Do you know your classical composers - Quiz!
pallex
classical composer, while only 14% knew that Mozart and Beethoven
wrote music. Can you do better than that?"
Wonder how much fiddling around i`ll have to do with my browser to get
anything to actually appear when I press `submit`? Anyway, here it
is:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/quiz/questions/0,12161,784915,00.html
Milton Dove
> "A recent survey found that 65% of children under 14 cannot name a
> classical composer, while only 14% knew that Mozart and Beethoven
> wrote music. Can you do better than that?"
I got all 11, which isn't saying much. Those questions are easy.
Milton
invictus
I think we've got to get used to the fact that much of what were
"touchstones," or part of "the furniture of the mind," in our own
lives will be less so to later generations. I wonder how many people
would even recognize, much less identify, names such as Arhtur Miller,
Tennessee Williams, William Inge, James Stewart, Frank Capra, or even
Ernest Hemingway. The same goes for the great Tin Pan Alley
composers, many of whose songs are virtually eclipsed on contemporary
radio. Who knows aobut Arlen, Berlin, Youmans, Porter, and the rest?
I recently checked a film dictionary and found Michael Douglas there
but not his father! Whether this reflects a greater cultural
literary, or merely a different cultural literacy, is another issue.
A more interesting point is the general lack of knowledge even
among those who should know. Many critics, for example, who write
about lyrics have no knowledge about the great lyric writers of Tin
Pan Alley; so how can they properly or historically evaluate the
lyrics of Rock songs. Certainly aesthetics and history are entwined to
a degree.
I find numerous mistakes in CD booklets. Only recently, in a CD
of THE COMPLETE WORKS FOR PIANO SOLO of Manuel de Falla, I read
included notes on one piano composition, called "Canto de las remeros
del Volga." Despite the title of the song, which virtually advertised
the pedigree of this composition (from the Russian folksong, "The
Volga Boatman"), the liner notes state: "'Canto de los remeros dela
Volga,' composed in Granada in 1922 and also unpublished until 1980,
is one of the interesting curiosities in de Falla's catalogue of
works. It was composed for the League of Nations to aid Russian
refugees and quickly became known as a 'typical example of Russian
song.'"
These are the complete notes on he song. It is certainly
suggested, if only by omission, that the song is an original
composition by de Falla, rather than a paraphrse of the Russian
folksong that it is. But then I still meet people today who insist
that Marvin Hamlisch wrote "The Entertainer"!
keith edgerley
>mdo...@hotmail.com (Milton Dove) wrote in message news:<90782eaf.02090...@posting.google.com>...
>
>>pal...@altavista.co.uk (pallex) wrote in message news:<1158a943.02090...@posting.google.com>...
>>
>>>"A recent survey found that 65% of children under 14 cannot name a
>>>classical composer, while only 14% knew that Mozart and Beethoven
>>>wrote music. Can you do better than that?"
>>>
>>I got all 11, which isn't saying much. Those questions are easy.
>>
>>Milton
>>
>
>I think we've got to get used to the fact that much of what were
>"touchstones," or part of "the furniture of the mind," in our own
>lives will be less so to later generations. I wonder how many people
>would even recognize, much less identify, names such as Arhtur Miller,
>Tennessee Williams, William Inge, James Stewart, Frank Capra, or even
>Ernest Hemingway. The same goes for the great Tin Pan Alley
>composers, many of whose songs are virtually eclipsed on contemporary
>radio. Who knows aobut Arlen, Berlin, Youmans, Porter, and the rest?
>I recently checked a film dictionary and found Michael Douglas there
>but not his father! Whether this reflects a greater cultural
>literary, or merely a different cultural literacy, is another issue.
>
The issue is, I think, that the sense of continuity of western culture,
stretching back to at least the renaissance, but also as far back as 4th
century Athens, has now been broken, I would say within the last 30
years. At least in the English-speaking world. The reasons are many and
various. One is the equating of "now" with "enlightenment", and hence
anything older than 30 years as reflecting lack of enlightenment and
hence not worth knowing. This was ever a natural tendency with the
young, but now it seems to have infected the whole teaching profession,
which IMHO should know better.
OTOH, I must say that I haven't found this in the French-speaking world
at all. French people still have a great sense of continuity with their
own past, and even the caesura that might be expected with the French
Revolution just didn't happen in French cultural memory. Young French
people know the old popular songs, some very old. They know their cinema
(French AND English-speaking: the average level of knowledge of cinema
history of the average French person would shame an English or American
film critic.)
>
> A more interesting point is the general lack of knowledge even
>among those who should know. Many critics, for example, who write
>about lyrics have no knowledge about the great lyric writers of Tin
>Pan Alley; so how can they properly or historically evaluate the
>lyrics of Rock songs
>
Have these people no native curiosity? It would appear not.
> Certainly aesthetics and history are entwined to
>a degree.
> I find numerous mistakes in CD booklets. Only recently, in a CD
>of THE COMPLETE WORKS FOR PIANO SOLO of Manuel de Falla, I read
>included notes on one piano composition, called "Canto de las remeros
>del Volga." Despite the title of the song, which virtually advertised
>the pedigree of this composition (from the Russian folksong, "The
>Volga Boatman"), the liner notes state: "'Canto de los remeros dela
>Volga,' composed in Granada in 1922 and also unpublished until 1980,
>is one of the interesting curiosities in de Falla's catalogue of
>works. It was composed for the League of Nations to aid Russian
>refugees and quickly became known as a 'typical example of Russian
>song.'"
