of Liszt on operas, lieder, paraphrases, Reminiscences. The transcriptions on Schubert's lieder are very interesting. It's like the chief cook Schubert invented the main dishes (melodies), then Liszt took the dishes, add spices, salt, pepper, put his decoration..then serve.
And Just finished the transcriptions of Mendelssohn's Songs without words.
 
#181 · (Edited)
I have a question for anyone who can reply.

What is Liszt's actual birth name: Franz or Ferencz?

Most sources report both versions, with the former as the first.
However, he was born in a town which was part of the Hungarian kingdom at the time (despite being in Austria today) from a Hungarian family. Which makes me wonder if his actual name was Ferenc (or as Wiki reports, Ferencz).

What did his parents call him? What is the record in the official list (pun intended) of the County?

Does anyone have reliable and certain sources on this?
 
#182 ·
It might not be a simple case of a "right name" vs. a "translation". For example, in Finland, 19th century, people were often given Swedish names (such as "Anders"), but those were never used, except in church sacraments and the final gravestone. In everyday parlance, Finnish version of the name (such as "Antti") was used. But which was the "right" name, then? I guess both were. Maybe people thought in a more platonic way back then, so that all translations were equally right, reflections of the true meaning of the name.
 
#183 ·
Interesting point.
My take is that the "right" name (for, say, Wikipedia purposes) is one that's written down "somewhere" (local registers or - alternatively - church) at birth.
 
#188 · (Edited)
Liszt did not learn Hungarian. That said, he certainly thought of himself as Hungarian...

"There's no doubt Liszt thought of himself as Hungarian. At least, he described himself as such in front of Hungarian audiences. Embarrassingly, he had to do it in French.

"Je suis hongrois," he famously told fans at his first concert in Pest, because he had never learned the language of the Magyars. His native tongue was German, the language of his parents, but he preferred to speak and write in French."
 
G
#194 · (Edited)
Spouse and myself were living in Vienna throughout 2011 and this was Liszt's anniversary year; lots of recitals all over Austria but what caught our attention was all the flag banners around the complete Ringstrasse with this picture of Liszt - wearing sunglasses and looking very cool!!



Spouse read Walker's three-volume tomes/biography of Liszt - complete with all footnotes- as it was in English and he was in Vienna with a music-nut. He now loves Liszt and grew to very deeply admire the man and his values; the sure sign of an excellent musical biography which is sympathetic to the subject as well as well researched and readable. Neither of us will forget Liszt's huge efforts to have the works of composers such as Schumann put before the public. In her turn, Clara and friend Brahms were both scathing about Liszt and contemptuous of his music and playing. Did not reflect well on the aforementioned, IMO!! And Liszt was responsible for the placement of Beethoven's statue in Bonn, having agitated to have it put there and paying for it himself.
 
#202 ·
This is not correct.

The Walker biography confirms that the meeting DID in fact happen, [Vol.1 pages 80-82] (Beethoven's "conversation books" also confirm that the meeting happened), but that it happened in private.

What almost certainly DIDN'T happen was Beethoven attending Liszt's concert the next day, which is the 'legend', Schindler categorically says that Beethoven did not attend.

Liszt never denied the story of Beethoven attending his concert, and the so-called "kiss of consecration", because; to quote Walker directly [Vol.1 pg.83]:

"Because the essential part of the story for him (Liszt), was true. There was indeed a 'Weihekuss', although it occurred in circumstances rather different from those invented by his (Liszt's) biographers."
 
G
#203 ·
The essential part of the story FOR LISZT was true. He was still a child and his father died the same year as Beethoven. This doesn't make it true and we definitely did not get the impression from Walker that it was definitive or absolute. I wanted it to be but it remains questionable and controversial.
 
#204 · (Edited)
Re-read what I posted. The meeting happened. It is confirmed in Beethoven's conversation book (an entry from Liszt's Father and/or Liszt himself). Walker absolutely confirms this. I gave the page number(s).

The part that is apocryphal is the concert/'Weihekuss', but Liszt let that legend persist because it (the kiss of consecration), was still essentially true for Liszt (that he received the kiss, just not at the concert).

I can post screenshots of the pages, but I assure you Walker confirms the meeting happened.
 
G
#206 ·
OK, thanks for that. I, along with spouse, got the distinct impression that Liszt's memory was faulty. And we couldn't imagine the gruff and boorish Beethoven - who had no interest in children - being sympathetic to a prodigious pianist (of which he was one himself). It's good to see the apocryphal elements clearly understood!!
 
#207 ·
You are correct. Beethoven particularly disliked "child prodigies", and was not sympathetic to the idea of meeting the young Liszt.

Walker says "it took considerable urging on the part of Schindler (Beethoven's secretary) and Czerny to persuade the master to grant the interview at all."

Walker also says that while Beethoven's replies were obviously spoken "it is not difficult to read between the lines (of the conversation books) and guess that his reception of Liszt had been less than friendly" (page 81). And that Schindler later felt guilty about the outcome.

