# Why did Germany lose music?



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Well, not exactly Germany, but Germany/Austria. They had (and have) a stranglehold on the top of the classical repertoire from the classical period well into the 1800s. Then along came assorted Hungarians, Poles, Czechs, French, and so on. But the Teutons were still kings of the hill.

Russians started showing up in the 1860s and gradually increased their presence, really taking off in the decade following 1910. That decade was also the last gasp of the Austro-Germans; they were replaced as the most popular musical country by the Russian/Soviets.

All this is based on a series of voting games (on another site) that determined the top-ten most popular works over several hundred years. The table below shows, by decade from 1800 to 1979, the number of top-ten works contributed by Austrian/German composers and Russian/Soviet composers. In the 60 years from 1920 on, the former group paced just one work in the top-ten by decade!

1800-1809: 10 Austrian/German, 0 Russian/Soviet
1810-1819: 10 Austrian/German, 0 Russian/Soviet
1820-1829: 10 Austrian/German, 0 Russian/Soviet
1830-1839: 5 Austrian/German, 0 Russian/Soviet
1840-1849: 8 Austrian/German, 0 Russian/Soviet
1850-1859: 7 Austrian/German, 0 Russian/Soviet
1860-1869: 9 Austrian/German, 1 Russian/Soviet
1870-1879: 7 Austrian/German, 2 Russian/Soviet
1880-1889: 6 Austrian/German, 0 Russian/Soviet
1890-1899: 6 Austrian/German, 1 Russian/Soviet
1900-1909: 4 Austrian/German, 1 Russian/Soviet
1910-1919: 2 Austrian/German, 5 Russian/Soviet
1920-1929: 0 Austrian/German, 2 Russian/Soviet
1930-1939: 0 Austrian/German, 3 Russian/Soviet
1940-1949: 1 Austrian/German, 5 Russian/Soviet
1950-1959: 0 Austrian/German, 3 Russian/Soviet
1960-1969: 0 Austrian/German, 3 Russian/Soviet
1970-1979: 0 Austrian/German, 4 Russian/Soviet

My question: Why did Austrian/German composers, who had created much or even most of our central musical repertoire for so many years, suddenly fade in popularity?


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Hans Henze though born german, has creative roots on Italian soil, makes up for the 100 + years of loss of creativity,,more than enough,,,add in Karl Kartmann 
Every country 20Th C, has 1,2, 3 major composers, Never a 4th. Germany is right there with every country's creative level. 
And for me, Henze is the fruit and flowering of the entire germanic tradition,. For me, i see history as complete and fulfilled. Not lacking in any way. 
Is more better? Since when. 
Is it better to have 10 2nd tier composers in a given epoch, or 1,2 1st rates within a musical era?
answer is easy.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

paulbest said:


> Hans Henze though born german, has creative roots on Italian soil, makes up for the 100 + years of loss of creativity,,more than enough,,,add in Karl Kartmann
> Every country 20Th C, has 1,2, 3 major composers, Never a 4th. Germany is right there with every country's creative level.
> And for me, Henze is the fruit and flowering of the entire germanic tradition,. For me, i see history as complete and fulfilled. Not lacking in any way.
> Is more better? Since when.
> ...


And now for something completely different.... oh, hang on, it's the same as in the previous zillion threads.


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

Well there were a couple of wars Germany started after 1910


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

How many of the results from 1920 were down to Prokofiev and Shostakovich?


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

WW1 + WW2
Germany lost much more than just music, but also its intellectual and scientific elite, who all emigrated to the USA. Even between the wars, there was a thriving culture in Berlin - Berthold Brecht etc.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

The tail-end of the Enlightenment finally filtered into Tsarist Russia, awakening Mikhail Glinka. Glinka awakened Mily Balakirev, and the rest is history. Russia at that time was like descriptions of the steppe awaiting the explosion of Spring.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

In general, it might be helpful for the discussion to list the composers that got in the top10 of each decade in the 1900-1979 range. I assume the only German composer scoring after WW1 was Richard Strauss?

EDIT: also, were these polls from a population predominantly from e.g. USA or UK? That might cause a bias in preference, whereas these countries were not particularly strong in terms of composers in the 19th century.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Bwv 1080 said:


> Well there were a couple of wars Germany started after 1910


Oh yeah, the germans have always been fierce warriors. Like the Turks and russians. 
WW2 is more like WW2875. If we take in every war since time began. Henze speaks of how he dodged the terrors of the war. He had a few close calls I am sure trying to get into relatively safe zones. 
Germany has acknowledged Henze in the recordings of his music. 
To my ears Stockhausen is the german composer of mid/late 20TH C music. But I can not place him 1st tier, thats for sure. ,


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Art Rock said:


> In general, it might be helpful for the discussion to list the composers that got in the top10 of each decade in the 1900-1979 range. I assume the only German composer scoring after WW1 was Richard Strauss?
> 
> EDIT: also, were these polls from a population predominantly from e.g. USA or UK? That might cause a bias in preference, whereas these countries were not particularly strong in terms of composers in the 19th century.


I think the OP is looking for 1st tier composers, Germany has only 2 that i know of 20th C.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Games and lists aside, perhaps they lost influence because they lost the war. It certainly didn't help the creative climate in Germany that was vibrant and alive during the Weimar Republic, from 1918 to 1933, not only in music but in painting, cabaret, and cinema, such as Fritz Lang's classic _Metropolis_. The tyrants got rid of too many good guys, became conservative and narrow, and they could have put Mahler on the map big time more than 20 years before Bernstein, but instead he was banned. Nevertheless, I've not seen German-Austrian music go out of style in the concert halls, and I would imagine there are a number of German composers that I haven't heard of yet or who are waiting to be discovered.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

elgars ghost said:


> How many of the results from 1920 were down to Prokofiev and Shostakovich?


Best of the 1920s:
1 - Prokofiev: Piano Concerto #3 (1921)
2 - Bartok: String Quartet #4 (1926)
3 - Janácek: Missa Glagolitica (1926)
4 (tie) - Janacek: Sinfonietta (1926)
4 (tie) - Sibelius: Symphony #7 in C, Op - 105 (1924)
6 - Bartok: Piano Concerto No - 1 (1926)
7 - Shostakovich: Symphony #1, Op - 10 (1925)
8 - Sibelius: Tapiola, Op - 112 (1926)
9 - Vaughan Williams: Lark Ascending (1914/1920)
10 - Nielsen: Symphony #5 (1922)


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Art Rock said:


> In general, it might be helpful for the discussion to list the composers that got in the top10 of each decade in the 1900-1979 range. I assume the only German composer scoring after WW1 was Richard Strauss?
> 
> EDIT: also, were these polls from a population predominantly from e.g. USA or UK? That might cause a bias in preference, whereas these countries were not particularly strong in terms of composers in the 19th century.


All the results can be seen *here*.

Yes, the Four Last Songs.

Respondents were predominantly (not entirely) US, at least that was my impression.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Jacck said:


> WW1 + WW2
> Germany lost much more than just music, but also its intellectual and scientific elite, who all emigrated to the USA. Even between the wars, there was a thriving culture in Berlin - Berthold Brecht etc.


Both Hitler and Stalin persecuted Composers. Totalitarianism did quite a bit to kill the development of Music


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Because too many people in the German area bought into the atonal/dodecaphonic/ugly school of composition. Composers who embraced tonality and melody, like Schmidt, Schrecker, Korngold, were hounded for being old-fashioned by the critics. Prokofieff and Shostakovich and their comrades, whatever their transgressions of formalism, at least still wrote in an idiom people can understand and like. So while Germans like Stockhausen were writing ugly music no one wanted to hear, Soviet composers like Khachaturian were writing marvelous scores such as Spartacus. It's an interesting topic, and far more nuanced that this.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

KenOC said:


> Best of the 1920s:
> 1 - Prokofiev: Piano Concerto #3 (1921)
> 2 - Bartok: String Quartet #4 (1926)
> 3 - Janácek: Missa Glagolitica (1926)
> ...


Sorry - I should have said '1920s onwards'...


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

mbhaub said:


> Because too many people in the German area bought into the atonal/dodecaphonic/ugly school of composition. Composers who embraced tonality and melody, like Schmidt, Schrecker, Korngold, were hounded for being old-fashioned by the critics. Prokofieff and Shostakovich and their comrades, whatever their transgressions of formalism, at least still wrote in an idiom people can understand and like. So while Germans like Stockhausen were writing ugly music no one wanted to hear, Soviet composers like Khachaturian were writing marvelous scores such as Spartacus. It's an interesting topic, and far more nuanced that this.


But who cares about Khachaturian, Shostakovich and Schnittke were the leading postwar Soviet / Russian composers. It wasnt like Hitler and Stalin favored modernist music

Posts in composer thread:

Schnittke: 408
Stockhausen: 249
Khachaturian: 130


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

elgars ghost said:


> Sorry - I should have said '1920s onwards'...


