# John Williams versus Mozart?



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

This is getting a good deal of play (and indignation) elsewhere: Gustavo Dudamel is quoted as saying, "John Williams is the Mozart of our day." Check out the article and chime in!

http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...conductor-gustavo-dudamel-20151214-story.html


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

KenOC said:


> This is getting a good deal of play (and indignation) elsewhere: Gustavo Dudamel is quoted as saying, "John Williams is the Mozart of our day." Check out the article and chime in!
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...conductor-gustavo-dudamel-20151214-story.html


I never took Dudamel very serious, now even less :lol:


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

I like Williams' music very much in films but to compare him with Mozart?


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

From the article it's not exactly clear what Dudamel meant. He does say Williams is a genius, which is not unreasonable. Perhaps he means Williams is similar to Mozart in that both were the most well known composers of their day. Maybe Williams has a wild laugh or uses lots of bathroom humor.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

I was thinking more...Vanilla Ice of our day.


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2016)

KenOC said:


> This is getting a good deal of play (and indignation) elsewhere: Gustavo Dudamel is quoted as saying, "John Williams is the Mozart of our day." Check out the article and chime in!
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...conductor-gustavo-dudamel-20151214-story.html


I think the context is important. Discovering that Dudamel conducted the opening and closing music; that they've been friends for years; that Dudamel has sought Williams' advice when writing his first film score. This all points to both flattery for a friend, but also that his remark is not as random as it might seem at first reading.

I also notice that Michael Giacchino is in the cast, playing a stormtrooper; anyone spotted any other composer/conductors among the extras?


----------



## GioCar (Oct 30, 2013)

What about a revised Amadeus soundtrack?
:devil:


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Sounds to me more like an off-hand remark intended as a compliment to a friend, rather than a carefully honed thesis.

But hey, if it gives the pearl-clutchers something more to get upset about, I'm all for it!


----------



## helenora (Sep 13, 2015)

wow! thank you "The Thread" . Now I know John Williams exists :lol: - well, I think this fact also shows how many movies I usually watch


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> I think the context is important. Discovering that Dudamel conducted the opening and closing music; that they've been friends for years; that Dudamel has sought Williams' advice when writing his first film score. This all points to both flattery for a friend, but also that his remark is not as random as it might seem at first reading.
> 
> I also notice that Michael Giacchino is in the cast, playing a stormtrooper; anyone spotted any other composer/conductors among the extras?


How about Daniel Craig as a grunt?


----------



## Truckload (Feb 15, 2012)

Interesting to think about. Who actually IS the Mozart of today? Is there a Mozart of today? It would have to be someone who is admired by a very wide audience. More than just the Talk Classical kind of listener. Talented as both performer and composer. Master of everything from quartets to symphony to opera, and in our time, cinema. A person who perfects more than innovates, but does so in an amazingly creative and competent manner.

Is there a Mozart of today?


----------



## Rhombic (Oct 28, 2013)

Dudamel is the Charles Chaplin of our day. But with a stick and in front of an orchestra.
Ahh. Thank God the Berliner Phil chose that other unexpected conductor.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Truckload said:


> Interesting to think about. Who actually IS the Mozart of today? Is there a Mozart of today? It would have to be someone who is admired by a very wide audience. More than just the Talk Classical kind of listener. Talented as both performer and composer. Master of everything from quartets to symphony to opera, and in our time, cinema. A person who perfects more than innovates, but does so in an amazingly creative and competent manner.
> 
> Is there a Mozart of today?


No, and I don't see why there should be. Isn't it the point of iconic figures that they're unique?


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

Truckload said:


> Interesting to think about. Who actually IS the Mozart of today? Is there a Mozart of today? It would have to be someone who is admired by a very wide audience. More than just the Talk Classical kind of listener. Talented as both performer and composer. Master of everything from quartets to symphony to opera, and in our time, cinema. A person who perfects more than innovates, but does so in an amazingly creative and competent manner.
> 
> Is there a Mozart of today?


Er... Pierre Boulez? *runs away very quickly*


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2016)

No one would even know who John Williams is without Lucas, Spielberg, etc. A corporate film composer that was fortunate enough to hitch a ride with popular directors.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

To me that's like Apples and Oranges. Both are good at what they do. Neither are innovators but both are or will have been incredibly influential to later generations.

But one of the mistakes people in the WCM make is to think that greatness and beauty are static, unchanging entities. So this is why you'll hear the incredible indignation at Dudamel's claim. Mozart is eternally great, Mozart IS what greatness sounds like, and it doesn't sound like a film score, no matter how dramatic the music is. This is as good as dogma in the WCM world.

John Williams sometimes writes incredible music that deserves to be compared to great composers', and by the same turn, the great composers' music deserves to be re-evaluated and not take for granted. Not all of their works are the superlative of beauty, and even the ones that are only exhibit a certain kind of beauty which is given an extreme priority in the WCM world. It actually cheapens them to make them as ubiquitous as they've become.

There are lots of people who might frequent orchestra concerts or tune into a classical music radio station but are actually turned off by Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Tchaikovsky etc., and very little is done to curb that tendency, because of the dogma of the static nature of greatness, which is fundamentally misguided. I think it has a genetic or universal component, which accounts for *some* of why some music endures, but also a large component that isn't. Things with appeal are a combination of what is novel and what is familiar, and since those things shift, so does greatness.


----------



## GioCar (Oct 30, 2013)

Rhombic said:


> Dudamel is the Charles Chaplin of our day. But with a stick and in front of an orchestra.
> Ahh. Thank God the Berliner Phil chose that other unexpected conductor.


You are overestimating Gustavo, just a bit...
Charles Chaplin was a genius. More on the line of Mozart than of John Williams


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

I think Williams is a very good composer.

I'm not sure what to make of the Mozart comparison, however.


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2016)

isorhythm said:


> I think Williams is a very good composer.


Indeed. Of film scores. I'm puzzled by claims that he ranks alongside composers whose reputation is built on music that has nothing to do with films.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

isorhythm said:


> I think Williams is a very good composer.
> 
> I'm not sure what to make of the Mozart comparison, however.


