# Born too late/early? Which time period....



## handlebar (Mar 19, 2009)

We all love music and it's history. SO much so that I bet many here wish we had been born in a different time period.
So....... if you could go back and do it all over again (of course not taking into account families,etc) and re-live life in a different time period, what would it be,where and why.

I would choose the time period of 1880 to 1980 as the century I wish to have lived. Location wise I would say London or Vienna, maybe Paris. Especially Europe until about 1933 and then it would be off to America for the remaining years,perhaps in New York or Boston.
The music scene in Europe from 1890 to 1930 was so rich with the composers and music that I love I cannot help but choose that era. I would meet Mahler,Rachmaninov,Copland,Bruckner,Faure,Elgar,Bax and Moeran. Oh how grand that would be. And the concerts!!!!! Oh my.

I adore watching shows such as Upstairs,Downstairs and Berkley Square. I seem to fit that time period well in thought and dress.

Those are my thoughts.

Anyone else?

PD. I would hat to give up my ipods and recorded music but oh well. There are always 78's. And I have plenty of those and my hand crank gramophone

Jim


----------



## danae (Jan 7, 2009)

I also born too late. I would probably feel more at ease if I were 20-25 years old in 1969.


----------



## Taneyev (Jan 19, 2009)

I was 27 in 1969 and I didn't feel at ease at that time.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

I think I would have liked to have been born in the late 1800s maybe around 1870 or so.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

Some interesting speculation, there, *handlebar*! Yeah, I've indulged the fantasy of an earlier time, but pretty much reject it out of hand, a mid-20th century (and beyond) medical intervention in a major American city could well have kept me from becoming an infant mortality! So... maybe not such a bad thing that I'm living at this hour.

For me, 19th century Continental Europe might be one heck of place to visit... but I wouldn't want to live there.


----------



## danae (Jan 7, 2009)

Taneyev said:


> I was 27 in 1969 and I didn't feel at ease at that time.


Well... I'm not you.


----------



## Yosser (May 29, 2009)

danae said:


> I also born too late. I would probably feel more at ease if I were 20-25 years old in 1969.


As it happens, my last stay in Greece including the islands was in 1967. The summer was so magical I swore I would never return, because it could never be that way again.

Mind you, as a back-packing tourist, I was (shamefully) not even aware of the dictatorship. Maybe you would not have felt as much at ease as you suspect.

On a recent trip across the pond, my seat mates were two young girls, who with their parents were returning stateside from a trip to the islands. They were very chatty. I asked them which was their favorite. Santorini. 'Oh!' says I, recalling the trip up the cliff aboard a donkey. 'Yeah!" one of them replied, 'I wanted to do the donkeys, but we took the cable car instead' 

I'm sure locals know where to find the quiet spots, where it is possible still to enjoy that unique light, the shimmer of the Agean, the sense of time suspended.

Have a great holiday.


----------



## Praine (Dec 20, 2008)

I have pondered this question many times in the past and I decided the perfect time I would have liked to be born would be the year of 1850. The more and more I think about it, the more it seems logical because I would of had a chance to live alongside EVERY composer that I actually give a care about (well, except Beethoven) and have a chance to meet them. I see myself as a composer when I think about living back then and there would be no better place to live this life than Vienna itself. I would've be born 10 years before Mahler so I would see his musical achievements from the very beginning with a solid 47 years of living alongside Brahms which is plenty of time to get to know the musical genius. Also, I would be there for the creation of impressionism, which I'm also huge fan of.

I don't think I would be asking too much to live a good 80 years or so. That way, I would still be alive when sound recording starts to become more prominent and I would even see the creation of film. Atonality would be getting quite popular in my last few years but I would most likely be too old to care about it anyways.  

Anyhow, that was a great question, handlebar. Good to know some people feel the same way I do about being born too late.


----------



## handlebar (Mar 19, 2009)

The option of living through sound recordings was something I pondered as well. I picked 1880 as the date because I would be in my mid 20's when Mahler was at his height and more open to meeting a young composer/pianist such as myself LOL.
If a century of living were possible I would be there from tinfoil recordings by Edison to CD's in the early 80's. I own quite a few wax cylinders and 78's from before 1903 and listen to the records on my Harris Portophone now and then for that nostalgic early 20th feel.

