Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Two Operas Falsely Attributed to Mozart 1/2

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    348
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Two Operas Falsely Attributed to Mozart 1/2

    Just a short article that hopefully introduces the scale of misattribution of works to Mozart which, in fact, were written by others -

    TWO EARLY ‘MOZART’ OPERAS

    On 10th January 1768 the 12 year old Mozart and his father Leopold arrived in Vienna. (The family hoped Wolfgang would succeed in the city as a composer of works for the stage. But things did not work out as they hoped.. Vienna was very suspicious of Mozart’s musical abilities)

    Only a few weeks later Leopold wrote to a friend in Salzburg –

    ‘The people here in Vienna carefully avoid every chance of seeing us and of admitting to Wolfgang's musical skill, so that many times when they can be asked if they have heard this boy’s (Wolfgang’s) music and what they thought of him, they could always say they had not heard him or his music and that it could not possibly be true - that his reputation was completely fiction and foolishness - that everything he did was all pre-arranged - that Wolfgang was given music by other people which he already knew - that he was ridiculous etc ....' - (Leopold Mozart, Vienna, January 1768 – Letter to Salzburg friend on the reaction of the Viennese public and musicians about Wolfgang, his son).

    Frankly, in Vienna Mozart and his father were not trusted. People were deeply suspicious of all the reports from their earlier European tours. Leopold’s reaction was predictable. He used his influence to obtain a meeting with the Empress Maria Theresa and her son, Emperor Joseph 2nd. Arguing that discourteous treatment to Wolfgang was grossly unfair it was agreed to commission the 12 year old boy to write an opera buffa for one of the Viennese theatres. Mozart’s father continued to protest about their treatment and sent a list of supposed works by his son to the Empress written.

    The commission was for ‘La Finta Semplice’ - payment to be 100 Ducats on completion. They were asked to contact the Vienna theatre director Giuseppe Affligio (1722-1788). Leopold, satisfied, went to see Affligio. (Affligio had 1 year before signed a 10 year contract to manage the two largest theatres in Vienna).

    (Note - 'La Finta Semplice’ was an opera that had already been staged in Vienna in 1764 with a libretto by Salvatore Perillo – based on a play by Goldoni).

    Leopold and Wolfgang then decided to return to Salzburg and work began on composition of the new piece. By March Leopold recorded that the composition was going well. By June the score was complete. (It consisted of some 558 pages of music).

    Father and son now returned to Vienna and presented the work to Affligio so that rehearsals could begin.

    But there was a major problem. Affligio (who stood to benefit finanically if the opera was performed) is convinced this music was NOT composed by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. So are thje singers. He dares to say so. In fact Affligio (agreeing with other musicians in Vienna) tells Leopold the opera has been 'ghost written' and was NOT the product of his 12 year old son. Leopold is deeply offended – once again. But now the orchestra and singers (who reluctantly work with the boy Mozart for a few more days on the piece) agree with Affligio - the work is definitely NOT by Wolfgang.

    What happens next ? Well, Leopold now complains at length to the Emperor and Empress (the Empress keen to know the truth) and encloses with his letter the long list of (supposed) compositions already written by his son. (It's this list which was the first attempted inventory of 'Mozart's music thus far).

    But the Emperor, despite having commissioned the work, now decides these matters are becoming a public scandal. He finds good reason to abandon the whole opera. Highly significant is that Mozart is not paid. So the Mozart's return to Salzburg empty handed. Back in Salzburg their Jesuit friends arrange for the work to be performed, once, the following year. (But Salzburg, of course, was not part of the Austrian/Hungarian Empire at this time).

    As for Affligio, he continued working in Vienna as per his contract but his theatres started to lose money. In a few more years he is obliged to transfer their control to a nobleman, Count Kohary. And, most remarkably, in 1778 Affligio is arrested. (Mozart at this time was 22 years old). He was accused of forgery. And, the following year, the man who challenged Mozart and his father is in Vienna was condemned to life imprisonment on the island of Elba - the island where, 9 years later, this same Affligio dies.

    I tell this remarkable story to give an example of how, time after time, things occured in the life and career of Mozart which call in to question the musical abilities and productions of this composer.