> These are the complete notes on he song. It is certainly
>suggested, if only by omission, that the song is an original
>composition by de Falla, rather than a paraphrse of the Russian
>folksong that it is. But then I still meet people today who insist
>that Marvin Hamlisch wrote "The Entertainer"!
>
--
Keith
Let us now praise famous men [...]
Such as found out musical tunes
Jim Dunphy
If only Beethoven had lived to write his Seventeenth Symphony!
Jim Dunphy
Sacqueboutier
pal...@altavista.co.uk wrote on 9/2/02 10:44 AM:
He's dead wrong on the Schubert question. Perhaps he should
study the subject a little more before he tries to test
others' knowledge.
(Schubert *completed* only seven symphonies)
--
Don Patterson
DCP Music Printing
Professional Music Copy
and Arrangements
don...@olg.com
"Sometimes I wonder. We are told that the little things
in life are what make life worth living. Then we are
told, "Don't sweat the small stuff". Does this mean that
if the little things in life don't happen, and we don't
'sweat it', life is not worth living?"
invictus
different terms. Post-modernism suggests a radical break with the
past, more radical than that of the Renaissance, for example. Because
that movement was as much antiquarian as contemporary. But
post-modernism has undermined any sense of ideological unity, as if
speaking in one voice, with one voice; a univocal culture or cultural
heritage (the assumed "furniture of the mind," a phrase used by
several writers, including Kenneth Clarke). Less ideologically, we
are living in a highly pluralistic age. Technology alone has made
this possible, apart from the collapse of ideological univocalisms.
This, to me, at least, is not a bad thing; I believe we are enriched
by this; and it has certainly enriched our music. At the same time,
although I myself would not argue for the *necessity* of the
traditional heritage (the "canon"), I would certainly argue for its
desirability. But I cannot subscribe to, say, Allan Bloom's
antiquarian rhetoric in his somewhat notorious book of some years ago.
For one, the Blues, in all its diverse forms (jazz, gospel, soul,
R&B, R&R, disco, rap, hip-hop, etc.) is one of the great contributions
to world culture. And cinema has increased, I think, the visual and
non-verbal literacy among most educated viewers. (By non-verbal, I
mean, paralinguistic clues, musical cues, sound effects, and
behavioral styles.) I don't think viewers are mindlessly passive
viewing movies, as maybe they were in the early stages of the flicks.
A visit to some of the newsgroups devoted to the movies shows
otherwise. There's a great deal of literacy there, including a sense
of the star machinery (iconography) or ideology, the work of the DP
(cinematographer), etc. While music appreciation on these newsgroups
has clearly developed beyond simply liking the music on the disc, as
distinct from a literate appreciation of the cue in the context of the
movie. I think this challenge to the hegemony of the word is a good
thing. Of course, there was visual literacy in the past too; however,
save for art scholars on the one hand, and illiterates on the other
hand (those who learned by viewing pictures in the churches), the
visual languages and other para-verbal discourses, were marginalized.
>
> OTOH, I must say that I haven't found this in the French-speaking world
> at all. French people still have a great sense of continuity with their
> own past, and even the caesura that might be expected with the French
> Revolution just didn't happen in French cultural memory. Young French
> people know the old popular songs, some very old. They know their cinema
> (French AND English-speaking: the average level of knowledge of cinema
> history of the average French person would shame an English or American
> film critic.)
and continuity, even in their defense of the language. But in Martin
Luther's quip, the drunk rider has got to be certain he doesn't fall
off the right side of the horse even as he struggles not to fall off
the left side.
>
> >
> > A more interesting point is the general lack of knowledge even
> >among those who should know. Many critics, for example, who write
> >about lyrics have no knowledge about the great lyric writers of Tin
> >Pan Alley; so how can they properly or historically evaluate the
> >lyrics of Rock songs
> >
> Have these people no native curiosity? It would appear not.
suppose, a lack of curiosity. Maybe there's just so much time, at
least for a journalistic critic. It's an issue of putting the disc on
the turntable and churning out copy. A scholar can afford to study
the great songs of the past and see influences in the modern songs,
weaknesses, etc. Yet I've read books where the writers seem highly
impressed by some of the Beatles songs, as if there were no
antecedents; no superior lyric specimens before them. One writer
enthused over the simple rhyme, "Will you still need me /Will you
still feed me / When I'm 64" from a famous Beatle song, on the basis
that it actually made sense! Well, the least of the lyrics of an Ira
Gershwin or W. S. Gilbert makes more sense than that; and they scan
better. Actually, there is not a single lyric of The Beatles that I
find entirely satisfactory, although it works well enough with the
vocal. But compare Gilbert's great nighmare song: "When you're lying
awake /With a dismal headache /And repose is tabooed by anxiety," etc.
That was surrealistic long before "Subterranean Homesick Blues,"
although the latter, admittedly, packs more of a punch.
Marcello Penso
invict...@yahoo.com says...
