# should Austria and Germany be considered as one when discussing musical traditions?



## ManuelMozart95 (Sep 29, 2018)

What do you think? There are some that talk about the Austro-German tradition of classical music and consider Mozart or Schönberg as belonging to this tradition of German music whereas others differentiate them according to today's nationalities and consider Mozart as an Austrian for example and other Austrian composers as their own tradition distinguishing them from German composers.


----------



## david johnson (Jun 25, 2007)

I do not consider them as being one.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Except for the language, what is the reason for lumping them together?


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Throughout time, there has been clear cultural, religious and political differences also between the various regions of the two countries, with myriads of changes occurring etc. The current borders of the countries date from the 20th century only. 

In some, very (or too -) generalizing circumstances, the term can probably be used, especially in terms of defining an overall, geographical or language-related area. But when going into further details, the term becomes much more problematical.


----------



## bravenewworld (Jan 24, 2016)

You mean some kind of musical _Großdeutschland_?

I do think it is valid to consider these two countries as artistically Germanic. What, really, is the cultural difference between Germans and Austrians, such as would justify a split? The only real objection I can see is the idea of nationalistic music: should the music of Wagner, with all its emphasis upon Germany, really be considered part of the Austrian tradition? My answer is yes, it should be. Wagner's _Ring_ was surely about mythological - yet inherently Germanic - history. And the Austrian people as ethnic and cultural Germans are, I think, entitled to share in that history. Of course, it is worth bearing in mind that it was an Austrian who was swept to power in Germany in 1933 on an ultra-nationalist platform.

Surely, in fact, if we do propose to split these German-speaking countries up, a better model would have been based upon the culture of the Bismarckian, Protestant North and the Catholic South (+Austria). This makes more sense considering the extent to which religion affects culture: Bach's cantatas are, at their core, informed by Luther's teachings, and not those of the Pope.



Art Rock said:


> Except for the language, what is the reason for lumping them together?


What is the reason for not lumping them together? We consider Saxon composers Germans, yet Germany was only united in the early 1870s after Bismarck's conquests. Austria missed out because of historical chance: it was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

And before anyone says that Austria is therefore better placed within an Austro-Hungarian tradition: Austria-Hungary's defining feature was its _lack_ of cultural uniformity, which came to hurt them greatly in World War One when their eleven (I think) official languages made them even more incompetent than the Russians (see the Brusilov Offensive). Anyway, my point is that Austria did not become part of Germany simply due to historical chance as Bismarck opted for a _Kleindeutschland_ (Lesser Germany) instead. And that its period as a senior partner in the Austro-Hungarian empire did little to suppress its Germanic nature, before it became the independent state of Austria.

But overall I don't really mind much either way.


----------



## ManuelMozart95 (Sep 29, 2018)

I agree that they should be considered as one musical tradition when analyzing the history of music.
It is true that you could talk about the Austro-Hungarian tradition but this is problematic since for example Smetana, Dvorak or Bartok are clearly considered Czech and Hungarian but surely not German or Austrian. 
On the other hand Hummel, Mahler or Hugo Wolf ate clearly Austrian even though they were born in today's Slovakia, Czechia and Slovenia respectively.

Most Austrian composers considered themselves in the tradition of German music "Deutsch" as they called them. For example Mozart in his letters considered himself clearly "Deutsch" and his music to be in that tradition. He never says he's Austrian. And his father was from Augsburg and he had family there so his culture was mostly Bavarian.
Arnold Schönberg said that with dodecafonism he had assured other 100 years of German music dominance. He said Deutsch when referring to it.

There are more differences between the Protestant north and the Catholic south than between southern Germany and Austria for that matter. So if Bach and Pachelbel are considered German then clearly Mozart is being in fact more culturally similar to Pachelbel than Bach and considered himself to be German.

Austria's seperate identity was born after 1945 so you could manera the case that we should consider them as different identities only for composers born after that date.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

For me, there's a noticeable difference and there's a certain aesthetic charm in the Austrian tradition that the more serious German tradition may not have, except perhaps when Brahms is in a good mood and trying to let his hair down.  I believe one can also hear the Viennese flavor in the Mahler symphonies brought out more by the Austrian orchestras and of course in the special rhythmic 'lilt' when playing the Strauss waltzes, though I believe the German orchestras would love to do that... So, I hear the two as not being the same while still being closely related because of their geographically close proximity and the intermingling of their cultures historically and politically. Josef Goebbels, the Reich Minister of Propaganda, claimed the Austrian composer Anton Bruckner as their own during Germany's reign of terror, and I wonder how the religiously inclined Bruckner would have felt about that after the Nazis had appropriated Austria to settle a "border" problem and please that humorless dictator with the Charlie Chaplin mustache.