    THE JESUIT ORDER AND THE CAREER OF MOZART PRIOR TO 1773

    It is important to appreciate that Mozart, the young boy, received surprisingly little academic or musical education. His father (a mediocre composer) provided some. There were also some academic lessons at home from a Jesuit priest, Abbe Bullinger – tutor to Count Arco. Bullinger was to become virtually a ‘member of the Mozart family’ for many more years – up to and beyond the ‘Paris’ symphony – and it was Bullinger who assisted Mozart's career financially at various times - although, of course, the Jesuit Order were officially suppressed in 1773. It was to Bullinger (not to Leopold) that Wolfgang wrote the news of his own mother’s death from Paris. And it was to Bullinger that Wolfgang wrote to celebrate the death of Voltaire. Several of Mozart’s early Salzburg works were written with the musical assistance of other Jesuit educated composers.

    The Emperor/Empress in Vienna went on record at this time of describing the Mozart's as virtual 'beggars; round the courts of Europe. They were also approving of moves to ban the Jesuit Order although, by 1773, Joseph 2nd was still official ruler of the Holy Roman Empire. Deep mistrust of the Jesuits by Joseph and other European rulers was well known. But in Salzburg Mozart was at least able to consider his next move. A tour to Italy seemed the best idea. This was to be the next target for improving the status of the young composer.

    2. "La Betulia Liberata KV118/74c

    Mozart, as a ‘prodigy’ of the Holy Roman Empire was to tour 3 times in Italy during his lifetime. The story of him writing down from memory a sacred mass in Rome is, of course, largely fiction (the written music already available for his study in Vienna long before his arrival). But, from a public perspective, Mozart was able to obtain, by 1770, the Order of the Golden Spur, a papal knighthood. This, for a composer nurtured by the Catholic Church, seemed highly appropriate. Surely, this would improve his questionable status ? So too his short period of study with Padre Martini ?

    Among the various new works attributed to Mozart from his time in Italy was the oratorio, ‘La Betulia Liberata’. This commision to write this piece, on a libretto by Metastasio, is refered to in a letter by Leopold Mozart of March 1771 – ‘We spent the 13th March in Padua and stayed in the Palazzo of the nobleman Pesaro’ he wrote - ‘We saw a lot of the city in one day and Wolfgang was asked to play at two houses. He also received a commission to compose an oratorio for Padua, which he can do at his own convenience’.

    The commission had come from Don Giuseppe Ximena of Padua, Prince of Aragon. He asked for it to be performed in the city the following Lent.

    But there is no evidence ‘La Betulia liberata’ was ever sent to Padua by Mozart. In fact, the Mozart’s never returned to Padua after their visit to Milan in December. And, although ‘La Betulia liberata’ WAS performed at Lent in 1772 in Padua its libretto (which still survives) identifies the composer of the music, NOT Mozart, but a local composer, Giuseppe Callegari ! What happened ? How do we explain the manuscript of ‘Mozart’s’ La Betulia liberata ?

    Well, we must look at this problem from another angle. In fact, from another composer.

    cont'd part 2

    r
    Last edited by robert newman; Dec-02-2006 at 06:39. Reason: corrections

  2. Likes NightHawk liked this post
  3. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    348
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default -part 2 - 2 'Mozart' Operas

    At the time of Mozart’s arrival in Padua there were many new developments within music. It was clear Jesuit control of musical education would probably suffer considerably soon in all countries of the Holy Roman Empire if the Order was annulled.

    And Mozart had a problem. He now had a commission. The littel known Joseph Myslivececk may very well have provided a solution.

    JOSEF MYSLIVECECK

    I introduce in to this story details of Josef Myslivececk (b.Prague 1737 – d. Rome 1781). According to the ‘Groves Dictionary of Music and Musicians’ Josef Myslivececk was a Czech composer and elder of identical twins. There is some speculation that he was a pupil of Benda. His attendance at the Jesuit Gymasium in the Prague Clementinum has been posited. He definitely attended Charles Ferdinand University (now Charles University).

    In the early 1760’s M abandoned his family business for music and began study of composition with Franz Haberman, then Josef Seger, organist at the Tyn Church in Prague. According to Pelel he was able to compose 6 symphonies in the early 1760’s though none survive in his name. He soon established an excellent reputation as a violinist. In November 1763 he left Prague for Venice, being funded partly by his brother Jachymn and also his long-standing patron Count Vincent von Waldestein.