Taking my cues from architecture (my field), I'd have to qualify this a
little. Italian Renaissance architects were fully aware that their use of
Greco-Roman motifs was strictly a formal exercise. They were not after
the complete symbolic meaning behind, say, elements of a triglyph or
metopes motifs. They started using that language because they found some
aesthetic value in it, and because, for some reason(s) I'm not quite
clear on, they found Gothic architecture not to be as nice looking. A
read of Alberti or Palladio, or even Vignola will show you how well they
understood that what they were doing was simply a formal exercise (though
a nice looking one at that)
So the Renaissance wasn't as 'antiquarian' as all that. Artists, writers
and thinkers were well aware that they were resuscitating Roman stuff,
yes, but also drastically molding it to fit there needs, their meanings
and so forth. In this sense, the Renaissance, at least in architecture is
much closer ot Post modernism that one might think.
As far as the plurality is concerned, people were well aware of that in
the 1870s to 1890s, when all the 'neo' movements really started popping
up, along with nationalistic movements, impressionism and so forth. The
20th century simply added more 'thing to choose from' on the heap.
As far as sense of 'cultural continuity', I don't think it's that
drastic, at least not in Europe (definitely not in Italy, where the sense
of historical context, in any field, can actually be stifling).
Marcello
Francois Desnoyers
Marcello Penso wrote:
> In article <dcb3fc7a.02090...@posting.google.com>,
> invict...@yahoo.com says...
>
>
> Taking my cues from architecture (my field), I'd have to qualify this a
> little. Italian Renaissance architects were fully aware that their use of
> Greco-Roman motifs was strictly a formal exercise. They were not after
> the complete symbolic meaning behind, say, elements of a triglyph or
> metopes motifs. They started using that language because they found some
> aesthetic value in it, and because, for some reason(s) I'm not quite
> clear on, they found Gothic architecture not to be as nice looking.
Maybe because it did not quench their thirst for order and clarity ?
invictus
> in article 1158a943.02090...@posting.google.com, pallex at
> pal...@altavista.co.uk wrote on 9/2/02 10:44 AM:
>
> > "A recent survey found that 65% of children under 14 cannot name a
> > classical composer, while only 14% knew that Mozart and Beethoven
> > wrote music. Can you do better than that?"
> >
> > Wonder how much fiddling around i`ll have to do with my browser to get
> > anything to actually appear when I press `submit`? Anyway, here it
> > is:
> >
> > http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/quiz/questions/0,12161,784915,00.html
>
> He's dead wrong on the Schubert question. Perhaps he should
> study the subject a little more before he tries to test
> others' knowledge.
>
> (Schubert *completed* only seven symphonies)
considered complete as is). I think there's a fine distinction
between a symphony being incomplete and one being unfinished.
Mahler's Tenth (or Elgar's Third) is incomplete. But how did this
mess with Schubert's numbering of his symphonies get this far? If we
can change the numbering of Dvorak's symphonies, I suppose we can
change the numbering of Schubert's as well. Is there anything sacred
about calling the C-major the 9th or the Unfinished the 8th? Would
the earth stop spinning on its axis if the Unfinished was identified
as S's 7th and the C-major his 8th and final symphony? People would
get used to it, just like they got used to calling the New World
Symphony the 9th after a couple of generations knew it as the 5th.
James Kahn
>... Is there anything sacred
>about calling the C-major the 9th or the Unfinished the 8th? Would
>the earth stop spinning on its axis if the Unfinished was identified
>as S's 7th and the C-major his 8th and final symphony? People would
>get used to it, just like they got used to calling the New World
>Symphony the 9th after a couple of generations knew it as the 5th.
Isn't a substantial portion of the "7th" extant in some kind of
reduced score? I seem to recall that, but I may be mixed up. Also,
though the "8th" may seem "complete" in some sense, aren't there
also sketches for a scherzo movement?
--
Jim
New York, NY
(Please remove "nospam." to get my e-mail address)
http://www.panix.com/~kahn
Marcello Penso
intel.com says...
>
>
> Marcello Penso wrote:
>
> > In article <dcb3fc7a.02090...@posting.google.com>,
> > invict...@yahoo.com says...
> >
> >
> > Taking my cues from architecture (my field), I'd have to qualify this a
> > little. Italian Renaissance architects were fully aware that their use of
> > Greco-Roman motifs was strictly a formal exercise. They were not after
> > the complete symbolic meaning behind, say, elements of a triglyph or
> > metopes motifs. They started using that language because they found some
> > aesthetic value in it, and because, for some reason(s) I'm not quite
> > clear on, they found Gothic architecture not to be as nice looking.
>
> Maybe because it did not quench their thirst for order and clarity ?
I'm not sure. There may be a few reasons. One that Alberti cites
specifically is that the Greco-Roman language mimics the natural 'body',
with head torso and base. In his writings you see a bit of that,
particularly in his discussions of what constitutes beauty, that all the
parts relate in an organic whole.
Another reason may simply that because the Gothic style never really
caught in Italy, (because Romanesque and Byzantine had such a strong
following) Italian architects did not give it much credence, even though
there were stonemason books in existence, from Germany or France, I
believe, that described the 'cathedral making' process in fair detail.
Another reason may be that Italian Renaissance artists in general saw in
Rome 'the splendor' of something past that was local, of the Italicus
peninsula (even though they were all in separate city-states), and so it
was a artistic treasure that they could easily relate to because they
were aware it had been there own past ancestors. A kind of national pride
of sorts before there was ever a nation of Italy.