You can see all the results *here*.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

mbhaub said:


> Because too many people in the German area bought into the atonal/dodecaphonic/ugly school of composition. Composers who embraced tonality and melody, like Schmidt, Schrecker, Korngold, were hounded for being old-fashioned by the critics. Prokofieff and Shostakovich and their comrades, whatever their transgressions of formalism, at least still wrote in an idiom people can understand and like. So while Germans like Stockhausen were writing ugly music no one wanted to hear, Soviet composers like Khachaturian were writing marvelous scores such as Spartacus. It's an interesting topic, and far more nuanced that this.


Different strokes. I find Stockhausen adventurous and Spartacus not worth my time.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

adventurous is putting in kindly,,,more like ridiculous 
sensational *music*
some people like this stuff


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

paulbest said:


> adventurous is putting in kindly,,,more like ridiculous
> sensational *music*
> some people like this stuff


Yes they do, and some folks like the music of Henze. There are even some people who like both. Your musical taste only applies to you.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Henze would have gotten a good chuckle out of this helicopter quartet. Not sure if Henze and Stockhausen ever resolved issues, but i am sure these kinds of stunts / deal is one reason why Henze could not remain among the german musical avant garde. 
He would have cracked jokes the whole time at the run way and really ticked off his comrades Stockhausen and others producing the work. 
Henze aspired more to the ancient greek ideas, and he completely succeeded. 
I could possibly come around to Stockhausen's best work, for 3 orchestras, but I refuse.


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

mbhaub said:


> Because too many people in the German area bought into the atonal/dodecaphonic/ugly school of composition. Composers who embraced tonality and melody, like Schmidt, Schrecker, Korngold, were hounded for being old-fashioned by the critics. Prokofieff and Shostakovich and their comrades, whatever their transgressions of formalism, at least still wrote in an idiom people can understand and like. *So while Germans like Stockhausen were writing ugly music no one wanted to hear*, Soviet composers like Khachaturian were writing marvelous scores such as Spartacus. It's an interesting topic, and far more nuanced that this.


I believe you forgot to mention that this is _your_ opinion.

You have to understand the precarious position that Austro-German composers who came of age immediately after WWII found themselves in. Silly as you may think this is, many of them felt they had to consciously break away from the swooning Romantic-era melodies that were just used by the Nazis to indoctrinate an entire nation; the 2nd Viennese School came to mind as an obvious starting place.

Nevertheless, it is _my_ opinion that this "ugly school of composition" produced some outstanding music.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Portamento said:


> ...You have to understand the precarious position that Austro-German composers who came of age immediately after WWII found themselves in. Silly as you may think this is, many of them felt they had to consciously break away from the swooning Romantic-era melodies that were just used by the Nazis to indoctrinate an entire nation; the 2nd Viennese School came to mind as an obvious starting place.


However, the disappearance of Austro-German music from the top-ten lists began with the turn of the century and was essentially complete by 1920. So something seems to have happened much earlier.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Sch...oenberg happens


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

KenOC said:


> However, the decline in German/Austrian appearances in the top-ten lists began with the turn of the century and was essentially complete by 1920. So something seems to have happened much earlier.


Reger, Schoenberg, Schreker, and R. Strauss were IMO the most important Austro-German composers of the 1910s. The fact that Strauss is the only one to be included _anywhere_ on the Amazon list doesn't sit well with me; Berg and Webern are also nowhere to be seen.

Ten per decade is way too less-we need something like 30 to draw proper conclusions. Even then, lists are highly subjective.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

I think some folks wish the romantic style would have continued on. Its kind of like, *oh the new music,,,nah, i;'ll stay with the romantic style, i am a happy camper*. 
Like *Why did it all have to end, why did the new composers have to follow such strange ideas, in forms which are bizarre , if not ugly*, They really want to say *weird*. 
I believe there are 2 basic camps, some believe this is all nonsense and just my fancy imaginations. 
I am in the middle camp, caught twix the romantics and the ultra /post mod group.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Portamento said:


> . Even then, lists are highly subjective.


Subjective suere. But lets look at the output of a composer, Mahler has syms, which some have issues, yet he is acclaimed as *the greatest symphonist since Beethoven*
OK greatest symphonist, But he has no 6 SQ,s a dozen piano sonatas, 2-4 VC.s , 2-3 PCs. 
Just a bunch of syms, which no one can agree who has the best recording, nor can anyone agree which is his most successful. 
Every list of Mahler;'s syms will look completely dif from one man to the next. 
I have to consider a composers oeuvre as a whole. 
Not saying to be considered significant has to include various genres,,,but it sure allows objectivity. 
If Schnittke did not have SQ's, he would still be considered genius, 1st tier. 
And so on, and so forth.
Its not all purely subjective, thats baloney


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Fabulin said:


> Sch...oenberg happens


 where would be all be w/o Schoenberg? 
Stuck with modern neo romantic stuff.
No thanks.
Also thank God for Varese, 
Saint Edgard


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Portamento said:


> Reger, Schoenberg, Schreker, and R. Strauss were IMO the most important Austro-German composers of the 1910s. The fact that Strauss is the only one to be included _anywhere_ on the Amazon list doesn't sit well with me; Berg and Webern are also nowhere to be seen.
> 
> Ten per decade is way too less-we need something like 30 to draw proper conclusions. Even then, lists are highly subjective.​


I can check this, but I'm pretty sure the Amazon lists pretty much mirror actual programming in concert halls. Whatever the merits of some of the composers you name, they simply did not write much "top-ten" music as defined by demand among the general classical music public.

And yes, opinions on music have an unhappy tendency to be subjective!


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

I, somehow, sense an ulterior motive behind this thread.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Lisztian said:


> I, somehow, sense an ulterior motive behind this thread.


:lol: Just an innocent and curious person, asking an innocent question. :lol:

BTW, what's _your _answer?

And while we're at it, who said, "I have made a discovery that will assure the supremacy of German music for the next hundred years"?


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

KenOC said:


> :lol: Just an innocent and curious person, asking an innocent question. :lol:
> 
> BTW, what's _your _answer?
> 
> And while we're at it, who said, "I have made a discovery that will assure the supremacy of German music for the next hundred years"?


Apparently, someone who didn't take to heart the 'everything is subjective' message that seems so popular today. But then again, how could one in the early 20th century.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

If we're talking about influence, Germany - in the shape of Schonberg, atonality and serialism - didn't "lose music" at all but was perhaps as important as ever. But by the end of the 19th century the German Classical/Romantic tradition had climaxed with Brahms and Wagner; no one could do what they did better than they did it, and those who carried on - Mahler, Strauss, Schoenberg, Berg and a number of lesser figures - represent German Romanticism's decadent, Expressionistic phase (Strauss being the last German composer to gain and keep a large public, partly by "writing down" to popular sensibilities). 

Every tradition declines as times change. With the rising tide of nationalism, neoclassicism's skepticism of grandiose Romantic subjectivity, and the Modernist worship of the new, all the arts were transformed. The cosmic idealism and musical system-building of Bach, Beethoven and Wagner no longer suited the times.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Losing two world wars is one thing but losing music is just plain carelessness.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Becca said:


> Losing two world wars is one thing but losing music is just plain carelessness.


What a wilde notion!


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Becca said:


> Losing two world wars is one thing but losing music is just plain carelessness.


Invading Poland - that was the end of the Music


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

I think another thing that should be considered, is whether Germany actually lost their music or just composers? Because of more developed and faster transportation methods, different cultures have become much more integrated and blended than, let's say, 300 years ago, when you were able to travel either by horse or a ship. I think social media and the Internet have also played a part in that. As a result, the German musical culture/tradition might not be dead itself, but it's just not practiced by Germans that much anymore, but for example by Americans or other European nations. That's just pure speculation.

Also, can we say that only the amount of composers should be considered when we talk about decline of musical tradition? I recently talked to a friend of mine who is German, and he said that learning different instruments is still very popular in Germany. Also, Germany has arguably some of the best opera singers, orchestras and opera houses, and therefore it's a bit ironic that the only thing they are currently lacking are composers.


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

KenOC said:


> And while we're at it, who said, "I have made a discovery that will assure the supremacy of German music for the next hundred years"?


Yeah, well.....


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

There are many German post-WWII composers writing in a more accessible style than purely modern, they are just not very well-known outside of Germany. 

Dozens in East Germany, that were obviously downplayed for ideological reasons, but some of them are quite good;

in the West, besides Hindemith, some K. A. Hartmann and Henze, also works by Krenek, Fortner, Zimmermann, Einem, Klebe, Killmayer, Bialas, and many others. 

