# Unpopular opinion: Beethoven sucked writing vocal music



## ManuelMozart95 (Sep 29, 2018)

I want to hear what you think. Of course saying he sucked is an exageration, I like Fidelio, his Missa Solemnis and the Ode to Joy, but I can't help but feel that these works are way below his best achievments in instrumental music like his Piano Sonatas, String Quartets, Violin Sonatas or most instrumental parts of his Symphonies.

When I listen to Mozart Operas or other vocal music he wrote like Ave Verum Corpus or Exultate Jubilate I hear the same genius that I hear when listening to his instrumental music. Same with Bach. But the same thing doesn't happen with Beethoven at least in my case.

Is this a popular opinion or am I missing something? I don't have so much time listening to Classical so I want to know what's the concensus and if I am missing something.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

"Beethoven’s music sets in motion the machinery of awe, of fear, of terror, of pain, and awakens that infinite yearning which is the essence of romanticism. He is therefore a purely romantic composer. Might this not explain why his vocal music is less successful, since it does not permit a mood of vague yearning but can only depict from the realm of the infinite those feelings capable of being described in words?" --ETA Hoffman, 1810


----------



## Tchaikov6 (Mar 30, 2016)

Comparing him to Mozart and Bach, well that's just unfair. As far as I know, Beethoven was never trained as a singer, while Mozart and Bach were trained extensively. Beethoven didn't understand the human voice, couldn't write well for it, but still produced masterpieces like Missa Solemnis and Ninth Symphony that I think are great not because of their vocal writing, but because of their fire that Beethoven is so famous. Without that fire, yes, Beethoven's vocal works can be some of his less interesting pieces (but still enjoyable to listen to it).


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

ManuelMozart95 said:


> I want to hear what you think. Of course saying he sucked is an exageration, I like Fidelio, his Missa Solemnis and the Ode to Joy, but I can't help but feel that these works are way below his best achievments in instrumental music like his Piano Sonatas, String Quartets, Violin Sonatas or most instrumental parts of his Symphonies.
> 
> When I listen to Mozart Operas or other vocal music he wrote like Ave Verum Corpus or Exultate Jubilate I hear the same genius that I hear when listening to his instrumental music. Same with Bach. But the same thing doesn't happen with Beethoven at least in my case.
> 
> Is this a popular opinion or am I missing something? I don't have so much time listening to Classical so I want to know what's the concensus and if I am missing something.


Fidelio always gives me chills when I listen to it, I think that the Missa Solemnis is a marvellous work of genius and that the Choral symphony is one of the greatest symphonies ever; and I also think that the Mass in C and that the Choral Fantasy are criminally underrated pieces. I love the Beethoven's lieder that I know, and I like his cantatas. I wanted that Beethoven had written _more_ vocal music.

...so, I love every vocal piece by Beethoven that I know, and can't really do anything else than vehemently disagree when someone comes with this notion that he was bad at writing vocal music. I don't care if his vocal pieces are hard to perform; if they sound good, they _are_ good to me. I'm no expert though, just a listener.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Interesting that Beethoven studied writing for the voice with Salieri, supposedly concentrating on Italian style singing. These lessons seem to have gone on for quite a while, some say until 1803. But solid evidence is lacking.

He seems to have envied the success of others in writing music for the voice, resenting especially that scoundrel Rossini. "No one has a mind any more for what is good, what is vigorous -- in short, for real music! Yes, yes, that's how it is, you Viennese! Rossini and his pals, they're your heroes. You want nothing more from me! Sometimes Schuppanzigh gets a quartet out of me, but you've no time for the symphonies, and you don't want Fidelio. It's Rossini, Rossini above everything. Perhaps your soulless strumming and singing, your own shoddy stuff that you take for real art -- that's your taste. Oh, you Viennese!"


----------



## Guest (Oct 12, 2018)

I didn't realise Beethoven was bad at writing for voice. Sure, the 9th symphony _is_ rather unusual to sing, but it's so effective and I can't imagine he could achieve the same effect if he wrote it in the same idiom as a Handel oratorio, for example.

When I hear music like _this,_ it confirms that Beethoven really must have known what he was doing when writing for voice.


----------



## Doctuses (Jun 11, 2018)

ManuelMozart95 said:


> I want to hear what you think. Of course saying he sucked is an exageration, I like Fidelio, his Missa Solemnis and the Ode to Joy, but I can't help but feel that these works are way below his best achievments in instrumental music like his Piano Sonatas, String Quartets, Violin Sonatas or most instrumental parts of his Symphonies..


I mean yeah that's a pretty common observation that his instrumental writing was better than his vocal work, which is of course different than saying he was a bad voice writer. He wrote a really large amount of vocal works when you add them all up, in the hundreds, so he never intended to not write for the voice, but it's a fact that Schubert, Schumann, and Brahms were better at it than he. It's important to remember that beethoven also lived during that transitory time when the zeitgeist concerning the best genres of music was changing from vocal to instrumental music, which is something he himself had much to do with.


----------



## Doctuses (Jun 11, 2018)

KenOC said:


> Interesting that Beethoven studied writing for the voice with Salieri, supposedly concentrating on Italian style singing. These lessons seem to have gone on for quite a while, some say until 1803. But solid evidence is lacking.
> 
> He seems to have envied the success of others in writing music for the voice, resenting especially that scoundrel Rossini. "No one has a mind any more for what is good, what is vigorous -- in short, for real music! Yes, yes, that's how it is, you Viennese! Rossini and his pals, they're your heroes. You want nothing more from me! Sometimes Schuppanzigh gets a quartet out of me, but you've no time for the symphonies, and you don't want Fidelio. It's Rossini, Rossini above everything. Perhaps your soulless strumming and singing, your own shoddy stuff that you take for real art -- that's your taste. Oh, you Viennese!"


Hah yeah I agree. When Beethoven met Rossini he told him not to write opera seria and apparently Rossini left the old master in tears. Nevertheless Rossini was so mesmerized with B that he went to
Klemens von Metternich and asked why he wouldn't do anything to help out the old master's living and financial situation, but Metternich felt Beethoven was a misanthrope whose misery was his own making. lol.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

> Is this a popular opinion or am I missing something? I don't have so much time listening to Classical so I want to know what's the consensus and if I am missing something.







Yes you do, big time, listen to his lieder,lots on You tube.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

shirime said:


> I didn't realise Beethoven was bad at writing for voice. Sure, the 9th symphony _is_ rather unusual to sing, but it's so effective and I can't imagine he could achieve the same effect if he wrote it in the same idiom as a Handel oratorio, for example.
> 
> When I hear music like _this,_ it confirms that Beethoven really must have known what he was doing when writing for voice.


Lovely stuff, and normally I don't even particularly like lieder. But this compares perfectly well with almost anything Schubert came up with.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I would choose different wording, but definitely his vocal music does not do it for me. I like Beethoven a lot (even if he's not top10 for me), but every time he includes vocals, I bow out. And yes, that includes the Missa Solemnis, Fidelio, An die ferne Geliebte, and above all the 9th.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Odd that we have concurrent threads questioning Beethoven's skills in counterpoint and vocal writing. What happens if we mix the two together? We get the fugue on _Et vitam venturi sæculi_ that closes the Credo of the _Missa Solemnis_, certainly one of the high points of Western Music. Not bad for a chap of such mediocre talents, eh?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

KenOC said:


> "Beethoven's music sets in motion the machinery of awe, of fear, of terror, of pain, and awakens that infinite yearning which is the essence of romanticism. He is therefore a purely romantic composer. Might this not explain why his vocal music is less successful, since it does not permit a mood of vague yearning but can only depict from the realm of the infinite those feelings capable of being described in words?" --ETA Hoffman, 1810


To say Berthoven was a purely romantic composer is a sweeping statement thatdoesn'tstand up to much scrutiny. He bridged the gap between classical and romantic. I can't see why this has any effect on his vocal music. After all, Beethoven was Verdi's hero.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Beethoven hadn't the sheer skill of Bach in writing choral music or Mozart n writing opera. But he had got sheer genius. Why the Missa and Fidelio continue to move audiences


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

There´s also a nice little, entertaining concert aria, "Mit Mädeln sich Vertragen"


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

"Fidelio always gives me chills when I listen to it, I think that the Missa Solemnis is a marvellous work of genius and that the Choral symphony is one of the greatest symphonies ever; and I also think that the Mass in C and that the Choral Fantasy are criminally underrated pieces. I love the Beethoven's lieder that I know, and I like his cantatas. I wanted that Beethoven had written more vocal music."

