# Linking a composer's name with a piece of music



## Joris (Jan 13, 2013)

At some point my sister said the following:

"Why remember the names of the composer [as if it were a tedious effort], it doesn't matter, i just want some pleasing music"

I wanted to explain this in terms of that music since Beethoven doesn't have this utilitarian function and to fully appreciate a work of art you have to be involved in the artistic process, but in fact i could hardly get the words out!

I began to doubt the fact that this was really what makes me want to know the composer's name, and I felt a bit that i was just paraphrasing Nicholas Cook for example

Is knowing the corresponding composer's name important for you, and why?


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Knowing who created any work of art is important to me because it allows the listener/viewer access to the person behind the art.


----------



## Joris (Jan 13, 2013)

That sounds very true to me. But some works of art might not derive their meaning from this, think of national anthems.
I also feel that I need some cognitive 'grip', because listening to music is some kind of 'surrender', if that makes sense.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

if you like the music and want more with (for lack of a better term) a similar feel, it might be useful to know who wrote it...


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

At the risk of being accused of sexism again, I'm reminded of the old Steely Dan song "FM." 

"The girls don't seem to care what's on
As long as the mood is right."

Most of my friends would fit in this category with very few exceptions. But every one of them could tell you who Orlando Bloom is whether that has anything to do with one's enjoyment of the films he's in or not.

The answer to the question is, if you love a creative work you want to know everything about it. Otherwise you are merely superficial. There's nothing wrong with being superficial if you don't mind boring me to tears. I'll try not to bore you with my fanboy depth.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

deggial said:


> if you like the music and want more with (for lack of a better term) a similar feel, it might be useful to know who wrote it...


There might be that. But also even understanding a composer's music it might help to understand the style and period and how their own voice is expressed through their own individuality. You can then more easily recognise when a composer is being more creative within what they do and when they aren't. It's just better as a means of comparison.

Also it's nice for categorising purposes, for those of us who like doing that. I definitely like to know composer and date of composition. There are a few things I may not know the composer of I think, and many more I don't know the year of (mainly need that for modern music). That's frustrating to me.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Imagine if you liked / preferred a particular brand of bath soap, and either wanted more, or to check out other products by the same maker.

There, if for no other reason, is why you might want the 'Brand Name" on that symphony, to be able to ask for it again, or for more, similar, by the same maker


----------



## hreichgott (Dec 31, 2012)

For the same reasons people like to know who sings a pop song, and whether s/he wrote it or was doing a cover.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Most people don't even bother to find out whether something was a cover or not.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

starry said:


> Most people don't even bother to find out whether something was a cover or not.


Right, because for such a listener, the rest is just not important. I don't think any fan of any music should be alarmed that many people "use" music in the most casual manner -- it is their way and suits their wants and needs.

The rest is that sort of reaction I think anyone is familiar with: 
Q: How could they not....?
A: Because they are not you 

[[ BTW - that little Q & A applies to so much of life and relationships of all sorts: if taken to heart, it prevents oceans of stress and being disappointed in others. ]]


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Covers can be better than originals anyway, but most of the time they probably aren't as they are often just done lazily to fill out a record or just to make some easy money out of a previously popular tune.


----------



## Joris (Jan 13, 2013)

This reminds me of Theodor Adorno's notion that culture in a capitalist society is reduced to an economic product. The culture industry, as he says, operates according to standard recipes which will be repeatedly considerered, put in a new look and wherein the illusion will be created that it's about original and individual artworks. In fact, according to him, it's only about selling ready-made effects: the intended response (stress, escape from reality, sadness, joy, pleasure) is 'chewed for', there's no need to think. We're talking about popular music here of course.

Maybe slightly off-topic


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

PetrB said:


> Imagine if you liked / preferred a particular brand of bath soap, and either wanted more, or to check out other products by the same maker.
> 
> There, if for no other reason, is why you might want the 'Brand Name" on that symphony, to be able to ask for it again, or for more, similar, by the same maker


Quite.
"What's your favourite piece of music?"
"Oh, I like Symphony no 2..."
Riiight....
GG


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

GraemeG said:


> Quite.
> "What's your favourite piece of music?"
> "Oh, I like Symphony no 2..."
> Riiight....
> GG


Even one name doesn't do the job... "I like Beethoven's / Mozart's piano concerto." <g>


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I have mixed feelings with regard to this issue. On the one hand, we have what might be called the "cult of personality". My this I mean that the artist's biography and his or her name have become more important to some than the actual art work. Thus the most miserable painting by Picasso or Van Gogh is worth millions, while truly masterful works by a less familiar name aren't even "worth" a fraction of the same... and are often housed away in deep storage in the museums. Thus the name is assumed as being a guarantee of quality... like a product brand. Picasso sarcastically pointed out late in his career, that he could scribble on a piece of paper, and they would call it a "masterpiece". 