But conventional genres - and the general picture - were somewhat confused/overshadowed/eroded by all the new, very modern German stuff coming up.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Germany had the Darmstadt Institute which list the who's who in modern mid/late 20TH C music. 
All the big names are there. 
Of the list only Varese interests me, as i consider him very influential in Carter and others. 
Yet I cked over the list several times, , i note many foreigners, yet not the german composer, Hans Henze. 
Something is out of place here, as Darmstadt was like THE place to be, the hip place for new music in germany.
,,,whats up with that. Surely Henze wanted to be in with the cool crowd. Rub shoulders with the Top Dogs in new music. A place to MAKE a name for himself,,,a place where a raod to success is almost guaranteed. 
Yet Henze is NOt where he is suppose to be, ina chair , front row, studying under Stockhausen.

Well now we know why Henze never became very popular there in germany, 
He skipped classes. 
damn rebel.
Traitor to germany's newest sounds, ideas in music. 
Had he stayed in Darmstadt, he may have had a road to fame and fortune. 
Serves him right, to be cast in the dark regions of being a *insignificant composer*. 
Stockhausen won. And his supporters, 
Darmstadt, no thanks. All that group, not my cup of tea.

other than Varese, there is not 1 name mentioned in that list which i have music of on my shelf,,and i am a committed 20th C fan-atic









https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darmstadt_School


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)




----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Geramny's involvements in wars modern times

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Germany

Pre 1870 to its earliest days, pre roman times, the list would go on forever. 
Rome utilized the german mercenary as their Iron Fist in all Rome's wars , the germans have always been well recognized as the most fierce , effective fighters in all of europe past 2000 years, 
Germany has always been the terrorists of europe. 
Now they will have nothing to do with major conflicts, , they despise wars, as they have spilled so much blood against their own people and perpetrated countless inhumane crimes against her *enemies*. 
Japan is the same, the amount of blood on their heads , has made them become a peaceful nation, anti-military. 
The germans , Turks, Russians are fierce fighters. It is in their blood.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

"The germans , Turks, Russians are fierce fighters. *It is in their blood*."

The same could be said about every branch and segment of _Homo sapiens._. I could supply a list (but I won't--too easy.)


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

paulbest said:


> Geramny's involvements in wars modern times
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Germany
> Pre 1870 to its earliest days, pre roman times, the list would go on forever.
> Rome utilized the german mercenary as their Iron Fist in all Rome's wars , the germans have always been well recognized as the most fierce , effective fighters in all of europe past 2000 years,
> ...


the US is not much better
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States
just because the wars do not happen in your own country does not mean that your country is not killing people somewhere else. Most of the evil since WW2 was done by the US and Russia fighting their proxy wars all over the world, toppling governments, financing terrorists etc. And do not fool yourself that it is about democracy or human rights. It it were, you could never align yourself with countries such as Saudi Arabia which is almost as bad as North Korea. Look at most of the wars happening in the world right now, they are proxy wars. For example Syria - the Russians support Assad, the US supports Sunni rebels, there are of course other players as well - Turkey, Iran etc. But it is a mess. The same happens in Yemen. Who do you think sells those weapons to Saudi Arabia which then massacres civilians in Yemen?


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Hitler, in particular, did more to destroy traditional German and to lesser extent European musical culture than any other modern figure. He alienated, killed or forced out Jewish composers, and eliminated gypsies, Huns and others by the millions. Also, as has been stated here, millions of others emigrated elsewhere after the war.

Paul Hindemith was the "greatest" German composer between the wars but there were still world-renowned German artists after the way, one being Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, one of the greatest lieder and opera singers in history. This did not translate into similar paths for composition, however.

I see the fall of German and Austrian music in the postwar 20th century as the precursor to where it has become today. Now, 44 years after the death of the last great composer, Shostakovich, there is no one on earth writing such music. Classical music seems to become less germane to world culture with every passing decades.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I think we will see a post in red ink here before too long...


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

"Classical music seems to become less germane to world culture with every passing decades."

Everything in the arts becomes an equal part of the blur of the New Stasis, and disappears into the white noise of constant change. Andy Warhol's alleged utterance that ''in the future, everyone will be world-famous for fifteen minutes" is being validated constantly. My turn comes soon, then yours......


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Nothing lasts forever. The better question would be how their musical hegemony lasted as long as it did.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Portamento said:


> I believe you forgot to mention that this is _your_ opinion.
> 
> You have to understand the precarious position that Austro-German composers who came of age immediately after WWII found themselves in. Silly as you may think this is, many of them felt they had to consciously break away from the swooning Romantic-era melodies that were just used by the Nazis to indoctrinate an entire nation; the 2nd Viennese School came to mind as an obvious starting place.
> 
> Nevertheless, it is _my_ opinion that this "ugly school of composition" produced some outstanding music.


Of course it's my opinion - everything written on this site is opinion. When it comes to music appreciation, facts go out the window.

People who like the "ugly" school of music (and I count myself among them) are in the distinct minority of classical supporters and listeners. In the US, where orchestras are not subsidized by the state, the vast majority of music is old, familiar, tonal, and frankly stale. The same thing on the classical radio stations. I don't think I've ever heard a note of Stockhausen, Henze, Berio or Boulez on our local classical station.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Perhaps due to the premise behind the first Darmstadt lectures and the music which came about as a result of their influence it's tempting to consider c. 1950 as a kind of 'year zero' for German music but let's not forget that, unlike the Bauhaus architectural movement from decades before, most of the prime movers weren't actually German...


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

mbhaub said:


> Because too many people in the German area bought into the atonal/dodecaphonic/ugly school of composition. Composers who embraced tonality and melody, like Schmidt, Schrecker, Korngold, were hounded for being old-fashioned by the critics. Prokofieff and Shostakovich and their comrades, whatever their transgressions of formalism, at least still wrote in an idiom people can understand and like. So while Germans like Stockhausen were writing ugly music no one wanted to hear, Soviet composers like Khachaturian were writing marvelous scores such as Spartacus. It's an interesting topic, and far more nuanced that this.


As someone who sincerely loves a lot of the "atonal/dodecaphonic/ugly school of composition," I think this is basically right.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Strange Magic said:


> "The germans , Turks, Russians are fierce fighters. *It is in their blood*."
> 
> The same could be said about every branch and segment of _Homo sapiens._. I could supply a list (but I won't--too easy.)


Obvious true, If we read about america's early history we find the westward invasion of indian lands wesa bloody affair. 
The US and its peoples committed genocide This list of US aggression could easily be extended. 
What I was emphasizing is that germany has such a long history of these assaults upon weaker nations, and upon its own people , past 2000 years. 
The Turks and russians are locked in a ongoing eternal battle. Russia loves to start wars. 
This is what I am getting at.

As to why germany produced such greats as Bach, Beethoven might be due to a certain genius within peoples of this area of europe. Genius runs in a family's ancestry. EDU, culture, all have to do with these manifestations in music.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Jacck said:


> the US is not much better
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States
> just because the wars do not happen in your own country does not mean that your country is not killing people somewhere else. Most of the evil since WW2 was done by the US and Russia fighting their proxy wars all over the world, toppling governments, financing terrorists etc. And do not fool yourself that it is about democracy or human rights. It it were, you could never align yourself with countries such as Saudi Arabia which is almost as bad as North Korea. Look at most of the wars happening in the world right now, they are proxy wars. For example Syria - the Russians support Assad, the US supports Sunni rebels, there are of course other players as well - Turkey, Iran etc. But it is a mess. The same happens in Yemen. Who do you think sells those weapons to Saudi Arabia which then massacres civilians in Yemen?


Excellent followup, Which I hoped someone would highlight. Let us not forget the USA diabolical operations in Viet Nam. Which to this day has fallout consequences. and will be extended til generations.

Lets look at Copland's music, themes which filter throughout his music, americana, pristine Appalachian mountain imagery, the historic old west folk songs. 
Yet all this is bogus and fake. 
Which is one reason i despise his music. 
its propaganda.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

mbhaub said:


> Because too many people in the German area bought into the atonal/dodecaphonic/ugly school of composition ... It's an interesting topic, and far more nuanced that this.


Yes, many topics we get into require more consideration than space allows. My response to most atonal/dodecaphonic music is that it differs in crucial ways from tonal music, and is not just another phase -- regardless of what Arnold Schoenberg claimed. For me dodecaphonic music in particular lacks harmony. But that doesn't mean I never like it. It certainly appeals to a different sensibility though; it is an acquired taste, and its audience is much smaller. And then the post-1950 avant-garde I've never been able to handle. The other reason for decline is that state subsidy (except in the USA), broadcasting policies, prizes and commissions, and the institutes of higher learning have supported and promoted the avant-garde. It's an international phenomenon, not limited to Germany and Austria, that the composers showcased internationally are the ones that could make their countries' musical cultures look the most advanced. After c. 1980 there has been another shift, but that's another story.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

mbhaub said:


> Of course it's my opinion - everything written on this site is opinion. When it comes to music appreciation, facts go out the window.
> 
> People who like the "ugly" school of music (and I count myself among them) are in the distinct minority of classical supporters and listeners. In the US, where orchestras are not subsidized by the state, the vast majority of music is old, familiar, tonal, and frankly stale. The same thing on the classical radio stations. *I don't think I've ever heard a note of Stockhausen, Henze, Berio or Boulez on our local classical station.*


I wonder why not?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

paulbest said:


> Excellent followup, Which I hoped someone would highlight. Let us not forget the USA diabolical operations in Viet Nam. Which to this day has fallout consequences. and will be extended til generations.
> 
> Lets look at Copland's music, themes which filter throughout his music, americana, pristine Appalachian mountain imagery, the historic old west folk songs.
> *Yet all this is bogus and fake. *
> ...


