# Eccentric Art



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

It happens to be my favorite Art, and as far as music goes, Erik Satie happens to be my all time favorite Artist (for his piano music).

I believe this quirky art comes from the spirit world, and our link to the spirit world on Earth is our dreams.

What do you think of my idea of linking eccentric art to the spirit world and is it your favorite, if so, who is (are) your favorite musical artist(s) and why?

Note: The music should be "eccentric" (a somewhat subjective measure, so interpret) not the artist, but they often go together.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

I'm actually my favorite _eccentric_ composer  I love merging the wildly creative with the unmistakeably catchy or moving, it's a natural gift I have for entertaining at least myself at this time: that is, I literally defined esoteric and eccentric in the definition, by pinpointing that the word inherently defines those who adhere to it. In other words, "eccentric = I would know!" or "you would know!" So funny.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Ethereality said:


> I'm actually my favorite _eccentric_ composer  I love merging the wildly creative with the unmistakeably catchy or moving, it's a natural gift I have for entertaining at least myself at this time: that is, I literally defined esoteric and eccentric in the definition, by pinpointing that the word inherently defines those who adhere to it. In other words, "eccentric = I would know!" or "you would know!" So funny.


I love my own music too. So you are in good company!


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

When people were noting the emotional differences between Mahler vs Wagner, I had thought it may be because the former is the spectrum who infatuates with their own music, but I was likely wrong. There's definitely more of an element of supposed objectivity to my infatuation, though certainly, most certainly, objectivity of clear social error, whatever may eccentricity entail. 

Short story: I just cleverly complimented my musical knowledge; you didn't notice that, did you.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Harry Partch

Giancinto Scelsi

John Cage

George Crumb


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Ethereality said:


> When people were noting the emotional differences between Mahler vs Wagner, I had thought it may be because the former is the spectrum who infatuates with their own music, but I was likely wrong. There's definitely more of an element of supposed objectivity to my infatuation, though certainly, most certainly, objectivity of clear social error, whatever may eccentricity entail.
> 
> Short story: I just cleverly complimented my musical knowledge; you didn't notice that, did you.


Oh, I knowticed alright. You just failed to knowtice my buttering of you up to feed my own ego of you taking my thread seriously.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I think Shostakovich fits nicely here.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Beethoven's 6th is quite juicy and eccentric I'd say.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Oh, I knowticed alright. You just failed to knowtice my buttering of you up to feed my own ego of you taking my thread seriously.


Tb totally honest, I don't even know what this thread is really about . Maybe by eccentric we mean composers only the few so ardently adore. While in the small view that would be someone like Weinberg, Zemlinsky or Wolf, in the large scheme of things, it is _Bach, Beethoven, Mozart_ who the few so fervently favor.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Ethereality said:


> Tb totally honest, I don't even know what this thread is really about . Maybe by eccentric we mean composers only the few so ardently adore. While in the small view that would be someone like Weinberg, Zemlinsky or Wolf, in the large scheme of things, it is _Bach, Beethoven, Mozart_ who the few so fervently favor.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Beethoven's 6th is quite juicy and eccentric I'd say.


I suspect that much of the music we listen to today, with our "today's ears", and judge as somewhat "old fashioned" was actually, in its own day, considered quite eccentric, for one reason or another.

Could ol' J.S. Bach have been composing those eccentric preludes and fugues while the younger generation, namely his own sons, were moving into a new "classical" world?

What did the followers of J.S. Bach think of the composer's sons' "strange" non-Baroque-styled symphonies and concertos?

Could anyone have considered the magical compositions of a pre-teen Mozart to be anything but eccentric displays of either God-blessed talent or deal-with-the-Devil bargainship?

Could anyone in the second decade of the 1800s listen to Beethoven's "new" music and judge it as anything but eccentric? If not totally mad?

Wagner's _Ring_ operas (What? Five hours long apiece?), Paganini's and Liszt's finger-busting, "danged-if-we-care if you can play this stuff" music, Debussy's "impressionistic" chords music, Mahler's strangely large symphonies .... Do we really have to stretch to the 20th century and the music of folks like Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Cage, Stockhausen, and Peter Maxwell-Davies in order to find "eccentric music".

Heck! What about those _mad_rigals by Gesualdo?


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

SONNET CLV said:


> I suspect that much of the music we listen to today, with our "today's ears", and judge as somewhat "old fashioned" was actually, in its own day, considered quite eccentric, for one reason or another.
> 
> Could ol' J.S. Bach have been composing those eccentric preludes and fugues while the younger generation, namely his own sons, were moving into a new "classical" world?
> 
> ...