Only if Williams had died penniless 50 years ago, and left the world numerous masterpieces. But instead he's become very wealthy writing for cheesy Hollywood swill.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

MacLeod said:


> Indeed. Of film scores. I'm puzzled by claims that he ranks alongside composers whose reputation is built on music that has nothing to do with films.


Right - also, Williams writes pastiche - the original Star Wars score is a (brilliant) pastiche of mostly Wagner and Prokofiev. That's fine but it doesn't get you into the big leagues!


----------



## Chronochromie (May 17, 2014)

Truckload said:


> Interesting to think about. Who actually IS the Mozart of today? Is there a Mozart of today? It would have to be someone who is admired by a very wide audience. More than just the Talk Classical kind of listener. Talented as both performer and composer. Master of everything from quartets to symphony to opera, and in our time, cinema. A person who perfects more than innovates, but does so in an amazingly creative and competent manner.
> 
> Is there a Mozart of today?


Was Mozart while he lived really much more well known than other composers of his day and admired by the masses, though?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Mozart is the Mozart of our day.


----------



## manyene (Feb 7, 2015)

I don't think Mozart needs to worry,wherever he is now- neither now, nor in the future.


----------



## Prodromides (Mar 18, 2012)

I select John Williams over Mozart, if for no other reason than I don't think Mozart could have ever produced the music that Williams had done for Robert Altman's 1972 film *Images*:


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Chronochromie said:


> Was Mozart while he lived really much more well known than other composers of his day and admired by the masses, though?


He had successes, certainly, and his operas produced a number of popular "hits."

The same could be said for many other composers of his time, though, the majority of them now utterly forgotten or obscure. There were certainly some who found Mozart's music too rich and difficult, Dittersdorf among them.

In the interest of fairness, it should be noted that the majority of people who enjoy John Williams' scores outside of movies do so primarily for their own "hits," rather than taking them in as extended pieces of music.

I'll answer the OP only to say that I don't see much of any comparison between the two.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Chronochromie said:


> Was Mozart while he lived really much more well known than other composers of his day and admired by the masses, though?


I think Mozart was considered pretty much at the top of the heap by the 1780s. Beethoven's first journey to Vienna, funded by the Elector of Bonn, in 1787 was to study with Mozart...not Haydn or any of the many lesser composers active in Vienna at the time. Beethoven had to return to Bonn almost immediately, and it's not known if the two ever met.

The Elector funded his second journey in 1792, but Mozart had died by that time and Haydn had agreed to take him on. Count Waldstein wrote a farewell note: "Through uninterrupted diligence you will receive Mozart's spirit through Haydn's hands."

Meanwhile, Mozart's tunes were being played by street musicians throughout Vienna, and writing variations on his arias had become a cottage industry. His piano concertos, in particular, were evidently considered unsurpassable through the 1790s and into the new century. A guest review in an 1805 number of the AMZ Leipzig suggests the temper of the times: "Wherever [Beethoven's 3rd Piano Concerto] can be performed well, it will have the greatest and most beautiful effect. Even in Leipzig, where one is used to hearing the greater Mozart concertos performed well and where one views them with justifiable preference, this will be and has already been the case."


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

KenOC said:


> I think Mozart was considered pretty much at the top of the heap by the 1780s. Beethoven's first journey to Vienna, funded by the Elector of Bonn, in 1787 was to study with Mozart...not Haydn or any of the many lesser composers active in Vienna at the time. Beethoven had to return to Bonn almost immediately, and it's not known if the two ever met.


Beethoven is hardly an analogue for the average person.


----------



## Harold in Columbia (Jan 10, 2016)

John Williams is the Auber of our time - or maybe better to say _an_ Auber of our time - (blockbuster films being a grande opera of our time) - except that film music is a far more limited form than opera, so he never produced a Meyerbeer.

re how Mozart was received in his own time, Goethe in 1787:

"All our endeavour ... to confine ourselves to what is simple and limited was lost when Mozart appeared. Die Entführung aus dem Serail conquered all, and our own carefully written piece has never been so much as mentioned in theater circles."


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> Beethoven is hardly an analogue for the average person.


The question was about Mozart's position in musical Vienna. I was trying to respond by mentioning what I know of the times, and of the opinions of people in and around Vienna. None of this had anything to do with Beethoven's opinion of Mozart (which BTW was quite high).


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

nathanb said:


> No one would even know who John Williams is without Lucas, Spielberg, etc. A corporate film composer that was fortunate enough to hitch a ride with popular directors.


Hmm. Earlier today I was comparing Haydn and Mozart, the relative merits of their Symphonies, Concertos, and Operas.
I am not really familiar with the Haydn Operas, having only heard a few excerpts. However it occurred to me that Mozart lived in the creative ferment of Vienna, and at least in the case of his Operas, was able to benefit from the talents of a librettist like Da Ponte, who in turn would be in spired by genius the likes of Beaumarchais, etc.
Haydn however was stuck in the plains of hungary and in his own words, forced to be original 9because he didn't have a particularly stimulating creative environment). With the genres of Quartets and Symphonies, this relative isolation proved to be a blessing, as Haydn virtually invented both forms in the manner which we recognize them today. However, Opera, with it's requirements for drama, staging, etc, perhaps Haydn isn't as well known here because of the low quality of his collaborators, and 
thus lacked the stimulation that may have greatly benefited Mozart.
Should we damn Williams for having some of the best creative talents in cinema as his coworkers? Perhaps they too inspired 
him to be a better Composer than he might have otherwise been


----------



## Le Peel (May 15, 2015)

I thought the music in The Force Awakens was quite bland and forgettable.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

Le Peel said:


> I thought the music in The Force Awakens was quite bland and forgettable.