Also, I would have been around for the composers I admire most. Not just around, but of age to understand and be experienced enough to travel the world.

Jim


----------



## danae (Jan 7, 2009)

Yosser said:


> As it happens, my last stay in Greece including the islands was in 1967. The summer was so magical I swore I would never return, because it could never be that way again.
> 
> Mind you, as a back-packing tourist, I was (shamefully) not even aware of the dictatorship. Maybe you would not have felt as much at ease as you suspect.
> 
> ...


I didn't say I would wanna be born in Greece. Living in Greece and being at your prime in 1969 would be a disaster. My parents were around 19 years old in 1969 and my mother had to go on exile to avoid getting arrested.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I would like to have been born in the early 21st century, perhaps 2001. Not that I think there is much going on of interest musically right now, but the entire history of music is available to me -- and I suspect the performances are far better today than they might have been back in the day.

Also I'd stand a good chance of growing up and being able to make art and music by just thinking about it. That is not as far fetched as it seems. I predict we will be able to do just that within 20 years. This doesn't mean that such music would be any good, but it sure would be fun to try.


----------



## nickgray (Sep 28, 2008)

I wish I would have born in the future, 23rd-24th century. "Nuclear wasteland" type of skepticism aside, given the current progress of science the technologies at that point in time would be absolutely marvelous, I think almost unfathomable to us. Still, I'm somewhat happy now - the current progress allows us to get an enormous, absolutely enormous amounts of all sorts of information completely for free without leaving our home. A technology that even twenty or so years ago one could only dream of.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

People have remarked to me that I should have been a child of the 1960s, really because I'm more of one at heart than anything else. I mean, I actually _like_ the pop music of the sixties, not to mention that so much ground was being broken as far as classical music was being concerned (Bernstein's first Mahler cycle was coming out at the time, and Gould's first recording of the Goldberg Variations was _still_ all the rage albeit being out for the past decade). So maybe being born in the US during the 1950's or something would be decent.

Being a bit more global, to have been close to Gustav Mahler would have been a really great thing (I have been feeling jealousy toward Bruno Walter for quite some time now, not only having been close to Mahler but also having been able to record his memories and some of Mahler's symphonies in high-fidelity 1950's sound). So maybe Austria 1860's-70's would be a good time/place? I dunno.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

I would have liked to have been around when "The Rite of Spring" premiered and also Ravel's "Daphnis et Chloe." I would have really loved to have walked up to Stravinsky and told him I thought the "The Rite..." was brilliant. I would just loved to hung out with Stravinsky and Ravel (who were both friends at the time), then I would like to travel back and talk to Debussy. Man, that would be a dream come true for me.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

I would say first half of XIX century, but let's consider one thing - living before 1900 equals no CD playsers etc, the only way to hear the music is go to a concert or play it yourself. Doesn't sound too good for me. It would be impossible to hear symphonies or full concertos everyday, even once in week would be a problem for someone not rich. However, there would be some nice things to do instead, like fighting in napoleonic wars or hangin' out with Paganini.


----------



## handlebar (Mar 19, 2009)

Mirror Image said:


> I would have liked to have been around when "The Rite of Spring" premiered and also Ravel's "Daphnis et Chloe." I would have really loved to have walked up to Stravinsky and told him I thought the "The Rite..." was brilliant. I would just loved to hung out with Stravinsky and Ravel (who were both friends at the time), then I would like to travel back and talk to Debussy. Man, that would be a dream come true for me.


That Parisian world of Stravinsky,Ravel and others in the 1920's and early 30's must have been incredible. The memoirs of Ned Rorem,Virgil Thomson and other American living,working and learning there at that time are rich with information and impression.
Hence one reason I enjoy reading their first hand accounts. I would like to find an autobiography of Nadia Boulanger next. She was pivotal in the progress of both European and American music for a century (considering whom she taught,etc).

AH yes, Paris in the 20's and 30's would have been grand.

Jim


----------



## Yosser (May 29, 2009)

Reign of Praine said:


> I have pondered this question many times in the past and I decided the perfect time I would have liked to be born would be the year of 1850.....
> I don't think I would be asking too much to live a good 80 years or so.


