# Wagner: Sunset or Dawn?



## Edward Elgar (Mar 22, 2006)

I'm giving you two options. Consider Wagner's role in music history and decide whether he was more a sunset or a dawn.

Sunset - Saying goodbye to tonal practices by moving away from a key centre. Basically rejecting the pre-Wagner traditions of opera.

Dawn - Creating new methods of expression (i.e. leitmotifs) and generally moving towards the music of the 20th century by introducing new forms of expression.

I've not included a "bit of both" option because that's a cop out. Of course he was the end of traditional classical opera and the beginning of atonality and expressionism, but which of these titles does he deserve the most?

Sunset or dawn? I leave in your capable hands y'all!


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Dawn.

Wagner's music doesn't assume anything, doesn't come straight from the past, it's a jump, jump over a huge gap filled with nothing. Sure, it is no secret that he was inspired by likes of Ludwig Van or Carl Maria Von, but still. 

It is stunning when you first listen to some of his works and then check out when precisely they were written. Tristan und Isolde - 1859! In this time there was still more oldschool guys that made music smell like classicism than real blood and bone heavy romantics. And yet he didin't inspire Mahler or Bruckner only, but even laid the foundations for Schoenberg.

Now, that was a dawn. You could hardly find any other that shined as brightly as this one.


----------



## andruini (Apr 14, 2009)

I vote Dawn, because to me as a music student there's a clear distinction in music pretty much "Pre-Wagner" and "Post-Wagner".. It's rational that he could be seen as the sunset of the tonal practice, but in my opinion, the Wagnerian harmonic practice, rather than close the book on tonality, opened up a myriad of new possibilities of tonal expression. 
So yeah, even today I sense the looming shadow of Herr Wagner in all of my musical studies, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it's the same for others..


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Although I fully accept the reason why people would consider him a 'dawn', I have a slight problem with that view. To me, he doesn't present _enough_ of a jump to warrant it - his music just doesn't sound like that much of a leap from his contemporaries. I too was surprised when I first had a look at some of the dates of his compositions, but not so surprised that I thought he was writing far later than he did. It seems to me that because Wagner was an _inspiration_ to so many future composers, but not a founder of those later ideas himself, he should truly be called a 'sunset' with some attributes of a 'dawn'.

A true 'dawn' would be someone like Schoenberg who was the 'dawn' of serialism. To me, Wagner is not the 'dawn' of atonal practices in quite the same way.


----------



## Edward Elgar (Mar 22, 2006)

But Polednice, consider the first bars of Tristan und Isolde (Prelude to Act 1). Surely that is the moment in musical history when tonal expression was to be transformed. Saying that, you do make a good and convincing argument.

There is also the issue of whether he was indeed a revolutionary, or merely continuing the tradition of Weber's Der Freischütz which used motifs to describe people and places in the opera. This is clearly the origin of the leitmotif.

Which date are you more suprised about? Tristan or Rite of Spring? For me it's Tristan.


----------



## Poppin' Fresh (Oct 24, 2009)

_Tristan_ in particular was a revolutionary composition, and because it consists of almost nothing but what are technically known as discords it has been looked on ever since as the starting point of 'modern music'. To many contemporaries it seemed to break all existing rules. Then Wagner's subsequent work pushed tonality to it's limits.

So, I say Dawn.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Edward Elgar said:


> But Polednice, consider the first bars of Tristan und Isolde (Prelude to Act 1). Surely that is the moment in musical history when tonal expression was to be transformed. Saying that, you do make a good and convincing argument.
> 
> There is also the issue of whether he was indeed a revolutionary, or merely continuing the tradition of Weber's Der Freischütz which used motifs to describe people and places in the opera. This is clearly the origin of the leitmotif.
> 
> Which date are you more suprised about? Tristan or Rite of Spring? For me it's Tristan.


I accept that the date of Tristan is more surprising and that Wagner was revolutionary in his ideas, but I still don't feel that it was enough. The difficult idea that you have to reconcile if calling him a 'dawn' is the constant description of him 'taking tonality to its limits'. To me, that describes a sunset. He takes it to the breaking point, he says *nudge nudge* *wink wink* *hint hint* to future composers - you can go somewhere with this! - but he didn't truly go past that breaking point by himself to establish a totally new kind of music.

Maybe he should be called the dark hour just before the dawn, but then that would be cheating


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I voted sunset. I have no analytical reason for doing so, only a purely subjective one. Tonality aside, his music_ feels _romantic to me. I might even say over the top romantic.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Polednice, I wonder which works by which composers written before 1859 you would mention asked about music that comes close to Wagner's revolutionary output.



> I might even say over the top romantic.


There is no such thing as "over the top romantic".


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Aramis said:


> Polednice, I wonder which works by which composers written before 1859 you would mention asked about music that comes close to Wagner's revolutionary output.