I agree. There was some good synchronization of dramatic points in the score with the shot of the big sand dune and the spaceship wreck, but it was pretty generic. My hypothesis is that this reflects the kind of stimulus the movie provided to the composer


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> I agree. There was some good synchronization of dramatic points in the score with the shot of the big sand dune and the spaceship wreck, but it was pretty generic. My hypothesis is that this reflects the kind of stimulus the movie provided to the composer


I haven't seen the movie, but would not expect a composer of 83 years to be writing his best and most inspired music.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

KenOC said:


> I haven't seen the movie, but would not expect a composer of 83 years to be writing his best and most inspired music.


I don't know - some people say there is a tendency for composers to get better with age. Granted many of them have quit, retired or died by that age.


----------



## Harold in Columbia (Jan 10, 2016)

Triplets said:


> However it occurred to me that Mozart lived in the creative ferment of Vienna, and at least in the case of his Operas, was able to benefit from the talents of a librettist like Da Ponte, who in turn would be in spired by genius the likes of Beaumarchais, etc.


In Mozart's first hit, all he had to benefit from was the talents of Gottlieb Stephanie.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

KenOC said:


> This is getting a good deal of play (and indignation) elsewhere: Gustavo Dudamel is quoted as saying, "John Williams is the Mozart of our day." Check out the article and chime in!
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...conductor-gustavo-dudamel-20151214-story.html


What an interesting article. While I have much esteem for the great John Williams, whose melodies and inventions I admire, I do prefer Wolfgang. But they are very different composers nonetheless, which makes such comparisons a touch non-productive.


----------



## hagridindminor (Nov 5, 2015)

It very much is a different skill, when writing music for a movie, the music needs to perfectly accentuate the events occurring in movie, too little and the scene will become anticlimactic, too much and the music will distract the audience away from the scene. It really is a hard thing to do. Whereas Mozart could pretty much write whatever he wants whenever he feels like it in terms of tempo shifts or key changes. It really is two completely different skills.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

hagridindminor said:


> It very much is a different skill, when writing music for a movie, the music needs to perfectly accentuate the events occurring in movie...


It is indeed a much different skill. Unlike the incidental music of the 19th century, which was mostly set pieces, movie music today is more fluid, more motival, mirroring and accentuating the action in real time. Grieg's Peer Gynt music could be made into an effective suite, but I have yet to hear John Williams's excellent movie music cast into a larger-scale form with a compelling dramatic form. Perhaps it can be done (which would be great) but not yet, that I've heard.

The closest is probably the Suite from Close Encounters, which is pretty good.


----------



## Guest (Jan 11, 2016)

Triplets said:


> Should we damn Williams for having some of the best creative talents in cinema as his coworkers?


Certainly not! But we shouldn't praise him for that, either 

The reason I like hearing some of Williams' tunes is because they remind me of some fun films. I cannot imagine his tunes having much use as absolute music.


----------



## Harold in Columbia (Jan 10, 2016)

I think they could make fine songs if somebody would set them to some reasonably good lyrics. Of course, Bill Murray already has Star Wars covered, but then, that's basically a Korngold tune.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

Why must there be a competition between composers? This is not the World Cup.


----------



## Harold in Columbia (Jan 10, 2016)

It's a very serious competition. The winning composers get to, in a sense, live forever.


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

It seems rather clear to me that Dudamel was simply saying that, where Mozart was the greatest composer of his day, so Williams is (in his opinion) the greatest composer of our day. As Dudamel would have been awed to conduct Mozart's music in Mozart's presence, so he also felt awed to be conducting Star Wars in Williams' presence. It has nothing to do with their relative styles and/or biographies. I don't see why it needs to be anymore complicated than that.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

arpeggio said:


> Why must there be a competition between composers? This is not the World Cup.


I don't think there is much of a competition. To me, it's like comparing Leibniz to the Count from Sesame Street.


----------



## Guest (Jan 11, 2016)

dsphipps100 said:


> It seems rather clear to me that Dudamel was simply saying that, where Mozart was the greatest composer of his day,


So why Mozart, given that Beethoven was the greatest composer of his day, and Mahler of his, and Boulez of his...????


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> ...and Boulez of his...????


Beware, the tonalists are probably reaching for their flame throwers right now....


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Le Peel said:


> I thought the music in The Force Awakens was quite bland and forgettable.


Possibly because very little of the original Star Wars music is Williams' work.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Couac Addict said:


> Possibly because very little of the original Star Wars music is Williams' work.


Please expand, thanks!


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

John Williams is the Mozart of our day?

No....just no.


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

It's hilarious the way that so many people are making 1000-times more than necessary out of Dudamel's plain and simple comments. All these attempts to put Williams down and to denigrate him to a mere wannabe are a complete waste of time in the present-day context.

Mahler died over 100 years ago, and yet his place in the pantheon of composers is only just now starting to be reasonably settled among music historians. The music business is also only just now starting to consider the possibility that modern film music (both the good and the bad that will not survive the test of time) might ought to be viewed alongside opera music of pre-movies days (both the good and the bad that has not survived the test of time).

Please do not be like the fools in Vienna during the 1890s and 1900s who dismissed Mahler's symphonies as garbage as if you know how history is going to judge Williams' music in the future. They were only exposing their ignorance just as you are also likely doing.

(And no, I'm not equating Williams with Mahler, so put down your mouse before you angrily click on "Reply with quote" and say something that embarrasses yourself.)


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Silly comment.

So Williams is famous for a dozen or so film scores - and what else.

His entire output is not even comparable to one eraly Mozart opera in the echelons of art.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

dsphipps100 said:


> It's hilarious the way that so many people are making 1000-times more than necessary out of Dudamel's plain and simple comments. All these attempts to put Williams down and to denigrate him to a mere wannabe are a complete waste of time in the present-day context.
> 
> Mahler died over 100 years ago, and yet his place in the pantheon of composers is only just now starting to be reasonably settled among music historians. The music business is also only just now starting to consider the possibility that modern film music (both the good and the bad that will not survive the test of time) might ought to be viewed alongside opera music of pre-movies days (both the good and the bad that has not survived the test of time).
> 
> ...