A great post, and while I know there is some sarcasm in it, I do want to note that I think there is music that is so individualistic that it transcends time and is eccentric. (Examples: Tom Waits - Blood Money/Real Gone; Miles Davis - In A Silent Way/Jack Johnson/Bitches Brew; Satie - Gymnopedie; Shostakovich - Symphony 10; Zappa - Apostrophe/Overnite Sensation/Jazz from Hell/Waka Jawaka.) To name a few.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

György Ligeti
Conlon Nancarrow
Harry Partch
Ben Johnston
Giacinto Scelsi
Raymond Scott
Lou Harrison
Kaikhosru Sorabji
Terry Riley
Robert Ashley


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

wow, harry Partch is really cool.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Captainnumber36 said:


> wow, harry Partch is really cool.


Se what you make of this


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Mandryka said:


> Se what you make of this


That wasn't as much to my liking. I don't like when he speaks/sings.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

SONNET CLV said:


> I suspect that much of the music we listen to today, with our "today's ears", and judge as somewhat "old fashioned" was actually, in its own day, considered quite eccentric, for one reason or another.
> 
> Could ol' J.S. Bach have been composing those eccentric preludes and fugues while the younger generation, namely his own sons, were moving into a new "classical" world?
> 
> ...


Yup. I suspect anything eccentric at the time it was originally conceived can become conventional over time and with enough followers. I think the setting or arrangement is also important. Others could take a concept and apply it make it commonplace or water it down, but the original setting/ arrangement could still be fresh and original.

Here is one piece I think time can never dilute it's eccentric impact, unless everyone starts doing a similar thing in a piano setting. I suspect most would shy away from something this brash, as it could be taken to sound amateurish.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Charles Ives .


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Phil loves classical said:


> Yup. I suspect anything eccentric at the time it was originally conceived can become conventional over time and with enough followers. I think the setting or arrangement is also important. Others could take a concept and apply it make it commonplace or water it down, but the original setting/ arrangement could still be fresh and original.
> 
> Here is one piece I think time can never dilute it's eccentric impact, unless everyone starts doing a similar thing in a piano setting. I suspect most would shy away from something this brash, as it could be taken to sound amateurish.


Great choice. Bartok's piano works in general are pretty unique I'd say.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

CaptainNumber36, listen to Castor and Pollux if you haven't. It's probably my favorite work by Partch. And very _eccentric_!


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Phil loves classical said:


> Yup. I suspect anything eccentric at the time it was originally conceived can become conventional over time and with enough followers. I think the setting or arrangement is also important. Others could take a concept and apply it make it commonplace or water it down, but the original setting/ arrangement could still be fresh and original.


I think some stuff has been attempted to be imitated, but fallen flat. For example, all those jambands trying to be like Phish like SCI or Pigeons.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> CaptainNumber36, listen to Castor and Pollux if you haven't. It's probably my favorite work by Partch. And very _eccentric_!


Will do sir, . <3.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> CaptainNumber36, listen to Castor and Pollux if you haven't. It's probably my favorite work by Partch. And very _eccentric_!


I certainly enjoyed that one! Thanks.


----------



## RICK RIEKERT (Oct 9, 2017)

I've always had a soft spot for the outré nuttiness and joie de vivre of George Antheil, the self-styled bad boy of music. Antheil was actively concerned with the fourth dimension and was encouraged to make bold innovations in the name of a higher reality.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

*John Fahey*


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

SONNET CLV said:


> I suspect that much of the music we listen to today, with our "today's ears", and judge as somewhat "old fashioned" was actually, in its own day, considered quite eccentric, for one reason or another. J.S. Bach


Yea. It's worth noting that some people (in Bach's time) complained that Bach was too complex, but no one in his time actually called him "old-fashioned". What's also interesting is the fact that (contrapuntal) liturgical music of the Classical period was considered "modern music" of its time by its contemporaries, contrary to how some people today think. (Although to discuss its "Classical elements" would be the topic for another thread.)



hammeredklavier said:


> Misericordias domini in D minor K.222. G.B. Martini calls it modern music in his letter to Mozart.
> Mozart: "A few days before my departure the Elector expressed a desire to hear some of my contrapuntal compositions. I was therefore obliged to write this motet in a great hurry, in order to have time to have the score copied for his Highness and to have the parts written out and thus enable it to be performed during the Offertory at High Mass on the following Sunday."
> Martini: "Together with your most kind letter, which reached me by way of Trent, I received the Motet… It was with pleasure that I studied it from beginning to end, and I can tell you in all sincerity that I was singularly pleased with it, finding in it all that is required by Modern Music: good harmony, mature modulation, a moderate pace in the violins, a natural connexion of the parts and good taste."





