# OK..... A Horribly good thread



## DavidMahler (Dec 28, 2009)

.... Or just a horrible thread,

I'm gonna list 15 painters.

It is your job to link them to their composer counterparts

You can choose simply match up the artists with their contemporaries from the same countries, or you can think about what their achievements were in comparison to other composer, or you can choose a different aspect

and let the discussion begin....

*Leonardo

Michelangelo

Rembrandt

Vermeer

Valesquez

Goya

Friedrich

Turner

Monet

Renoir

Seurat

Picasso

Chagall

Dali

Close
*


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Hmmm... I have absolutely no ****ing clue.


----------



## DavidMahler (Dec 28, 2009)

Polednice said:


> Hmmm... I have absolutely no ****ing clue.


well you dont have to matchem all, can pick just one and make your case


----------



## pjang23 (Oct 8, 2009)

I think StlukesguildOhio is the only poster able to answer this thread. The only connection I'm aware of is Stravinsky and Picasso for being "chameleons". My knowledge of painters is too limited to say more.


----------



## Dodecaplex (Oct 14, 2011)

Where is Antinous when you actually need him to list a bunch of paintings and somehow make them analogous to classical music?


----------



## Trout (Apr 11, 2011)

After much in-depth research, these are the closest connections I found:

Leonardo --> Leonin

Michelangelo --> Michelangelo Rossi

Rembrandt --> Brant

Vermeer --> Vermeulen

Valesquez --> Valen

Goya --> Gouy

Friedrich --> Friedrich von Flotow

Turner --> Turnage

Monet --> Monte

Renoir --> Reynolds

Seurat --> Sierra

Picasso --> Lasso

Chagall --> Chabrier

Dali --> Diabelli

Close --> Coates


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

Antinous...didn't he drown?



Dodecaplex said:


> Where is Antinous when you actually need him to list a bunch of paintings and somehow make them analogous to classical music?


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

Monet should be linked to Debussy. Both were French Impressionists. Even though Debussy disliked the term he was in fact doing in music what the visual artists were doing at the time in painting.

Stravinsky and Picasso were friends and worked together on several projects. Picasso also married one of the dancers from the Ballet Russes for whom Stravinsky composed the Firebird, Petrushka, and ROS.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I'm not knowledgeable about visual art, though I am about literature. But, even with literature, I would be at a complete loss with this. I have no idea how you can do a cross-media comparison???


----------



## Dodecaplex (Oct 14, 2011)

NightHawk said:


> Antinous...didn't he drown?


Nope, he's right _here_ in TC. I actually tried to say hi to him the other day, but apparently my avatar is too ugly and therefore not worth the attention of someone so fabulously beautiful.


----------



## pjang23 (Oct 8, 2009)

Trout said:


> After much in-depth research, these are the closest connections I found:
> 
> Leonardo --> Leonin
> 
> ...


Don't forget about Schoenberg --> Schoenberg


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Leonardo- J.S. Bach: the very definition of genius.

Michelangelo- Richard Wagner: superhuman artist creator of grandeur beyond grandeur.

Rembrandt- Beethoven: a lumbering emotion-laden human giant.

Vermeer- Couperin: nearly forgotten master of the few polished and perfect gems.

Valesquez- Brahms: the great classicist continuing in the footsteps of his predecessors, Titian and Rubens (Rubens being Mozart).

Goya- Mussorgsky... a haunted and turbulent visionary. (Maybe Scriabin as well)

Friedrich- Schubert- the romantic poet of evening and night.

Turner- Liszt... THE romantic virtuoso of sweeping landscapes. 

Monet- Debussy... obvious, no? 

Renoir- Delius: a sensual hedonist of the intimate splendors of nature and love. 

Seurat- Jacques Ibert: A mixture of contrasting French sensibilities: sensuality and joie de vivre with a witty and ironic intellectual sophistication.

Picasso- Stravinsky (the great modernist chameleon)

Chagall- Prokofiev: the humorist and fabulist. 

Dali- Harry Partch: a cross between genius and con-artist. 

Close- Philip Glass: the artist merging the minimalism with obsessive process.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I liked your list/comparisons stlukes, but this one I can't understand -



StlukesguildOhio said:


> ...
> Dali- Harry Partch: a cross between genius and con-artist.
> ....


I see Dali as more a stirrer in terms of what he said, his politics, etc. & kind of a traditionalist in terms of his paintings, eg. using old techniques (unlike say Miro). Partch was nothing but genuine & serious in what he did, he even wrote theory books on microtonality. He wasn't a "con-artist" at all. He was fringe but now is moving towards the centre, there was even a performance here of his works a couple of months back. His music is studied at conservatorium level by budding composers, same as Schoenberg's or Xenakis' is, or Beethoven's, J. S. Bach's, etc. for that matter. Partch is now part of the pedagogical (teaching) canon, no doubt about it...


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

*Leonardo* - I'd say *Harry Partch*, in terms of them both inventing things, Leonardo all types of wierd contraptions that predicted the inventions of the future, Partch inventing or re-inventing new instruments, sometimes based on ancient models, as well as a 43 note mictrotonal scale to go along with them.