Can you actually give some substance for your argument instead of making wild statements which are unsubstantiated?


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

DavidA said:


> I wonder why not?


I know. I wonder too. There's some great music there.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

I've gone over this Copland propaganda ideology at least 1 or 2 X's here on TC, lack of time, shortened version.
OK whats wrong,,or lets ask , what do you see in this photo?
with the consideration, of indigenous ti-pees may have been in the same vicinity at one time,,,animals roaming. 
Is anything out of place? Or did IT get there? 
What are the words to these songs , do these songs reflect true americana?


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

Almost all classical composers have been influenced by the folk music of their native country. Copland is no exception. I certainly don't consider it propaganda though, particularly when the same charge could be much more fairly made in relation to works by Prokofiev ("Zdravitsa") and Shostakovich ("The Sun Shines Over Our Motherland"). OK, those works were written under duress but Copland never faced a stretch in the gulag; he simply wrote what he was inspired to write. For what it's worth, "Appalachian Spring" has always reminded me of Stravinsky in places, especially in Koussevitzky's 1945 premiere recording. Or is that just because Koussevitzky was Russian himself? It's all so complicated!


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

paulbest said:


> I've gone over this Copland propaganda ideology at least 1 or 2 X's here on TC, lack of time, shortened version.
> OK whats wrong,,or lets ask , what do you see in this photo?
> with the consideration, of indigenous ti-pees may have been in the same vicinity at one time,,,animals roaming.
> Is anything out of place? Or did IT get there?
> What are the words to these songs , do these songs reflect true americana?


I am not a Copland fan but quite a lot great art was produced specifically to represent and propagandise a view required by a patron. Many of the greatest portrait painters, for example, made their livings making kings and dukes look stronger and more real than they actually were and surrounding them with symbols that represented these qualities.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

chill782002 said:


> Almost all classical composers have been influenced by the folk music of their native country. Copland is no exception. I certainly don't consider it propaganda though, particularly when the same charge could be much more fairly made in relation to works by Prokofiev ("Zdravitsa") and Shostakovich ("The Sun Shines Over Our Motherland"). OK, those works were written under duress but Copland never faced a stretch in the gulag; he simply wrote what he was inspired to write. For what it's worth, "Appalachian Spring" has always reminded me of Stravinsky in places, especially in Koussevitzky's 1945 premiere recording. Or is that just because Koussevitzky was Russian himself? It's all so complicated!


WOW a Stravinsky-esque Appalachian Spring? 
UNREAL. 
Agree, many composers throughout history uses folk material, Ravel's tribute to old espana. 
Smetana 's Moldau. 
I guess its OK for Copland to follow past masters.
But I don't know,,there is just something of the thought of the once pristine Appalachians which come to mind when I realize Copland's music really do not reflect the reality of that land today in 2019. 
Some of his selections are not true to life and as i see it, propaganda. 
Of course LA Phil Orch sees differently, they have Copland 2 X 's on the 2019/2020 program,,Zero for Elliott Carter. 
Considering LA
's concert hall is so modern style, you would think Carter would be more often on the program. 
take Vienna, berlin past 200 yrs,,They are not going to promote french composers, nor minor 2nd tier composers. 
Those buildings were built for the great german/austrian masters. All others will have to go find their own venues. 
Propaganda, and Iron Fist moderation/censorship. 
Stinks. 
I can smell both venues a mile away.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Then again, which country in the world can boast of having a composer with such a extensive variety of works and quality, even more than Elliott Carter's extensive list, maybe equal to Alfred Schnittke.

I would say germany is very well represented in the creative musical scene post 1950.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_by_Hans_Werner_Henze


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

I wouldn't call Copland a "minor 2nd tier composer," but then neither is Carter or Schnittke.

Osmo Vänskä has been promoting Kalevi Aho since his days with the Lahti Symphony Orchestra and continues to program contemporary music in Minnesota.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

paulbest said:


> Lets look at Copland's music, themes which filter throughout his music, americana, pristine Appalachian mountain imagery...its propaganda.


I guess we hear what we want to hear (and believe what we want to believe, even against all evidence). Propaganda?

"Because he composed the music without the benefit of knowing what the title was going to be, Copland was often amused when people told him he captured the beauty of the Appalachians in his music..." (Wiki)


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

KenOC said:


> My question: Why did Austrian/German composers, who had created much or even most of our central musical repertoire for so many years, suddenly fade in popularity?


Short answer: World Wars I and II.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

My ears tell me Copland was inspired by the Czechs. Dvorak did the earlier favor of emigrating Beethoven's pastorality to America. To me Copland sounds like a European attempting to write cowboy music for orchestra... and either Copland or Martinu can sound like a Marlboro commercial.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

well if you scroll down in this link, note under Ballet's story line, where LA Times arts writer mentions *Coplands Appalachian Spring story line broadens out to become a parable about americans conquering a new land*.

You see this is how i've always heard /interpret Copland's imagery/ideas in music. 
Why I draw this connection with the american *go west young man* spirit of conquer /develope, move on further west/south. 
The work was premiered 1944. Had he trecked through the mountains , he may have witnessed the coal mining and other developments taking place. .Logging, fur trapping. Etc. 
Man doing his thing upon the land,. His music depicts only the virginal nature to the once pristine mountains. 
all that is now gone. 
In this sense i claim his music is bogus and a fraud. 
The White House loves his music, Propaganda to propaganda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_Spring


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

philoctetes said:


> My ears tell me Copland was inspired by the Czechs. Dvorak did the earlier favor of emigrating Beethoven's pastorality to America. To me Copland sounds like a European attempting to write cowboy music for orchestra... and either Copland or Martinu can sound like a Marlboro commercial.


Beach symphony sounds more Dvořákish to me than Copland. Currently I think that the best US symphony is Ives 4th, and the best US composer is Carter. He is not easily accessible, but he is very brilliant and among the dodecaphonic chaos can create some beautiful music. For example in the piano sonata, first chaos and then out of the chaos emerge some slow transcendental passages.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Copland's music is hardly "bogus and a fraud." What a misrepresentation and distortion. His music captures something genuine about the spirit of the country whether the outer landscape has changed or not, just like Charles Ives and Elliott Carter, though in a different way. He was a brilliant orchestrator. His works are positive, vibrant and inspiring, and they're not about 'going west young man,' unless the Appalachian Mountains have suddenly been relocated to California or, better yet, Hawaii... The problem that some have with Copland is that he's too constructive to be fully appreciated unless they have had their fill of the 20th-century neurotic composers—the one's that loved to dwell in their own pain, anguish and misery — who loved to wallow in it for a lifetime — and never thought about opening the windows for a breath of fresh air and watching the miracle of the sun come up just like it always does. Some composers are able to transcend their own self-pity and represent a sense of health and well-being, as Copland certainly does for those who are greatful and appreciate him. I believe he's one of the treasures of American composers. But for those in love with their own misery, who love to feel bad because they're used to it, he's generally not appreciated as much as the 20th-century neurotics who love to tell their listeners just how bad life can be rather than transcending their own self-created limitations. These are the composers who never really catch on with the public no matter how much they're promoted.


----------



## Aloevera (Oct 1, 2017)

The German region was at one point the cosmopolitan center of the world leading in practically every department, math, philosophy, sciences and arts. They were the voice of the world, and I think the music reflected this. What caused the change is most likely the reduction of the cosmopolitian attitude, possibly out of arrogance into a more internal national affair. Similar to the case of North Korea this tends to breed ignorance and they eventually turned into the opposite of what they once were. I suppose Russian composers more accurately reflected the existential dread of the 20th century.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Aloevera said:


> The German region was at one point the cosmopolitan center of the world leading in practically every department, math, philosophy, sciences and arts. They were the voice of the world, and I think the music reflected this. What caused the change is most likely the reduction of the cosmopolitian attitude, possibly out of arrogance into a more internal national affair. Similar to the case of North Korea this tends to breed ignorance and they eventually turned into the opposite of what they once were. I suppose Russian composers more accurately reflected the existential dread of the 20th century.