Mahler has been in the canon of top composers now for at least 50 years - think about the great conductors who did Mahler cycles in the 60s - Solti - Karajan - Jochum etc

But Williams' rep rests on film music and he is famous now (and much more successful than Mozart was in his pomp) - no doubt in 100 years he will still be a dominant name in film music history.


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

stomanek said:


> Mahler has been in the canon of top composers now for at least 50 years - think about the great conductors who did Mahler cycles in the 60s - Solti - Karajan - Jochum etc


That certainly did help, yes. But even in those times, a complete Mahler Symphonies cycle was a considerable rarity. The most sought-after "Mt. Everest" of orchestral literature was still to have done a complete cycle of Beethoven Symphonies. Today however, even such orchestras as the Atlanta Symphony and the Dallas (where I live) Symphony Orchestras pursue a complete Mahler cycle (even if they never finish it, unfortunately).


stomanek said:


> But Williams' rep rests on film music and he is famous now (and much more successful than Mozart was in his pomp) - no doubt in 100 years he will still be a dominant name in film music history.


If that turns out to be the case, then I will certainly have no problem with it. (Since I do plan to live that long, naturally.







)


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

violadude said:


> John Williams is the Mozart of our day?
> 
> No....just no.


Amen to this


----------



## dzc4627 (Apr 23, 2015)

He must have been joking. He must have been. Please tell me he is.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Please expand, thanks!


Sure, so Star Wars starts with the main crawl 




...the Empire are chasing the Rebels in their spaceships 




...R2D2 and C3PO are stranded in the desert 



 (Williams didn't even bother trying to disguise the temp track for this one.

More Rite of Spring pops in throughout....plenty of Dvorak's 9th as well.

Stormtroopers attack 



 . Stick this onto the cellos from Dvorak's 9th and you also get Jaws.

I can't remember the movies. What happens next? Han and Leia probably fall in love 




...they fly to the Death Star 



 and then blow it up with the finale of Holst's Mars.

...get some medals at ceremony with a mash-up of Mendelssohn's Wedding March and Dvorak's 9th 




...hang out with ewoks 




...mix in some Walton throughout and you've got yourself a blockbuster.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

Couac Addict said:


> Sure, so Star Wars starts with the main crawl
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Maybe you're not a composer but this is common for anyone. If you listen to the motive introducing/ populating much of Bach's e-minor partita, and the dotted-note motive from the third movement of beethoven's appossioanata, they are the same gesture, but with different tempo and a half step from one another. Then, Chopin saw fit to steal from the same movement the motive with the Neapolitan and the oscillating notes on the high end for the coda of his first ballade.

The extent to which Williams steals might actually be somewhat less than these composers, since common-practice gestures are used over and over and over again and there are more restrictions on technique.

The original backing track for the 1977 movie was bruckners 9th and Dvorak's 9th.....much of Williams music for it closely resembles Stravinsky, Walton, and Howard Hanson.


----------



## Truckload (Feb 15, 2012)

Well done Couac Addict - can you do that with Harry Potter?


----------



## Truckload (Feb 15, 2012)

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> Maybe you're not a composer but this is common for anyone. If you listen to the motive introducing/ populating much of Bach's e-minor partita, and the dotted-note motive from the third movement of beethoven's appossioanata, they are the same gesture, but with different tempo and a half step from one another. Then, Chopin saw fit to steal from the same movement the motive with the Neapolitan and the oscillating notes on the high end for the coda of his first ballade.
> 
> The extent to which Williams steals might actually be somewhat less than these composers, since common-practice gestures are used over and over and over again and there are more restrictions on technique.
> 
> The original backing track for the 1977 movie was bruckners 9th and Dvorak's 9th.....much of Williams music for it closely resembles Stravinsky, Walton, and Howard Hanson.


I agree in principal that often composers will mimic something by another composer by accident, but the Star Wars score just seems a bit more extreme than typical. But even knowing the worst, I still love the Star Wars score, even if we might be tempted to call it an "arrangement" as opposed to an original composition.

But after Star Wars, Williams seems to get a lot more comfortable in his own skin. Correct me please if I have a faulty memory, but the rest of his scores seem very original in my memory.


----------



## Prodromides (Mar 18, 2012)

dzc4627 said:


> He must have been joking. He must have been. Please tell me he is.


I can't tell you if he was joking.
But what I can say is that one of Philly's vendors who sells/buys vinyl LPs does purchase soundtracks but does not buy classical.
I sold some of my LP collection to him, but he refused the 15 classical LPs I attempted to sell to him.

John Williams may not be the Mozart of the 21st century, but - for customers who grew up during the 1980s & 1990s - the 'millenniels' rather purchase soundtracks than classical music.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

violadude said:


> John Williams is the Mozart of our day?
> 
> No....just no.


Dudamel sucking up to the ol' maestro. I believe Bernstein did the same with Mitropolis. Literally!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

I think we have a case of people taking an off the cuff remark far too seriously!


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

Truckload said:


> Well done Couac Addict - can you do that with Harry Potter?


I think calling what John Williams did plagiarism is an example of one of the chief ways classical music education and the WCM establishment stifles creativity, which is part of why you get generations of composers that end up sounding generic and characterless in their foremost aim of not being derivative. What that poster noticed in the SW score aren't even the most derivative elements. For instance, there are clearer similarities between the rebel fanfare and a horn passage/ motive that populates the first movement of Howard Hanson's 2nd symphony, and the opening of the Jawa Sandcrawler scene is extreme in its similarity to the opening of the second part of the Rite of Spring, with c# minor and d# minor triads interpolating over a d minor triad in the lower range of the orchestra.

The poster took things that bear stylistic similarity but would be very difficult to call plagiarism by any stretch of the imagination. However, when you look at the similarities in the great classical and baroque composers, the amount of re-using stock gestures and the similarity between compositional ideas is much greater than most between Williams and his source material and greater than any to be found in the 20th century and beyond - it's just part of the dogma and double-standard the WCM establishment applies to music from different eras and by established masters as to why we view Williams' work as plagiarism and theirs as original.