Maybe orangiemike would know. He seems familiar with those early
Renaissance writings....
Marcello
invictus
> In <dcb3fc7a.02090...@posting.google.com> invict...@yahoo.com (invictus) writes:
>
> >... Is there anything sacred
> >about calling the C-major the 9th or the Unfinished the 8th? Would
> >the earth stop spinning on its axis if the Unfinished was identified
> >as S's 7th and the C-major his 8th and final symphony? People would
> >get used to it, just like they got used to calling the New World
> >Symphony the 9th after a couple of generations knew it as the 5th.
>
> Isn't a substantial portion of the "7th" extant in some kind of
> reduced score? I seem to recall that, but I may be mixed up. Also,
> though the "8th" may seem "complete" in some sense, aren't there
> also sketches for a scherzo movement?
I don't know about that. From what little I know on this subject,
there has never been a 7th. I'm certain if there was a reduced score
of *any* music by a famous composer, these days it would be traduced
by an ambitious musicologist. Actually, considering the number of
musicologists hyphenating their names with those of famous composers,
it's a wonder Schubert's Unfinished remains unfinished. I keep
fearing that any day we'll hear of Schubert's Finished Symphony in a
new performing version. The marketplace being what it is, every major
symphony orchestra will compete for the premiere rights to that
version!
Sacqueboutier
invict...@yahoo.com wrote on 9/4/02 5:51 AM:
> Sacqueboutier <don...@olg.com> wrote in message
> news:<B99AE31B.4A0F%don...@olg.com>...
>> in article 1158a943.02090...@posting.google.com, pallex at
>> pal...@altavista.co.uk wrote on 9/2/02 10:44 AM:
>>
>>> "A recent survey found that 65% of children under 14 cannot name a
>>> classical composer, while only 14% knew that Mozart and Beethoven
>>> wrote music. Can you do better than that?"
>>>
>>> Wonder how much fiddling around i`ll have to do with my browser to get
>>> anything to actually appear when I press `submit`? Anyway, here it
>>> is:
>>>
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/quiz/questions/0,12161,784915,00.html
>>
>> He's dead wrong on the Schubert question. Perhaps he should
>> study the subject a little more before he tries to test
>> others' knowledge.
>>
>> (Schubert *completed* only seven symphonies)
> The commentary can be interpreted either way (assuming the 8th is
> considered complete as is).
Yeah. That's why it's called "The Unfinished".
> I think there's a fine distinction
> between a symphony being incomplete and one being unfinished.
Finished...complete. Look it up in Roget.
> Mahler's Tenth (or Elgar's Third) is incomplete.
They are also "unfinished".
> But how did this
> mess with Schubert's numbering of his symphonies get this far? If we
> can change the numbering of Dvorak's symphonies, I suppose we can
> change the numbering of Schubert's as well.
And we have...more than once. the 9th is now the 8th. The 8th
is now the 7th.
> Is there anything sacred
> about calling the C-major the 9th or the Unfinished the 8th? Would
> the earth stop spinning on its axis if the Unfinished was identified
> as S's 7th and the C-major his 8th and final symphony? People would
> get used to it, just like they got used to calling the New World
> Symphony the 9th after a couple of generations knew it as the 5th.
This is irrelevant. The question clearly stated the the composer
wrote nine symphonies, but completed only eight. Schubert completed
only seven symphonies, therefore the question is in error. Strange
coming from that British paragon of journalism, The Guardian.
I'll wager that while interviewing those kids and discovering that
most of them didn't know Mozart composed music, the reporter
porbably didn't know it himself.
Sacqueboutier
ka...@nospam.panix.com wrote on 9/4/02 9:16 AM:
> In <dcb3fc7a.02090...@posting.google.com> invict...@yahoo.com
> (invictus) writes:
>
>> ... Is there anything sacred
>> about calling the C-major the 9th or the Unfinished the 8th? Would
>> the earth stop spinning on its axis if the Unfinished was identified
>> as S's 7th and the C-major his 8th and final symphony? People would
>> get used to it, just like they got used to calling the New World
>> Symphony the 9th after a couple of generations knew it as the 5th.
>
> Isn't a substantial portion of the "7th" extant in some kind of
> reduced score? I seem to recall that, but I may be mixed up. Also,
> though the "8th" may seem "complete" in some sense, aren't there
> also sketches for a scherzo movement?
Schubert left the 8th unfinished...incomplete...not totally done...
whatever you want to say. In Schubert's day, a symphony didn't
consist of only two movements. Why didn't he finish it? Don't
know. Maybe he set it aside to go onto some new project he suddenly
thought of. Just speculating.
As for the 7th, I think he left sketches unscored...probably
in condensed score form. This usually takes the form of about
four staves of music with notes as to what goes where.
Don Patterson
sch...@gefen.cc.biu.ac.il
: Schubert left the 8th unfinished...incomplete...not totally done...
: whatever you want to say. In Schubert's day, a symphony didn't
: consist of only two movements. Why didn't he finish it? Don't
: know. Maybe he set it aside to go onto some new project he suddenly
: thought of. Just speculating.
Schubert apparently had a habit of abandoning something he was working on when
his inspiration started to flag. The 8th symphony isn't his only unfinished
work -- I know that there are several sonatas that he abandoned at various
points. I sort of wish that he had done that with the D. 845 sonata, in
which (IMHO) the quality of the movements decreases monotonically from 1 to 4.