I think that cultures or civilizations go through phases. First they are young and dynamic, than then start to stagnate and then they degenerate. The culture in Germany towards the end of the 19th century started to degenerate, became extremely introverted, decadent and negativistic and had no direction towards which it could grow anymore. And something needed to happen. The world wars happened and cleaned the air and a new culture was born.


----------



## Aloevera (Oct 1, 2017)

Jacck said:


> I think that cultures or civilizations go through phases. First they are young and dynamic, than then start to stagnate and then they degenerate. The culture in Germany towards the end of the 19th century started to degenerate, became extremely introverted, decadent and negativistic and had no direction towards which it could grow anymore. And something needed to happen. The world wars happened and cleaned the air and a new culture was born.


Yeah agreed, and sometimes there isn't always a reason within ones control as to why cultures fluctuate. Sometimes just due to geography and the state of affairs in other parts of the world.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

paulbest said:


> I've gone over this Copland propaganda ideology at least 1 or 2 X's here on TC, lack of time, shortened version.
> OK whats wrong,,or lets ask , what do you see in this photo?
> with the consideration, of indigenous ti-pees may have been in the same vicinity at one time,,,animals roaming.
> Is anything out of place? Or did IT get there?
> What are the words to these songs , do these songs reflect true americana?


presumably Dvorak was engaging in propaganda when he wrote the New World? For goodness sake, because a composer is influenced by his countries folk music it doesn't;t make it propaganda. That is nonsense.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

I think Monty Python might have the answer too


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

But least we forget Russian Music in this debate and in fact other communist leaders of the 20th century including the Chinese.....


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Well, I used to more or less ignore Copland exactly for the those few well-known, populist works, which I found rather uninteresting, but I've certainly revised my views later on, becoming more acquainted with the diversity and variety of his works, especially his instrumental ones, for example in the influences from Paris in the 1920s and the more modernist, late works. 

Btw, I wouldn't really call a person that influenced by pacifism - as Copland was - a propagandist in the traditional or militant sense ... he apparently even remained a pacifist during WW II.

Concerning post-1945 German music, I do think much of it has a bit more resonance and popularity in Northern- and Middle Europe, than say in the US or Asia (Rihm, Henze, Krenek, and a few others).


----------



## Guest (Aug 22, 2019)

I'm a little sceptical of the reliability of the polls that underpin these results. This is partly because it seems they are be dominated by American voters, and partly because I have no idea how many people were involved in the polls, and how the voting was carried out. I also think that a list of the top 10 favourite works in each decade is rather too short. Another potential problem is that it is implicitly assumed that each list of 10 is as important as another in terms of representing the voters' likes overall, regardless of time period. All in all, I'm somewhat suspicious of the data base on which this discussion is taking place.

Leaving these polling issues aside, I agree with those who have already said that the explanation for the relative demise of German classical music from the 1910s is most likely to be the effect of the two World Wars. There can't have been a lot of composing going on in Germany during the 1914-18 war itself. As for the aftermath of that War, Germany was in a serious financial mess for a long while into the 1920's, and there was a lot of revulsion against Germany in several areas, including its brand of classical music. There was some emigration of German musical talent to other countries during the inter-War period. Needless to say, the whole experience was repeated as a result of the Second World War. Even to this day, one of Germany's most famous 19th composers is eyed with considerable suspicion in some areas.

Germany's lead in classical music might have continued for a while longer in the absence of these Wars, but my guess is that other countries would eventually have taken away its dominance. This would have happened partly due to the effects of migration and increased international labour mobility, with some of the best talent being attracted by generally better remuneration and other terms on offer elsewhere (E.g. USA). In addition, as already mentioned, there was the emergence of new styles of classical music in the 1920s and later, in which German composers would not necessarily be expected to have an advantage over other nationalities, e.g in respect of the growing interest in music with a strong nationalist flavour across Europe and elsewhere.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)




----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Now here is a tribute to some modern German Music


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

We lost a lot (not everything), because we didn't deserve to have much. We still have one Korngold, one R. Strauss, one Henze, one Schnittke etc... And don't forget the guys like Kurt Weill, Franz Waxmann, Eric Zeisl (AU, but with heavy German influence) Erwin Schulhof (Czech / German) etc. and many others...


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Paul Hindemith's shabby treatment in Germany didn't help their cause or prestige, either:



> Hindemith's relationship to the Nazis is a complicated one. Some condemned his music as "degenerate" (largely based on his early, sexually charged operas such as Sancta Susanna), and in December 1934, during a speech at the Berlin Sports Palace, Germany's Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels publicly denounced Hindemith as an "atonal noisemaker". The Nazis banned his music in October 1936 and he was subsequently included in the 1938 Entartete Musik exhibition (Degenerate Music) in Düsseldorf.
> 
> Other officials working in Nazi Germany, though, thought that he might provide Germany with an example of a modern German composer, as by this time he was writing music based in tonality, with frequent references to folk music; the conductor Wilhelm Furtwängler's defense of Hindemith, published in 1934, takes precisely this line. The controversy around his work continued throughout the thirties, with the composer falling in and out of favor with the Nazi hierarchy.
> 
> ...


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Dimace said:


> We lost a lot (not everything), because we didn't deserve to have much. We still have one Korngold, one R. Strauss, one Henze, one Schnittke etc... And don't forget the guys like Kurt Weill, Franz Waxmann, Eric Zeisl (AU, but with heavy German influence) Erwin Schulhof (Czech / German) etc. and many others...


Do some in germany hold the opinion that Schnittke is of german soil?
Its hard to pin Schnittke either german nor russian.

Also Henze, He left germany early in his career, late 1940's. Settled in Italy. Is Henze really a *german composer*, wiki has him as german composer.

Kurt Weill, Love his 1st sym, 2nd sym is more *popular* and I like that one also. 
Los Angeles Phil has the Kurt Weill violin concerto on the 2020 schedule. I like that concerto. 
There are passages in the 1st sym, main thematic , just grabs hold of me. 
Great composer.

I will take a look at the others in your list, i think i heard some Waxmann on YT. Thought it was interesting. A bit lite.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

Jacck said:


> Currently I think that the best US symphony is Ives 4th, and the best US composer is Carter.


Got to see Ives 4th live with MTT / SFS - and Carter in person on his 80th b-day. Perhaps the most significant American music events I've attended.

For me *American music* also includes, if by association and not birth (like Dvorak in Iowa), names like Korngold and Eisler in Hollywood or Milhaud and Harrison at Mills College or Hovhaness in Seattle, even Villa-Lobos has a sound that Is more American than European...


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

Err... Hovhaness was born in Massachusetts and was only of Armenian ancestry.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

joen_cph said:


> Well, I used to more or less ignore Copland exactly for the those few well-known, populist works, which I found rather uninteresting, but I've certainly revised my views later on, becoming more acquainted with the diversity and variety of his works, especially his instrumental ones, for example in the influences from Paris in the 1920s and the more modernist, late works.


It is pretty clear (to me anyway) that Copland was a partisan of the Communist Party from the mid-1930s, and adopted the doctrine of socialist realism in his music. _El Salón México_, the first of his signature works, dates from 1936. In adopting a new and simpler style, he was joined by many leftist artists in those days.

Of course, with the onset of the cold war, the USSR was no longer a friend. Copland was questioned in Washington DC by McCarthy and Cohn during the Red scare in the early 1950s and was included on an FBI list of 151 artists thought to have Communist connections. His composition _A Lincoln Portrait_ was removed from the program at Eisenhower's 1953 inauguration for that reason.

This all blew over in a few years. But how many beer-drinking "real Americans" realize that their favorite American music was written by a homosexual and probably Communist Jew from New York?


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

^^^^

This is true, and The New Yorker has a fascinating article by Alex Ross about the Communist sympathies of Copland
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/08/27/appalachian-autumn

But as regards the concept of Socialist Realism, one must point to that it is usually defined by glorification of institutional life in the USSR, in particular the Stalin regime, or other ~communist countries. I don't know of musical works from Copland, that celebrated specific communist parties, actions, or leaders. But they might exist. _The Fanfare for the Common Man,_ also dealt with in the _3rd Symphony_, was inspired by a text from the leftist Henry Wallace, and _El Salon Mexico_ was composed during the communist-inspired presidency of Cardenas in Mexico, after Copland visited the country; it does depict class differences. These are the few examples mostly told of.

A somewhat different, more softened, and perhaps more typical view of Copland ideologically, pointing to more diverse trends and patriotism in his work, both before and after the 1930s, and downplaying the aspects of communism, can be read here (Naomi Liao): 
https://myhero.com/aaron-copland


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

The Alex Ross article is tremendous. Many thanks!