Couldn't agree more, although I think I would put many of his Lieder into the "criminally underrated" bracket as well.

For a short piece of lovely, Echt-Beethoven, I'd also recommend the short cantata A Calm Sea and a Prosperous Voyage. I love it!


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

ManuelMozart95 said:


> Of course saying he sucked is an exageration,


So, really nothing but TC click bait.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

It seems like the people who don't like his vocal music, most particularly choir music, are the ones who have to sing it. Fortunately, I don't have to, so I really like his choral music. The Missa Solemnis sends me through the roof, as does the closing of the 9th symphony.


----------



## ManuelMozart95 (Sep 29, 2018)

I have read that Verdi didn't like the 4th movement of the 9th Symphony because he thought it was subpar compared ti his instrumental music.
I do like the Ode to Joy but I think it is the heart that it has that makes it a touching piece.
But from a pure technical analysis I think it has some problems and Verdi analyzing it as an Opera composer is probably right.
But I guess it is perfect un its own way because it's pure Beethoven, it has all his passion and it couldn't have been better un that sense.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

ManuelMozart95 said:


> *I have read that Verdi didn't like the 4th movement of the 9th Symphony because he thought it was subpar compared ti his instrumental music.*
> I do like the Ode to Joy but I think it is the heart that it has that makes it a touching piece.
> But from a pure technical analysis I think it has some problems and Verdi analyzing it as an Opera composer is probably right.
> But I guess it is perfect un its own way because it's pure Beethoven, it has all his passion and it couldn't have been better un that sense.


That's correct, Verdi kind of despised the vocal music in Beethoven's 9th.

"_The alpha and omega is Beethoven's Ninth Symphony, marvelous in the first three movements, very badly set in the last. No one will ever approach the sublimity of the first movement, but it will be an easy task to write as badly for voices as in the last movement._
-- Giuseppe Verdi, 1878


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

I'll take the _Missa Solemnis_ over all the sacred music of Mozart and Haydn put together (which I also love). So, no, I don't agree that he sucked.

He certainly didn't specialize in vocal writing, and I admit I've never warmed to _Fidelio_.


----------



## Biffo (Mar 7, 2016)

ManuelMozart95 said:


> I have read that Verdi didn't like the 4th movement of the 9th Symphony because he thought it was subpar compared ti his instrumental music.
> I do like the Ode to Joy but I think it is the heart that it has that makes it a touching piece.
> But from a pure technical analysis I think it has some problems and* Verdi analyzing it as an Opera composer *is probably right.
> But I guess it is perfect un its own way because it's pure Beethoven, it has all his passion and it couldn't have been better un that sense.


Perhaps that is part of the problem as far as Verdi is concerned, he was analyzing it as an opera composer. Vaughan Williams, as a symphonist and writer of choral music, had a different perspective -

'I have simply tried to set down, largely to clarify my own mind, my personal 'reactions' ...... to what I believe, together with the B Minor Mass and the St. Matthew Passion, to be the greatest of choral music. In case this last sentence should appear to be an impertinent truism, I ought to explain that the early nineteenth-century idiom is naturally repugnant to me. My natural love is much more the Gothic-Teutonic idiom of J.S. Bach and his predecessors ........ Thus it is, so to speak, in spite of myself, that I have to acknowledge the supremacy of the Ninth Symphony'


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

DavidA said:


> To say Berthoven was a purely romantic composer is a sweeping statement thatdoesn'tstand up to much scrutiny. He bridged the gap between classical and romantic. I can't see why this has any effect on his vocal music. After all, Beethoven was Verdi's hero.


Hoffman wrote this in 1810, when the word "romantic" meant something quite different, at least to him, than it does today. He also classed Haydn and Mozart as "romantic" composers. For more perspective, you can read his entire essay:

https://sites.google.com/site/kenocstuff/eta-hoffman-on-beethoven


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_Comparing him to Mozart and Bach, well that's just unfair. _

I don't think so. I have sung all three composers -- Beethoven's Missa Solemnis, several of his lied, Der Glorreiche Augenblick and others; Mozart's Ave Verum Corpus, Mass in C Minor, Coronation mass, opera arias and Laudate Dominum; Bach's St. Matthew Passion, cantatas BWV and motets -- and I wouldn't say Beethoven wrote less well for the voice than the others.

Mozart is much easier to learn than either Bach or Beethoven and probably more tuneful much of the time. But so is Mendelssohn and Haydn easier to learn, more tuneful and just as prophetic as the big three. They are all a lot of fun to learn and sing.

Anyone that thinks Beethoven wrote poorly for the voice hasn't heard or performed much of his music. It is always challenging because he pushed everything beyond its limit. He felt restrained by the four octaves of the fortepiano of his time and wanted to go beyond it, the reason so much of the finale of the 32nd piano sonata spends so much time at the high end tinkling around. He was like that with the voice too.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Over the years, I have read that Beethoven apparently didn't have any melody skill, no counterpoint, no orchestration, no harmony, 'only form'. And now no vocal writing skill. 

Nevertheless, he managed to be one of the greatest composers ever. Of course, he excelled in all those skills, and that's why he's great. 

When reading these claims about the supposed ineptness of the great composers at some specific, vital to write good music, skill (like in that Chopin bashing thread), it becomes clear to me that the actual inept is usually the claimant, which operates under a rather narrow and cliché notion of the skills being discussed (e.g., counterpoint must refer only the ability to write a fugue in a north germanic baroque style, melody must refer only to the ability to write in a romantic bel canto style and the same with emotion, etc.)


----------



## Gallus (Feb 8, 2018)

Cough...






To me this is one of the most _profound_ (that word again) moments in all of opera, and music in general.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

There is a odd mental condition by which some people seek (and perhaps find) a kind of validation of individualization and intellect by making outrageous claims that simply fly in the face of established opinion. (There seems to be a particular delight in trying to take down a peg or two someone with a well-established reputation.) It is as if they are saying that this idea is important because I hold it, and I am important because I am the only champion for it. Furthermore, it seems that the more people don't agree with them, the more validation they receive from expressing it. I see this often, although I don't understand the mysteries of why it seems to work for them. It is a strange world.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

I think it goes without saying that operatic writing came more difficult for Beethoven than Mozart. It wasn’t a question of lack of skill, but of a composer who was never satisfied with the end result. After all, he wrote no less than 4 versions of the overture and did a major rewrite of his only opera that was originally called Leonore. (Anyone who loves Fidelio should give Leonore a listen.) after all the years he spent on Fidelio, I think Beethoven soured on the idea of another opera.

On the other hand, Mozart churned out operas like they were a no-brainer. My guess is that opera was his favorite medium by far. And he fine-honed it to perfection with the final 4-5 operas. IMO, Mozart’s final operas don’t sound like any of his other music, symphonies, concertos, etc. The melodies are especially exquisite, the music anticipates the romantic era and the arias are particularly well written for the situation in the opera. Unlike a number of other operas that have only a couple of ‘hit’ arias, Mozart’s operas came with several, sort of like a Beatles album back in the day. (Apparently true of Lil Wayne at present, but sadly, I’m not a fan.)


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Beethoven was aware that, when it came to opera, he was a bit slow. "Rossini is a talented and a melodious composer, his music suits the frivolous and sensuous spirit of the times, and his productivity is such that he needs only as many weeks as the Germans do years to write an opera." (1824)

He had perhaps forgotten about Mozart, who wasn't very slow at all.


----------



## Doctuses (Jun 11, 2018)

aleazk said:


> Over the years, I have read that Beethoven apparently didn't have any melody skill, no counterpoint, no orchestration, no harmony, 'only form'. And now no vocal writing skill.


Who in the world has ever claimed Beethoven had no orchestration? I'm genuinely curious.

And even though all these claims have been leveled against Beethoven, he's one of only three pantheon composers to never have needed a "revival"; the other two being Handel and Chopin. Even Mozart needed one. Point is that people complain a lot about musicians, probably even more than they do poets, prosaists, painters etc.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I prefer Beethoven's instrumental music, but in I have a strong preference for classical music without vocals anyway. Although vocal music didn't come naturally to him, works like Fidelio, Missa Solemnis, An Die Ferne Geliebte and the Ode to Joy are cornerstones of Western music. If you're looking for duds, the Scottish and Irish Songs and Christ on the Mount of Olives are less highly regarded by the cognoscenti. 

I dislike opera but Fidelio was one of the very few works in the genre which could grab my attention, even if for its dramatic power alone. Beethoven later toyed with writing an opera based on Macbeth. After abandoning it he used some of the material in the middle movement of the Ghost trio.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

DaveM said:


> I think it goes without saying that operatic writing came more difficult for Beethoven than Mozart. It wasn't a question of lack of skill, but of a composer who was never satisfied with the end result. After all, he wrote no less than 4 versions of the overture and did a major rewrite of his only opera that was originally called Leonore. (Anyone who loves Fidelio should give Leonore a listen.) after all the years he spent on Fidelio, I think Beethoven soured on the idea of another opera.
> 
> On the other hand, Mozart churned out operas like they were a no-brainer. My guess is that opera was his favorite medium by far. And he fine-honed it to perfection with the final 4-5 operas. IMO, Mozart's final operas don't sound like any of his other music, symphonies, concertos, etc. The melodies are especially exquisite, the music anticipates the romantic era and the arias are particularly well written for the situation in the opera. Unlike a number of other operas that have only a couple of 'hit' arias, Mozart's operas came with several, sort of like a Beatles album back in the day. (Apparently true of Lil Wayne at present, but sadly, I'm not a fan.)


Beethoven probably would have written a second opera if he only could have found a worthy subject. He loved the musical abilities of Mozart, but felt that the subjects Mozart set music to were quite unworthy.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

aleazk said:


> *Over the years, I have read that Beethoven apparently didn't have any melody skill, no counterpoint, no orchestration, no harmony, 'only form'. And now no vocal writing skill. *
> 
> Nevertheless, he managed to be one of the greatest composers ever. Of course, he excelled in all those skills, and that's why he's great.
> 
> When reading these claims about the supposed ineptness of the great composers at some specific, vital to write good music, skill (like in that Chopin bashing thread), it becomes clear to me that the actual inept is usually the claimant, which operates under a rather narrow and cliché notion of the skills being discussed (e.g., counterpoint must refer only the ability to write a fugue in a north germanic baroque style, melody must refer only to the ability to write in a romantic bel canto style and the same with emotion, etc.)


The sort of claims are usually made by talentless musicologists who can read music but can't hear it. Beethoven certainly didn't have the facility of a Bach fir writing choral music or the utter naturalness of Mozart for opera. But he did have immense need to go genius and then ability to create something of Titanic and memorable proportions such as Fidelio and the Missa Solemnis. It is the huge struggle contained within these works that makes them so memorable


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

DavidA said:


> The sort of claims are usually made by talentless musicologists who can read music but can't hear it. Beethoven certainly didn't have the facility of a Bach fir writing choral music or the utter naturalness of Mozart for opera. But he did have immense need to go genius and then ability to create something of Titanic and memorable proportions such as Fidelio and the Missa Solemnis. It is the huge struggle contained within these works that makes them so memorable


You have just stated how different Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart were in their abilities. I am thankfull. Would not be as good if they all had the same talents/skills.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Actually, it was Bernstein the one who famously bashed Beethoven in that way, supposedly to highlight how good he was in the sense that, despite all of this, he managed to be great (?!). Of course, he was exaggerating and he knew it, but stars like to do those things when they want to make a point. The problem are the ones that hear those claims and repeat them without any idea of what they are saying.


----------



## Guest (Oct 16, 2018)

aleazk said:


> Actually, it was Bernstein the one who famously bashed Beethoven in that way, supposedly to highlight how good he was in the sense that, despite all of this, he managed to be great (?!). Of course, he was exaggerating and he knew it, but stars like to do those things when they want to make a point. The problem are the ones that hear those claims and repeat them without any idea of what they are saying.


That is a misrepresentation of Bernstein's remarks. He was not "bashing" Beethoven, but making the observation that Beethoven could write a melody which taken in isolation almost seemed not to be a melody at all (like the repeated note of the 7th symphony Allegretto) and transform it into one of the most memorable melodies every written through its context and development.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Just listening too the Missa Solemnis. Sao glad Beethoven wrote it


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Baron Scarpia said:


> That is a misrepresentation of Bernstein's remarks. He was not "bashing" Beethoven, but making the observation that Beethoven could write a melody which taken in isolation almost seemed not to be a melody at all (like the repeated note of the 7th symphony Allegretto) and transform it into one of the most memorable melodies every written through its context and development.


Please... if that's _only_ what he wanted to say, there are zillions of better ways to say it to avoid 'misrepresentation'.

But, actually, that's what he wanted to say (as it is actually implied in my comment), but he also wanted to say it in an iconoclastic way, that's why the bashing, which is there.


----------



## Guest (Oct 16, 2018)

aleazk said:


> Please... if that's _only_ what he wanted to say, there are zillions of better ways to say it to avoid 'misrepresentation'.
> 
> But, actually, that's what he wanted to say (as it is actually implied in my comment), but he also wanted to say it in an iconoclastic way, that's why the bashing, which is there.


He's being iconoclastic, sure. But the general mood is reverence for Beethoven. To say he is "bashing" Beethoven because of his take on Beethoven's technique as a melodist is missing the point, I think.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I remember Bernstein’s diatribe about Beethoven quite well, since I saw it on YouTube – but I can’t find it right now. He does indeed go WAY off the deep end – Beethoven couldn’t write a decent tune, his rhythms were pedestrian and boring, his harmonies mostly off-the-shelf, his orchestrations a uniform shade of gray… But NONETHELESS (you can fill in the blank here yourself).

It was obviously a rhetorical device, but way overdone. Some professor posted a lengthy demolition of Bernstein’s demolition of Beethoven, which is also on YouTube and worth seeing if you can find it.

I also remember that Bernstein’s diatribe was later published in print, but toned down to a less objectionable level.


----------



## Guest (Oct 16, 2018)

Can't find it? It's linked in Aleazk's post.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Statements that are clearly made only for the sake of being controversial generally are not worth much. The same can be said of music.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Baron Scarpia said:


> Can't find it? It's linked in Aleazk's post.


Thanks! It was hiding in a link I missed. Here's the lengthy demolition of Bernstein that I mentioned. The YouTube description opens with, "Bernstein is wrong on the internet."


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Baron Scarpia said:


> He's being iconoclastic, sure. But the general mood is reverence for Beethoven. To say he is "bashing" Beethoven because of his take on Beethoven's technique as a melodist is missing the point, I think.


Well, we wouldn't be 'missing the point' if he had chosen different words for his argumentations.

And we wouldn't be missing the point with Boulez if he had chosen different words with, say, Schoenberg. He also was reverential with Schoenberg, but he also said he was 'mort' and that he didn't know how to write genuinely with his own method without falling into relying in old devices ('unlike Webern, of course').

But, of course, they are not naive people that are being just unfairly misrepresented. They knew, and wanted to say, exactly what they were saying. And they were indeed bashing them in order fit some other agenda.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_I think it goes without saying that operatic writing came more difficult for Beethoven than Mozart._

I don't know if that's true. Beethoven was clear, however, that he could never write an opera about a superfluous subject … such as the Queen of the night, a Latin lover, minor Shakespearian character or a Chinese madam, all of whom were turned into famous operas.

Like Bach and religious music (Bach didn't write operas because he didn't consider them serious), Beethoven could only write an opera about an important subject -- such as the tyranny of an innocent person being stored in a Spanish prison, then being set free as a metaphor for all mankind.

Beethoven lived through Napoleon's tyranny, then the French and American revolutions and their promises of liberty and equality. These ideas fired his imagination; silly subjects did not, at least when it came to opera.

Whether or not he could write as easily as Mozart is open to question. There is no question, I don't think, that his Missa Solemnis towers over any Mozart sacred choral work and probably over any other sacred choral work ever written except possibly for the Verdi Requiem. So I'm sure, had it been important to him, he'd have written other operas at a very high level of excellence.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

larold said:


> I don't know if that's true. Beethoven was clear, however, that he could never write an opera about a superfluous subject … such as the Queen of the night, a Latin lover, minor Shakespearian character or a Chinese madam, all of whom were turned into famous operas.