It's very difficult for Williams or any living composer to write something that will have an urgency or appeal while not being accused of being a musical klepto, in spite of that this is what every great composer has always been. In trying to avoid derivation, composers end up expunging any element of familiarity and lose their chance of speaking to an audience - while at the same time, works that are overly abundant and have lost most of their novelty are called incarnations of greatness and declared to possess a beauty that can never be reached. So basically composers are told what to think greatness is, but also told that they must not emulate greatness to any discernable degree. No wonder we struggle to find analogues for the great composers in the present day.


----------



## TwoPhotons (Feb 13, 2015)

If we're going to compare "Mozart the Composer" to "Williams the Composer", then Williams' concert works give much more insight into "Williams the Composer" IMO than his more popular film scores because, as Williams has said in a 1979 interview, he consciously 'warps' their style so that they sound familiar to the audience:



> *Interviewer*: What would you cite as your influences in composing the scores for the "Star Wars" films?
> 
> *Williams*: My influences, like those of all musicians, came from wide range of sources and I acknowledge them freely. In the case of "Star Wars" I made a conscious decision to try to model and shape the score on late nineteenth century, romantic orchestral scores. The idea was that the music should have a familiar emotional ring so that as you looked at all those strange robots and other unearthly creatures, at sights hitherto unseen, the music would be rooted in familiar traditions.


Some of my favourite concert works of his:





















And a slightly more jazzy one (Williams of course started out as a jazz pianist):


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

DavidA said:


> I think we have a case of people taking an off the cuff remark far too seriously!


THANK YOU.









As for Williams "borrowing" from other composers, I remember in January, 1979 when I was 12 years old (just gave away my age there...), sitting in a movie theater watching the first Christopher Reeve/Superman movie (one month after its December 1978 release). As the opening credits were rolling, I remember thinking to myself, "that sure sounds a lot like the Rebel Spaceship Fanfare from Star Wars...", and then to my shock, the screen said, "Music by John Williams". No wonder it sounded like Star Wars!

I share this to demonstrate that, regardless of whatever eclecticism other people might accuse Williams of, he has such a distinctive sound that a 12-year-old was able to recognize it.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Truckload said:


> Well done Couac Addict - can you do that with Harry Potter?


I can't because I haven't seen the movies. I'm only aware of the Harry Potter theme because it was everywhere at the time.
…which is cribbing this 



…which is cribbing this 




This sort of thing is common in film music. The problem is that film studios need music within the constraints of the movie and they want it done yesterday.

Spielberg might make his film using this as a temp track 



 - a piece of music that he uses temporally to set the mood and edit to…and then he'll hand it over to Williams. Williams tacks on some Dvorak 



 and you've got yourself E.T.

Superman is derived from Lalo's Vainement, ma bien aimée 



 and Strauss' Death and Transfiguration (14:10 )




Indiana Jones …from Bernstein's Commancheros 




Unfortunately, it never ends.

Is Williams to blame? Not especially. He's providing a service which is made-to-order music and he's possibly more of an arranger than a composer. Or at least, he's a good arranger. Perhaps the issue is that film studios have neither the time and in some cases, budget to create new music. Or, perhaps they just don't rate it highly enough to justify the time/cost etc. It is just background music for the movie.

I think the reason many have a gripe with Williams is more to do with the listeners who think his work is new and exciting classical music when his career is just endless derivative work.

Of course, cribbing has been going on since the dawn of music. The issue is that the great composers have a large body of original work to accompany it. I suspect that Williams only has a collection of derivatives which isn't the mark of anyone substantial in music.

I think of Williams as much the same as a pop DJ who samples others works, except that Williams has more skill at piecing it all together. 








Musical tastes, aside. Surely Bessie Jones is the talent. Moby just owned a drum machine.

At the end of day, it's probably just a friendly off the cuff remark about Williams and Mozart made by someone with little musical knowledge...but they've probably seen Amadeus.


----------



## Guest (Jan 12, 2016)

Couac Addict said:


> Musical tastes, aside. Surely Bessie Jones is the talent. Moby just owned a drum machine.


No, Both Bessie Jones and Moby have the talent. If Moby 'just' owned the drum machine, then his arrangement would have remained as obscure as hers.


----------



## scratchgolf (Nov 15, 2013)

arpeggio said:


> Why must there be a competition between composers? This is not the World Cup.


No, but the Germans usually win.


----------



## Truckload (Feb 15, 2012)

Couac Addict said:


> I think the reason many have a gripe with Williams is more to do with the listeners who think his work is new and exciting classical music when his career is just endless derivative work.
> 
> Of course, cribbing has been going on since the dawn of music. The issue is that the great composers have a large body of original work to accompany it. I suspect that Williams only has a collection of derivatives which isn't the mark of anyone substantial in music.
> 
> ...


You really are quite good at finding these musical ancestors. A few were a bit of a stretch, but over all, very impressive.

I don't think using the same harmonic progression is quite the same as quoting a melody, or in some cases melody and orchestration. Still the most extreme example is "Kings Row". I had no knowledge of the movie "Kings Row", so when the "similar" music was pointed out to me I literally gasped in shock.

So what do you think of his "serious" compositions? Are those also derivative? I am asking, as I have no idea if they are or are not derivative. I have not listened to enough of the similar things being written in the last 20 years to be able to even guess.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

dsphipps100 said:


> It's hilarious the way that so many people are making 1000-times more than necessary out of Dudamel's plain and simple comments. All these attempts to put Williams down and to denigrate him to a mere wannabe are a complete waste of time in the present-day context.
> 
> Mahler died over 100 years ago, and yet his place in the pantheon of composers is only just now starting to be reasonably settled among music historians. *The music business is also only just now starting to consider the possibility that modern film music (both the good and the bad that will not survive the test of time) might ought to be viewed alongside opera music of pre-movies days (both the good and the bad that has not survived the test of time).*


Personally, I have yet to hear a movie score that stands on its own as a piece of music, divorced from the movie, the same way that Operas stand on their own as pieces of music. Care to enlighten me?