I don't he had any contemporaries that were as revolutionary as he was, I just don't think he was revolutionary enough


----------



## Il Seraglio (Sep 14, 2009)

Wagner's music is highly contingent on the subjective experience of the listener. Either a story or the emotions of the listener are required to impart meaning on Wagner's music as it is tonally ambiguous. I think the emphasis on subjectivity in Wagner's music and the importance of _experiencing_ Wagner rather than processing him what makes him modern. I like how Nietszche described Tristan und Isolde as Dionysian music. Music for the senses.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Polednice said:


> I don't he had any contemporaries that were as revolutionary as he was, I just don't think he was revolutionary enough


I didn't ask for examples of works that were as revolutionary as his, but for those works that make you say "not enough". If he wasn't enough revolutionary, then it's because he didn't leave his contemporaries far enough behind. So I'm asking about works that were so close to what he did that they would justify your opinion.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Il Seraglio said:


> Wagner's music is highly contingent on the subjective experience of the listener. Either a story or the emotions of the listener are required to impart meaning on Wagner's music as it is tonally ambiguous. I think the emphasis on subjectivity in Wagner's music and the importance of _experiencing_ Wagner rather than processing him what makes him modern. I like how Nietszche described Tristan und Isolde as Dionysian music. Music for the senses.


Doesn't that apply to all music?


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Dim7 said:


> Doesn't that apply to all music?


Not really? There is a lot intelectuall/dry music.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Aramis said:


> I didn't ask for examples of works that were as revolutionary as his, but for those works that make you say "not enough". If he wasn't enough revolutionary, then it's because he didn't leave his contemporaries far enough behind. So I'm asking about works that were so close to what he did that they would justify your opinion.


There would be little point in me making a list of works because I'd just end up listing everything ever written by the late Romantics. It seems that arguments on both sides of this debate rest on the fact that Wagner paved the way to atonality. The reason that I say he is a sunset is because he took Romanticism to its absolute height - he didn't give us a _fully_ revolutionary piece brimming with obvious atonality. The first person to have done that would be the true 'dawn'.

Remember, when I say that he pushed Romanticism to its limits, I'm not suggesting that he is the 'noon of the day before when the sun is at its height', rather, he is practically jumping on the sun, pushing it down behind the hills so that night passes quicker! But he's certainly not the sun coming up in the morning as the first example of a completely new kind of music. He was a stretcher, not a breaker!


----------



## Il Seraglio (Sep 14, 2009)

Dim7 said:


> Doesn't that apply to all music?


Well it goes without saying we need our senses to enjoy music. But music in the classical style is written to satisfy our cognitive processes. For instance we listen to Brahms or Beethoven expecting to hear a cadence that will set the tonal centre in a musical form that makes sense to us. We are given no such thing in Tristan und Isolde. The music frequently shifts from major to minor keys depending on the events of the story.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> There would be little point in me making a list of works because I'd just end up listing everything ever written by the late Romantics.


Then you would make a serious mistake, because late romantics wrote most of their adult works after our date. Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, Mahler and others we consider late romantics didin't mean anything or even didn't live at this time.



> he is practically jumping on the sun, pushing it down behind the hills so that night passes quicker!


Nice description, I would like to agree with it if I wouldn't disagree.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

I say sunset, not because he didn't contribute majorly to the end of tonality etc., but because he didn't do so as prominently as others, notably Mahler, Stravinsky, and Debussy.

So, sunset.


----------



## Poppin' Fresh (Oct 24, 2009)

Meh, it's really two sides of the same coin. His music deserves it's reputation as the seminal work in the emancipation of harmony from the Classical tonal system. It was to be another half a century before the twelve notes of the chromatic scale were to be treated as co-equals, but _Tristan_, perhaps more than any other piece of music, symbolized the end of one era and looked forward to the birth of another. So you can either look at it as a beginning or an end: maybe "twilight" would be a better way to describe it.

And maybe it's a "cop-out", but it's true. But if I had to choose, I'd still choose dawn, just because I'm not looking at it from the standpoint of him never creating a "new type of music", or going completely atonal. I think by generating a new way of composing and considering music other than being either major or minor, or being in a particular key, it was the beginning of something.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Surely you know you're not going to get Polednice to admit just how revolutionary and influential Wagner was... to do so would go against the grain of every tied-in-the-wool Brahmsian. Even if they know... in their heart of hearts... that its true.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Surely you know you're not going to get Polednice to admit just how revolutionary and influential Wagner was... to do so would go against the grain of every tied-in-the-wool Brahmsian. Even if they know... in their heart of hearts... that its true.


It's true! It's true! From the beginning I didn't even feel qualified to answer the question, but there's no way in hell that I'm going to let Wagner get any more glory


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Our guy's bigger than your guy!!! Na na na na!!


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

By the looks of things, my guy outweighs yours 







View attachment 894


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

And just to further prove Wagner's insignificance, I was just watching a quiz show on which the introduction to _Das Rheingold_ was featured and someone said it was the music to _Sleeping Beauty_


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Polednice said:


> It's true! It's true! From the beginning I didn't even feel qualified to answer the question, but there's no way in hell that I'm going to let Wagner get any more glory


Y, I can recall that just recently you wrote in other place that you listened your first Wagner's opera, Rheingold. Considering that it wasn't long ago, I wonder if you even listened to Tristan und Isolde already


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

I vote Dawn.