Well, I disagree, "the subject" of an opera was not what made it difficult to Beethoven to write more operas, as if the subject of Fidelio was the only serious or worthwhile subject available to Beethoven while he lived. Mozart could have written music for any opera in any subject he wanted, no question about it.



larold said:


> _
> Whether or not he could write as easily as Mozart is open to question. There is no question, I don't think, that his Missa Solemnis towers over any Mozart sacred choral work and probably over any other sacred choral work ever written except possibly for the Verdi Requiem. So I'm sure, had it been important to him, he'd have written other operas at a very high level of excellence._


_

"No question"? Disagree with this too. The Great Mass in C minor and Requiem may be less lengthy (unfinished after all) than Missa Solemnis, but to me at least equally great in several aspects._


----------



## Guest (Oct 16, 2018)

KenOC said:


> I remember Bernstein's diatribe about Beethoven quite well, since I saw it on YouTube - but I can't find it right now. He does indeed go WAY off the deep end - Beethoven couldn't write a decent tune, his rhythms were pedestrian and boring, his harmonies mostly off-the-shelf, his orchestrations a uniform shade of gray… But NONETHELESS (you can fill in the blank here yourself).
> 
> It was obviously a rhetorical device, but way overdone. Some professor posted a lengthy demolition of Bernstein's demolition of Beethoven, which is also on YouTube and worth seeing if you can find it.
> 
> I also remember that Bernstein's diatribe was later published in print, but toned down to a less objectionable level.


I remember seeing these videos, which where shown as an introduction to Bernstein's performances of the Beethoven Symphonies with the Wiener Philharmoniker when they were shown on public television in the US (back around 1980). Sure, he wanted to be a bit controversial, but the message I took from it was not at all a teardown of Beethoven. It was an attempt to make the point that Beethoven's genius was putting together elements that might seem banal in isolation in brilliant ways. I found Bernstein's comments gave me interesting insights into Beethoven's music.

And, quite frankly, there isn't a person on this board that has the insight into music the Bernstein had, and that fact that people want to use this video to "bash" Bernstein seems quite childish to me.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Baron Scarpia said:


> I remember seeing these videos, which where shown as an introduction to Bernstein's performances of the Beethoven Symphonies with the Wiener Philharmoniker when they were shown on public television in the US (back around 1980). Sure, he wanted to be a bit controversial, but the message I took from it was not at all a teardown of Beethoven. It was an attempt to make the point that Beethoven's genius was putting together elements that might seem banal in isolation in brilliant ways. I found Bernstein's comments gave me interesting insights into Beethoven's music.
> 
> And, quite frankly, there isn't a person on this board that has the insight into music the Bernstein had, and that fact that people want to use this video to "bash" Bernstein seems quite childish to me.


Nice appeal to authority... and ad hom, too. We are idio.ts, Bernstein is god, ergo he can say whatever he wants and we must accept it as the divine, revealed word.

No, I don't think he makes a good analysis at all, and that is not a judgement on Bernstein in general terms, just of that silly video, nobody is questioning Bernstein's musicianship (again, another fallacy, our mouths never said that), just his obvious misleading claims in that 4 mins video. I think he misses the point by trying to force his effect shock caricature of view through a deliberate dishonest analysis, and in that way gives a distorted view of what Beethoven is doing there. If anyone is being childish, that's Bernstein in that video.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

​


larold said:


> _..._Beethoven was clear, however, that he could never write an opera about a superfluous subject … ​


​Beethoven seemed to be put off by certain topics, not so much whether the subject was "serious" or not. For example, he criticized Mozart's _Don Juan_ for its immorality, saying "…our sacred art ought never permit itself to be degraded to the level of a foil for so scandalous a subject." But he was happy with the _Barber _and came close to worshipping _Magic Flute_.

He definitely had a taste for bizarre or eerie subjects. He actually began work on _Macbeth_, evidently starting with the witch's cauldron scene (music he reused). Later in life he was effusive in his praise of Weber's _Der Freischutz_, a fantasy story of no great weight but with a somewhat similar scene, in the Wolf's Glen.


