# most serious and unserious composers



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

Serious = Always trying to make their compositions the best they can be and trying to express themselves as clearly as possible.

Unserious = Writing music for fun. Music for music's sake.

For the first I would say Schumann. His compositions always, to me, seem as if he has put as much effort in as possible. It is clearly very emotive and does not seem as light hearted as some other composers.

For the second option I would say Saint-Saens, his music can be serious but the playfulness of the finales of his piano concertos and the lack of sternness in the carnival of the animals is unmistakable.

So, what do you think? Who are the most serious and unserious composers?


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Burroughs said:


> Serious = Always trying to make their compositions the best they can be and trying to express themselves as clearly as possible.
> 
> Unserious = Writing music for fun. Music for music's sake.
> 
> For the first I would say Schumann. His compositions always, to me, seem as if he has put as much effort in as possible. It is clearly very emotive and does not seem as light hearted as some other composers.


Hmm for me there seem to be a lot of Schumann works that don't sound heart and soul serious, like Carnaval, Pappillons or Kinderzenen?

I think Schumann's friend Brahms is a better candidate for being a serious curmudgeon when it came to his music.


----------



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

Although of a different timeline to Schumann the first names that popped into my head were Magnard and Webern - both composed very slowly, very deliberately - flippancy didn't seem to be on their agenda and it showed in their work. 

Burroughs, I do have a bit of a problem with the term 'writing music for fun' as it implies dilettantism - perhaps we are talking Ives as he was a) comfortably-off anyway by his mid-30s and b) he never really hoped to have his work championed and so pleased himself what to write and when. Have I missed the point a bit here?


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

It doesn't get much more serious than Bruckner who seemed incapable of letting a composition go and calling it finished.

For non-serious, Frank Zappa comes to mind. If you consider him an outsider, then certainly Haydn is among the most witty. Mozart and Beethoven too.


----------



## Selby (Nov 17, 2012)

I read once that Bohuslav Martinů did not tend to re-work his compositions: once and done. Now, this could be bogus, but, if true, would fall into unserious I think. If it is true it is also pretty amazing how good some of it is.









ps. I'd been appreciative if someone could tell me whether or not this is nonsense.


----------



## Feathers (Feb 18, 2013)

Burroughs said:


> Serious = Always trying to make their compositions the best they can be and trying to express themselves as clearly as possible.
> 
> Unserious = Writing music for fun. *Music for music's sake*.


I think writing music for music's sake actually sounds pretty serious.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Mitchell said:


> I read once that Bohuslav Martinů did not tend to re-work his compositions: once and done. Now, this could be bogus, but, if true, would fall into unserious I think. If it is true it is also pretty amazing how good some of it is.
> 
> View attachment 21224
> 
> ...


I can only relate what a musicologist friend told me, him being an extreme stickler for accurate documentation, and that is what he told me, that Martinu 'Just wrote" and never looked back, no revision, no reworking before calling it finished. (I recall reading something to exactly the same point, but not being a proper academic scholar of the musicological persuasion, I don't keep a log of those sources.)

Prolific composers often do this, write, barely pause to reconsider, don't look back. (Some -- Mozart -- really can construct a large-scale piece in their head, hold it in memory, and in the writing down need to make few if any changes -- exceptionally rare, of course) This writing fast and not looking back does account for some of the weirdly uneven 'quality' of not so much the writing itself, but pieces not holding together from movement to movement.

And I agree, somewhere around four hundred works, cantata, opera, chamber music, numerous orchestral works and concertante orchestral works, the "writing" itself of a consistent high quality, is already pretty phenomenal.


----------



## drpraetorus (Aug 9, 2012)

Least Serious. Tie. P.D.Q. Bach, Spike Jones


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Wagner may have been quite serious, though I'm no expert there. In fact from the Romantics and onto modernism you probably get greater seriousness. But earlier periods like the classical and baroque are probably overall lighter in outlook. A big generalisation though.


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

Most serious: Brahms
Most unserious: Saint-Saens (I agree with you)


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Most serious: Bach, Brahms
Most un-serious: (Gilbert &) Sullivan, Offenbach, also Strauss Jr. and company


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

violadude said:


> Hmm for me there seem to be a lot of Schumann works that don't sound heart and soul serious, like Carnaval, Pappillons or Kinderzenen?
> 
> I think Schumann's friend Brahms is a better candidate for being a serious curmudgeon when it came to his music.


Absolutely true about Brahms. Marked perfectionism is serious business.


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> Most serious: Bach, Brahms
> Most un-serious: (Gilbert &) Sullivan, *Offenbach*, also Strauss Jr. and company


Huilunsoittaja, that made me laugh. He's a great candidate!


----------



## Guest (Jul 15, 2013)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> Most serious: Bach, Brahms
> Most un-serious: (Gilbert &) Sullivan, Offenbach, also Strauss Jr. and company


Excellent answer. I would just add Satie to the un-serious list. In a footnote we might mention Alkan's Marcia Funebre Sulla Morte d'un Papagallo and Mozart's Leck Mich Im Arsch.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Mitchell said:


> I read once that Bohuslav Martinů did not tend to re-work his compositions: once and done. Now, this could be bogus, but, if true, would fall into unserious I think. If it is true it is also pretty amazing how good some of it is.
> 
> View attachment 21224
> 
> ...


Composing came _very easily_ to Martinu but what's unusual in his case is that so many of these works are of such high quality and I simply couldn't imagine a revision actually doing the music any favors and may, in fact, make them not as spontaneous or energetic. He didn't labor over of his music and surprisingly it all sounds quite natural. Another composer that wrote a lot of music and was actually quite consistent was Villa-Lobos. He was composer that had no need or desire to revise works. As for composers who working now, Aho is one of those composers who can compose instantly without any revision or back-tracking. He 'sees' the music and writes it down right away. Absolutely mind-blowing how he, like Martinu and Villa-Lobos, has remained consistent through his oeuvre.


----------



## Borodin (Apr 8, 2013)

One's mode for seriousness can differ greatly from another; that is subjective. What is serious behavior or thoughts to one is unserious to another, thus perhaps we don't have the proper grounds to even know.

What I do know is serious-sounding music ≠ serious composer, unserious-sounding music ≠ unserious composer. This is mostly because I think the quality of seriousness in music itself is subjective as well, especially when speaking of esotericism.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Mitchell said:


> I read once that Bohuslav Martinů did not tend to re-work his compositions: once and done. Now, this could be bogus, but, if true, would fall into unserious I think.


Well, Shostakovich almost NEVER went back to a revise a work once finished. But it's really hard to think of him as "unserious."


----------



## worov (Oct 12, 2012)

Was Mozart serious when he wrote this ?


----------