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

Alexander Nevsky?

I don't think there's any film you could extract the entire score, eliminate the silence & dialogue, then just play it.
But then the visual is always paramount in a film, in opera the music and visuals are much more equal partners.
cheers,
GG


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Some film music can yield fine shorter set pieces, though getting something larger in scale with a real structure is far more difficult. My ears perked up today (because of these recent discussions) when the radio played the march from Raiders of the Lost Ark. A stirring piece!

Prokofiev's _Battle on the Ice _from Alexander Nevsky has been popular since it was written.


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

violadude said:


> Personally, I have yet to hear a movie score that stands on its own as a piece of music, divorced from the movie, the same way that Operas stand on their own as pieces of music. Care to enlighten me?


Certainly, it's very simple. I take the CD in my hand of whatever soundtrack I wish to listen to, put it in my CD player, press "Play", and listen to it just fine without the movie going, enjoying it quite thoroughly.

If people can listen to the Ride of the Valkyries, oftentimes not knowing what's going on in the original opera, and yet still enjoy it, then why can they not do the same with some equally excellent music from a film, such as "The Crack of Doom" from "The Return of the King"?

Furthermore, anything in the 19th Century that we refer to as "Incidental Music" (such as Mendelssohn's Midsummer Night's Dream, Beethoven's Egmont, Schubert's Rosamunde, or Bizet's L'arlessiene) is pretty much the pre-celluloid film days equivalent of a soundtrack. Everytime you listen to one of those, you're basically listening to a soundtrack.

How many of you here, for example, can honestly say that you know precisely what's going on in the action of the play behind the music from Egmont or Rosamunde? I don't, but it certainly doesn't stop me from enjoying the music on its own.

It used to be that, before celluloid film was around, the opera was the hottest topic around town. Read any biography of any composer who lived in Europe during the late 19th Century, and you'll find that people used to sit around in the taverns gossiping about their favorite opera singers and the latest, hottest new opera, just like today, we talk about our favorite movie stars and the latest, hottest movie.

Movies are the "operas" of today. If our stuffy, dusty concert programmers on the orchestra boards of directors around the world would realize that, they just might suddenly discover a way to bring the orchestra business back into the mainstream, into the 21st Century, and most important of all, into the black on their bank account's balance sheet.

C'mon people, think outside of the box.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

dsphipps100 said:


> C'mon people, think outside of the box.


I do. That's why I won't be wasting time and money to go see/hear a crappy movie like Star Wars.


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

starthrower said:


> I do. That's why I won't be wasting time and money to go see/hear a crappy movie like Star Wars.


Reminds me of Eduard Hanslick talking about Wagner...


----------



## Harold in Columbia (Jan 10, 2016)

dsphipps100 said:


> Movies are the "operas" of today.


Pop concerts are the operas of today. Movie scores are more like "incidental music" for plays, which you also mentioned.


----------



## Guest (Jan 13, 2016)

Couac Addict said:


> I think the reason many have a gripe with Williams is more to do with the listeners


That's a bit rough on Williams.



dsphipps100 said:


> The music business is also only just now starting to consider the possibility that modern film music (both the good and the bad that will not survive the test of time) might ought to be viewed alongside opera music of pre-movies days


Whether this is true or not, there is no shame in being a mere film composer. Williams' work stands on its own two feet in the context for which it is intended.


----------



## Harold in Columbia (Jan 10, 2016)

dsphipps100 said:


> Mahler died over 100 years ago, and yet his place in the pantheon of composers is only just now starting to be reasonably settled among music historians.


I don't think that's going to be settled until we stop being post-modern and stop needing to make work for symphony orchestras - because right now that's two automatic points in Mahler's favor.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Truckload said:


> I had no knowledge of the movie "Kings Row", so when the "similar" music was pointed out to me I literally gasped in shock.
> 
> So what do you think of his "serious" compositions? Are those also derivative?


...meanwhile in the Puccini camp....last few measures of this. 




I've no idea what Williams is doing outside of film work. I'm only aware of his film work because I go to the movies.

Oh we forgot Darth Vader's theme in the previous list. What if we take Bruckner's 9th II (after that pesky pizzicato) and play Chopin's Funeral march over the top of it?


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

dsphipps100 said:


> Certainly, it's very simple. I take the CD in my hand of whatever soundtrack I wish to listen to, put it in my CD player, press "Play", and listen to it just fine without the movie going, enjoying it quite thoroughly.
> 
> If people can listen to the Ride of the Valkyries, oftentimes not knowing what's going on in the original opera, and yet still enjoy it, then why can they not do the same with some equally excellent music from a film, such as "The Crack of Doom" from "The Return of the King"?
> 
> ...


You missed the point of what I'm asking. What is a movie soundtrack that you think works just as well as a standalone piece and not just a movie soundtrack?


----------



## Truckload (Feb 15, 2012)

violadude said:


> You missed the point of what I'm asking. What is a movie soundtrack that you think works just as well as a standalone piece and not just a movie soundtrack?


What do you think of Howard Shore's The Lord of the Rings Symphony?


----------



## Guest (Jan 13, 2016)

This silly comment assumes that there can be another Mozart, or that each generation has a Mozart. That someone like Mozart could exist was the rarest of events and it's likely that it will never happen again. Mozart had to happen and VIENNA had to happen. Let's honor Mozart by recognizing we'll never see the like of him again. Just like we'll never see another Beethoven. Stravinsky died in 71. 

Whether people 100 years from now will hear Williams' music will entirely be dependent on whether they'll watch the movies. Without the movies, the music doesn't stand on its own. However, I would bet that a 100 years from now Mozart's music will be played just as enthusiastically as it is still played today.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

DoReFaMi said:


> This silly comment assumes that there can be another Mozart, or that each generation has a Mozart. That someone like Mozart could exist was the rarest of events and it's likely that it will never happen again. Mozart had to happen and VIENNA had to happen. Let's honor Mozart by recognizing we'll never see the like of him again. Just like we'll never see another Beethoven. Stravinsky died in 71.
> 
> Whether people 100 years from now will hear Williams' music will entirely be dependent on whether they'll watch the movies. Without the movies, the music doesn't stand on its own. However, I would bet that a 100 years from now Mozart's music will be played just as enthusiastically as it is still played today.