----------



## ManuelMozart95 (Sep 29, 2018)

Larkenfield said:


> For me, there's a noticeable difference and there's a certain aesthetic charm in the Austrian tradition that the more serious German tradition may not be known for, except perhaps when Brahms is letting his hair down. I believe one can hear the Viennese flavor in the Mahler symphonies brought out more by the Austrian orchestras and of course in the special rhythmic 'lilt' when playing the Strauss waltzes, though the German orchestras can come close... I hear them as not being the same while still being closely related because of their geography, close proximity, and the intermingling of their cultures historically and politically. Josef Goebbels, the Reich Minister of Propaganda in Germans, claimed the Austrian composer Anton Bruckner as their own during WW2 and I wonder how the religiously-inclined Bruckner would have felt after the Nazis had appropriated Austria as their own to settle a "border" problem.


I agree there are differences but as another uses said above there seems to be a cultural break between northern Protestant Germany and southern Catholic Germany including Austria.
For example Mozart was born in Salzburg and his father was from Augsburg, he had family there and his culture would be considered as Bavarian. In his letters he considered himself Deutsch as so did many other composers.


----------



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

Musically there has been enough connective tissue and cross-pollination over the centuries to assume that there is an Austro-Germanic tradition. Both Beethoven and Brahms lived a large part of their lives in Vienna but I don't think that made any discernible difference to their music - moving there hardly seemed to be a culture shock.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Larkenfield said:


> For me, there's a noticeable difference and there's a certain aesthetic charm in the Austrian tradition that the more serious German tradition may not be known for, except perhaps when Brahms is letting his hair down. I believe one can hear the Viennese flavor in the Mahler symphonies brought out more by the Austrian orchestras and of course in the special rhythmic 'lilt' when playing the Strauss waltzes, though the German orchestras can come close... I hear them as not being the same while still being closely related because of their geography, close proximity, and the intermingling of their cultures historically and politically. Josef Goebbels, the Reich Minister of Propaganda in Germans, claimed the Austrian composer Anton Bruckner as their own during WW2 and I wonder how the religiously-inclined Bruckner would have felt after the Nazis had appropriated Austria as their own to settle a "border" problem.


It seems to me that there can be different flavors (using your word, which I think is a good one in this context) within a single, broader tradition. In such cases, it may be best to acknowledge both senses of tradition. There have been considerable changes in borders and governing bodies in various parts of Europe over the last several centuries. It may be necessary to consider such traditions within a given context. (Countries that break away and establish a separate identity are often more than a bit reluctant to acknowledge previous connections, for obvious political and social reasons.)


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I'd say yes, for purposes of Western music anyway. We conflate others in a similar way, eg. Russia and Ukraine, the countries of Great Britain.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

I have lived in each of the countries for several years and I definitely do not consider them to be the same culture. Both the culture and the mentality of the people is very different. And the history as well. Germany = Prussia, Austria = Austria-Hungary. These two states were bitter enemies and waged wars against each other. And their relationship is strained to this day. The Germans have stereotypes about the Austrians and vice versa. 

as the saying goes "The Austrians are brilliant people. They made the world believe that Hitler was a German and Beethoven an Austrian".


----------



## ManuelMozart95 (Sep 29, 2018)

Jacck said:


> I have lived in each of the countries for several years and I definitely do not consider them to be the same culture. Both the culture and the mentality of the people is very different. And the history as well. Germany = Prussia, Austria = Austria-Hungary. These two states were bitter enemies and waged wars against each other. And their relationship is strained to this day. The Germans have stereotypes about the Austrians and vice versa.
> 
> as the saying goes "The Austrians are brilliant people. They made the world believe that Hitler was a German and Beethoven an Austrian".


Certainly they have different histories and are different countries, I'm not arguing that.
My question was only for the purpose of music history if we could consider them one musical tradition and I think there is a strong case for that.
Lots of Austrians including Mozart or Schönberg considered their music German for example.
Besotes, a Bavarian doesn't have much to do with Prussia's culture and more with Austrian culture so saying that Germany=Prussia is not correct even if ir was the most dominant culture.


----------

