Not for particular discussion/reflection, but just to emphasize the point, e.g.:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/happ...-birthday-mozart-how-this-musical-genius-summed-up-the-universe-in-three-notes/

http://www.fastcocreate.com/3055976...5976/its-mozarts-260th-birthday-today-heres-why-you-should-celebrate-his-genius

http://www.gramophone.co.uk/feature/mozart-the-greatest-composer-of-all

 

Dunno about "genius", but I posted this a while ago elsewhere.

"Spending part of the day celebrating Mozart's birthday by listening to his chamber music. So far it's been the Piano Trio in G K.564, the Horn Quintet in E-flat K.407, and the Piano Quartet in E-flat K.493. Did this guy write nothing but masterpieces?"

Call him a genius, I won't complain.

 

Partly because of the stupid child prodigy thing.

Partly because, more than any comparably great composer, Mozart makes it sound easy.

 

But then again it's not :tiphat:

 

Well I've made my views on the term "genius" known before but in Mozart's case the structural integrity of his music is near perfection until he hit the age of 17 or 18. After that it became perfect.

Here's something he wrote for him and his sister to play while touring Europe... And yes he was indeed a prodigy he was 8 when he wrote this...

 

Well, exactly. It it were easy, then making it sound easy wouldn't be unusual.

 

Mozart is a genius and one of the outstanding creative minds of mankind, in any endeavor. This is what makes Mozart's genious outstanding. Genius itself is already outstanding but Mozart is at the top of the top.

 

For fun, I Googled a few composers plus the word "genius" and got:

Mozart genius = 1,400,000 results
Beethoven genius = 904,000 results
Haydn genius = 400,000 results
Brahms genius = 406,000 results
Schubert genius = 417,000 results
Bach genius = 973,000 results

So yeah, "genius" does seem to be Mozart's thing.

Then again,

Kanye West genius = 2,760,000 results

 

Then again,

Kanye West genius = 2,760,000 results

Well, he is one.

 

I like that. Mozart has become the "genius thing" and all the "Romantic" ideals of a young and poor composer when he died.

 

Most of us are just saying what we think we're supposed to say. But I have faith that at least some of us are the kind of people with expert knowledge about what Mozart did, and I'm willing to trust their evaluation.

 

My AirB&B host and I were talking about Kanye West today because something about him came up on the news. Neither one of us can remember ever having heard a single note of his music. Can someone point me to what I ought to know? A few years ago one of my students was shocked to find out that I'd never heard any of Justin Bieber's music, and at her advice I listened to several seconds of "Baby" or "Baby Baby" or something like that. It was educational. Can anyone do me a similar service with Kanye West?

 

EDIT: Withdrawn. Dismal.

 

More Google results, searching (with quotes!) we get:

"Mozart was a genius" 14,900 results

"Beethoven was a genius" 10,200 results

"Bach was a genius" 8,790 results.

Unfortunately, I tried comparing my fellow countrymen:

"Elgar was a genius" 6 results

"Vaughan Williams was a genius" 4 results

No results found for "Bax was a genius"

There'll always be an England

Then again:

"Shakespeare was a genius" 27,200 results

P.S. Brahms, Schubert, and others, do fairly well in this test so I think the original thesis is wrong.

 

The music Wolfgang wrote is enough testament to his legacy. I don't need to assign the word genius to absolutely love him. He is almost on par to good old Johann Sebastian at present.

Mozart has the stunning ability to create the most complicated music and make it sound utterly simple, as if nothing has happened.

Even my 4 year old has been amazed at times when listening to say his piano sonatas.

When she innocently asks me to meet Mozart I explain to her that he lived a long time ago and is now dead.

She looks at me bewildered as if asking: 'How can someone be omnipresent in our household, 'talk' to us with his unique musical language and not be alive?'

'Well, Mozart is indeed alive within his music and he will live with us as long as we keep listening.'

My little one still answers back: 'Oh papa, I miss him so much!'

 

It's amazing to me how some perfectly decent threads get hijacked and descend into discussions about nonsensical things such as subhuman rappers (who may think they are genius but are most assuredly not) whom have no business being on said thread in the first place.

And on Mozart's birthday thread... I'm sure he's spinning and knocking around other skeletal remains in that paupers grave of his.