In my own personal defense of Beethoven here, (and Walker notes this as well), Beethoven was mostly deaf at this point, and meeting with a child pianist must have seemed quite pointless.
 
#208 ·
What is really telling from all of this is just how staggering a pianist Liszt must have been, even at 11 years of age, for Schindler and Czerny to go to such efforts.

Now that I have just reread the whole relevant section I should correct one of my previous posts where I said Liszt's concert was the next day, it was actually two days after the meeting. The meeting was on Friday April 11 1823, and Liszt's concert was on Sunday the 13th.

Walker notes that the, now feeling guilty, Schindler approached Beethoven on Saturday the 12th with this request:

"Little Liszt has urgently requested me humbly to beg you for a theme on which to improvise at his concert tomorrow. He will not break the seal till the time comes."

Beethoven did not provide a theme. (Vol.1 pg.82)
 
#213 ·
Revisiting Liszt, part one: concertos, poetic and programmatic

“It would be good to invent a new form that consists of one large movement in a moderate tempo, wherein the preparatory part might take the place of a first allegro, the cantabile that of the adagio and a brilliant conclusion that of the rondo. Perhaps this idea will inspire something that we would gladly see embodied in a peculiarly original compositon.”
- Robert Schumann, Neue Zeitschrift fur Musik, 1836.

Piano Concerto #2 (1839, published 1861/3)

During the first half of the 19th century, the concerto shifted away from merely being a virtuoso showpiece and began to take on the characteristics of a symphony. Liszt was at the forefront of this change, and his models included Schubert’s Wanderer Fantasy, Weber’s Konzertstuck and Mendelssohn’s Capriccio brilliant. When he read Schumann’s article, Liszt responded by saying that he intended to compose a concerto along similar lines.

Liszt’s Piano Concerto #2 has a free flowing and poetic quality, but it’s also tightly integrated. It reads like a series of conversations, between the pianist and orchestra or individual sections and soloists. There are no breaks, and after the opening the pianist never repeats the theme in its original form. Here, the theme is transformed rather than developed.

The calm opening of the work brings images of nature to mind. A strident and dramatic idea emerges, becoming increasingly agitated, even warlike. The third movement (Allegro moderato), with a reflective cello solo being delicately answered by the piano, is where the poetry really kicks in. Reminiscences of earlier ideas follow, with moods ranging from triumphant to lyrical. There is a stately quality here which ensures that there is no rush to reach the conclusion.

Video: Donald and Daffy Duck as duelling pianists perform the Hungarian Rhapsody No. 2 in Who Framed Roger Rabbit? Although Liszt sought to get away from it, popular culture has done nothing but strengthen his image as a virtuoso pianist. Liszt’s name is, for all intents and purposes, synonymous with the most entertaining and captivating piano music.



Totentanz (1839, published 1864/65)

“In vain I implored him to play something from his Totentanz…To no avail I asked him to explain the principal variations in Totentanz, for which no programme is given (contrary to the practice Liszt has followed in all his symphonic works). He flatly refused to play this piece, and as for the programme, he said only that it was one of those works whose content must not be made public. A strange secret, a strange exception, the strange effect of his life as and abbe and his stay in Rome!”
- Critic Vladimir Stasov, remembering a meeting with Liszt in 1869.

Liszt’s retirement as a concert pianist in the 1840’s changed his entire outlook towards composition, he sought to shift the focus away from himself as a virtuoso. While the first concerto still had Liszt the performer somewhat in the foreground, the second had the soloist and orchestra as equal partners. Totentanz combines these and adds a programmatic element.

Totentanz reads like a musical diptych. It was inspired by images of the last judgement, the woodcuts by Holbein and frescoes at the Camposanto cemetery in Pisa. Likewise, the piece combines two sets of variations, on the Dies Irae plainchant and an eight-note theme from Mozart’s Requiem. The strategy of combining two similar themes within the same piece is brilliant, because it allows for musical variety while also maintaining thematic integrity.

The Dies Irae variations start after an ominous introduction, the timpani and brass bringing forth the images of skeletons playing instruments in the images by Holbein. A series of accompanied variations encase a canon and fugue, separated by a lonely clarinet solo. Time seems to be suspended in the former, while the latter emphasises propulsive energy. I like the sense of contrast here, it’s my favourite part of the piece.

The second set of variations starts about three-quarters into the piece. There is somewhat of a lighter quality here, and as in Liszt’s first concerto there is a section where the triangle accompanies the piano. The initial theme eventually returns, ushering in the brilliant conclusion.

The recordings I listened to:

Concerto #2 – Jorge Bolet, piano/Rochester SO/David Zinman; alto ALC 1011

Totentanz – Peter Katin, piano/London PO/Jean Martinon (mono recording); Decca Eloquence 476 7671

Source:

“Liszt’s piano concerti: a lost tradition” by Anna Celenza (in Hamilton, K. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Liszt, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005).
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top