*Michelangelo - Palestrina*, in terms of their sacred music/visual art.

*Rembrandt, Velasquez - Beethoven*, virtuosity, innovation, depth of expression, humanity.

*Vermeer* - In terms of the intimacy of his art, I think of *Chopin,* also for the most intimate instrument the piano, and he liked playing in salons not concert halls, he was an artist on the human scale (although he loved hearing opera, but never wrote one).

*Goya - Castelnuovo-Tedesco*, the Italian composer wrote one of his major solo guitar works, _24 Caprichos de Goya, Op. 195_, after the Spanish master's famous series of etchings.

*Friedrich - Brahms*, a sense of deep things, very German.

*Turner - Berlioz*, in terms of their epic/sublime qualities.

*Monet / Seurat - Elliott Carter*, thinking VERY laterally here, though I've read this comparison between impressionism & Carter elsewhere. In terms of both using small fragments/cells to build images that the viewer/listener has to join up, take in, interpret as the "big picture." Carter's chamber work called _Mosaic_ is kind of attestation to this connection.

*Renoir *- I'm thinking the sensuous quality of* Debussy*, eg. _Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faun_.

*Picasso - Stravinsky*.

*Chagall - Ernest Bloch*, both imaging the Jewish experience, very vividly and emotionally.

*Dali *- maybe *Ligeti,* in terms of the absurd, hyper-reality, the surreal, disturbing imagery and music, a sense of time passing, eternity - eg. Dali's famous painting with the clocks melting and Ligeti's pieces that seem to suspend time, eg. the _Requiem_.

*Close - don't know this painter's work.*


----------



## Meaghan (Jul 31, 2010)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Seurat- Jacques Ibert: A mixture of contrasting French sensibilities: sensuality and joie de vivre with a witty and ironic intellectual sophistication.


I was thinking Stephen Sondheim, though he's not classical. Mainly because of the direct connection in the form of his score for _Sunday in the Park with George._ It helped that it was deliberate, but I've never heard anybody come so close to capturing Seurat's aesthetic in music. "Sensuality and joie de vivre with a witty and ironic intellectual sophistication" pretty much sums up that score, and "witty and ironic intellectual sophistication," in particular, sounds like every critic who ever wrote about Sondheim.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Seurat - Schoenberg
Both approaching their art from a technical point of view (colour dots, 12-tone), both very influential but not as brilliant as their contemporaries.

Not listed:
Duchamp - Cage
Pushing the boundaries of what is art.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Art Rock said:


> Seurat - Schoenberg
> Both approaching their art from a technical point of view (colour dots, 12-tone), both very influential but not as brilliant as their contemporaries...


This is what I was saying regarding Elliott Carter's connection with pointillism/dotism and impressionism. They give us the elements, we put the "big picture" together. It's like a mosaic, which is what Carter titled a chamber work of his.

But I'd argue both Suerat & Schoenberg were not only influential but also brilliant compared to their contemporaries and beyond. But Seurat died fairly young and had a small output (he's a bit like Vermeer in that regard, his art required time and precision) & Schoenberg has not yet, maybe never will, be understood by a good number of classical listeners, but in terms of some of his works entering the repertoire, it's happening slowly, and he is part of the teaching/pedagogical canon, all composition students, for example, study his music in depth...


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

i don't know, i think often about the similarities of the two arts, and for some painter i can find a composer or a musician that in some way i consider a good equivalent: a great coloristic sensibility with great harmonic sensibility for example. But how can you translate the idea of cubism in music? Cubism is about see the same object from different points of view, how you can do that with music?
There are things that are very specific of a certain art?


----------



## DavidMahler (Dec 28, 2009)

I tried...


Leonardo - Has to be Bach. In the sense that Leonardo is the most towering figure in the history of arts, even if it's still debatable that he is not the greatest artist who ever lived. Mass In B Minor could be compared to The Last Supper; The Brandenburgs can be compared to The Mona Lisa and The great keyboard works of Bach could be compared to Leonardo's great hand drawings.

Michelangelo - Handel...Both created the most famous religious works in their field. Both are almost compared to Leonardo / Bach for the time in which they lived and their achievements, usually just slightly eclipsed by the other master.

Valesquez - Mozart (both achieved a real humanness in their art which was never present before)

Rembrandt - Beethoven (a towering figure which demonstrated deep emotions in their work, far ahead of their time...potentially the greatest of all time in both their fields)

Vermeer - Hummel (a significant and underrated figure overshadowed by other masters)

Goya - Berlioz (explosive emotions...turmoil)

Friedrich - Schubert (see StLukesGuildOhio  

Turner - Wagner (big stormy works)...Though I agree that Liszt is a good choice here as well

Monet - Debussy (see StLukes Guild Ohio again)

Renoir - Ravel (I feel this is an obvious choice if Monet is to compare with Debussy)

Seurat - Satie

Picasso - Stravinsky

Chagall - Berg

Dali - Prokofiev

Close - Glass

....rushed as my lunchbreak ended


----------

