# What would Beethoven think?



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

First, to define the parameters of this as well as I can, this is only in reference to Beethoven's ideas of music theory. I don't mean to ask what people from his period would have thought, rather what his own opinion would be if he was given sufficient information to see where music theory went after he left it.

1. What would Beethoven think of the directions that opera went in from Wagner to composers like Janacek, and Smetana, to composers like Korngold, and Prokofiev?

2. What would Beethoven think of the movement to bypass tonality, jump-started by Debussy, and further progessed by the likes of Scriabin, Feinberg, Roslavets, Mosolov, Stravinsky, Schoenberg, and Bartok, into the eclectic likes of composers such as Ligeti, Schnittke, Zemlinsky, Louvier, Messaien (I get the idea Beethoven would hate Messaien), Berio, Casella, Julian Carillo, etc. ?

3. Specifically, what would his opinion be on Impressionistic music? Would he find it just as weak spirited and tinkling as the composers before him?

4. What would he think about the later works of any famous orchestrator like Mahler, Mussorgsky, Dvorak, Henselt, Tchaikovsky, etc. ?

5. And of course, what would he think of the later works of the greats right after him, who wrote mostly for the piano? For example: those like Heller, Alkan, Thalberg, Liszt, Chopin, and Anton Rubinstein.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

It depends how you want to set up the question. I mean, if we're actually going to consider what Beethoven the actual man would think, then you'd assume that he would hate all of it. Even though Abraham Lincoln abolished slavery, what would he think of the equal rights we have in (some) Western countries today? He'd probably find it repugnant. The same can be said of anybody else in any other time. If you don't grow up with the changes, you're not likely at all to appreciate them, especially as people who _do_ live long enough to see changes still seem incapable of leaving past generations' prejudices behind.

So, that would be my answer to the actual question, but I assume you'd find it more helpful if we constructed a fake Beethoven in our heads with his artistic ideals and then considered what a contemporary Beethoven might make of the things you listed?


----------



## Air (Jul 19, 2008)

What would Mozart think?
What would Bach think?
What would Clara Schumann think?


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

I think he'd like some of the drama of Tchaikovsky's music. The kind of opera he liked was Rossini, Mozart, Weber. Maybe he might have liked some Italian opera like Verdi. Not sure he would have liked 2 or 3. Later composers for the piano it's hard to say, but he would have probably disliked most of it as some of it would have just sounded like virtuoso music to him.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

You can't tell. 

There are plenty of surprising opinions of famous composers about other classical composers. If we wouldn't know, could you guess that Tchaikovsky disliked Brahms? They share so much in common, and yet! Therefore you can talk, talk and talk about what Ludwig Van would like and dislike, but anything you will accomplish in this discussion will be worthless. You can't dig the ways of genius thinking.

Only I can do that.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Aramis said:


> You can't tell.
> 
> There are plenty of surprising opinions of famous composers about other classical composers. If we wouldn't know, could you guess that Tchaikovsky disliked Brahms? They share so much in common, and yet! Therefore you can talk, talk and talk about what Ludwig Van would like and dislike, but anything you will accomplish in this discussion will be worthless. You can't dig the ways of genius thinking.


I got to the end of that paragraph and I knew what my response would be...



Aramis said:


> Only I can do that.


But then you beat me to it!


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

I think you can make educated guesses, even if Beethoven might have had some surprising opinions in there somewhere as well. The composer of the Coriolanus Overture most likely would have like the Romeo and Juliet Fantasy Overture in my opinion.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I feel certain that Beethoven would have frowned on too much freedom. It takes a universal musical language in order to communicate the kinds of stories and jokes as told through Beethoven's music. He may have broken the "rules," but without them there could be no surprises.

On the other hand he might have really enjoyed the opening night of _Rite of Spring._


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

As I already pointed out on another thread, he would have committed suicide if he lived to see that Brahms was a greater composer...


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Polednice said:


> As I already pointed out on another thread, he would have committed suicide if he lived to see that Brahms was a greater composer...


lol, I can guarrantee that he wouldn't have said Brahms was a greater composer than himself. He would have liked some pieces though I'm sure.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

starry said:


> lol, I can guarrantee that he wouldn't have said Brahms was a greater composer than himself. He would have liked some pieces though I'm sure.


You can't guarantee that because _I_ can guarantee that he would have killed himself!


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Even Brahms was in awe of Beethoven. Everybody knows he copied his first symphony from Beethoven.

[Gosh - look at the time! I gotta run.]