-----
Richard Schultz sch...@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
It's a bird, it's a plane -- no, it's Mozart. . .
AllenGaryK
>>> (Schubert *completed* only seven symphonies)
>> The commentary can be interpreted either way (assuming the 8th is
>> considered complete as is).
>
>Yeah. That's why it's called "The Unfinished".
Only by Schubert, that slacker. It's been finished off by others many times.
There was a famously derided competition sponsored by Columbia for the Schubert
centenary in 1928, with a prize for the best completion of the "Unfinished."
That one was won by a composer named Merrick, I believe, while there seems to
have been a European wing of the restoration project according to this site:
www.musicweb.force9.co.uk/music/classrev/ 2001/Jan01/atterberg.htm
In addition, Brian Newbould made another completion for the bicententary in
1997, for which I've only just found the reference. Does anyone have a count
as to how many times completions have been made?
Gary
Descartes
Well, you (or that website) got it half-right.
The Schubert Unfinished Symphony Competition of 1928 sponsored
by the Columbia Gramophone Company was won by the then-young
Swedish composer Kurt Atterburg--who eventually turned out to
be one of most distinguihed Romantic symphonists
of the 20th Century. The prize was 2000 pounds sterling, a
princely sum in 1928. Atterburg composed two movements to
complete Schubert's Unfinished. Reaction was favorable to his
music, but many critics thought it didn't sound all that much like
Schubert. So Atterburg got his revenge on his critics. He composed
two more movements to replace the movements that Schubert wrote,
lumped all four of his movements together, and the new
work was published as Atterburg's Symphony. I think it is his
Fourth--which means that he would have had to transpose the
two movements he wrote for the competition from B minor
into G minor.
I've never heard of any composer named Merrick.
Regarding Newbould, he completed Schubert's unfinished
scherzo for this symphony. But so have several others.
The Australian conductor Denis Vaughan recorded his
completion of the same movement many years ago
with the Orchestra of Naples on RCA. Schubert
did complete most of this movement. Only half of the trio was
left empty. So a completion of this movement is
no big deal. Moreover, Schubert's music is not
very interesting. That is the real reason this symphony was
never finished. It is obvious that Schubert took a look
at what he had composed of the Scherzo thus far and said
to himself: this stinks, time to turn to another piece for
a while until I get some exciting ideas for my
scherzo. There is no sketch for a fourth movement.
invictus
> in article al513l$nei$2...@reader1.panix.com, James Kahn at
> ka...@nospam.panix.com wrote on 9/4/02 9:16 AM:
> Schubert left the 8th unfinished...incomplete...not totally done...
> whatever you want to say.
Distinctions may be useful in one context but not in another. What I
was getting at was, regarding the quiz, I don't think Schubert's
Unfinished should be considered incomplete, in the way that other
compositions (Atlantida, for one) are obviously incomplete, therefore
completed by others. Schumann had his similarly incomplete symphony,
which he published. True, this had his imprimatur, as it were. But I
suggest that, after a certain amount of time, we can assume an
imprimatur by default; as if, when accused of a crime, a suspect does
not defend himself. A composer of Schubert's facility and inspiration
would hardly have left an ms in such an incompleted state unless he
felt he had said everything he wanted to. I still think the
distinction, however fine, between a work being unfinished and
incomplete is worth defending. But I won't belabor the point either.
It would be interesting to report other such works. I've already
mentioned Schumann's "Overture, Scherzo, and Finale." As I recall,
Samuel Barber also had problems with his violin concerto and finally
appended a very short movement. But if he had died before he did so,
would it be defensible to say the concerto was "incomplete" in the
sense intended here? Rather, I would say the pressures of the
marketplace (performance, etc.) were as much a motive as aesthetic
concerns, and they may have prevailed over aesthetic concerns. It's
possible Schubert lacked the strength to oppose the marketplace and
was waiting for aesthetic inspiration to respond to the pressures of
the market. Wagner capitulated to the marketplace to, appending a
ballet in one of his earlier operas. But if there was no ballet would
we say the opera was incomplete? True, I recognize the difference in
Schubert's case, that he never actually published his symphony as it
has come down to us. But bear in mind that Schubert published
precious little in his lifetime, so the lack of a publication
imprimatur does not have the same weight as it would in the case of
another composer. But this is a genuinely contentious issue and I
have no wish to claim to say the final word here.
invictus
And it might be worth listing all the works composers had trouble
affixing a final movement! I recently mentioned a Barber opus. But
there have been countless others, I believe. Schumann replaced at
least one final movement, based on his wife's suggestion (2d Pno
Sonata). The final movement of DSCH's 5th is by now notoriously
known. Beethoven replaced his Grosse Fuge as the final mvt of a piano
sonata. The final movements of at least a couple of Mahler's
symphonies have been perceived as problematic (the middle 3).
Beethoven publicly debated the final movement of his final symphony.