----------



## JeffD (May 8, 2017)

ManuelMozart95 said:


> Is this a popular opinion or am I missing something? I don't have so much time listening to Classical so I want to know what's the concensus and if I am missing something.


Just an aside. I can't for the life of me figure out why it matters what others think on this. If you like it listen, if you don't, don't, and if you sort of like it, just sort of listen.

I promise you, we are all missing something.


----------



## Guest (Oct 17, 2018)

aleazk said:


> Nice appeal to authority... and ad hom, too. We are idio.ts, Bernstein is god, ergo he can say whatever he wants and we must accept it as the divine, revealed word.
> 
> No, I don't think he makes a good analysis at all, and that is not a judgement on Bernstein in general terms, just of that silly video, nobody is questioning Bernstein's musicianship (again, another fallacy, our mouths never said that), just his obvious misleading claims in that 4 mins video. I think he misses the point by trying to force his effect shock caricature of view through a deliberate dishonest analysis, and in that way gives a distorted view of what Beethoven is doing there. If anyone is being childish, that's Bernstein in that video.


Let's not get argumentative. Appeal to Beethoven's authority doesn't help my argument, I admit. My point is simply that I found Bernstein's comments very interesting, even if he focuses on a few extreme examples to further his case. The salient point is that Beethoven was not primarily interested in "melodies," he was interested in whatever melodic fragments he could use to build musical drama. Often he found that "melodies" that in isolation are almost not melodies at all suited his purpose. The only thing I really objected to in the criticism of Bernstein is that he was "bashing" Beethoven. The overall tenor of his talk is reverence for Beethoven, and wonder that he could do so much with such simple building blocks.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_The (Mozart) Great Mass in C minor and Requiem may be less lengthy (unfinished after all) than Missa Solemnis, but to me at least equally great in several aspects. _

Mozart's masterpieces are the equal to Beethoven … but having sung all three I believe the Missa Solemnis contains music -- vocal and instrumental -- that transcends the other two. I also think it is less episodic than Mozart's Requiem. Beethoven's great fugue in the finale and his famous "mental illness" interlude toward the end drive players mad … and inspire them to heights never before reached. His music is so difficult it drives everyone crazy yet it continues to get played and recorded because it does things for players and singers no one except Bach achieves.


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

DavidA said:


> Beethoven hadn't the sheer skill of Bach in writing choral music or Mozart n writing opera. But he had got sheer genius. Why the Missa and Fidelio continue to move audiences


And with regard to Bach, don't forget that writing choral music was literally his day job for some 40 years. He had a _lot_ of practice; Beethoven, who frequently wrote to commissions, had far less incentive to be writing vocal music (setting aside the multitude of folk song arrangements, which while often remarkable, are all based on already-fixed melodies from Thomson that he couldn't change significantly).


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Baron Scarpia said:


> Let's not get argumentative. Appeal to Beethoven's authority doesn't help my argument, I admit. My point is simply that I found Bernstein's comments very interesting, even if he focuses on a few extreme examples to further his case. The salient point is that Beethoven was not primarily interested in "melodies," he was interested in whatever melodic fragments he could use to build musical drama. Often he found that "melodies" that in isolation are almost not melodies at all suited his purpose. The only thing I really objected to in the criticism of Bernstein is that he was "bashing" Beethoven. The overall tenor of his talk is reverence for Beethoven, and wonder that he could do so much with such simple building blocks.


I used the term 'bashing' in reference to the rethorical device of reducing Beethoven's skills in a misleading way and with this use him in a functional way to canalize his own (Bernstein's) personal histrionics and showmanship. Thus, 'bashing' in the sense of insulting Beethoven in this abrupt way (bashing: 'strike hard and violently') and only for his personal gain and use, not bashing in the sense in which, say, some posters here bash Cage, which is a different thing since they don't like Cage while Bernstein does like Beethoven.

Normally, I wouldn't care that much, but here it was just so exaggerated and misleading that becomes a bit irritating. One has only to hear the tone of voice of Schell when he asks 'in which thing was he good at, then?', somewhat outraged at the obvious falsity of the claims but also knowing that he had no musical authority (at least in comparison to Bernstein's) to counter them.


----------