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Weston said:


> Even Brahms was in awe of Beethoven. Everybody knows he copied his first symphony from Beethoven.
> 
> [Gosh - look at the time! I gotta run.]


Of course Brahms was in awe of Beethoven, which is why Brahms would kill himself after Beethoven would.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Polednice said:


> It depends how you want to set up the question. I mean, if we're actually going to consider what Beethoven the actual man would think, then you'd assume that he would hate all of it. Even though Abraham Lincoln abolished slavery, what would he think of the equal rights we have in (some) Western countries today? He'd probably find it repugnant. The same can be said of anybody else in any other time. If you don't grow up with the changes, you're not likely at all to appreciate them, especially as people who _do_ live long enough to see changes still seem incapable of leaving past generations' prejudices behind.
> 
> So, that would be my answer to the actual question, but I assume you'd find it more helpful if we constructed a fake Beethoven in our heads with his artistic ideals and then considered what a contemporary Beethoven might make of the things you listed?


Actually, I disagree with you. In his own words, Beethoven wanted to "get at the guts" of music. He wrote a few chamber pieces that were heavily chromatic (you might even compare some of them to Liszt's Grand Concert Solo), and they ended up as a big flop with the music critics of the time. So you might say that Liszt, Chopin, Alkan, and Thalberg, were doing what he wanted to do and had been denied the right to do so, himself.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

As I already pointed out on another thread, he would have committed suicide if he lived to see that Brahms was a greater composer...

Of course Brahms was in awe of Beethoven, which is why Brahms would kill himself after Beethoven would.

Of after recognizing that Wagner was a better composer than he?


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Polednice said:


> Of course Brahms was in awe of Beethoven, which is why Brahms would kill himself after Beethoven would.


I'm sorry, but we've already had this discussion. Brahms was a little cheese-wheel compared to Beethoven's tank of piano music


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Alkan and Thalberg...

Do you honestly believe these are "great composers"?


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Brahms is the supreme Deity of classical music under which all other composers have no significance. We might as well not listen to anybody else. Dvorak gets a look in because they were best buddies, and we only listen to Beethoven nowadays because Brahms liked him. The rest tried their best, but it just wasn't good enough...


----------



## Air (Jul 19, 2008)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Alkan and Thalberg...
> 
> Do you honestly believe these are "great composers"?


Alkan = It depends, IMHO... yes.
Thalberg = No, though as a pianist he was probably one of the most fluid technicians of all time.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Alkan and Thalberg...
> 
> Do you honestly believe these are "great composers"?


Get back to me when you've actually studied all of this, and try telling me he wasn't monumental: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=EF6BB732BFADE86A

As of right now, it seems apparent that all you can do is blow smoke when it comes to Alkan 

Harsh one, right? Don't get me wrong, I'm not quite that mean. But try being worth your weight in salt before you actually come to a conclusion about Alkan.


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

I think he'd have been quite inspired. But he could doubtless have done some of it himself. Give the man valved horns and chromatic trumpets, and the rest, and he'd have had a blast. I sometimes wonder what Mozart would have thought if he'd heard the Eroica symphony. He'd only have had to live to 52, and he might have thought - man, I've got some competition here! And then what would Mozart's Symphony No 42 have sounded like?
Although, he might have felt that Mahler could do with some editing. "Tighten it up, keep the tension," I can hear him saying. Then again, he did write the fife&drum march in the 9th symphony, so perhaps he'd be pretty tolerant.


Aramis said:


> There are plenty of surprising opinions of famous composers about other classical composers. If we wouldn't know, could you guess that Tchaikovsky disliked Brahms? They share so much in common, and yet!


No. Tchaikovsky's a fine tunesmith, but his major works are tacked together like a prefab henhouse compared to the masterly architecture of Brahms. (Hence his antipathy, I reckon.) Whatever else you might say, Brahms was technically the most competent composer since the 1700s. No seams, no awkward joins, no bits-not-quite-fitting. Every note right, in the right place. I think if he'd wanted too (or for a bet!) he could have written in anyone's style. No-one else has had such technical facility.