    His studies in Italy with GB Prescetti brought fast results. In his first opera ‘Semiramide’ (1765) at Bergamo and Alessandria (1766). His first great success came a year later (1767) with ‘Il Bellorfonte’ at Theatro S Carlo in Naples. In 1771 Myslivececk was admitted in to the Accademia Filarmonica of Bolgona after befriending Padre Martini.

    Myslivececk made 3 trips to North Europe. The first, a triumphant return to Prague in 1768. The second, in 1772, to Vienna not so successful though he met Charles Burney, the English musicologist there that September. The third was at the invitation of the Elector of Bavaria, Maximilian 3 Joseph in 1777-8 when he visited Munich. (Reports of an earlier visit to Munich have not been confirmed). While in Munich 1778, his opera ‘Ezio’ and oratorio ‘Isacco’ were staged but he needed medical treatment. He also received commissions from Earl Cowper in Venice for 6 symphonies published in England (these recently recorded for the first time).

    On his return to Italy in 1778 he enjoyed further successes in Naples and Venice but his final decline came at the same time as failure of two operas he wrote for Carnival in 1780 – ‘Armida’ for Milan, and ‘Medonte’ for Rome. Myslivecek died shortly afterwards in Rome in abject poverty, his funeral held at the St. Lorenzo in Lucina and paid for by a mysterious Englishman named ‘Barry’ (a former pupil ?).

    Myslivececk’s adventurous life has been the subject of numerous treatments in Czech and German literature including the opera, ‘Il divino Buemo’ (1912) by Stanislav Suda.

    Relations with the Mozart Family

    Myslivececk first met the Mozarts in Bolgona in March of 1770. He remained a friend of them for some 8 years. Their friendship soured in 1778 when he failed to fulfil a promise to arrange an opera commission for Mozart at the Teatro S Carlo for Carnival in 1779. Leopold was also resentful of the fact that Myslivececk was successful in obtaining patronage through the Prince Archbishop Colloredo of Salzburg. Myslivececk is in fact the most commonly mentioned composer in the entire Mozart family correspondence.

    Recent research has proved that Mozart undoubtedly turned to Myslivececk for his own stylistic models. For example, Mozart’s very first opera seria ‘Mitridate’ has direct references to Myslivececk’s own ‘Nitteti’ and, in addition, Mozart borrowed copiously from him in numerous concertos, symphonies and even keyboard sonatas. (See Freeman -1995).
    The incipit of a Myslivececk symphony specially admired by Mozart (which its composer used as the Overture to the opera ‘Demofoonte’ in 1769) is quoted in a postscript to a letter written by Leopold in Milan in December 1770.

    Today, the most famous composition of Myslivececk is rarely credited to him – ‘Il caro mio bene’. This today is better known as an arrangement by Mozart and goes by the name of ‘Ridente la calma’.

    Stylistic

    Myslivececk adopted Italianate models of expression in virtually all his works. In fact, in the long period 1765-1780 he was the most prolific composer of opera-seria in all of Europe.

    At first, he composed works dominated by elaborate ‘del segno’ arias with brilliant passage works and sophisticated arrangements. But around 1773 (corresponding with the official end of Jesuit musical influence) he begins to create music associated with a reform in opera. He starts to construct his operatic arias in sonata and other forms. He also begins, from around this same time (1773 onwards), to use simpler more tuneful themes. Starting with the opera ‘La Calliroe’ (1778) his operas then feature even more elaborate sections of highly accompanied recitatitve and many arias of the slow/fast rondo type in which Myslivececk was specially talented. He uses very rich melodic ideas and has skillful techniques of phrase extension.

    His setting of Metastasio’s ‘Isacco figura del redentore’ is perhaps his greatest work.

    Concertos

    The violin concertos of Myslivecek (many of them lost of attributed to other composers such as Mozart) were very fine. He was recognized in the 1770’s as one of the greatest composers of this form. 8 violin concertos are indisputably credited to him but questions exist on the 5 of ‘Mozart’.