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

KenOC said:


> It is pretty clear (to me anyway) that Copland was a partisan of the Communist Party from the mid-1930s, and adopted the doctrine of socialist realism in his music. _El Salón México_, the first of his signature works, dates from 1936. In adopting a new and simpler style, he was joined by many leftist artists in those days.
> 
> Of course, with the onset of the cold war, the USSR was no longer a friend. Copland was questioned in Washington DC by McCarthy and Cohn during the Red scare in the early 1950s and was included on an FBI list of 151 artists thought to have Communist connections. His composition _A Lincoln Portrait_ was removed from the program at Eisenhower's 1953 inauguration for that reason.
> 
> This all blew over in a few years. But how many beer-drinking "real Americans" realize that their favorite American music was written by a homosexual and probably Communist Jew from New York?


 Well, maybe some of you would like to point out specific works that illustrate Copland's homosexuality and his leftist sympathies that the beer drinkers of America should know about. His great 3rd Symphony?- no, can't be found there. Maybe The Tender Land?- no, can't be found there either for those who have actually heard it. Maybe an Ode to Joseph Stalin or Leonard Bernstein somewhere or to the overthrow of the US government? I suppose if one is Jewish and a homosexual he's not American even though he was born here and has no right to say anything about it, just like Germans who were Jews or homosexuals were considered outsiders and not German during the war according to the bigots in charge. Maybe it exist somewhere, but I've yet to see any indications that his music is about homosexuality or communism just because he was trying to reach the general public and do something that might actually have wider appeal than some of his more abstract 12-tone compositions. He did not live a simple life - it was wide, experimental and complex - and some of his leftist sympathies were because of the terrible Depression in this country during the 1930s. Some of you have no idea of how bad it was and the tremendous search for answers that went on whether they may have been misguided or not. I consider Copland one of our greatest American composers who deliberately wanted to be accessible to the people and he captured something genuine about the spirit of the country. He was a brilliant orchestrator and his 3rd Symphony is a masterpiece, as far as I'm concerned, without pejorative labels about his character.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

(deleted, sorry - no longer that relevant)


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Larkenfield said:


> Well, maybe some of you would like to point out specific works that illustrate Copland's homosexuality and his leftist sympathies that the beer drinkers of America should know about. His great 3rd Symphony?- no, can't be found there. Maybe The Tender Land?- no, can't be found there either for those who have actually heard it. Maybe an Ode to Joseph Stalin or Leonard Bernstein somewhere or to the overthrow of the US government? I suppose if one is Jewish and a homosexual he's not American even though he was born here and has no right to say anything about it, just like Germans who were Jews or homosexuals were considered outsiders and not German during the war according to the bigots in charge. Maybe it exist somewhere, but I've yet to see any indications that his music is about homosexuality or communism just because he was trying to reach the general public and do something that might actually have wider appeal than some of his more abstract 12-tone compositions. He did not live a simple life - it was wide and varied and fascinating - and some of his leftist sympathies were because of the terrible Depression in this country during the 1930s. Some of you have no idea of how bad it was and the tremendous search for answers whether they may have been misguided or not. I consider Copland one of our greatest American composers who deliberately wanted to be accessible with the people of this country. He was a brilliant orchestrator and his 3rd Symphony is a masterpiece as far as I'm concerned without pejorative labels.


Can you give us more hint as to what we should be looking for, please. What is homosexual music or communist music and how will we know it?

Thank you, BTW, for the recommendation of Copland's 3rd. I just listened to it and enjoyed it more than I have enjoyed his music in the past.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

this is actual communist music. Does it prevent me from enjoying it? No.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ Do you think Prokofiev was a communist?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

joen_cph said:


> ^^^^
> 
> This is true, and The New Yorker has a fascinating article by Alex Ross about the Communist sympathies of Copland
> https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/08/27/appalachian-autumn


That was an excellent piece. Thanks.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

Prokofiev was not a communist. Neither was Shostakovich. Works of that nature were written by both merely to ensure that they stayed out of trouble with the authorities (Stalin). However, unlike many other Russian composers of their generation (well, maybe not Shostakovich, he was quite a bit younger than the others) they stayed in the Soviet Union instead of leaving after (or, in Stravinsky's case, several years before) the October revolution. Shostakovich because he had never really known anything else (again, too young) and Prokofiev because he found that he could not happily live outside of Russia (he left, but then came back again).


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

A study of the creation of Prokofiev's score for _Alexander Nevsky_ and of the on-again, off-again enthusiasm of the Soviet regime to release the film as Germany and Russia dithered over whether to be "allies" or foes just before WWII makes for fascinating reading. Also interesting is the history and reception of Orff's _Carmina Burana_ and its two seldom-heard sequels:

https://www.americansymphony.org/after-carmina-burana/

Both highlight the degree to which Art is subject to outside influences and forces and so often does not "rise above" and speak to us of a higher plane.

Both Prokofiev and Orff (and also Copland) loved their countries yet not necessarily their regimes.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Well, I knew he was no communist (not that it would matter to me if he had been) but I understood his return to Russia as being at least partly motivated by a desire to escape his gambling debts. Did I get that wrong?


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

That might well be true, although he also had severe financial problems in the later years of his life (although whether these were due to gambling, I don't know). I think it was more homesickness than anything else though.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Prokofiev was lionized whenever he would visit his homeland, which certainly appealed to his vanity. And, during his final stay abroad, he remarked as follows to his old friend Vladimir Dukelsky (Vernon Duke): "Here is how I feel about it: I care nothing for politics--I'm a composer first and last. Any government that lets me write my music in peace, publishes everything I compose before the ink is dry, and performs every note that comes from my pen is all right with me. In Europe we all have to fish for performances, cajole conductors and theater directors; in Russia they come to me--I can hardly keep up with the demand. What's more, I have a comfortable flat in Moscow, a delightful dacha in the country and a brand-new car. And my boys go to a fine English school in Moscow."

Later, once permanently installed in Soviet Russia, certain realities became increasingly clear....


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

Homesickness and vanity then. No one's perfect. In any case, Prokofiev had more musical talent in one of his little fingers than I do in my entire body.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

Although I suspect we've already gone a little off-topic, given that the original discussion point of this thread was Germany's (in the opinion of some) decline in the quality of its classical composers, I'm going to deviate even more and wonder out loud why it is that my country (the UK) has not really produced any composers of really significant note? I know Handel identified as British but he was really German. Also, while I'm fond of Britten, Elgar, Holst, Vaughan Williams and Walton, I wouldn't rate any of them as genuine first-tier composers. To say nothing of Arnold, Brian, Tippett et al...


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

chill782002 said:


> Although I suspect we've already gone a little off-topic, given that the original discussion point of this thread was Germany's (in the opinion of some) decline in the quality of its classical composers, I'm going to deviate even more and wonder out loud why it is that my country (the UK) has not really produced any composers of really significant note? I know Handel identified as British but he was really German. Also, while I'm fond of Britten, Elgar, Holst, Vaughan Williams and Walton, I wouldn't rate any of them as genuine first-tier composers. To say nothing of Arnold, Brian, Tippett et al...


For me Bax and Moeran are first tier (top 20).


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

How could I forget Bax and Moeran? Both wrote some lovely works, I agree, but neither is really well-known enough to be considered first-tier (in my opinion, of course). Perhaps the UK should be famous for producing a large number of lesser-known composers.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

chill782002 said:


> Also, while I'm fond of Britten, Elgar, Holst, Vaughan Williams and Walton, I wouldn't rate any of them as genuine first-tier composers. To say nothing of Arnold, Brian, Tippett et al...


It's all subjective I know but I can't help feeling that, no matter where you have set the bar, you have got Britten wrong if you don't think he makes the first tier. I have found his music (and a great mass of it) as rewarding as any composer I can think of and he is certainly (for me) one of the top 5 of the 20th century. Personally, I would include Elgar and VW in the first tier as well but I may be setting the bar a little lower than you.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

No country 1900-2000 has produced more than 2 or 3 top tier composers. 
Now sure there are some who believe tier is all fancy. Yet output and quality is for real. 
For my opinion, RVW is 1st tier, on my radar, nearly all his syms, are solid. 
btw votes for Elgar, Britten, come only from british fans. 
You guys really support your home town composers, Good for you, 
Although it may be a bit *islander* attitude there. 
Same for the USA, there are some TC members who place a whole host of american composers as top tier. Whereas i only can imagine 1 fitting this illustrious spot. 
So england is right there with every world country past 100 years. 
1 or 2 top tier, 1-3 2nd tier.


----------



## Mifek (Jul 28, 2018)

Enthusiast said:


> It's all subjective I know but I can't help feeling that, no matter where you have set the bar, you have got Britten wrong if you don't think he makes the first tier. I have found his music (and a great mass of it) as rewarding as any composer I can think of and he is certainly (for me) one of the top 5 of the 20th century.