hammeredklavier said:


> "Even during [Michael Haydn's] early student years, he composed small-scale Masses, litanies, hymns, Salve Reginas, etc., which, *because of their correct setting and pleasing modern taste, were accepted by everyone with great approval.*"
> -Maximilan Stadler (1748~1833), Materialien zur Geschichte der Musik, P.135
> ("Schon während seine frühen Studienjahren komponirte er kleinere Messen, Litaneyen, Hymnen, salve regina usw., welche wegen richten Satz und dem angenehmen neuern Geschmack von jedermann mit größten Beyfall aufgenommen wurden.")


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

*Rued Langgaard*, such as 
'Insektarium' (1917)









'Music of the Spheres" 




*Henry Cowell*, such as
"The Tides of Manaunaun" (1917)





*Jaroslav Jezek*, such as 
'Concerto for Violin & Winds' (1930)




'Bugatti Step" 





*Georgy* *Dorokhov*, such as 
'Smoke"





*Erwin Schulhoff,* such as 
'Die Wolkenpumpe"


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

joen_cph said:


> *Rued Langgaard*, such as
> 'Insektarium' (1917)
> 
> 
> ...


May I add Peter Maxwell Davies _Eight Songs for a Mad King_?


----------



## Dimboukas (Oct 12, 2011)

SONNET CLV said:


> I suspect that much of the music we listen to today, with our "today's ears", and judge as somewhat "old fashioned" was actually, in its own day, considered quite eccentric, for one reason or another.
> 
> Could ol' J.S. Bach have been composing those eccentric preludes and fugues while the younger generation, namely his own sons, were moving into a new "classical" world?
> 
> ...


Who were J.S. Bach's followers? I'm not aware of any followers of his, to the contrary, he was old-fashioned for quite some time already before his death.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Dimboukas said:


> he was old-fashioned for quite some time already before his death.


He wasn't any more than, for instance, Handel, who (has been rather exaggerated about his "newness", but) was in fact just as "stuck in" the doctrine of the affections. https://www.talkclassical.com/67827-do-other-baroque-composers-12.html#post2155907


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Dimboukas said:


> Who were J.S. Bach's followers? I'm not aware of any followers of his


Then you do not have any 'awareness' of music history, sorry.


----------



## Dimboukas (Oct 12, 2011)

tdc said:


> Then you do not have any 'awareness' of music history, sorry.


Stop being ridiculous and tell me one of his followers.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

Dimboukas said:


> Stop being ridiculous and tell me one of his followers.


His mom thought he was the best ever.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

Has anyone said Morton Feldman?


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Dimboukas said:


> Stop being ridiculous and tell me one of his followers.


Who were Beethoven's followers? Who were Wagner's followers? I think you will find with many great composers they have influence, but nobody stylistically is quite the same as they are after. Beethoven was considered old fashioned at the end of his career. Did you know that?

Mozart studied Bach's music, therefore he was a follower, Beethoven studied Bach's music. As did Chopin, Brahms and many others.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

tdc said:


> Mozart studied Bach's music, therefore he was a follower, Beethoven studied Bach's music. As did Chopin, Brahms and many others.


Yeah, I think these are the most immediate successors (+ Bach's own pupils, such as G.A. Homilius); they studied Bach in their formative years:



hammeredklavier said:


> Also, take a look at this triple (organ) fugue by Emanuel:





hammeredklavier said:


> For instance, this contains all the "traits of Classicism" I described earlier ("Mood shifts within a single movement, Classical style orchestration/instrumentation, sections/phrases cleanly-cut with cadences, and through-composition, etc"):
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Dimboukas (Oct 12, 2011)

To say that Mozart and Beethoven are Bach's most immediate followers just because they studied Bach's music is a generalization that leads us nowhere. As for Beethoven's and Wagner's followers it is common knowledge that everyone aspired to be a follower of the former after his death (from Schumann and Brahms to even Wagner), and Mahler and Schoenberg are well known followers of Wagner. Poor Bach was a Faust of his day whose style died with him. This doesn't diminish his value; to the contrary, for modernists this is a great plus for his value.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Dimboukas said:


> To say that Mozart and Beethoven are Bach's most immediate followers just because they studied Bach's music is a generalization that leads us nowhere. Poor Bach was a Faust of his day whose style died with him.