In general, final movements have been considered "letdowns" from the
main body of the work, far more than the other movements; or, in the
case of the 9th, the most glorious part of that work. Also, regarding
another poster, 2 movement works received their ultimate imprimatur
from Beethoven's final piano sonatas. By the time of Schubert, and
under the immediate influence of Beethoven, all formal parameters were
in question. Certainly, if Beethoven could write a 2-movement piano
sonata, why couldn't a composer at least have pondered a 2-movement
symphony. But related to the other, aesthetic, issue, whose solutions
do not come easily, that would not have been an "easy" or facile
decision. Hence, many composers would more likely "abandon" (or seem
to abandon) a work, rather than make an easy final decision on its
external form. Finally, as I said in another post, the publication
imprimatur in Schubert's case is far more ambiguous, since Schubert
published little. It is quite possible that, under the pressure of
market demands, Schubert, feeling a need to issue his symphony, would
have done so in its two-movement form.
doran
>
> And it might be worth listing all the works composers had trouble
> affixing a final movement!
> The final movement of DSCH's 5th is by now notoriously
> known.
Please explain what S's 'trouble' was here in 'affixing a final movement'.
> Beethoven replaced his Grosse Fuge as the final mvt of a piano
> sonata.
No he didn't. It was the finale of the Op.130 String Quartet.
> The final movements of at least a couple of Mahler's
> symphonies have been perceived as problematic (the middle 3).
But not, I think, by the composer; i.e. another illegitimate example of a
composer supposedly 'having trouble affixing a final movement'.
Mark D.
Descartes
>It is quite possible that, under the pressure of
>market demands, Schubert, feeling a need to issue his symphony, would
>have done so in its two-movement form.
No, it's not.
Schubert died at 31, busy working on the sketch of his Tenth--which
was going along just GREAT. Eventually, had he lived, he would have picked
up the B minor Symphony again just where he had temporarily left it.
D.
invictus
> Beethoven publicly debated the final movement of his final symphony.
Here what I meant by "publicly debated" is the "public" musical
discourse in the movement itself, the expository rejection of various
ideas before settling on the chorale ode melody in that movement.
invictus
> "invictus" <invict...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> >
> > And it might be worth listing all the works composers had trouble
> > affixing a final movement!
>
> > The final movement of DSCH's 5th is by now notoriously
> > known.
>
> Please explain what S's 'trouble' was here in 'affixing a final movement'.
final movmement was forced on DSCH. I myself find the movement
persuasive enough; however arguments have been made (including some
dubiously [or contentiously] accredited quotations from DSCH
himself)regarding the Stalinist pressures involved in the final
movement, where aesthetic Truth and ideological Pravda seemed to be at
odds.
>
> > Beethoven replaced his Grosse Fuge as the final mvt of a piano
> > sonata.
>
> No he didn't. It was the finale of the Op.130 String Quartet.
posted.
>
> > The final movements of at least a couple of Mahler's
> > symphonies have been perceived as problematic (the middle 3).
>
> But not, I think, by the composer; i.e. another illegitimate example of a
> composer supposedly 'having trouble affixing a final movement'.
>
> Mark D.
arguments concerning the "Unfinished" is simply that in the realm of
aesthetics there are no easy or simple solutions. That's all I'm
saying. Specifically regarding this proximate point, I believe many
finales are struggled with more than other movements. I mean you hear
of the rare slow movement that is discarded (I think Mozart has a
few), or a trio revised or replaced in a scherzo (Schumann's
Quintet)but finales are much more commonly questioned, both by the
composers themselves and/or later critics. In Schubert's case, there
is no cut-and-dried conclusion, just because the symphony is named
"Unfinished." The C-major is named the Great, but that doesn't mean
all other symphonies are less great or not great at all. As a
romantic composer, and following in the gigantic footsteps of a
recently deceased composer who experimented adventurously with formal
outlines (including one 2-movement piano sonata, a great one at that),
I wouldn't claim, too hastily, or with critical facility, that S
certainly intended to affix two more movements to his "Unfinished"
symphony. But, just as credibly, he might have.
invictus
Had Jack Dempsey returned to a neutral corner, he would have knocked
out Gene Tunney. WE DON'T KNOW THIS. We never will know this. All
we know is that Tunney took a long count. Whether he would have
cleared his head sooner, making Jack the first heavyweight to regain
the crown, we will never know. That means *never*. That's all I'm
saying regarding Schubert. Your argument about the reputed Tenth
could just as well be a conclusive, or persuasive, argument for the
terminal state of the 8th, since S. was progresing rapidly, and it's
unlikely he could have affixed movements to a symphony after composing
two more. It's possible of course; but not probable. Even
Mendelssohn's later expansion of the Midsummer music did no more than
expand on his earlier melodies for the longer suite of incidental
music. And Beethoven never completed his first violin concerto, the
source, presumably, of a surviving violin movement.
Risto Karttunen
>Well, you (or that website) got it half-right.
>
>The Schubert Unfinished Symphony Competition of 1928 sponsored
>by the Columbia Gramophone Company was won by the then-young
>Swedish composer Kurt Atterburg
You got that almost right. Atterberg, not Atterburg. But perhaps we
shouldn't call "young" a composer whose age is 40 years. Compared to
Schubert, at least.
> Atterburg composed two movements to
>complete Schubert's Unfinished. Reaction was favorable to his
>music, but many critics thought it didn't sound all that much like
>Schubert. So Atterburg got his revenge on his critics. He composed
>two more movements to replace the movements that Schubert wrote,
>lumped all four of his movements together, and the new
>work was published as Atterburg's Symphony.