It gets played in concerts a lot, actually. Personally I think the OT Star Wars suite is really inspired and it would be a shame if it weren't around in 100 years.

Listen. The music from Star Wars is not Spice Girls. And it sure as hell isn't Howard Shore's or Hans Zimmer's comparatively pedestrian music. I own the scores for Star Wars as well as other music John Williams created and it's some very advanced writing with a lot of creativity.

What I feel like I'm reading is people lumping all of those things into one category because they are not or are not thought to be classical, and because Mozart is one of the WCM world's sacred cows.



violadude said:


> You missed the point of what I'm asking. What is a movie soundtrack that you think works just as well as a standalone piece and not just a movie soundtrack?


A lot of JW's music does just that, but I also think some of Max Steiner's scores.


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

DoReFaMi said:


> This silly comment assumes that there can be another Mozart, or that each generation has a Mozart. That someone like Mozart could exist was the rarest of events and it's likely that it will never happen again. Mozart had to happen and VIENNA had to happen. Let's honor Mozart by recognizing we'll never see the like of him again. Just like we'll never see another Beethoven. Stravinsky died in 71.
> 
> Whether people 100 years from now will hear Williams' music will entirely be dependent on whether they'll watch the movies. Without the movies, the music doesn't stand on its own. However, I would bet that a 100 years from now Mozart's music will be played just as enthusiastically as it is still played today.


Once again, somebody takes Gustavo Dudamel's plain and simple comment, blows it out of proportion, and takes it way too seriously.


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

violadude said:


> You missed the point of what I'm asking. What is a movie soundtrack that you think works just as well as a standalone piece and not just a movie soundtrack?


I'm sorry I missed the point, please forgive me. 

There are a number of soundtracks that I would list as potential stand-alone music, including all of Episodes 4-6 of the original Star Wars trilogy, 1978's Superman, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Schindler's List, and from other composers I would include everything Howard Shore wrote for Middle Earth and Peter Jackson (both The Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit trilogy), plus also Hans Zimmer's Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy, Jerry Goldsmith's Alien (as he wrote it, not as it was used in the movie, mind you), Jerry Goldsmith's The Omen, Miklos Rosza's Ben-Hur, Max Steiner's Gone With the Wind, Elmer Bernstein's The Ten Commandments...

and I could probably go on and on, but hopefully that'll get the idea across.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

violadude said:


> You missed the point of what I'm asking. What is a movie soundtrack that you think works just as well as a standalone piece and not just a movie soundtrack?


Star Wars or any great film music is composed fine art music. This is perfectly acceptable as avant-garde composers have composed other types of music that are equally presented regarded as such.


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2016)

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> It gets played in concerts a lot, actually. Personally I think the OT Star Wars suite is really inspired and it would be a shame if it weren't around in 100 years.
> 
> Listen. The music from Star Wars is not Spice Girls. And it sure as hell isn't Howard Shore's or Hans Zimmer's comparatively pedestrian music. I own the scores for Star Wars as well as other music John Williams created and it's some very advanced writing with a lot of creativity.


Ah, well, if you own the scores, then it must be advanced!



Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> What I feel like I'm reading is people lumping all of those things into one category because they are not or are not thought to be classical, and because Mozart is one of the WCM world's sacred cows.


Never mind the comparison with Mozart. Consider the purpose(s) of film music: to assist in the creation of atmosphere and emotion; to combine with the visuals in punctuating, drawing attention to, commenting on aspects of the story; to frame the film. (Additionally, some soundtracks are compiled to make money, but they tend not to be original music but compilations, usually of pop music). So, there's a good reason to 'lump together' soundtracks by composers as they are written for a purpose other than standalone compositions. That music is also shaped, stretched and cut to work with a movie over 90 minutes. Then it is recut and reconstituted (like formed meat) to be packaged for consumption as a CD tie-in.

The fact that there are a number of composers whose soundtracks using classical orchestra have become famous, often due to the memorable themes, possibly due to the success of the movie, does not transform the work into something comparable to a concerto or symphony, which is written for its own purposes.

I love the movies and the music of the movies, and there are many composers who are as well known to me and as distinctive in their contribution as the actors and directors and special effects people who also get a credit. What they do adds value to the movie experience, and when I buy the CD it's because I want to recreate that experience. However, I actually only own four OSTs (while I own many DVDs of the movies), and whilst there is still some pleasure to be had from them, their rewards for me have diminished over time in a way that the standard classical repertoire has not.

Great movie soundtracks deserve recognition in their own right. They don't need recognition as "classical music" as well to give them some kind of spurious additional status so that they can be taken seriously alongside works (by any other 'classical' composer, not just Mozart) produced for different purposes and to different formats.

(By the way, Zimmer was not the main composer for all three POTC movies).


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> The fact that there are a number of composers whose soundtracks using classical orchestra have become famous, often due to the memorable themes, possibly due to the success of the movie, does not transform the work into something comparable to a concerto or symphony, which is written for its own purposes.


That is certainly true, but neither does it preclude the music from being able to artistically stand on its own in cases where the music is of exceptionally high quality.


MacLeod said:


> I actually only own four OSTs (while I own many DVDs of the movies), and whilst there is still some pleasure to be had from them, their rewards for me have diminished over time in a way that the standard classical repertoire has not.


That is a matter of personal taste (to which you are certainly entitled of course), but does not reflect on the music's quality.


MacLeod said:


> Great movie soundtracks deserve recognition in their own right. They don't need recognition as "classical music" as well to give them some kind of spurious additional status so that they can be taken seriously alongside works (by any other 'classical' composer, not just Mozart) produced for different purposes and to different formats.