Personally, I admire the medieval approach to the anonymous creation of art (the idea of taking credit for creation... something only God could do... being almost heresy). As a result of the lack of artist's names we judge the work as art... and not based upon the "name brand".

The same "cult" exists in music. The minor and insignificant works of Mozart or Beethoven are afforded endless recordings in contrast to truly splendid works by "lesser" artists (Joseph Kraus, Gluck, Hummel, Josef Mysliveček, Michael Haydn, etc...). 

Having said this... there is something to the notion that Mozart's or Beethoven's or Van Gogh's minor works or juvenilia have a certain value in painting a fuller picture of the artist as a whole... especially if one is interested in understanding how an artist developed. There is also something to be said for the link between the biographical facts of an artist's life and a deeper understanding of the intention or inspiration of the music.


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

PetrB said:


> Even one name doesn't do the job... "I like Beethoven's / Mozart's piano concerto." <g>


Ah yes, I hear that one all too often. =\


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> I have mixed feelings with regard to this issue. On the one hand, we have what might be called the "cult of personality". My this I mean that the artist's biography and his or her name have become more important to some than the actual art work. Thus the most miserable painting by Picasso or Van Gogh is worth millions, while truly masterful works by a less familiar name aren't even "worth" a fraction of the same... and are often housed away in deep storage in the museums. Thus the name is assumed as being a guarantee of quality... like a product brand. Picasso sarcastically pointed out late in his career, that he could scribble on a piece of paper, and they would call it a "masterpiece".
> 
> Personally, I admire the medieval approach to the anonymous creation of art (the idea of taking credit for creation... something only God could do... being almost heresy). As a result of the lack of artist's names we judge the work as art... and not based upon the "name brand".
> 
> ...


This links to the whole hero worship thing. Ultimately it's better to just listen to something as music rather than as something representing a name. To me though the main use is cataloging, and often this is for lesser known composers who I'd hardly know anything else by anyway. It's nice to know where music fits in not necessarily within a single composer's oeuvre but within the whole classical tradition.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

starry said:


> There might be that. But _also_...


I was strictly referring to the OP's sister's situation. Of course _also_, but when you start thinking in terms of _also_, you're somewhere else altogether.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> I have mixed feelings with regard to this issue. On the one hand, we have what might be called the "cult of personality". My this I mean that the artist's biography and his or her name have become more important to some than the actual art work. Thus the most miserable painting by Picasso or Van Gogh is worth millions, while truly masterful works by a less familiar name aren't even "worth" a fraction of the same... and are often housed away in deep storage in the museums. Thus the name is assumed as being a guarantee of quality... like a product brand. Picasso sarcastically pointed out late in his career, that he could scribble on a piece of paper, and they would call it a "masterpiece".
> 
> Personally, I admire the medieval approach to the anonymous creation of art (the idea of taking credit for creation... something only God could do... being almost heresy). As a result of the lack of artist's names we judge the work as art... and not based upon the "name brand".
> 
> ...


I place the most blame on the cult of personality at the feet of the public and society of Beethoven's era, who lionized him to the skies even prior his death, there is an extreme of the idea of the individual coming to the fore. Until then, even the high-profile composers such as Mozart still pretty much thought of themselves as craftsmen.

I like artworks signed on their back, not on the image surface. Deed done, no intrusion on what the maker wants you to see.

I recall when Prête à Porter clothing hit the racks, and those insidious monogrammed logos began to appear on the outside of clothing, at first only on ties. I found myself unable to resist commenting, "How gracious of Yves to loan you his tie."

The best comment I saw on the current state of signed this and overtly labeled / logo stamped everything was a British fashion designer's bomber jacket, the fabric of which was a quilt of a myriad of nothing but the cloth designer labels from other clothing


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Understanding a composer's life and the circumstances they created their art in gives a person a new appreciation for the music and brings something, that already sounds great to us, to a whole new level of enrichment.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Haydn may have been lionised in his last years, though most of his life I don't think he had that luxury. When he died though I expect the crown passed to Beethoven.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

Knowing the name of the composer (or performer) is part of giving them due credit for their creation, I think. I care because I understand that this music came _from_ someone. I think that's important.


----------



## AntonioVitali (Jun 17, 2013)

I think it is important to understand the composer of a piece to be able to play it well. Studying the composer and his life gives insight into the intentions (stylistically and emotionally) the composer may have had. This is similar to if one knows the musical era the piece was written the way the performer plays the piece differs.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

The music itself may be enough of a clue as to the style and period. And we may not know exactly what the emotions were of a composer at the time a piece was composed. So though I think knowing the name of a composer is useful for my purposes I'm not sure I would give those reasons in many cases.


----------