I am wondering which two (or more) of the following six names you would get rid of to make place for Britten:

Debussy
Ravel
Stravinsky
Bartók
Prokofiev
Shostakovich


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> It's all subjective I know but I can't help feeling that, no matter where you have set the bar, you have got Britten wrong if you don't think he makes the first tier. I have found his music (and a great mass of it) as rewarding as any composer I can think of and he is certainly (for me) one of the top 5 of the 20th century. Personally, I would include Elgar and VW in the first tier as well but I may be setting the bar a little lower than you.


As you say, it's subjective, so I can't judge "first-tier" status purely on quality. It has be assessed on the basis of world-wide popularity, in my opinion. I like Britten as well but, as paulbest points out, he's not as popular in other parts of the world as he is in the UK.

In fact, on that basis, there are quite a small number of composers that I would consider first-tier. Perhaps just the following, none of which are likely to surprise you:

Bach
Bartok
Beethoven
Brahms
Bruckner
Chopin
Debussy
Handel
Haydn
Liszt
Mahler
Mendelssohn
Mozart
Prokofiev
Ravel
Schubert
Schumann
Scriabin
Shostakovich
Sibelius
Stravinsky
Tchaikovsky
Vivaldi

To be honest with you, I'm actually wondering whether Bartok, Ravel and Scriabin should really be included in the list... I love them, but they're probably not quite as widely known and appreciated as the others there.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

paulbest said:


> btw votes for Elgar, Britten, come only from british fans.
> You guys really support your home town composers ...


Maybe Elgar and Britten get played more in Britain but I think you'll find they are respected and valued by those in the know much more widely than you suggest. I don't know about our "supporting" our composers - they are not football teams or tennis players! - but we might get more opportunity to hear them. Britten operas were a fairly regular features on TV when I was growing up but his music is actually hated as much as it is loved in Britain. Elgar is heard as patriotic - and harking back to a time when we "ruled the world" - and although that is not really what his great works are about that does lead many with little interest in music liking some of his pieces. There may be composers of equal genius from other countries who I have missed because of poor exposure for them in Britain but, like most serious music lovers, I think I have a good awareness of much classical music that was written anywhere before 1950. I'm certainly not unique in this so I feel your "islander attitude" (which would surely be concerned with keeping foreign music out) may be wide of the mark. But it is true that before Britten British composers went very much their own ways. This is true even though Vaughan Williams studied with Ravel. I guess the thing in Britain in the first half of the 20th century was to create a national music after centuries in the wilderness.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Mifek said:


> I am wondering which two (or more) of the following six names would you get rid of to make place for Britten:
> 
> Debussy
> Ravel
> ...


easy , Stravinsky
Has no SQ;'s, no piano solo, little chamber, no symphonies, no operas,,,etc He has 2 major hits, well 3 if you count in the VC @ 22 minutes, a bit short if you ask me. , and one of these 3 hits, which was a sensation in Paris due to the skimpy dance outfits on the gals and also he has a cool russian name.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

paulbest said:


> easy , Stravinsky
> Has no SQ;'s, no piano solo, little chamber, no symphonies, no operas,,,etc He has 2 major hits, well 3 if you count in the VC @ 22 minutes, a bit short if you ask me. , and one of these 3 hits, which was a sensation in Paris due to the skimpy dance outfits on the gals and also he has a cool russian name.


How about doing some fact checking before posting?


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

paulbest said:


> easy , Stravinsky
> Has no SQ;'s, no piano solo, little chamber, no symphonies, no operas,,,etc He has 2 major hits, well 3 if you count in the VC @ 22 minutes, a bit short if you ask me. , and one of these 3 hits, which was a sensation in Paris due to the skimpy dance outfits on the gals and also he has a cool russian name.


Stravinsky did write some solo piano music. One of his very first works was a piano sonata, although I can't say it's particularly compelling.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

paulbest said:


> easy , Stravinsky
> Has no SQ;'s, no piano solo, little chamber, no symphonies, no operas,,,etc He has 2 major hits, well 3 if you count in the VC @ 22 minutes, a bit short if you ask me. , and one of these 3 hits, which was a sensation in Paris due to the skimpy dance outfits on the gals and also he has a cool russian name.


Pretty sure he wrote a couple of operas as well although opera is not an area I know a great deal about.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

chill782002 said:


> Stravinsky did write some solo piano music. One of his very first works was a piano sonata, although I can't say it's particularly compelling.


and a number of symphonies, and opera.....


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

See you have Mahler 1st tier, But as i've said countless times here on TC, lets look at his oeuvre,,,symphonies, symphonies and more symphonies,,and.....
I mean I guess he has a fanatic fan base.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

paulbest said:


> But as i've said countless times here on TC...


There, right there. That's your problem, and you make it our problem. You repeat and repeat and repeat the same things, which are either opinions (presented as facts) or would-be facts, which often are demonstrably wrong.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

paulbest said:


> See you have Mahler 1st tier, But as i've said countless times here on TC, lets look at his oeuvre,,,symphonies, symphonies and more symphonies,,and.....
> I mean I guess he has a fanatic fan base.


True, his work was not particularly wide-ranging in terms of the formats he chose, but he is nonetheless one of the most popular composers of all time. His sales are huge and he is regularly performed world-wide. No one could seriously dispute that Mahler is a first-tier composer on that basis.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Art Rock said:


> and a number of symphonies, and opera.....


I found one of his *symphonies* on YT, again 22 minutes, a tad short if you ask me,,why most of Mahler's movements in any of his symphonies are far longer than Stravinsky's complete sym timing.

Is Stravinsky living off old fame? 
now I realize Henze mentions he learned so much from the great composer, But 1st tier?
I ain't buying, never did buy him as 1st .

I do not understand this sym, I just can not follow it. Its like greek or coded, like Mahler is coded.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

chill782002 said:


> True, his work was not particularly wide-ranging in terms of the formats he chose, but he is nonetheless one of the most popular composers of all time. His sales are huge and he is regularly performed world-wide. No one could seriously dispute that Mahler is a first-tier composer on that basis.


I wonder why.. this is,,,I have no clue,,and will not attempt to unravel, this mystery as i've done so , many times here on TC. 
Oh the CM industry, so slick.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

paulbest said:


> I wonder why.. this is,,,I have no clue,,and will not attempt to unravel, this mystery as i've done so , many times here on TC.
> Oh the CM industry, so slick.


As I said, assessing music on its quality can only ever be subjective. On that basis, one cannot say "best", one can only say "favourite". If sales are taken as a basis to establish whether a composer is "first-tier" (and I'm not seriously suggesting that this is important, the only thing that matters where music is concerned is if it moves you personally, not whether anyone else likes it) then Mahler and Stravinsky indisputably qualify for that status.


----------



## Mifek (Jul 28, 2018)

chill782002 said:


> To be honest with you, I'm actually wondering whether Bartok, Ravel and Scriabin should really be included in the list... I love them, but they're probably not quite as widely known and appreciated as the others there.


This is even more true for Bruckner. 
I think the Ranker list reflects the "popular view" nearly perfectly:
https://www.ranker.com/crowdranked-list/my-favorite-classical-composers-of-all-time


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

chill782002 said:


> Stravinsky did write some solo piano music. One of his very first works was a piano sonata, although I can't say it's particularly compelling.


Yeah, he wrote 3 piano sonatas actually, one of them for 2 pianos ...
And 4 Symphonies plus the work Symphonies for Winds.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

Mifek said:


> This is even more true for Bruckner.
> I think the Ranker list reflects the "popular view" nearly perfectly:
> https://www.ranker.com/crowdranked-list/my-favorite-classical-composers-of-all-time


Yeah, fair enough, Rachmaninov and Dvorak should probably be included as well. Saint-Saens I'm not so sure about, on the same basis as Bartok, Ravel and Scriabin above. Verdi is enormously popular as far as opera is concerned, but opera is basically all he wrote (rather like Wagner, who should probably also be included on the basis of sales) and a lot of people don't like opera. Completely unsurprised that Beethoven, Bach and Mozart are the top three although I am surprised that Tchaikovsky came in so high in the list. In any case, the last twenty or so posts in this thread (including mine) show how utterly futile it is to try and rank composers on any kind of popularity basis. If that particular composer works for you, then great. Which neatly links back to the original point of this thread - maybe Germany didn't "lose" any musical composition value in the twentieth century, it's just that the music it produced then appealed to a different set of people than the music it produced previously. Ultimately, it's all good.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

paulbest said:


> I found one of his *symphonies* on YT, again 22 minutes, a tad short if you ask me,,why most of Mahler's movements in any of his symphonies are far longer than Stravinsky's complete sym timing.
> 
> Is Stravinsky living off old fame?
> now I realize Henze mentions he learned so much from the great composer, But 1st tier?
> ...


You posted that Stravinsky didn't write Symphonies 17:02, a poster corrected this at 17:04-17:05. At 17:13 you write that you found a Symphony by Stravinsky lasting 22 minutes and that you don't understand it, that you just can't follow it ... maybe spend more time exploring those 4-5 works. Also, they are very different from each other.

