Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 4101112131415161718 LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 270

Thread: Has Classical Music become too popular?

  1. #196
    Banned (Temporarily)
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norman bates View Post
    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".
    Modernism is serialism, they go hand in hand.

    It's not my opinion, you need to read before you write.

  2. #197
    Senior Member norman bates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,504
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    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.
    Modernism to many starts with the impressionism of Debussy with his Prelude of the afternoon of a faun. I don't think it's necessarily true, besides the fact that Debussy himself was inspired by Fanelli, there are works like Tristan and Isolde, Smetana's Macbeth and the Witches and others that could be mentioned (even going back to Beethoven's Grosse fuge, or Bach's Art of the fugue) to me it's more a gradual transformation, the late eighteen century/early twentieth century was just the moment where a lot of things happened at the same time. But in any case impressionism, expressionism and free atonality, concrete music, minimalism, electronic music, microtonality, experiments with ryhthm (like Nancarrow) are all parts of modernism.
    About Scriabin:

    What time is the next swan?

  3. #198
    Senior Member norman bates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,504
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    Modernism is serialism, they go hand in hand.

    It's not my opinion, you need to read before you write.
    I read before I write and I know that modernism is not just serialism, exactly as in the architecture modernism wasn't just Le Corbusier or Mies Van Der Rohe but also Gaudi and Frank Lloyd Wright, and in painting it wasn't just Mondrian or Malevic but it was also Kandinsky, Klee, Soutine, Bacon etc. Modernism was about an attitude, the idea of create something new, not strictly a style.
    Varese, Bartok, Ravel, Messiaen, Takemitsu, Scelsi, Ohana, Harry Partch, Ligeti, Sorabji, Vermeulen, Stravinsky, John Cage etc (just to mention a few) were all modernists and their music wasn't about serialism at all. Some of them hated or rejected serialism. Even Gerswhin was a modernist, with his absolutely melodic music.
    Last edited by norman bates; Jun-06-2020 at 22:18.
    What time is the next swan?

  4. #199
    Banned (Temporarily)
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The main movement is rooted in the 12 tone technique, some say that it's then postmodernism but that's because they consider post-romantics and impressionists modernists, but they're not because their music is extremely sensual.

    The main figure is Schoenberg and he rejected sensuality and destroyed the tradition, springing a rebirth in music. If you consider post-romanticism and impressionism modernism then Schoenberg is not a modernist but a postmodernist.

    If however you tie post-romanticism and impressionism to romanticism, as simply an extension of it; then the reaction can be called modernism and that's Schoenberg and the Second Viennese School.

    Of course Schoenberg started as a post-romantic and impressionist, but later completely rejected it, founded a school, and made his impact on the world which lasts to this day. Moses und Aron is his masterpiece and it's the premier work which defines modernism and postmodernism. He intended it to be the law.
    Last edited by 1996D; Jun-06-2020 at 22:27.

  5. #200
    Senior Member norman bates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,504
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    The main movement is rooted in the 12 tone technique, some say that it's then postmodernism but that's because they consider post-romantics and impressionists modernists, but they're not because their music is extremely sensual.

    The main figure is Schoenberg and he rejected sensuality and destroyed the tradition springing a rebirth in music. If you consider post-romanticism and impressionism modernism then Schoenberg is not a modernist but a postmodernist.
    It's a generally accepted fact that impressionism is a part of modernism.
    And if Schoenberg destroyed the tradition, he did it with the help of Gesualdo and his madrigals, Bach and his art of the fugue, Beethoven and his grosse fuge, Wagner and his Tristan and isolde, Debussy with his entire work, Stravinsky with the rite of Spring, Ives with his entire work, Liszt, Scriabin, Busoni and many others. Because as others and myself has already said to you, music were going in that direction already.

    Schoenberg has been a crucial figure, but even without him the music would have gone in the same direction, like paintings and sculpture and architecture and literature and movies were going in that same direction of a drastic change. The world was accelerating, science was changing everything, psychoanalysis and phylosophers were questioning a lot of things and composers were immersed in that same world and they would have changed with or without Schoenberg (and Hauer made serialism before him), even if you see him as the source of all evil and you have this naive idea that without him music would have stayed the same (the same as what? Brahms? Stravinsky? Ives? Russolo?).
    Last edited by norman bates; Jun-06-2020 at 22:40.
    What time is the next swan?

  6. #201
    Banned (Temporarily)
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norman bates View Post
    It's a generally accepted fact that impressionism is a part of modernism.
    No it's not, different writers have different opinions.