    Reference books on Myslivececk’s works –

    A. Evans and K Dearling – ‘J Myslivececk’ – Thematic Catalogue (Munich, 1999) of Instrumental and Orchestral Works

    Operas

    Semiramide – (1766)
    Il Bellorofonte – 1767 Jan
    Fernace – Nov. 1767
    Il trionfo di Clelia – Metastasio – Dec.1767
    Demofoonte – Metastasio – Jan 1769
    L’Ipermestron’ –Metastasio – March 1769
    La Nitteti – Bologna – April 1770
    Motezuma – Jan 1771
    Il Gran Tamerlano – Dec 1771 Milan
    Il Demetrio – Metastasio – May 1773
    Romolo ed Eruilia – Metastasio – Naples – August 1773
    Antigona – Turin – Dec 1773
    La Clemena di Tito – Metastasio – Jan 1774 – Venice
    Aride – Padua – June 1774
    Artasarse – Metastasio – Naples – Aug 1774
    Il Demofoonte (2nd version) – Naples – Jan 1775
    Ezio – Metastasio – Naples 1775
    Adriano in Siria – Metastasio – September 1776 – Florence
    Ezio – (2nd version) – Metastasio – Carnival 1777 – Munich
    La Callioroe – May 1778 – Naples
    L’Olimpiade – Metastasio – Nov 1778
    La Circe – Venice – 1779 May
    Demetrio – Metastasio – Naples – Aug 1777
    Armida – Milan – Dec 1779
    Il Medonte – Rome – Jan 1780
    Antigono – Rome – April 1780

    Oratorios

    * Betulia liberata – Metastasio – Padua 1771 (lost)
    La Passion di Nostro Signore Gesu Christo – Metastasio – Florence 1773
    La liberazione d’Israele – Easter 1775 – (lost)
    Isaac figura del redentore – Metastasio – Florence – March 1776 (parts attributed to Haydn and parts to Mozart)

    Instrumental

    At least 45 symphonies
    Lost 6 early symphonies (possibly attributed to others)
    Lost 5 symphonies (c.1776-7)
    A symphony in C formerly in Berlin Staatsbibliothek destroyed during 1945

    Other Sources

    G. de Saint-Fox ‘Mozart d’apres Myslivececk’ ReM Vol 9/4-6 (1927-8) p.124-8
    M Shaginyan – ‘Resurrection from the Dead – J Myslivececk’ – Moscow 1964 – translated into Czech language 1965
    R Pecman – ‘J Myslivecek und sein Opern – Brno 1970 (with extensive list of minor literature including stories of Myslivececk’s life and career)
    M. Flothius – ‘Ridente la calma – Mozart oder Myslivececk – MJb – 1971/2 – p.241-3
    D.E. Freeman – ‘Josef Myslivececk’

    COMMENTS

    It is surely a remarkable coincidence that Mozart, commissioned to write ‘Betulia liberata’ for Padua was unable to do so, and yet the very same piece was composed by Josef Myslivececk in Padua, in that very same year of 1771, now lost !

    So the solution may be simple. Mozart accepted the commission for ‘Betulia liberata’ in Padua but was unable to write it. His friend and great helper Josef Myslivecek came to his rescue. But, by this time, the delay in providing the piece made it necessary for the commissioner to obtain the same work for Padua from a local composer, Callegari. This is the only oratorio of that name performed in Padua at Lent in 1772.

    There is no record that ‘Mozart’s’ work of that name (actually by Myslivececk) was performed during Mozart’s lifetime. Nor any record that it was sent to Padua.

    Once again, the clear inference is that Mozart’s reputation was being manufactured by men who, just prior to the dissolution of the Jesuit Order, wanted to promote him, Mozart, as a symbol of musical excellence. Myslivececk was very probably the true composer of the violin concertos attributed today to Mozart. The works of Myslivececk are indisputably similar in style to those we today associate with Mozart. (Recently recorded arias by this composer are virtually ‘Mozart’, stylistically).

    The Mozart/Myslivececk relationship ended with the death of Myslivececk in Rome. Mozart’s debt to this Jesuit educated Czech composer is enormous. It will only increase. And with rediscovery of Myslivececk’s music (and that of Andrea Luchesi) will surely come recognition of the true composers of many works falsely attributed to Mozart.


    R.E.Newman
    Last edited by robert newman; Dec-01-2006 at 11:29.

  4. Likes NightHawk liked this post
  5. #3
    Senior Member NightHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,284
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Can you supply the source of the article? A very interesting story. Thanks!