Btw, some composers you expressed admiration for (Henze, Carter, Pettersson and Hartmann) wrote symphonies even shorter than that or of the same length.


----------



## Guest (Aug 23, 2019)

I said previously that I thought the results might be sensitive to the polling procedure that was used on the other forum. On further reflection, considering the 250 works over the period from 1760 onwards up to 2010, I have two main areas of concern about the polling procedure.

First, I think that the number of works per period is possibly too low. If the number of works was increased to, say, 20 per period then a different time profile for the end of the dominance of German/Austrian dominance might result. For example, there is currently only one work by Tchaikovsky listed, which seems to be strange given the large number of popular works he wrote. If the number of works increased to, say, 20 then it might have included more of Tchaikovsky’s works, which would obviously boost the Russian contingent in the 1870s, 1880s and 1890s. Another example is that there is no work currently listed by Rimsky-Korsakov, which again seems strange, and which might be altered if 20 works were included, thus reinforcing the same result as regards Russian composers.

Secondly, the polling procedure gives equal weight to each 10-year time slot. I think that is rather suspicious, as it is probably a poor reflection of peoples' underlying preferences for classical works. I’m not entirely sure about this at the moment but I think that it could distort the results. If instead the poll had been based on identifying the top 250 works over the period 1760-2010, then a different set of results would have emerged. I guess there would be more 19th C works and fewer 18th, 20th and 21st C works. If these revised works were then placed into their respective 10 year time slots, I suspect that a different time profile would result regards the changing fortunes of composer nationalities over the 250 year period. I don't know how this might pan out as I'm lacking the basic data.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

joen_cph said:


> You posted that Stravinsky didn't write Symphonies 17:02, a poster corrected this at 17:04-17:05. At 17:13 you write that you found a Symphony by Stravinsky lasting 22 minutes and that you don't understand it, that you just can't follow it ... maybe spend more time exploring those 4-5 works. Also, they are very different from each other.
> 
> Btw, some composers you expressed admiration for (Henze, Carter, Pettersson and Hartmann) wrote symphonies even shorter than that or of the same length.


True his major syms, might each be quite dif so judging all his syms based on skipping though only 1 sym, is a bit incredulous and disrespectful. 
Though based on my limited attempts of hearing his 2 major hits, sadly stravinsky never made much of a impression on me. 
Baffles me how he has maintained popularity. Even more so than Mahlers popularity. Mahler has these huge hour long symphonies where the young listeners can delight, ravish and emersed , lose themselves inside. 
Allan Pettersson;'s shortest sym is longer than any from Stravinsky, 
As I say Pettersson needs no apologists. 
Seems Stravinsky has his loyal defenders.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

*20th Century German Composers* 
(I found this quite illuminating!)



> There were, by the rise of the Nazis, essentially three trends in German composition: the legacy of the large-scale late-Romantic idiom, represented by Strauss; the politically-aware socialist works represented by Weill; and a neo-classical trend, abstract and intellectual, represented by Hindemith. The cultural philistinism of the Nazis destroyed Germany's musical experimentalism, banning any works that hinted at socialism or `decadence', and restoring Wagner and late-Romanticism as the nation's music. Most of the more advanced artists working in Germany fled, including Brecht, Dessau, Eisler, Hindemith, Schoenberg and Weill. Those composers and musicians that stayed, such as the conductor Furtwängler or Strauss, became inextricably enmeshed in the demands and the constrictions of the Nazi system, with the notable exception of Hartmann.
> 
> Contemporary music of any value, apart from the works of Orff, Egk, and Hartmann, ceased during the Nazi domination, but after 1945 a new phase of German music paralleled the emergence of the country from its war-time devastation. The impetus for the revival was two-fold. First, the International Summer Music Courses at Darmstadt, founded in 1946 by Wolfgang Steinecke, became a centre for the very latest music ideas, and thus a major factor in the emergence of the avant-garde movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Among those who taught there were Messiaen, Berio, Boulez, Maderna, Nono, Pousseur, and Karlheinz Stockhausen (born 1928). Second, Stockhausen, who had himself been a student at Darmstadt, emerged as a major force in modern music, initially as a serialist, then as a composer of electronic music and explorer of new sound worlds, and more recently as a composer of a huge cycle of operas using unusual venues and employing all his experience of avant-garde techniques and structures. His co-direction (from 1963) of the Westdeutscher Rundfunk's electronic studio in Cologne attracted composers to the city. The prolific Hans Werner Henze (born 1926) emerged in the same period, less experimental than Stockhausen, but attracting international attention, especially with his operas, and causing political controversy with his socialist subject-matters in the 1960s; overall his output represents an attempt to marry more recent techniques with the neo-classical tradition. Giselher Klebe (born 1925), has followed a similar path to that of Henze, following serial ideas in the 1950s, but then developing a more Romantic style in which 12-tone methods have formed only a part. He has used the variable metres developed by Blacher, and his output has been dominated by eleven operas, little known outside Germany, and five symphonies. An important avant-garde individualist was Bernd Alois Zimmermann (1918-1970), whose celebrated opera Die Soldaten (1956-1960, revisions to 1964) was the culmination of Expressionist extremes.
> 
> ...


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Note:
*The PROLIFIC Hans Henze*
Key word there when discussing who is most important in mid/late 20th C music. 
Here is one of Hans Henze earliest works, just a few years later, Henze was well on his way creating masterpieces. 
Here is how i define this vague subjective idea of *The masterpiece*
No Fluff, No Fillers, No Gimmickery. 
Kind of like the notes you see displayed on the side of a organic item, where it specifically says, nothing artificial = *the real deal*. 
I was sorely cheated as a young boy by those whom i trusted the most, Which is why I am so choosey in the composers I embrace.

Read what the fair opinion , highly interesting commenter on YT, The Toulouse-ian Gerard Begni had to say in 2 posts , both 2 yrs ago on this early Henze work. 
btw I find his assessment is well said, short to the point, accurate. , As is his usual style.

Oh yes you will need to go to the actual YT upload to see what Gerard has to say,,,which i know many of you won't, as you are not interested in Henze. Point being to my post, even in his eraliest work, he has a hit. 
I can ner find even one dud, though his 2nd VC came close for me tagging *8DUD** that is til i gave it a 3rd,4th opportunity,,then i began to come around. 
Henze is the only composer I know who has hit after hit and 1st note to last,,and extensive compositions in every genre. 
In the 400 yr history of CM that is. Schnittke comes awefully close. Or lets say equals Henze in this creative process.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)




----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

chill782002 said:


> Completely unsurprised that Beethoven, Bach and Mozart are the top three although I am surprised that Tchaikovsky came in so high in the list.


He doesn't frequently get the spot he deserves, does he?


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

paulbest said:


> True his major syms, might each be quite dif so judging all his syms based on skipping though only 1 sym, is a bit incredulous and disrespectful.
> Though based on my limited attempts of hearing his 2 major hits, sadly stravinsky never made much of a impression on me.
> Baffles me how he has maintained popularity. Even more so than Mahlers popularity. Mahler has these huge hour long symphonies where the young listeners can delight, ravish and emersed , lose themselves inside.
> *Allan Pettersson;'s shortest sym is longer than any from Stravinsky, *
> ...


No, Stravinsky's _Symphony in C_ is 28-32 minutes, and his _Symphony in E Flat_ is around 35 minutes.

Pettersson's symphonies 10+11+16 are of shorter duration, around 23-27 minutes; 
the finished version of the 1st Symphony is around 30 minutes.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Larkenfield said:


> *20th Century German Composers*
> (I found this quite illuminating!)
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

joen_cph said:


> No, Stravinsky's _Symphony in C_ is 28-32 minutes, and his _Symphony in E Flat_ is around 35 minutes.
> 
> Pettersson's symphonies 10+11+16 are of shorter duration, around 23-27 minutes;
> the finished version of the 1st Symphony is around 30 minutes.


Nor were symphonies as crucial to Stravinsky's creativity as they were to Mahler's and Pettersson's. Stravinsky wrote a few that belong (for those who have the ears and experience to hear) among his greatest works - the Symphony in 3 Movements and the Symphony of Psalms as well as the Symphony in C - but they do not form a body of work that represents him in the way that the symphonies of the great symphonists (like Beethoven, Brahms, Mahler, Bruckner, Sibelius) do. Relative brevity was, of course, part of his neoclassical reaction to Romanticism, as was the relative austerity of much of his more typical music.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

They aren't a full creative diary, the late period is missing, but then, the ballets perhaps aren't either. For me, the Psalm Symphony and the Symphony in 3 Movements are among his best works. Btw some, including actually Igor himself, have seen the latter as a description of events in WW II.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ WW2 - yes but as filtered through newsreel images if I remember correctly (which I may not!). Yes, definitely among his best works but there are many, including many of his middle and late period ballets.


----------