OK, so we'll use the term "Orchestral Music".







That still doesn't automatically preclude OSTs from having artistic standing on their own, where merited.


MacLeod said:


> (By the way, Zimmer was not the main composer for all three POTC movies).


Correct, Klaus Badelt was credited as the composer for "The Curse of the Black Pearl". That fact is, however, that Zimmer did help him on that movie, and Zimmer was also one of Badelt's primary teachers. During production for "The Last Samurai", Zimmer was visiting the set the day after "The Curse of the Black Pearl" was released to theaters, and he says Tom Cruise came up to him and said, "Nice work on Pirates of the Caribbean". Zimmer then goes on to say that he was rather dismayed that his contribution was so obvious, because he wanted Badelt to get the credit.


----------



## Truckload (Feb 15, 2012)

MacLeod said:


> The fact that there are a number of composers whose soundtracks using classical orchestra have become famous, often due to the memorable themes, possibly due to the success of the movie, does not transform the work into something comparable to a concerto or symphony, which is written for its own purposes.
> 
> . . .
> 
> Great movie soundtracks deserve recognition in their own right. They don't need recognition as "classical music" as well to give them some kind of spurious additional status so that they can be taken seriously alongside works (by any other 'classical' composer, not just Mozart) produced for different purposes and to different formats. (By the way, Zimmer was not the main composer for all three POTC movies).


You make some very interesting points. In general I agree with the point that lots, perhaps most. of movie music is not particularly deserving of attention independent of the movie itself. But the best of the genre has much to offer.

Anything that brings more people into an orchestral concert is good, because they might hear some additional music that will open their ears to more serious music and increase the size of the classical audience. The best of the movie music can be very original in using colorful harmonic progressions and/or superb orchestration to evoke powerful emotions.

There is definitely something going on with movie music that is interesting. I think people have a hunger to be touched by music. And that hunger is not being assuaged by the "serious" composers today.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

dsphipps100 said:


> Tom Cruise came up to him and said, "Nice work on Pirates of the Caribbean". Zimmer then goes on to say that he was rather dismayed that his contribution was so obvious, because he wanted Badelt to get the credit.


Perhaps Tom Cruise saw Drop Zone.
(2:00)







Truckload said:


> What do you think of Howard Shore's The Lord of the Rings Symphony?


Sibelius' 3rd for the Fellowship theme? (8:46 and 9:34)


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2016)

dsphipps100 said:


> That is certainly true, but neither does it preclude the music from being able to artistically stand on its own in cases where the music is of exceptionally high quality.That is a matter of personal taste (to which you are certainly entitled of course), but does not reflect on the music's quality.OK, so we'll use the term "Orchestral Music".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Whatever the 'quality', I still have to ask: stand on their own as what?



Truckload said:


> And that hunger is not being assuaged by the "serious" composers today.


Could that be simply because concert programmes are too full of the old and not of the new?


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

Truckload said:


> You make some very interesting points. In general I agree with the point that lots, perhaps most. of movie music is not particularly deserving of attention independent of the movie itself. But the best of the genre has much to offer.
> 
> Anything that brings more people into an orchestral concert is good, because they might hear some additional music that will open their ears to more serious music and increase the size of the classical audience. The best of the movie music can be very original in using colorful harmonic progressions and/or superb orchestration to evoke powerful emotions.
> 
> There is definitely something going on with movie music that is interesting. I think people have a hunger to be touched by music. And that hunger is not being assuaged by the "serious" composers today.


In addition to Truckload's insightful comment, I would also point out that the majority of music does not survive and enter into the repertoire. There was a _ton_ of music written during the 19th Century that has disappeared into obscurity. To (rightly) point out that most soundtrack music is not worthy of posterity is simply saying that, in that regard, it's exactly the same as 19th Century (and 20th Century, for that matter) "classical" music. Even the "classical" composers whose music has entered into the mainstream repertoire are very much in the minority. And consider how much of even their music would receive no attention whatsoever were it not for some other masterpiece(s) that they wrote. (Honestly for instance, would anybody ever pay attention to Bruckner's Symphony # 0 if it wasn't for his other very deserving symphonies?)


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> Whatever the 'quality', I still have to ask: stand on their own as what?


I guess I'm not understanding what you're looking for. My answer at this point would be "stand on their own as music to listen to", but I suspect you're looking for something more specific than that.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Stand on their own as providing listening enjoyment - I think that would be the simplest and obvious answer.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Couac Addict said:


> Sibelius' 3rd for the Fellowship theme? (8:46 and 9:34)


I thought I was the only one who noticed that!


----------



## Arsakes (Feb 20, 2012)

John Williams' music style is like a combination of RVW, Sibelius and Stravinsky.

My 50 cents!


----------



## dsphipps100 (Jan 10, 2016)

ArtMusic said:


> Stand on their own as providing listening enjoyment - I think that would be the simplest and obvious answer.


Sorry, I was probably just over-thinking it.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2016)

dsphipps100 said:


> I guess I'm not understanding what you're looking for. My answer at this point would be "stand on their own as music to listen to", but I suspect you're looking for something more specific than that.


Well it's not me making the claim that Williams' music is, to paraphrase, 'good enough in its own right to be freestanding, as good as a piece composed specifically to be freestanding by a classical composer of the stature of Mozart.'

Here's a visual analogy. This is an old master...

View attachment 80263

https://simon-rivett-9f1w.squarespace.com/blog/2013/7/17/rembrandts-nose

This is not...

View attachment 80264

https://realmenstitch.wordpress.com/tag/patchwork-quilt-tsushin/

...though if you follow the link, it's an approximation of one, made as a patchwork quilt.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Mozart was very progressive for his day. I think he'd have enjoyed Williams' music, all the while chuckling through it.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

pianozach said:


> Mozart was very progressive for his day. I think he'd have enjoyed Williams' music, all the while chuckling through it.


Progressive meant something else in those stuffy days than in the contemporary wilderness. Just a nitpick.


----------