I think that's a common misconception; I think it's more plausible to think that Bach simply had greater range and variety of expression than guys like Telemann. There are also clear "bridges" between Bach and Mozart (K.427, K.504, K.551, K.626) as I showed with examples in [Post#36]. Bach's style didn't die with him; he was simply composing in the way a late Baroque church composer (like his contemporaries, Zelenka, Hasse, Heinichen, Zach, etc, circa. 1720s~1740s) would have, and the expression was "extended on" (or "modified") by his immediate "post-Bachian" Classical successors (such as F.J. Aumann, who influenced Bruckner in St. Florian, or to a lesser extent, Albrechtsberger, Pasterwitz, etc.).

For instance, the Dies irae movement of this (6:26~13:39) is a wonderful example of operatic drama contained in formal design. Listen to how the character central aria section is transformed in the later section (consisting more of choruses and ensembles) and the drama ensues as the themes are recapitulated: 



 (at 12:12, the theme from the beginning, 6:26 is recapitulated, and at 12:41, the theme from 7:00 is recapitulated).
And from whom do you think they got their contrapuntal expressivity?
("Judging from a signed, dated autograph score that he copied in 1757 of Fux's Missa Canonica, Michael studied some of the Viennese composer's work during his formative years. The Biographische Skizze mentions that he also studied works of Bach, Handel, Graun and Hasse.")


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Bonkers (does that word cross the Atlantic?) works that I sometimes or often enjoy include

Peter Maxwell Davies - Resurrection (as well as the far less crazy 8 Songs for a Mad King and Miss Donnithorne's Maggot)
Schnittke - "Faust Cantata"
Honegger - Jeanne d'Arc au Bûcher

and I also would include much of Harry Partch's music.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Dimboukas said:


> To say that Mozart and Beethoven are Bach's most immediate followers just because they studied Bach's music is a generalization that leads us nowhere. As for Beethoven's and Wagner's followers it is common knowledge that everyone aspired to be a follower of the former after his death (from Schumann and Brahms to even Wagner), and Mahler and Schoenberg are well known followers of Wagner. Poor Bach was a Faust of his day whose style died with him. This doesn't diminish his value; to the contrary, for modernists this is a great plus for his value.


Among the first romantics is Chopin, and he was quoted as saying 'Beethoven turned his back on eternal principles' so your statement that everyone wanted to follow Beethoven is wrong. Weber an early romantic was also not interested in Beethoven. The romantic approach to sonata form differs significantly from that of the classical era, so we can also say that to a large extent Beethoven's style also died with him. (The romantic's in trying to codify sonata form destroyed it).

I am not aware of any operas that Mahler composed, and Schoenberg's mature style doesn't remind me of Wagner much.

Yes, there is some truth to what you are saying, but Beethoven's influence on the romantic era is in my view often over stated (Charles Rosen agrees with me here), and the Bach 'old fashioned' with no followers idea is also over stated. I think the truth is more nuanced.

Sorry to derail thread, this is my last post in this thread on the subject.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

tdc said:


> Among the first romantics is Chopin, and he was quoted as saying 'Beethoven turned his back on eternal principles' so your statement that everyone wanted to follow Beethoven is wrong. Weber an early romantic was also not interested in Beethoven.


Weber modelled both of his piano concertos after Beethoven's 1 and 5, both in some general gestures and in the comparably uncommon keys of the slow movements (Ab in C and B in Eb). It's also hard to imagine that the dungeon scene and ensemble/choral finales of Fidelio had no impact on him (some scenes in Freischütz just seem to be too close for pure accident). Weber eventually took a different path but that he would not have been interested in Beethoven is just wrong.

Even Chopin was influenced by Beethoven in his scherzi and in the setup of the b flat minor sonata (Beethoven's op.26 is the model, supposedly the only Beethoven sonata Chopin liked) although he probably is the important composer (besides some opera composers) of the first half of the 19th century least impacted by Beethoven.
Of course any composer of some originality would not follow another one too closely, certainly not at Beethoven's time (Bach could still compose concerti very close to Vivaldi or just making arrangements because originality was not valued as highly). The closest to Beethoven is probably some second rate composer like his former student Ries (NB I think the students of Beethoven were all piano students, not composition).

In any case, Bach was never considered particularly "excentric", for all I know. Compared to 30 years earlier stylus phantasticus even his "wild young man" organ works take steps into more regular and systematized forms. 
And the baroque intermittently had a rather high tolerance for mannerisms anyway, cf. Biber, Rebel and others.


----------