I understand that Handlebar's query is a 'thought experiment' and thus predicated on certain assumptions. But one should perhaps try to be just a bit realistic. For example, I do think it would have been asking a very great deal to live to 'a good 80 years or so' if born in 1850 (when life expectancy in the US was 38). One should also not forget that 19th century Europe was a society based on social class. I wouldn't venture to put a figure on the fraction of the population that heard any of Mahler's music, or Brahms', or even any classical music at all, but it probably is not very high.

Of course, when dreaming one is entitled to assume an ideal.

I believe myself to have been incredibly fortunate to have lived through a period where I was never required to engage in any military activity, never suffered from true hardship, when remedies existed for the childhood illnesses I contracted, and I'm very grateful that I spent my youth in a country (the UK) where the full panoply of classical music was available for free by tuning a radio to BBC3 -- not excluding the most modern serial compositions. Some quite dreadful stuff by composers such as Elizabeth Lutyens (who seems these days mercifully to have been forgotten) comes to mind.

I hope this dose of 'reality' does not poison your thread, Handlebar


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Yosser said:


> I do think it would have been asking a very great deal to live to 'a good 80 years or so' if born in 1850 (when life expectancy in the US was 38).


How much of that average is due to infant mortality skewing the results? I don't know though. Maybe you're right. The composers themselves notoriously didn't live very long -- with a few exceptions.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

handlebar said:


> Ah yes, Paris in the 20's and 30's would have been grand.
> 
> Jim


Well, for me, 1900-1930 would have been an amazing time period. I would go meet Ravel, Vaughan Williams, Stravinsky, Debussy, Bartok, Poulenc, Delius, Mahler....so many to meet.


----------



## LvB (Nov 21, 2008)

Being 'realistic' about the fantasy (  ), I'd be no worse off, and probably much better off, had I been born a century earlier, in 1859 (same city, same basic parental class situation, same talents). I've had no illnesses which were especially deadlier 100 years ago than today (and, since the only time I've had health care as an adult was when I lived in Canada, the medical situation is no better now than it would have been then, and is probably, adjusting for inflation, worse). I would have been able to use such talents as I have much more broadly then; writing of all sorts was much more in demand, as every city of any substance had several newspapers, all of them with multiple stringers to review concerts, plays, etc., and there were many more magazines publishing an enormous range of fiction and essays. I'd have been too old for any of the U.S. wars during my adulthood (and too young, by far, for the Civil War), and would have died long before WW2. I'd likely have heard music of Wagner, Strauss, Rubinstein, Mahler, and so many others when it was new-- and of course these would have been live performances, not CDs. It's tough to see any tremendous drawback to having been born then; while it's true that I wouldn't have heard music by some of my favorite composers today, I wouldn't have known what I was missing (just as I don't know what wonderful pieces will be premiered the day after I die in this century).

Alas, cruel reality intrudes, and I wake to realize that I was born a century too late, and there's naught to be done about it....


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

Yosser said:


> 'Yeah!" one of them replied, 'I wanted to do the donkeys...'


 Well, _that_ didn't come out sounding quite right, did it??!! I will, however, make it a candidate for TC 'laugh-of-the-month' for July!


World Violist said:


> Being a bit more global, to have been close to Gustav Mahler would have been a really great thing (I have been feeling jealousy toward Bruno Walter for quite some time now, not only having been close to Mahler but also having been able to record his memories and some of Mahler's symphonies in high-fidelity 1950's sound). So maybe Austria 1860's-70's would be a good time/place? I dunno.


Gustav Mahler was _born_ in 1860- so if one was in Austria at that time, perhaps one could hope to start a nascent childhood friendship with Mahler (which, I suppose, would be okay...)


----------



## Yosser (May 29, 2009)

Chi_town/Philly said:


> Well, _that_ didn't come out sounding quite right, did it??!! I will, however, make it a candidate for TC 'laugh-of-the-month' for July!


It's a direct quote (I think). The girls were around 10-12-ish and one of them also said she was 'into horses'. Feel free to add that to your lotm list.

Cheez, ya get on a plane these days, who knows what pervs you get sat next to!


----------