    Wagner did begin the hyper-sensuality movement with Tristan, which lead to the bohemianism and 'free love' that Schoenberg loved at first but then hated after it destroyed his marriage. He reacted to it with the 12 tone technique with the goal to destroy sensuality in music, an effect that lasts to this day.

    Moses und Aron wasn't performed until the 50s and continued to have an impact for the rest of the 20th century in which serialism became the main element in music, and all schools and composers started following it. It was a complete takeover.
    Last edited by 1996D; Jun-06-2020 at 23:46.

  7. #202
    Senior Member norman bates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,504
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    No it's not, different writers have different opinions.
    ok. A LOT of writers, critics, historians and composers think that modernism begins with impressionism.


    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    He reacted to it with the 12 tone technique with the goal to destroy sensuality in music which last to this day
    how strange that you didn't reply to the other part of my last comment. I wonder why
    Last edited by norman bates; Jun-06-2020 at 23:48.
    What time is the next swan?

  8. #203
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    217
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    The main movement is rooted in the 12 tone technique, some say that it's then postmodernism but that's because they consider post-romantics and impressionists modernists, but they're not because their music is extremely sensual.

    The main figure is Schoenberg and he rejected sensuality and destroyed the tradition, springing a rebirth in music. If you consider post-romanticism and impressionism modernism then Schoenberg is not a modernist but a postmodernist.

    If however you tie post-romanticism and impressionism to romanticism, as simply an extension of it; then the reaction can be called modernism and that's Schoenberg and the Second Viennese School.

    Of course Schoenberg started as a post-romantic and impressionist, but later completely rejected it, founded a school, and made his impact on the world which lasts to this day. Moses und Aron is his masterpiece and it's the premier work which defines modernism and postmodernism. He intended it to be the law.
    Your theory is interesting, if not somewhat convolunted, at least to the point where it prompted me to listen to my recording of Schoenberg's Moses Und Aron (George Solti/Chicago & friends). It's quite an impressive piece of material. Interesting that you hail Moses Und Aron as a masterpiece, and, yet, also identify Schoenberg in such negative terms. You say that Schoenberg rejected sensual experience in music, but it seems to me that in Moses Und Aron, he is able to convey various feelings through tone and texture, even if his music is intentionally devoid of melody. I think that the terms getting thrown about; Romantic, Neo-Classical, Impressionism, Expressionism, Modern, Post-Modern; are better used for the purpose of discussion as opposed absolute categorization. The above terms have often been applied to classical music but have also been linked to movements that have also taken place in visual arts and literature, not always in ways where the terms can have the same meaning across the arts.
    Last edited by Coach G; Jun-06-2020 at 23:50.

  9. #204
    Banned (Temporarily)
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coach G View Post
    Your theory is interesting, if not somewhat convolunted, at least to the point where it prompted me to listen to my recording of Schoenberg's Moses Und Aron (George Solti/Chicago & friends). It's quite an impressive piece of material. Interesting that you hail Moses Und Aron as a masterpiece, and, yet, also identify Schoenberg in such negative terms. You say that Schoenberg rejected sensual experience in music, but it seems to me that in Moses Und Aron, he is able to convey various feelings through tone and texture, even if his music is intentionally devoid of melody. I think that the terms getting thrown about; Romantic, Neo-Classical, Impressionism, Expressionism, Modern, Post-Modern; are better used for the purpose of discussion as opposed absolute categorization. The above terms have often been applied to classical music but have also been linked to movements that have also taken place in visual arts and literature, not always in ways where the terms can have the same meaning across the arts.
    It's quite complex but it's my living to study these things, a requirement as a composer. I've finally realized what the next step is, but only through vigorously studying history and attempting to explain it here, and thus learning further: teaching is absolutely the best way to learn; the final step.

    The Modernist movement as a whole (not the musical one) holds Moses und Aron as its representation in music. After that it was easier to understand things.

    When you tie music to other art forms and especially to politics, things start to make sense. Postmodernism is a further politicized extension of Modernism, but they are essentially one.
    Last edited by 1996D; Jun-07-2020 at 00:03.

  10. #205
    Senior Member norman bates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,504
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1996D View Post
    The Modernist movement as a whole (not the musical one) holds Moses und Aron as its representation in music.
    no it doesn't, even in the production of Schoenberg for instance is a lot less known composition than The Pierrot Lunaire or Erwartung, and there are other pieces like The Rite of spring (which is actually THE most famous modernist work), Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune, or the operas of Berg and his Violin concerto, or The quartet for the end of times, Le marteau sans maitre, Ionisation, 4'33'' and many other possible examples.
    Last edited by norman bates; Jun-07-2020 at 08:24.
    What time is the next swan?