    Quote Originally Posted by robert newman View Post
    At the time of Mozart’s arrival in Padua there were many new developments within music. It was clear Jesuit control of musical education would probably suffer considerably soon in all countries of the Holy Roman Empire if the Order was annulled.

    And Mozart had a problem. He now had a commission. The littel known Joseph Myslivececk may very well have provided a solution.

    JOSEF MYSLIVECECK

    I introduce in to this story details of Josef Myslivececk (b.Prague 1737 – d. Rome 1781). According to the ‘Groves Dictionary of Music and Musicians’ Josef Myslivececk was a Czech composer and elder of identical twins. There is some speculation that he was a pupil of Benda. His attendance at the Jesuit Gymasium in the Prague Clementinum has been posited. He definitely attended Charles Ferdinand University (now Charles University).

    In the early 1760’s M abandoned his family business for music and began study of composition with Franz Haberman, then Josef Seger, organist at the Tyn Church in Prague. According to Pelel he was able to compose 6 symphonies in the early 1760’s though none survive in his name. He soon established an excellent reputation as a violinist. In November 1763 he left Prague for Venice, being funded partly by his brother Jachymn and also his long-standing patron Count Vincent von Waldestein.

    His studies in Italy with GB Prescetti brought fast results. In his first opera ‘Semiramide’ (1765) at Bergamo and Alessandria (1766). His first great success came a year later (1767) with ‘Il Bellorfonte’ at Theatro S Carlo in Naples. In 1771 Myslivececk was admitted in to the Accademia Filarmonica of Bolgona after befriending Padre Martini.

    Myslivececk made 3 trips to North Europe. The first, a triumphant return to Prague in 1768. The second, in 1772, to Vienna not so successful though he met Charles Burney, the English musicologist there that September. The third was at the invitation of the Elector of Bavaria, Maximilian 3 Joseph in 1777-8 when he visited Munich. (Reports of an earlier visit to Munich have not been confirmed). While in Munich 1778, his opera ‘Ezio’ and oratorio ‘Isacco’ were staged but he needed medical treatment. He also received commissions from Earl Cowper in Venice for 6 symphonies published in England (these recently recorded for the first time).

    On his return to Italy in 1778 he enjoyed further successes in Naples and Venice but his final decline came at the same time as failure of two operas he wrote for Carnival in 1780 – ‘Armida’ for Milan, and ‘Medonte’ for Rome. Myslivecek died shortly afterwards in Rome in abject poverty, his funeral held at the St. Lorenzo in Lucina and paid for by a mysterious Englishman named ‘Barry’ (a former pupil ?).

    Myslivececk’s adventurous life has been the subject of numerous treatments in Czech and German literature including the opera, ‘Il divino Buemo’ (1912) by Stanislav Suda.

    Relations with the Mozart Family

    Myslivececk first met the Mozarts in Bolgona in March of 1770. He remained a friend of them for some 8 years. Their friendship soured in 1778 when he failed to fulfil a promise to arrange an opera commission for Mozart at the Teatro S Carlo for Carnival in 1779. Leopold was also resentful of the fact that Myslivececk was successful in obtaining patronage through the Prince Archbishop Colloredo of Salzburg. Myslivececk is in fact the most commonly mentioned composer in the entire Mozart family correspondence.

    Recent research has proved that Mozart undoubtedly turned to Myslivececk for his own stylistic models. For example, Mozart’s very first opera seria ‘Mitridate’ has direct references to Myslivececk’s own ‘Nitteti’ and, in addition, Mozart borrowed copiously from him in numerous concertos, symphonies and even keyboard sonatas. (See Freeman -1995).
    The incipit of a Myslivececk symphony specially admired by Mozart (which its composer used as the Overture to the opera ‘Demofoonte’ in 1769) is quoted in a postscript to a letter written by Leopold in Milan in December 1770.

    Today, the most famous composition of Myslivececk is rarely credited to him – ‘Il caro mio bene’. This today is better known as an arrangement by Mozart and goes by the name of ‘Ridente la calma’.

    Stylistic

    Myslivececk adopted Italianate models of expression in virtually all his works. In fact, in the long period 1765-1780 he was the most prolific composer of opera-seria in all of Europe.