And i dont mean to offend or Patronise but reading some of your objections it feels to me like youre not looking at his music from a theoretical perspective.

Theoretically his music is vastly innovative and groundbreaking.. its not always about how it feels.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I based my response purely on how it feels because I don't see how something like this can truly be quantified. The fact is that every great composer is remembered because of a unique style, individual to them, and that necessarily means something that no one else has done before. Perhaps some composers advance tonality, while others advance form or structure or instrumentation _etc._, but every one of them is - at the very least - a 'dawn' of their own style which might lighter influence others in various ways. How, then, can we properly distinguish between composers who are apparently individual and new but 'only' sunsets, while others are similarly individual and new but dawns?


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

For the benefit of lurkers and various acolytes, the premise of the poll owes something to a _bon mot_ by Debussy, who reportedly referred to Wagner's artistry as "a glorious [or beautiful, depending upon the translation] sunset that was mistaken for a dawn."

To argue for the "sunset" premise is to argue for the reckoning of Wagner as some manner of _fin-de-ciècle_ composer. I have trouble seeing the justification for that perspective. What manner of compositional practice did he provide examples of concluding representation?!

If one can somehow claim that Wagner in some way pulled the curtain down on some aspects of musical art, I think it's clear that he _raised_ far more curtains (metaphorically and otherwise).


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I think part of the problem (which I think further demonstrates my claim that a question such as this cannot really be answered - the premise cannot be measured) is that no one can seem to describe their thoughts without the use of extended metaphors, which only renders everyone's arguments and perceptions incredibly cloudy!


----------



## Edward Elgar (Mar 22, 2006)

I don't think this premise can be measured, but we can put Wagner on trial, establish the facts, and reach a verdict.

What did Debussy mean by referring to Wagner as a sunset? I assume he meant the conclusion of tonal practices. This is an understandable position as Wagner paved the way for Schoenberg. 

But then look at Wagner's legacy. Modern cinema depends on Wagnerian techniques. This music remains tonal. Wagner's influence on Mahler, Bruckner and Elgar all gave tonal conclusions.

Was Wagner the end of tonality? In some respects, yes. But consider all Wagner gave us, and his influence can lead to both tonal and atonal conclusions.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Edward Elgar said:


> Was Wagner the end of tonality? In some respects, yes. But consider all Wagner gave us, and his influence can lead to both tonal and atonal conclusions.


And this ambiguity is why Wagner is both a sunset and a dawn, and hence why it is only personal preference as to what each individual decides upon. So, I suggest that everyone stops making arguments and we just let the poll decide


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

Edward Elgar said:


> But then look at Wagner's legacy. Modern cinema depends on Wagnerian techniques.


Now _there's_ a point. There's the issue of Wagner's influence over the future of _all_ of the expressive arts, which I believe to be greater than that of any other composer (even Beethoven). You have to go to the world of literature for influences of a similar or greater degree- Shakespeare, of course, Goethe, possibly Dante...

Now I'd previously speculated about the possibility that Wagner's stage instructions were an influence on Bernard Shaw. This might not be the best place for this- but it's been on my mind for awhile, so here goes--

Here's a memorable (to me) stage instruction from _Tannhäuser_, which calls for an amazing (perhaps impossible) degree of non-verbal communication:


> Elisabeth assures [Wolfram], by her gestures, that she thanks him for his faithful affection, but that her path leads to heaven, where she has a lofty duty to fulfil; he must therefore let her go alone and must not follow her.


Any candidates for *anyone* from the world of stage or screen who would enough skill in unspoken expression to pull this off?!

I'm thinking... maybe Marlee Matlin---

Feasible or not, Wagner's stage instructions are well worth the reading, just like Shaw's are.


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

He was certainly a dawn for me. I'd like to inject a different perspective into the discussion by observing that I never listened to Wagner as 'pure' music at all, and still don't. Or should I say, _can't_. From the very first, it hit me as what he'd intended it to be: music-drama (I've always felt the term to be inadequate for describing this particular composite art, but I can't think of a better one).

It's possible, obviously, to talk purely about the music, as music - just as it's possible to talk about Blake's illuminated books as poetry - but in doing so something essential is being left out. The art to be considered is the _whole_ - the art as a composite unity - however difficult it may be to assimilate.

So, attempting, however feebly, to do that: I see no precedent for the enormous task that Wagner set himself and largely achieved. The enormity of the conception - the weaving together of music, voices, drama and myth in this particular way - goes far beyond the boundaries of any opera that preceded it. For a very long time I had little interest in what I thought of as 'mere opera' other than the _Ring_, _Tristan_, and _Parsifal_ because 'mere operas' seemed to fall so short in terms of conception. I know better than that now, thankfully, and I see that I was trying to compare fundamentally different things; but that's the point, really. Although there are poems, and there are pictures, and there are illustrated poems, there's nothing in the whole of art like Blake's illuminated books; and there's nothing in the whole of music like _The Ring_. So for me, it was, is, and can only be a dawn, and the only sunset associated with it is the twilight that the gods experience.


----------