 

It's amazing to me how some perfectly decent threads get hijacked and descend into discussions about nonsensical things such as subhuman rappers (who may think they are genius but are most assuredly not) whom have no business being on said thread in the first place.

And on Mozart's birthday thread... I'm sure he's spinning and knocking around other skeletal remains in that paupers grave of his.

Apologies for the thread diversion, but... subhuman? Seriously?

 

Aaaaaanyways....

The google searches are interesting, but as I mentioned before, that really was not my point.

I was more interested in what you hear or read. Does anyone else notice how often the label gets thrown around with him?

I don't necessarily care about the label's use -- correct, appropriate, whatever -- but I am curious about why him, versus all those composers before or those after. Why is it every time I hear someone talk about Mozart, the comments are couched in terms of genius and this sort of eternal, untouchable art that is the work of God. I suppose it's that I don't hear or read discussions of other composers in that way, and this is what confuses me.

Again, I may be alone in this view. But I highly doubt it.

 

Why is it every time I hear someone talk about Mozart, the comments are couched in terms of genius and this sort of eternal, untouchable art that is the work of God. I suppose it's that I don't hear or read discussions of other composers in that way, and this is what confuses me.

My guess would be the following:

No other composer in the history of Western music put forth such an incredible body of musical works, by the age of 35, in which amazing masterpieces were produced in every genre, including opera. Other major composers lived for the most part into their 60s, 70, and 80s. In fact, most composers created their greatest masterpieces at much more advanced ages than their 20s and 30s as Mozart did.

Also, name just one other composer who mastered opera as well as every other genre. Answer -there are none. Handel comes the closest.

 

Well, some of us, including me, gave you answers, but evidently they didn't satisfy, so I don't know what else you want.

 

Mozart was probably the most musically gifted person that has ever lived. His work rate and the quality of it inspires awe. Much of it is absolute perfection. He mastered just about every form of composition and turned out works of genius in each one. As a composer he is certainly one of the very greatest.

 

I think a big reason is how effortlessly he composed his music. While Beethoven went through draft after draft while writing his works, Mozart had no trouble at all writing it down perfectly without any editing.

 

The comparison among genres is kind of misleading. If we're whittling it down to just generic names like "opera" and considering a composer of master of that genre by having one or two highly acclaimed and regularly performed works there, their success can only be compared in terms of number, which ignores other aspects of mastery like style. Mozart's achievement in composing 7 regularly performed operas is impressive to me not just because of the quality of the music but in the mastery of three very different styles: Opera seria, Italian comedy, and German singspiel.

 

Schubert doesnt get enough credit for being the genius he was. The only composer in my view who is the equal of Mozart in terms of his talent.

 

Wolfgang had the remarkable ability of composing his works in his head and then transcribing them onto paper.

The overture to Don Giovanni was written few hours before its premiere according to eye witness sources. However it was written in his mind probably long before that. Before the premier to Don Giovanni apparently he was amused by the anxiety of those around him as the overture was not yet composed. The night before he started composing he had to sleep a few hours as he had too much to drink. His wife Costanza woke him up and kept him awake by telling him fairytales about Cinderella, Alladin and many more. He wrote it within a few hours and it was copied and given to the orchestra few minutes before the start of the opera.

Could it just be that this innate ability gave him the power to mould his compositions to 'perfection' during any time of day or night even in his sleep?

Schubert also had a somewhat similar ability but in his case the music used to erupt out of him by inspiration and he needed to write it down as soon as possible.

Mozart might have had the ability to keep his inspiration and music controlled consciously and subconsciously within him. Once finished he would eventually write it down when he felt the time was right.

I can't imagine how many musical pieces may have died with him without being written down. Some pieces such as the Requiem may have consumed him at the end of his life as he worked at it within his mind.

The works he left for us are so precious that it would be a disservice to him to compare him to others. Every brilliant composer had his gifts and Mozart used his talent to give us a treasure of astounding music.

 

Wolfgang had the remarkable ability of composing his works in his head and then transcribing them onto paper.

Could it just be that this innate ability gave him the power to mould his compositions to 'perfection' during any time of day or night even in his sleep?