    At first, he composed works dominated by elaborate ‘del segno’ arias with brilliant passage works and sophisticated arrangements. But around 1773 (corresponding with the official end of Jesuit musical influence) he begins to create music associated with a reform in opera. He starts to construct his operatic arias in sonata and other forms. He also begins, from around this same time (1773 onwards), to use simpler more tuneful themes. Starting with the opera ‘La Calliroe’ (1778) his operas then feature even more elaborate sections of highly accompanied recitatitve and many arias of the slow/fast rondo type in which Myslivececk was specially talented. He uses very rich melodic ideas and has skillful techniques of phrase extension.

    His setting of Metastasio’s ‘Isacco figura del redentore’ is perhaps his greatest work.

    Concertos

    The violin concertos of Myslivecek (many of them lost of attributed to other composers such as Mozart) were very fine. He was recognized in the 1770’s as one of the greatest composers of this form. 8 violin concertos are indisputably credited to him but questions exist on the 5 of ‘Mozart’.

    Reference books on Myslivececk’s works –

    A. Evans and K Dearling – ‘J Myslivececk’ – Thematic Catalogue (Munich, 1999) of Instrumental and Orchestral Works

    Operas

    Semiramide – (1766)
    Il Bellorofonte – 1767 Jan
    Fernace – Nov. 1767
    Il trionfo di Clelia – Metastasio – Dec.1767
    Demofoonte – Metastasio – Jan 1769
    L’Ipermestron’ –Metastasio – March 1769
    La Nitteti – Bologna – April 1770
    Motezuma – Jan 1771
    Il Gran Tamerlano – Dec 1771 Milan
    Il Demetrio – Metastasio – May 1773
    Romolo ed Eruilia – Metastasio – Naples – August 1773
    Antigona – Turin – Dec 1773
    La Clemena di Tito – Metastasio – Jan 1774 – Venice
    Aride – Padua – June 1774
    Artasarse – Metastasio – Naples – Aug 1774
    Il Demofoonte (2nd version) – Naples – Jan 1775
    Ezio – Metastasio – Naples 1775
    Adriano in Siria – Metastasio – September 1776 – Florence
    Ezio – (2nd version) – Metastasio – Carnival 1777 – Munich
    La Callioroe – May 1778 – Naples
    L’Olimpiade – Metastasio – Nov 1778
    La Circe – Venice – 1779 May
    Demetrio – Metastasio – Naples – Aug 1777
    Armida – Milan – Dec 1779
    Il Medonte – Rome – Jan 1780
    Antigono – Rome – April 1780

    Oratorios

    * Betulia liberata – Metastasio – Padua 1771 (lost)
    La Passion di Nostro Signore Gesu Christo – Metastasio – Florence 1773
    La liberazione d’Israele – Easter 1775 – (lost)
    Isaac figura del redentore – Metastasio – Florence – March 1776 (parts attributed to Haydn and parts to Mozart)

    Instrumental

    At least 45 symphonies
    Lost 6 early symphonies (possibly attributed to others)
    Lost 5 symphonies (c.1776-7)
    A symphony in C formerly in Berlin Staatsbibliothek destroyed during 1945

    Other Sources

    G. de Saint-Fox ‘Mozart d’apres Myslivececk’ ReM Vol 9/4-6 (1927-8) p.124-8
    M Shaginyan – ‘Resurrection from the Dead – J Myslivececk’ – Moscow 1964 – translated into Czech language 1965
    R Pecman – ‘J Myslivecek und sein Opern – Brno 1970 (with extensive list of minor literature including stories of Myslivececk’s life and career)
    M. Flothius – ‘Ridente la calma – Mozart oder Myslivececk – MJb – 1971/2 – p.241-3
    D.E. Freeman – ‘Josef Myslivececk’

    COMMENTS

    It is surely a remarkable coincidence that Mozart, commissioned to write ‘Betulia liberata’ for Padua was unable to do so, and yet the very same piece was composed by Josef Myslivececk in Padua, in that very same year of 1771, now lost !

    So the solution may be simple. Mozart accepted the commission for ‘Betulia liberata’ in Padua but was unable to write it. His friend and great helper Josef Myslivecek came to his rescue. But, by this time, the delay in providing the piece made it necessary for the commissioner to obtain the same work for Padua from a local composer, Callegari. This is the only oratorio of that name performed in Padua at Lent in 1772.

    There is no record that ‘Mozart’s’ work of that name (actually by Myslivececk) was performed during Mozart’s lifetime. Nor any record that it was sent to Padua.

    Once again, the clear inference is that Mozart’s reputation was being manufactured by men who, just prior to the dissolution of the Jesuit Order, wanted to promote him, Mozart, as a symbol of musical excellence. Myslivececk was very probably the true composer of the violin concertos attributed today to Mozart. The works of Myslivececk are indisputably similar in style to those we today associate with Mozart. (Recently recorded arias by this composer are virtually ‘Mozart’, stylistically).

    The Mozart/Myslivececk relationship ended with the death of Myslivececk in Rome. Mozart’s debt to this Jesuit educated Czech composer is enormous. It will only increase. And with rediscovery of Myslivececk’s music (and that of Andrea Luchesi) will surely come recognition of the true composers of many works falsely attributed to Mozart.


    R.E.Newman

  6. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    176
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Note that the previous posts were all from 2006, and the original poster has, in the mean time, been banned, so I don't think he'll be supplying any further information.

  7. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    San Diego CA
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I don't understand; how did this material pop up now, six years old, written by a banned member?

    I'm no musicologist but have read extensively in the serious Mozart literature. Nobody has ever questioned that, in his early (childhood) works, Mozart responded to influences from many sources: Most notably his father, but also Myslivecek (a sadly underrated composer), J.C.Bach, Vanhal, and both Haydns. Nevertheless, the fatuous attempt to undermine Mozart's genius as a composer-prodigy is absurd and essentially pointless. Yes of course Leopold Mozart helped his son in the early years; so did Christian Bach during the London visit. This probably included suggestions and likely even touching-up here and there. If Jiri Myslivecek (whom Mozart nicknamed "The Divine Bohemian") did so in Italy as well, it would be no surprise at all. (Leopold was there too, I'm sure he also helped out.)

    But to suggest that there's a whole body of Mozart music just waiting to be proved spurious is idiotic. Certainly there are a few such works, most of which have long since been ferreted out: A couple of the earliest symphonies, the so-called "Paris" overture, the 6th and 7th violin concerti and most notably the old 37th Symphony K.444 which is a copy of a Michael Haydn work to which Mozart added a brief introduction. But wholesale false attribution is ridiculous.

    But don't rely on me, I'm not a formal scholar. Go to a good library and read in some of the recent scholarly biographical studies on the man, and you'll see; questions always remain about certain things, primarily because of lost or destroyed documentation over the generations; but not even remotely at the level these earlier posts state or imply.
    Last edited by CVM; Apr-03-2012 at 20:47. Reason: omission of fact

  8. #6
    Senior Member jhar26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,443
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NightHawk View Post
    Can you supply the source of the article? A very interesting story. Thanks!
    Interesting, but complete nonsense. FYI - Newman has been trying to convince for years anyone naive enough to listen to him that almost the entire works of Mozart, Haydn and the young Beethoven have been composed by lesser mortals among their contemporaries. Contemporaries who never wrote anything of the same level in their own name. They somehow were always able to compose works of genius when they were writing for those three losers though.
    Martha doesn't signal when the orchestra comes in, she's just pursing her lips..

  9. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    448
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CVM View Post
    I don't understand; how did this material pop up now, six years old, written by a banned member?
    Obviously because somebody quoted it, see the top of post 3. The fact that the posts referred to were written in in late 2006 is one thing, but asking the banned member who made them to provide further particulars seems astonishing.

    As for your comments questioning the veracity of Newman's claims, you have merely touched the tip of a big iceberg. You've said nothing that hasn't been said a thousand or more times before.

    Newman started many threads on Mozart/Haydn. This is merely one that nobody took much interest in. If you look around you'll find many more. He was banned from this Forum ages ago, and he has suffered the same plight in most other places he joined in order to propagate his stories. Hardly anyone takes him seriously.

  10. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Straya mate
    Posts
    9,329
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    May as well close this thread then.

  11. #9
    Senior Member jhar26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,443
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ComposerOfAvantGarde View Post
    May as well close this thread then.
    Good idea.
    Martha doesn't signal when the orchestra comes in, she's just pursing her lips..

  12. Likes ComposerOfAvantGarde liked this post

Posting Permissions

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