AFAIK the original aim of that competition was the completion of the
Unfinished. But that was widely thought sacrilegious, and the task was
changed to the composition of an orchestral work "in the spirit of
Schubert". Atterberg composed his symphony on this basis.
> I think it is his
>Fourth
Quite close. Sixth, nicknamed "Dollar Symphony", because Atterberg got
a cheque for $ 10,000 as the first prize. It is quite nice music, btw.
--
risto
Descartes
>Had Jack Dempsey returned to a neutral corner, he would have knocked
>out Gene Tunney. WE DON'T KNOW THIS. We never will know this. All
>we know is that Tunney took a long count. Whether he would have
>cleared his head sooner, making Jack the first heavyweight to regain
>the crown, we will never know. That means *never*. That's all I'm
>saying regarding Schubert. Your argument about the reputed Tenth
>could just as well be a conclusive, or persuasive, argument for the
>terminal state of the 8th, since S. was progresing rapidly, and it's
>unlikely he could have affixed movements to a symphony after composing
>two more. It's possible of course; but not probable. Even
>Mendelssohn's later expansion of the Midsummer music did no more than
>expand on his earlier melodies for the longer suite of incidental
>music. And Beethoven never completed his first violin concerto, the
>source, presumably, of a surviving violin movement.
Here are some well-established historical facts about Schubert's unfinished
symphonies, reflecting the most recent published research:
When Schubert died from syphillis at age 31, he
had been making sketches continuously for 2-3 weeks in a large
notebook, which was found among his possesions after his
death and deposited in the Vienna Library, where it remains
today. While all Schubert scholars, including Deutsch and
Einstein, knew of the existence of this sketchbook, no scholar
ever bothered to study its contents until the 1980s, when the
Curator of the library published a bombshell of an article
revealing that the notebook contained the piano short scores
of about a dozen orchestral movements in various states of completion
for four different different symphonies, all of them in D major, and
each one of them dating from a totally different period in Schubert's
short life, going back to his early twenties.
The last of these works, the one Schubert was
feverishly working on while he was dying, is what is now
called the Tenth. Not the reputed Tenth, by the way.
The unfinished Tenth. Schubert virtually completed composition of
three movements of this work. Newbould realized a
musicological orchestral score based on Schubert's sketches
and indications for these movements.
So, to begin with, we have FOUR unfinished symphonies by
Schubert, in additon to Schubert's "Unfinished" Symphony.
Next we have Schubert's E Major Symphony, which today
is usually given the number 7. This symphony was also
unfinished, although Schubert left it in a very advanced
state of orchestral development. (This is the symphony
that Felix Weingartner completed--extremely successfully,
by the way, despite the disparaging comments of ill-informed critics
who never had the opportunity to hear it performed
by a great orchestra under a great conductor--that is,
until quite recently. Weingartner died before recording
it. There was once an awful recording by an atrocious
East German orchestra that did more harm than good)
So that makes FIVE symphonies that Schubert left unfinished,
in addition to the "Unfinished."
Then there is the matter of the "lost" Gastein Symphony
and the Grand Duo for Piano. The latest published musicological
writings on these subjects strongly assert.
1) that, while the manuscript for a symphony that Schubert is known
to have composed while visiting Gastein is indeed lost, this
manuscript was actually the preliminary version of the symphony
that today we now know as No. 9 in C Major (The Great.) This,
of course, contradicts your contention about Schubert
not being likely to pick up an earlier work and finishing
it later. Also, theories that the "lost" Gastein was actually
the Grand Duo are now discounted.
2) Nevertheless, the latest research tends to backup
the idea, first proposed by that noted musicologist Johannes
Brahms (the first editor of Schubert's symphonies) and
later realized by his protegé the composer
Joseph Joachim, that the Grand Duo was indeed a
4-hand short score for a projected but unfinished symphony.
So, we can add to the pile at least one more symphony that
Schubert left unfinished for many years, until he
finally picked it up again and remodeled it into
the completed No. 9. Plus the high probability
that the Grand Duo is yet another unfinished
symphony.
If should be obvious by now, that there is NOTHING
UNUSUAL about Schubert's "Unfinished" Symphony.
There are MANY Schubert unfinished symphonies.
Throughout his life, he worked intermittently
on his numerous symphonies. He often went back
and picked up half-finished pieces where
he had left them. He died unexpectedly at
age 31, after all. He NEVER published a
complete symphony in two movements. He
NEVER published a complete piano sonata
in two movements, or a complete string quartet
in two movements.
So, while you are welcome to dream up any conjectural
hypothesis that you want, your contention that
he would have published the "Unfinished"
as complete in two movements, despite the
fact that Schubert did compose an unfinished
scherzo for this work, has no historical facts to back
it up.
D.
jpk
else I know (work, friends, relatives) would have guessed more than a couple
right. And they weren't that tough. All people in the real world talk
about any more is TV commercials.
"Milton Dove" <mdo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:90782eaf.02090...@posting.google.com...
> pal...@altavista.co.uk (pallex) wrote in message
news:<1158a943.02090...@posting.google.com>...
> > "A recent survey found that 65% of children under 14 cannot name a
> > classical composer, while only 14% knew that Mozart and Beethoven
> > wrote music. Can you do better than that?"
>
Descartes
>You got that almost right. Atterberg, not Atterburg. But perhaps we
>shouldn't call "young" a composer whose age is 40 years. Compared to
>Schubert, at least.