Mozart might have had the ability to keep his inspiration and music controlled consciously and subconsciously within him. Once finished he would eventually write it down when he felt the time was right.

I think a big reason is how effortlessly he composed his music. While Beethoven went through draft after draft while writing his works, Mozart had no trouble at all writing it down perfectly without any editing.

I'm not sure about this, but isn't it known now that Mozart often sketched and reworked material extensively in composing his late works?

 

I think also Mozart's genius manifested itself earlier than other great composers - take the great aria Lungi Da Te from one of his earlier operas - composed at 14 - the complexity and maturity of this aria are way beyond his years, in fact way beyond what Gluck and Salieri were capable of at at their peak. There are more examples.
I dont think Beethoven's genius really manifested itself until the eroica - before that he composed a lot of music - very fine indeed - but lacking the inspiration of god - so to speak.

 

I dont think Beethoven's genius really manifested itself until the eroica - before that he composed a lot of music - very fine indeed - but lacking the inspiration of god - so to speak.

I'd nominate the immediately preceding Kreutzer sonata (with a very strong backbench including the Pathétique, Moonlight, and Tempest sonatas, the third piano concerto, and the second symphony).

 

A genius is anyone with exceptional intellectual or creative power or other natural ability. Any composer with a firm place in the canon is, by definition, a genius. I have heard people saying "Sibelius was a genius" or "Rachmaninov was a genius". That's what my internet search results showed - there are many people saying "X was a genius", where X is a canonical composer. Being a genius isn't *that* big of a thing - nothing compared with being called (say) the "greatest composer of all time", for which title Mozart is in the running with Beethoven and Bach (according to most critics...)

 

It may be that being the first to be widely acclaimed a genius is enough to drain that word of its impact when used later to describe others who follow that first and spectacular example. Mozart combined extreme precocity in both composition and performance with a gift for endearing himself to others, a mastery of virtually all important musical genres of the time, and evidently the ability to compose extensively in his head and then commit it to paper while doing some mundane task. In addition to these gifts we may assume he had absolute pitch and a photographic memory. So once this exemplar of musical genius is very deservedly established, who can later come along to surpass or dethrone him? Saint-Saens and Mendelssohn are often referred to as geniuses; Rachmaninoff had both absolute pitch and a photographic memory. So in Mozart's case, I think he benefits both from a superabundance of evidence for genius and from the equal strength of being the first such genius so designated. A parallel would be Einstein--people will possibly still be calling some very bright person "an Einstein!" for centuries to come, and for the same reasons.

 

I think with Mozart, so many stereotypes get lazily applied to him that it's not a bad idea now and then to challenge them.

He died broke, except he didn't.

He was an infant hooligan vulgar prodigy with a direct channel to the angels. Except, he wasn't.

His music is sweet and light and pleasant but lacks depth. Except this isn't true either.

The "genius" tag is an easy and safe one to give him, because if anybody was a genius, he self-evidently was one. As noted, he composed complex pieces with utter mastery in any form of classical music. I think only string quartets presented him with a little more difficulty but this might be based upon his dedication to Haydn of the six quartets he wrote for him: the fruits of long and laborious effort, or something like that. Many crossings-out in the manuscript. Hard work. But here's another myth of Mozart: that he wrote big long works in his head, flawless operas and symphonies, then basically became a copyist in writing them down.

Remember his reply in the movie Amadeus, when Schikanader asked him, "where's my opera?"

"In me noggin," replied the shifty proto-rock star.

But he worked hard at composition, was serious and erudite as an individual and gave all this work a lot of thought. He just happened to have a sublime gift of composing music with no seams between the themes. In any form of music at all. And at great speed. That is genius, but it's also deep knowledge of the craft and a result of excellent teaching from his father...

 

But he worked hard at composition, was serious and erudite as an individual and gave all this work a lot of thought. He just happened to have a sublime gift of composing music with no seams between the themes. In any form of music at all. And at great speed. That is genius, but it's also deep knowledge of the craft and a result of excellent teaching from his father...

He also had an unmatched genius for composing memorable tunes.

 

OP: Listen to any aria or duet for the female voices from Figaro, Cosí fan tutte or Don Giovanni. THAT is extraordinary genius.

Nobody understood women better through music than WA Mozart.