Page 13 of 18 FirstFirst ... 391011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 195 of 270

Thread: Has Classical Music become too popular?

  1. #181
    Senior Member norman bates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,504
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    Moses und Aron
    I don't think I've said a word about it (even because I don't even remember it onestly).
    But I know that a lot of works, from both the early Schoenberg to the late Schoenberg are without a doubt expressionist works.


    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    We can simplify things:

    Baroque is Bach and Handel; Classical is Haydn and Mozart; Romantic is Beethoven and Schubert; post-romantic Wagner and Mahler; modernist Schoenberg and Webern.
    and in what way that would simplify things? Because Wagner and Mahler were without any sort of doubts romantic composers. Wagner is often considered (and rightly so in my opinion) THE romantic composer, the one who incarnates romanticism more than anyone else with its lush sensual harmonies, the titanism, the turmoil, the sense of longing.
    So calling him post romantic... what should make him different from proper romanticism?

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    The two most important of each era; any other terms are redundant.
    I think that post-romantic (I don't even know what you mean) is much more redundant than expressionism, that it's a very useful term.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    Impressionism is a sort of hyper-romanticism that reflected the sexual decadence of the 20s and was a precursor to modernism. It was prominent for a very short period.
    Actually impressionism in music was in many ways the opposite of romanticism. Instead of putting in music the inner self of the composer they wanted to give an impression of the external world, and the music it's often much more lighter in tone. That's why Debussy wrote pieces where he for instance tried to give a musical impression of the reflections of the water, or even mocked Wagner and his heaviness (I don't remember in what piece of the Children corner he used a theme from Wagner and put it in a almost comical music context).

    Than of course even things are not not so clear even there, there are also composers who had traits of romanticism and impressionism like Delius, Szymanowski or Ysaye but that's another story.
    Last edited by norman bates; Jun-06-2020 at 12:14.
    What time is the next swan?

  2. #182
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,763
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norman bates View Post
    I don't think I've said a word about it (even because I don't even remember it onestly).
    But I know that a lot of works, from both the early Schoenberg to the late Schoenberg are without a doubt expressionist works.




    and in what way that would simplify things? Because Wagner and Mahler were without any sort of doubts romantic composers. Wagner is often considered (and rightly so in my opinion) THE romantic composer, the one who incarnates romanticism more than anyone else with its lush sensual harmonies, the titanism, the turmoil, the sense of longing.
    So calling him post romantic... what should make him different from proper romanticism?



    I think that post-romantic (I don't even know what you mean) is much more redundant than expressionism, that it's a very useful term.



    Actually impressionism in music was in many ways the opposite of romanticism. Instead of putting in music the inner self of the composer they wanted to give an impression of the external world, and the music it's often much more lighter in tone. That's why Debussy wrote pieces where he for instance tried to give a musical impression of the reflections of the water, or even mocked Wagner and his heaviness (I don't remember in what piece of the Children corner he used a theme from Wagner and put it in a almost comical music context).

    Than of course even things are not not so clear even there, there are also composers who had traits of romanticism and impressionism like Delius, Szymanowski or Ysaye but that's another story.
    Golliwog cakewalk.

  3. Likes norman bates liked this post
  4. #183
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,763
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    Because his wave has lasted 100 years.
    That didn't actually address what I said.

  5. #184
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,763
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    Moses und Aron



    We can simplify things:

    Baroque is Bach and Handel; Classical is Haydn and Mozart; Romantic is Beethoven and Schubert; post-romantic Wagner and Mahler; modernist Schoenberg and Webern.

    The two most important of each era; any other terms are redundant.
    The two most important in your view of course. Probably not many would debate the likes of Mozart and Beethoven (though Beethoven had a foot in both eras); the rest is not settled though imo.
    Last edited by janxharris; Jun-06-2020 at 13:12.

  6. #185
    Senior Member tdc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    7,860
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    Impressionism is a sort of hyper-romanticism that reflected the sexual decadence of the 20s and was a precursor to modernism. It was prominent for a very short period, and Ravel was the peak of it.
    I don't think so. One cannot reduce Impressionism to a reflection of 'sexual decadence' (for one thing it was invented about 26 years before the 20's so your comment regarding that makes no sense), nor over-look it's impact. The harmonic language spread to major composers such as Prokofiev, Bartok and Stravinsky and beyond. To most listeners and concert goers these composers are some of the most important names of the early 20th century. After that we have Messiaen, Boulez, Dutilleux and Takemitsu who all were heavily inluenced by impressionism. So the 'prominent for a short period' is provably false and to say all of it is merely about sexual decadence is silly. Mozart's music has been described as 'voluptuous' and 'sensual', but of course it would be fallicious to reduce his music to just that. It is just one aspect of it.

    Impressionism is arguably more integral to modernism than Schoenberg's atonality because it came first and its impact has spread far deeper into the mainstream repertoire. The 12 tone system came after modernism had already been firmly established by Debussy. Yes dodecaphonic music was influential but also highly polarizing. Many composers then and now want nothing to do with it.
    Last edited by tdc; Jun-06-2020 at 13:43.

  7. Likes mikeh375, Strange Magic liked this post
  8. #186
    Banned (Temporarily)
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tdc View Post
    I don't think so. One cannot reduce Impressionism to a reflection of 'sexual decadence' (for one thing it was invented about 26 years before the 20's so your comment regarding that makes no sense), nor over-look it's impact. The harmonic language spread to major composers such as Prokofiev, Bartok and Stravinsky and beyond. To most listeners and concert goers these composers are some of the most important names of the early 20th century. After that we have Messiaen, Boulez, Dutilleux and Takemitsu who all were heavily inluenced by impressionism. So the 'prominent for a short period' is provably false and to say all of it is merely about sexual decadence is silly. Mozart's music has been described as 'voluptuous' and 'sensual', but of course it would be fallicious to reduce his music to just that. It is just one aspect of it.