Even if Beethoven himself had lived another 5-odd years, he might have heard the Symphonie Fantastique. That opinion I'd have liked to hear.
cheers,
Graeme


----------



## mueske (Jan 14, 2009)

GraemeG said:


> I think he'd have been quite inspired. But he could doubtless have done some of it himself. Give the man valved horns and chromatic trumpets, and the rest, and he'd have had a blast. I sometimes wonder what Mozart would have thought if he'd heard the Eroica symphony. He'd only have had to live to 52, and he might have thought - man, I've got some competition here! And then what would Mozart's Symphony No 42 have sounded like?
> Although, he might have felt that Mahler could do with some editing. "Tighten it up, keep the tension," I can hear him saying. Then again, he did write the fife&drum march in the 9th symphony, so perhaps he'd be pretty tolerant.
> 
> No. Tchaikovsky's a fine tunesmith, but his major works are tacked together like a prefab henhouse compared to the masterly architecture of Brahms. (Hence his antipathy, I reckon.) Whatever else you might say, Brahms was technically the most competent composer since the 1700s. No seams, no awkward joins, no bits-not-quite-fitting. Every note right, in the right place. I think if he'd wanted too (or for a bet!) he could have written in anyone's style. No-one else has had such technical facility.
> ...


How would he have done that?

And are you implying Beethoven wasn't a technical master?


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

Beethoven was very forward thinking and open to new music and technology, and according to this historical document, would have fully immersed himself in 80's hair metal:






(Even though the song features a Mozart lick played on guitar)


----------



## TresPicos (Mar 21, 2009)

I wonder how 142-year-old Beethoven would have liked the premiere of Stravinsky's Rites of Spring. 

I can picture him and 77-year-old Saint-Saëns climbing over each other, desperate to get out of the theatre. 

But I can also picture him with a big smile on his face, sitting calmly in the midst of an audience in uproar, nodding to Stravinsky: "I approve".


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

mueske said:


> How would he have done that?


Er, who would have done what? I'm not sure which bit of my post you're responding to



> And are you implying Beethoven wasn't a technical master?


No, and I don't see where I've suggested that either...
Graeme


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

GraemeG said:


> No. Tchaikovsky's a fine tunesmith, but his major works are tacked together like a prefab henhouse compared to the masterly architecture of Brahms. (Hence his antipathy, I reckon.) Whatever else you might say, Brahms was technically the most competent composer since the 1700s. No seams, no awkward joins, no bits-not-quite-fitting. Every note right, in the right place. I think if he'd wanted too (or for a bet!) he could have written in anyone's style. No-one else has had such technical facility.


I'm going to have to disagree there. Tchaikovsky crossed over several realms of what it was to orchestrate. You may have a taste for full, colorful, and involved orchestration, but that doesn't make it superior. Tchaikovsky was great at what you would call loose structure. Each instrument plays many different roles in his compositions, and it's not a sin for the "basement" (cellos, basses, etc. Those who hold up the foundation) to rest for a while. Another instance of taste giving the illusion of superiority (no offense intended).


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

Lukecash12 said:


> I'm going to have to disagree there. Tchaikovsky crossed over several realms of what it was to orchestrate. You may have a taste for full, colorful, and involved orchestration, but that doesn't make it superior. Tchaikovsky was great at what you would call loose structure. Each instrument plays many different roles in his compositions, and it's not a sin for the "basement" (cellos, basses, etc. Those who hold up the foundation) to rest for a while. Another instance of taste giving the illusion of superiority (no offense intended).


I'm not talking about orchestration, especially. Tchaikovsky was right to worry about 'the seams showing' in his 4th symphony, for instance. I'm saying his works are bitty and episodic compared to Brahms. Nothing to do with orchestration. Orchestration is one of T's strengths, I think.
Graeme


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

GraemeG is correct. Tchaikovsky's works are episodic compared to Brahms. Tchaikovksy only got it right in his last 2 symphonies.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

GraemeG said:


> I'm not talking about orchestration, especially. Tchaikovsky was right to worry about 'the seams showing' in his 4th symphony, for instance. I'm saying his works are bitty and episodic compared to Brahms. Nothing to do with orchestration. Orchestration is one of T's strengths, I think.
> Graeme


Yes, you are right in that. A lot of his major works aren't really that cohesive as a whole. He was much better at short pieces, in my opinion. Something like a overture was more up his alley.


----------



## bplary (Sep 13, 2009)

I always love thinking about this kind of thing. Just the other day I was with my friends listening to some techno and we were debating about which of the great composers would be the first to start bobbing their head to the beat.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Probably Stravinsky. He was the only great I know of that actually wrote pop music. But that was some good music he wrote, though. I've got nothing against that genre of the blues.


----------



## linceed87 (Oct 21, 2008)

since 1700´s?? i dont think brhams would beat bach or Mozart, thats technical mastery


----------