  11. Likes mikeh375 liked this post
  12. #206
    Senior Member hammeredklavier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,891
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norman bates View Post
    And if Schoenberg destroyed the tradition, he did it with the help of Gesualdo and his madrigals, Bach and his art of the fugue, Beethoven and his grosse fuge, Wagner and his Tristan and isolde,
    Of all these masters, Schoenberg considered Bach and Mozart his two most important influences, btw. I'm not sure if he ever considered Gesualdo to be one of them.

    In the second of his 1931 essays on 'National Music', Schoenberg acknowledged Bach and Mozart as his principal teachers and told his readers why.
    "My teachers were primarily Bach and Mozart, and secondarily Beethoven, Brahms, and Wagner."

    "Schoenberg now proudly described himself as Mozart's pupil — and the final movement of the Suite, the 'Gigue', comes close to explicit homage to the G major Gigue, KV 574, in which Mozart at his most neo-Baroque and most harmonically chromatic seems almost to anticipate elements of Schoenberg's serial method."
    ( Arnold Schoenberg, By Mark Berry, Page 135 )



    Schoenberg: "From Bach I learned:
    1. Contrapuntal thinking; i.e. the art of inventing musical figures that can be used to accompany themselves.
    2. The art of producing everything from one thing and of relating figures by transformation.
    3. Disregard for the 'strong' beat of the measure.
    From Mozart:
    1. Inequality of phrase-length.
    2. Co-ordination of heterogeneous characters to form a thematic unity.
    3. Deviation from even-number construction in the theme and its component parts.
    4. The art of forming subsidiary ideas.
    5. The art of introduction and transition."
    Last edited by hammeredklavier; Jun-07-2020 at 16:02.

  13. #207
    Senior Member norman bates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,504
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hammeredklavier View Post
    Of all these masters, Schoenberg considered Bach and Mozart his two most important influences, btw. I'm not sure if he ever considered Gesualdo to be one of them.
    why do you have to use every possible occasion to post things about Mozart? I'm sure that if we were talking about cheese you would say something like "that was Mozart's favorite cheese".
    I wasn't talking about Schoenberg's influences there, I was saying that tradition isn't a static thing but it drastically change with time and a lot of composers have produced revolutionary things for their period through the centuries.
    But yes, I knew about that work.
    Last edited by norman bates; Jun-07-2020 at 10:15.
    What time is the next swan?

  14. Likes Allegro Con Brio liked this post
  15. #208
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    7,262
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Have we drifted away from the OP's thesis? The focus on a single composer seems quite disproportionate to the general question about whether classical music should become more elitist.

  16. Likes caracalla liked this post
  17. #209
    Senior Member JAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,943
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I'll bet that Mozart liked cheese. (In days before refrigeration, cheese and bread were pretty much staples.) This comment is not to suggest that anything Mozart might have written could be considered cheesy.
    Last edited by JAS; Jun-07-2020 at 11:12.

  18. Likes AbsolutelyBaching liked this post
  19. #210
    Senior Member hammeredklavier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,891
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norman bates View Post
    why do you have to use every possible occasion to post things about Mozart? I'm sure that if we were talking about cheese you would say something like "that was Mozart's favorite cheese".
    I wasn't talking about Schoenberg's influences there, I was saying that tradition isn't a static thing but it drastically change with time and a lot of composers have produced revolutionary things for their period through the centuries.
    But yes, I knew about that work.
    Sorry, I didn't quite get you. With the kind of argument you were making, I'm pretty sure you could make an argument virtually every composer in classical music is revolutionary in his own way. You could make the same argument about John Cage. I just didn't see the point. You might as well just say "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", "art is subjective", to convince 1996D

    Quote Originally Posted by norman bates View Post
    if Schoenberg destroyed the tradition, he did it with the help of Gesualdo
    You said it; "help". That implies "influence", "inspiration" in art. And we can't leave out Mozart when discussing the "help" Schoenberg got from his predecessors. The same way we don't leave out Beethoven when discussing Bartok in a similar way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXlii5kUsjY (ex. Philip Glass singled out Schubert a crucial influence on his own music)
    How many times I mention Mozart's name shouldn't matter. It doesn't matter if I mention it a million times, the important thing is to get facts straight. =) And I didn't even mention Mozart only, I mentioned both Bach and Mozart (that they were Schoenberg's biggest inspirations) this time. You're the one overreacting, I think. =)
    Last edited by hammeredklavier; Jun-07-2020 at 16:46.

Posting Permissions

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