    Impressionism is arguably more integral to modernism than Schoenberg's atonality because it came first and its impact has spread far deeper into the mainstream repertoire. The 12 tone system came after modernism had already been firmly established by Debussy. Yes dodecaphonic music was influential but also highly polarizing. Many composers then and now want nothing to do with it.
    Liszt and Debussy foresaw it but it didn't reach public acceptance until the 20s and Ravel was the peak. La valse perfectly represents the 20s and impressionism.

    The composers you say were influenced by it are not impressionists, they were influenced like Schoenberg was influenced by Mozart but have little in common.

  9. #187
    Senior Member JAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,948
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I might suggest that if modern classical music reflected sexual decadence, in any meaningful sense, it would be more popular.

  10. #188
    Banned (Temporarily)
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JAS View Post
    I might suggest that if modern classical music reflected sexual decadence, in any meaningful sense, it would be more popular.
    Yes, but it's the exact opposite. Modernism and post-modernism reject sensuality, it started as a reaction but has extraordinarily continued to this day.

    One thing going for it though is that if you're prone to sexual amorality modernism certainly won't tempt you to it. It is an asexual purely intellectual movement .

  11. #189
    Senior Member JAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,948
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I think I have misinterpreted your position. At the risk of extending a discussion that has already consumed a thread (albeit a thread for which the original track has already mostly expired), are you postulating that the failure of modern classical music is that it rejected anything other than a purely intellectual response? (I ask this as someone who has no love for modern classical music, as I think my many posts have sufficiently demonstrated.) I note that many fans of modern classical music have often described or claimed a kind of emotional response, particularly to, for example, the music of Messiaen. (This is not a response that I share, but do not necessarily question.)

  12. #190
    Senior Member norman bates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,504
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    Liszt and Debussy foresaw it but it didn't reach public acceptance until the 20s and Ravel was the peak. La valse perfectly represents the 20s and impressionism.

    The composers you say were influenced by it are not impressionists, they were influenced like Schoenberg was influenced by Mozart but have little in common.
    Actually Messiaen had a lot in common with the impressionists especially harmonically, Debussy was one of his greatest influences, maybe the greatest one.
    What time is the next swan?

  13. #191
    Banned (Temporarily)
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JAS View Post
    I think I have misinterpreted your position. At the risk of extending a discussion that has already consumed a thread (albeit a thread for which the original track has already mostly expired), are you postulating that the failure of modern classical music is that it rejected anything other than a purely intellectual response? (I ask this as someone who has no love for modern classical music, as I think my many posts have sufficiently demonstrated.) I note that many fans of modern classical music have often described or claimed a kind of emotional response, particularly to, for example, the music of Messiaen. (This is not a response that I share, but do not necessarily question.)
    Messiaen is a exception, he said so himself that he was out of place in the modernist movement. Like Stravinsky he doesn't really fit anywhere.

    Modernism is by intention asensual and purely intellectual.

  14. #192
    Senior Member norman bates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,504
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    Yes, but it's the exact opposite. Modernism and post-modernism reject sensuality, it started as a reaction but has extraordinarily continued to this day.

    One thing going for it though is that if you're prone to sexual amorality modernism certainly won't tempt you to it. It is an asexual purely intellectual movement .
    I don't even know what it means "sexual amorality modernism", but while it's true that modernism was often very cerebral (nothing necessarily wrong with it in my opinion) there are modernist composers who made very sensual music.







    Last edited by norman bates; Jun-06-2020 at 21:56.
    What time is the next swan?

  15. #193
    Senior Member norman bates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,504
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    Messiaen is a exception, he said so himself that he was out of place in the modernist movement. Like Stravinsky he doesn't really fit anywhere.

    Modernism is by intention asensual and purely intellectual.
    Messiaen and Stravinsky were modernists without a doubt. It's like your idea of modernism instead of including all the different things of the twentieth century (actually I think that usually modernism starts even before the twentieth century) means just "serialist music". But Stravinsky not only wrote works like Rite of Spring, l'histoire du soldat, Las Noces, but also he wrote serialist music himself and he had words of great admiration for composers like Webern, Takemitsu and even Boulez (I'm not a fan of Boulez at all, but still).
    Last edited by norman bates; Jun-06-2020 at 21:53.
    What time is the next swan?

  16. #194
    Banned (Temporarily)
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Scriabin... Seriously? He's a post-romantic and impressionist.

    Modernism is 12 tone atonal music and postmodernism is what we have today. They are related even closer than romanticism and post-romanticism in that they are purely intellectual movements that reject sensuality.
    Last edited by 1996D; Jun-06-2020 at 21:55.

  17. #195
    Banned (Temporarily)
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norman bates View Post
    Messiaen and Stravinsky were modernists without a doubt. It's like your idea of modernism instead of including all the different things of the twentieth century (actually I think that usually modernism starts even before the twentieth century) means just "serialist music". But Stravinsky not only wrote works like Rite of Spring, l'histoire du soldat, Las Noces, but also he wrote serialist music himself and he had words of great admiration for composers like Webern, Takemitsu and even Boulez (I'm not a fan of Boulez at all, but still).
    Stravinsky is a lot of things, he composed in a wide range of styles, that why he doesn't fit anywhere.

Page 13 of 18 FirstFirst ... 391011121314151617 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •