# Things that don't go together



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

I sometimes wonder why I dislike things. 

I've realised I dislike a lot of Richard Strauss' because it combines Mozartian mannerisms with Wagnerian harmonies which I deem contradictory, rendering both into cliches.

Simmilarly Elgar and early orchestral Schoenberg combine Brahms' mannerisms with Strauss' which just makes the thick thicker, the muddy mudddier and the fat and weight heavier and fatter.

Nielsen mixes Brahms and Schostakovich plus folk music. It's a weird combo. Is it an attempt to rectify Schostakovich's form or to modernize Brahms or both, neither?

Ravel while succeding to mix new Debussian colours to a Mozartian and a French-Baroque traditional basis, he decided sometimes to go Spanish which resulted in very fake Spanish music and in his late years to also incorporate Gershwin, which jabs at his perfectionism for a start and is noted by many as a stranger in his established style.

In general, I think different genres (however distanced or artificial the distinctions might be) don't mix well. It ends up being neither one thing and in sticking and parodically exaggerating the elements of each, it evidences the ones that go out of date the most.

The mix with classical that has worked the most over the centuries is with folk music but it's when the latter is heavily transformed and absorbed into the former, often in a totally new direction, that it works the best. Stravinsky being a primary example of this kind of process.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

I would say Bruckner was successful in combining Schubertian sense of space + Wagnerian dramatisms
Mahler was successful in combining the Viennese festive style of Johann Strauss II + Wagnerian dramatisms


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Concerning Nielsen and Shostakovitch, I don't think it's an established view, so more a question of your feeling of resemblances ...

BTW, from your thought, I get a certain similarity between Nielsen's last symphony no.6 (1924) and Shostakovich's last one no.15 too (1971).

The chronology of course can't suggest Nielsen being influenced by Shostakovitch. If you take an early, very Nielsenesque and rather satirical work, the '_Serenata in Vano_', it's from 1914, when Shosty was 9 years old. And overall, there's a real lot of variation in Nielsen's works. His 5th Symphony, showing him as a very established composer (1922), was performed internationally, such as by Furtwängler in 1927, about the same time that Shosty's 1st Symphony began to be performed abroad.

Many composers besides Brahms have been established as influencing Nielsen, for example also the much more rhapsodic Berlioz, cf. https://tidsskrift.dk/carlnielsenstudies/article/view/27741

An overall current with Nielsen, IMO, is a more life-assuring, positive mood, than you'll see with Shostakovich. It's often picturing the dynamics of life, from a basically optimistic outlook. And perhaps Nielsen is more refined and varied in his instrumentation (?). I don't have the technical expertise to prove it, but to me, the musical ongoings often also seem more unpredictable and varied than with Shostakovitch.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I can't decide whether the mixing of Bachian counterpoint and Wagnerian chromaticism in Reger's organ music is interesting or repugnant. But it hasn't made me run to turn it off, so I guess interesting wins for now even if it doesn't imply likable. I do tend to dislike the organ music of Classical and Romantic composers, who try to incorporate formal procedures and sounds from the Baroque and end up sounding stilted and dull. Of all the works by Mendelssohn, Schumann and Brahms, their organ works are some of the least interesting to me despite real musical virtues. Mozart could do a decent imitation of Bach, but the juxtaposition of Baroque and Classical elements can be disconcerting and does nothing for me.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I've often thought Gliere ballets sound way too Broadway to me.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

hammeredklavier said:


> I would say Bruckner was successful in combining Schubertian sense of space + Wagnerian dramatisms


Wagner (and Ravel) already have a perfect sense of space imo.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> Mozart could do a decent imitation of Bach, but the juxtaposition of Baroque and Classical elements can be disconcerting and does nothing for me.


I see what you mean, but try to think of it this way;
1. symphony in D, K.504, with its "French overture-like opening, and the similarly French overture-like expressions in the development of the concluding (third) movement", can be seen as having a similar structure as K.608.
2. The fugue of K.608 sounds "Classical" (not "Baroque") with its "sense of symmetry", and "Classical sense of drama"; just as the Baroque methods of recitative/aria, sinfonia, concerto, minuet, etc, in Mozart's hands, "sound Classical".

Btw, also interesting in the Classical expressions is the formal construction and mood contrast between the "kyrie eleison" and "christe eleison" in the ordinary mass setting, (which Bach "experimented" in his Mass in A major). The kyrie double fugue from Mozart's requiem also contrasts the "kyrie" and "christe" in the Classical fashion.
To me, this is an example of the "most ideal way" a late 18th century composer is "supposed to sound"; can we tell which parts are "Classical" and which parts are "Baroque"?: SfbwNRKuVRo&t=12m24s (~21:34)
Likewise, a lot of Mozart is like this; natural juxtapositions of solos and ensembles in his operas. What I'm saying is that Mozart fuses the elements so well it's hard to tell which parts are Baroque and which are Classical; we simply have to conclude "they're all Classical".
Lastly, listen to this dazzling display of chromaticism; Jkh8Re4JUCw&t=8m47s. Perhaps we could say "It was much too good for the Baroque composers, they (except Bach; he's an "anomaly" anyway) did not know what to do with it, so Mozart had to take it and make the "improvements"."