How about anybody compared to Schubert? Atterberg lived to
the ripe old age of 87. He composed until the end. He was
a relatively late bloomer compared to most composers
with his eventual international reputation. He was virtually unknown
to the world of music before he won the Schubert Prize.
So, even after reading your comment above that he was
40 years old when he won the prize, I would still say he
was a young composer.
>> I think it is his
>>Fourth
>
>Quite close. Sixth, nicknamed "Dollar Symphony", because Atterberg got
>a cheque for $ 10,000 as the first prize. It is quite nice music, btw.
Well, first of all Grove V states quite clearly that Atterburg received
2000 pounds sterling from the Columbia Gramophone Co.
of London.
Secondly, I've never heard or read any of these scores, but
nevertheless I am very skeptical about your claim that it
was his Sixth. Can you cite any reference work that says
it was his Sixth. Atterburg's Sixth Symphony, Opus 31, is
published by Universal Edition. It calls for a very large and
very UN-Schubertian symphony orchestra. The orchestration
for Atterberg's Sixth, according to Universal's catalog, includes
such instruments as harp, tuba, three flutes, four horns, three
trumpets and percussion (aside from the timpani.) The
orchestration for Schubert's Unfinished Symphony contains
no harp, no tuba, only two flutes, only two horns, only two
trumpets and no percussion.
On the other hand, the orchestration of
Atterberg's Fourth Symphony matches
exactly the orchestration of Schubert's Unfinished
Symphony--with two minor exceptions. Instead of
Schubert's bass trombone, Atterburg substitutes a tuba
(a common 19th C. orchestral practice since a tuba can play
softly more easily than a bass trombone); and here again
he employs four horns instead of Schubert's two.
With its classical woodwinds in pairs, Atterburg's Fourth
is much closer in orchestration to Schubert's
Unfinished Symphony than his Sixth. But certainly I
could be wrong about which symphony was the
prize-winner.
In the catalog of Universal Edition, there is no
indication that Atterberg Sixth was named "The Dollar
Symphony." or "The Pound Sterling Symphony."
(Or "The Schubert Symphony. or "The Finished
Symphony".) Nor was the Fourth, for that matter.
Perhaps "The Dollar Symphony" was a
sobriquet bestowed by some envious
music critic.
D.
invictus
Thanks for a good post.
Risto Karttunen
>So, even after reading your comment above that he was
>40 years old when he won the prize, I would still say he
>was a young composer.
I think that "young" here gives a false impression to most readers.
> I am very skeptical about your claim that it
>was his Sixth. Can you cite any reference work that says
>it was his Sixth.
A couple of links after a very hasty search (why don't you make these
searches yourself, for that matter):
http://www.duttonlabs.demon.co.uk/dcd8/dcd8.html
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/5490/Atterberg.html
And a couple of other recordings:
http://www.bis.se/cdfiles/CD-553.htm
http://www.audaud.com/audaud/MAY01/CLASSICAL/clcds2MAY01.html
--
risto
Peter T. Daniels
> Thanks for a good post.
And the reason for reposting the entire thing was ...?
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net
Peter T. Daniels
> In the catalog of Universal Edition, there is no
> indication that Atterberg Sixth was named "The Dollar
> Symphony." or "The Pound Sterling Symphony."
> (Or "The Schubert Symphony. or "The Finished
> Symphony".) Nor was the Fourth, for that matter.
> Perhaps "The Dollar Symphony" was a
> sobriquet bestowed by some envious
> music critic.
That's how compositions usually get their nicknames.
Keith Edgerley
"Descartes" <cog...@ergo.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
u9ignu8gda1mq8rul...@4ax.com...
I have heard the B minor ballet from Rosamunde suggested and played as the
last movement of the Unfinished, meaning that the only movement Schubert
hadn't finish for whatever reason was the Scherzo. The ballet is in the
right key, is the right length for a finale and too long for a ballet. The
suggestion is that Schuber was pushed for time for the incidental music to
Rosamunde and cannibalized his symphony.
Descartes
wrote:
It just conjecture with no facts to substantiate it. So the ballet is in
the same key. So what? Why is it too long for a ballet? Dancers get tired?
It doesn't resemble in construction the finales of Schubert's other
symphonies, especially the late ones.
D.
Descartes
Sixth. But two other things I did not know about this work are 1) the aim of
the competition completely changed after initial public criticism; apparently,
Atterberg's Sixth had nothing to do with completing Schubert's Unfinished,
just writing a work in the spirit (not even the the style) of Schubert. I
don't see what a Atterberg's harp, tuba and percussion could possibly
have to do with Schubert. 2) The jury included Carl Nielsen.
D.
Descartes
>invictus wrote:
>
>> Thanks for a good post.
>
>And the reason for reposting the entire thing was ...?
Oh my! Someone is ESPECIALLY CRANKY today.
Try some Ex-Lax and Citrucel. Together.
D.
pallex
> OK, I got all 11 too, but what's frustrating is that I don't think anyone
> else I know (work, friends, relatives) would have guessed more than a couple
> right. And they weren't that tough. All people in the real world talk
> about any more is TV commercials.
I`ve been talking about TV commercials a little bit lately, but only
because a mobile phone network has been using John Tavener's `the
lamb`, which is very nice!