# A surprising fact for me: wikipedia considers Berlioz to have written four symphonies



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

We don't usually think of Berlioz's four symphonies do we? Its a bit debatable as to what some of these works are, and all of them are far cries from symphonies in even a conventional romantic sense. Genre defying hybrids is a hallmark of Berlioz's output, yet all of these pieces can supposedly be referred to as symphonies.

1. Symphonie Fantastique
2. Harold in Italy
3. Romeo et Juliette
4. Symphonie Funebre et Triomphale

Berlioz isn't very talked about on TC, I've noticed. Symphonie Fantastique is the only work many of us can vouch for, Harold in Italy being another that is more frequently noted. Romeo et Juliette seems to be considered by many Berlioz fans to be his masterpiece and I haven't yet looked into it. The last one listed, Symphonie Funebre et Triomphale, I have Lisztian to thank for introducing me to it.


----------



## Arsakes (Feb 20, 2012)

The other three are more like symphonic poems or Fantasias ... considering that Dvorak would have more than 20 symphonies!


----------



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

Some argue that whatever the composer's designation Harold en Italie is as much a concertante work as anything else. Although I'm probably in error I prefer to think of it as a symphonic suite similar to something like Rimsky-Korsokov's later Scheherazade, especially as there is a string instrument representing the central character. As for Romeo et Juliette, I really should give it more of a chance - I've never indulged it as often as the other three listed by clavichorder. It's not because it's too sprawling (I have no problem with the similarly-proportioned Mahler 3) but maybe I'm just a bit bored with the ubiquity of the original story, not helped by overdosing on Prokofiev's ballet first.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

I have firmly placed Harold In Italy alongside R.Strauss' symphonic poems. The obbligato viola part is too significant to downgrade the work to Rimsky's level. R&J works as a late Romantic-style symphony if one ignores the program.

When I listen to Damnation of Faust or Les Troyens I am always taken by the orchestral music. Seems like DoF could easily (by a pro) be made into a symphony. Les Troyens has enough material for at least three.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I probably shouldn't admit this, but when I first heard of Harold in Italy, I thought, ugh, another tone poem. But when someone said it was really a symphony, my ears perked up, and I bought a CD. It's much nicer to just follow melodies without having to figure out some convoluted storyline.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Manxfeeder said:


> I probably shouldn't admit this, but when I first heard of Harold in Italy, I thought, ugh, another tone poem. But when someone said it was really a symphony, my ears perked up, and I bought a CD. It's much nicer to just follow melodies without having to figure out some convoluted storyline.


I agree, though "The rape of the Sabine women" is effective.


----------



## Guest (Oct 19, 2012)

I'd like to have notice of who "we" are.

I grew up in the fifties and sixties, when it was just common knowledge that Berlioz had written four symphonies.

Indeed, my surprise for the day is finding out that someone in 2012 is surprised that Berlioz is supposed to have written four symphonies.

In any case, TC is not the same as the world. Not even roughly equivalent, Gott sei dank!


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

some guy said:


> I'd like to have notice of who "we" are.
> 
> I grew up in the fifties and sixties, when it was just common knowledge that Berlioz had written four symphonies.
> [...]


Well, I am 'we', and have uncommon knowledge. 'Harold' is not a symphony.


----------



## Guest (Oct 20, 2012)

Haha, actually Harold is closer to fitting the traditional mold of "symphony" than any of the other three. Aside from the persistent soloist, and the three against two rhythm in the last movement, it's a step backwards from the advances of its predecessor. Berlioz was purposely attempting to build on the advances of Beethoven, whom he idolized, and take them even further. Mostly he succeeded. In Harold, he doesn't so much advance as duplicate the condition of the symphony in the teens.

You are correct, though. That is all _common_ knowledge.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Well, I am 'we', and have uncommon knowledge. 'Harold' is not a symphony.


I see it as a symphony, or maybe symphonic poem, with viola obbligato. Its hard to categorise it, and the notes of the Eloquence cd I have of it discuss this. Its actually coupled with Bloch's _Voice in the Wilderness_, which is similar that its a work for orchestra with cello obbligato. But unlike the Berlioz, its not programmatic (however, Berlioz radically departed from his source - Byron - the 'narrative' of _Harold in Italy _is more by Berlioz than Byron, the notes say).


----------



## palJacky (Nov 27, 2010)

""Harold en Italie, Symphonie en quatre parties avec un alto principal ""
from the title page of Berlioz's score.

Obviously one needs to count mahler's 'erde' as a symphony if one uses the same critera(another discussion perhaps?)
Just pointing out that is where the person who wrote the wiki page is coming from.

as far as 'Romeo and Juliet"
take a look at the original premier flyer from this wiki link,
it looks like it reads "symphonie dramatique"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roméo_et_Juliette_(Berlioz)

I would be interested in knowing why Berlioz called 'romeo' a 'dramatic symphony'
and why he called 'faust' a "légende dramatique" (dramatic legend).

perhaps I need to relisten to both since they sort of occupy the same place in my mind.


----------