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist: "I think Bach - while my favorite Baroque composer and one of my favorites of all time - is hardly representative of the Baroque era. He was kind of an anomaly, in fact."
hammeredklavier: "People also have this misconception that Bach was the norm of the Baroque and Boccherini was the norm of the Classical period, and the difference of their styles represent the idiomatic change that occurred in the mid 18th century. But I think it would be more reasonable to categorize Bach as a "church composer" and compare his style with the "church composers' " of the Classical period. There was a divergence of different styles, but the alleged "decline of counterpoint" is a "myth"; it never really happened. For instance, Anton Cajetan Adlgasser (1729-1777), an organist in Salzburg, was referred to as a "master of counterpoint" by the 20-year-old Mozart in a letter."


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

^^^ The baroquey stuff in K608 is great, but then you have that "Little Maria Therese Breaking her Fast with Mozartkugeln" at about 3 minutes in, which lacks only a glass harmonica to make my teeth ache. It's as if Mozart felt he had to reassure his audience that he would not lose them in a Gothic labyrinth in which their enlightened sensibilities would be darkened for all eternity. The poor things.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> ^^^ The baroquey stuff in K608 is great, but then you have that "Little Maria Therese Breaking her Fast with Mozartkugeln" at about 3 minutes in, which lacks only a glass harmonica to make my teeth ache. It's as if Mozart felt he had to reassure his audience that he would not lose them in a Gothic labyrinth in which their *enlightened sensibilities* would be darkened for all eternity. The poor things.


I can understand what you mean. I guess this is one of those cases where we can't communicate the feelings by words. 
Similarly, I talked about how Mozart's K.533/ii is related to Wagner's Tristan, but it was sad to me that many people don't see or find it hard to see the relation. At the same time, it was understandable cause the Mozart is admittedly too "restrained" compared to the unrestrained passions and fantasies of the Wagner. 
I'm reminded of some of our conversations, (LOL):
hammeredklavier: "I myself am "moved to tears" by stuff like K.616, but at the same time I agree with everything you said here"
Woodduck: "Oh, you 'absolute' musicians. Clarity, control, clean Classical canvas - ay caramba!"
hammeredklavier: "The Mozart stuff, which you call "ridiculous", is among my "guilty pleasures"! LOL!"


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

I like to think hammered has the optimism that the Classical period will one day be revived :lol:

I don't have such wishes.  But the worst combo per the thread question: Perhaps someone like *Mendelssohn* or *Haydn*, who are both too 'controlled and tied together' and yet 'lacking interesting structure,' in essence, tied together for no good reason.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

Opera and yodelling.


----------



## MusicSybarite (Aug 17, 2017)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> Nielsen mixes Brahms and Schostakovich plus folk music. It's a weird combo. Is it an attempt to rectify Schostakovich's form or to modernize Brahms or both, neither?


Ha! This made me smile because I also feel a connection between Shostakovich and Nielsen, but _clearly_ it was Nielsen who could have influenced Shostakovich, and I think that mix works quite well, actually.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I am admittedly quite fond of the pseudo-spanish Alborado del gracioso and Rapsodie espagnole. I don't think any Ravel really sounds "jazzy" even if it might have been intended. The "blues" movement of the violin sonata to me seems a bit like the balkan folk allusions in Bartok and others.
If one ignored the plot parallels between Rosenkavalier and Figaro would we really find most of this music "Mozartean"?

Not sure, but spontaneously I can think of very little stylistic mixes I found so jarring that I disliked a piece or composer for that reason. Gershwin would be an example, I don't find the Rhapsody in Blue convincing and the Concerto in F seems even more pretentious (I like Porgy and Bess, I am probably more tolerant in musical theatre).

However, there some "hybrid pieces" I find rather flawed for that reason, despite liking parts of them. I think Mendelssohn should have split "Lobgesang" into an instrumental symphony and a cantata and while Berlioz' Romeo & Juliet contains some of his best music, the strange hybrid with choir doesn't work well for me as a whole (His Faust (my favorite Berlioz piece) does, despite also being something between opera and oratorio).


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> would we really find most of this music "Mozartean"?


The instrumental color of their wind ensembles (ie. the frequent use of the basset horn)


----------

