# Musical Rivals or Contemporaries that Despised Another Composer?



## MonagFam (Nov 17, 2015)

The idea of rival contemporaries is fascinating to me. I tend to think of it more from a sports perspective, but I wondered what musical examples might exist. Occupying the same space and vying for recognition or popularity.

This could also apply to just composers that really despised another one.

Any books on the topic?

Thanks as always for any replies or additional discussion.


----------



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

Well, maybe composers don't tend to wash dirty linen in public compared to sportspeople (esp. boxers, it seems...) but I'm sure there are many examples.

I don't think Saint-Saëns had too many nice things to say about French composers other than himself, but most of his disdain seemed to stem from his last decade or so when the changing musical world was leaving him behind.

And the least celebrated member of the Mighty Handful, César Cui, allegedly burnt numerous bridges by royally trashing various colleagues such as Mussorgsky and Rimsky-Korsakov in written articles.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Prokofiev, as a certified egomaniac as well as an overflowing musical fountain, often had nasty things to say about other composers or their works, and the payback from other composers was just as vigorous. P wrote that he and Rachmaninoff hated one another, the ill-will largely resulting from a serious disagreement on remarks P made to R following R's memorial performance of a Scriabin work, following Scriabin's early death. P also said that Ravel was the only composer in France who knew what he was doing. He boasted of sleeping through a performance of Sibelius' second symphony.

I have also seen suggestions that Bartok was less than enthusiastic about Shostakovich, especially denouncing S' seventh symphony (Leningrad). Also, Brahms and Tchaikovsky heartily disliked one another's music, but evidently after confessing that fact to one another over dinner and drinks, proceeded to find that they personally got on famously. Hugo Wolf was probably literally insane with hatred of Brahms.

Behavior very like people in general, methinks, overall.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Certainly Beethoven had a hearty contempt for Rossini, probably driven by envy. But the reverse doesn't seem to have been true.


----------



## Guest (Nov 19, 2015)

elgars ghost said:


> And the least celebrated member of the Mighty Handful, César Cui, allegedly burnt numerous bridges by royally trashing various colleagues such as Mussorgsky and Rimsky-Korsakov in written articles.


And yet, those guys are the only reason anyone knows César Cui's name


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

There was something of a rivalry between Stravinsky and Schoenberg during their lifetimes. The composers met briefly around the time of Pierrot lunaire's massive success, right before the Rite of Spring vaulted Stravinsky into the international limelight. Stravinsky's next work, Three Japanese Lyrics, shows some inspiration from Pierrot in its instrumentation. When Stravinsky started composing Neoclassical works, though, Schoenberg was decidedly nonplussed, and made the Russian composer the brunt of one of his Three Satires. He expressed a very strong dislike of Oedipus Rex in a private note, although at the same time he said he respected Stravinsky and loved Petrushka. Stravinsky, for his part, claimed to have no need for Schoenberg's chromatic methods and that he was pleased to work with diatonic scales. They ended up living in Hollywood a few blocks away from each other, but never met or talked. Stravinsky's turn to serial techniques after Schoenberg's death shocked many of the supporters who had considered them antithetical to each other (which they never were, of course, any more than Brahms and Wagner had been).


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Pierre Boulez and John Adams have exchanged barbs, although I wouldn't call it a full-blown rivalry.

A lot of this stuff is personality driven. Stravinsky, for example, can be very cutting in his comments. There may be others who didn't like someone else's music, but never spoke up.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Danish Langgaard (1893-1952) saw himself very much in opposition to Nielsen (1865-1931) and wrote a mockery piece, 
"Our Great Composer Carl Nielsen" (



) etc., 
but it turns out to be a bit more complicated than that, since some of Langgaard´s music isn´t that far from Nielsen´s anyway.


----------



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

nathanb said:


> And yet, those guys are the only reason anyone knows César Cui's name


Yes, well...Cui had to make his mark somehow, I suppose. I've been told his more bitchy writings make good reading.


----------



## Dawood (Oct 11, 2015)

I read somewhere once - I would imagine in a book on Shostakovich that the holy time (this was a Freudian slip that I've decided to keep) he and Stravinsky met they briefly agreed on how little they liked Puccini...


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

elgars ghost said:


> Well, maybe composers don't tend to wash dirty linen in public compared to sportspeople (esp. boxers, it seems...) but I'm sure there are many examples.
> 
> I don't think Saint-Saëns had too many nice things to say about French composers other than himself, but most of his disdain seemed to stem from his last decade or so when the changing musical world was leaving him behind.
> 
> And the least celebrated member of the Mighty Handful, César Cui, allegedly burnt numerous bridges by royally trashing various colleagues such as Mussorgsky and Rimsky-Korsakov in written articles.


And I don't think Debussy said very nice things about Saint-Saëns either...


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

Berlioz let rip on all kinds of other composers - contemporaries and those from the past. 

In return, a fair amount of flak was directed his way by other composers too


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> There was something of a rivalry between Stravinsky and Schoenberg during their lifetimes. The composers met briefly around the time of Pierrot lunaire's massive success, right before the Rite of Spring vaulted Stravinsky into the international limelight. Stravinsky's next work, Three Japanese Lyrics, shows some inspiration from Pierrot in its instrumentation. When Stravinsky started composing Neoclassical works, though, Schoenberg was decidedly nonplussed, and made the Russian composer the brunt of one of his Three Satires. He expressed a very strong dislike of Oedipus Rex in a private note, although at the same time he said he respected Stravinsky and loved Petrushka. Stravinsky, for his part, claimed to have no need for Schoenberg's chromatic methods and that he was pleased to work with diatonic scales. They ended up living in Hollywood a few blocks away from each other, but never met or talked. Stravinsky's turn to serial techniques after Schoenberg's death shocked many of the supporters who had considered them antithetical to each other (which they never were, of course, any more than Brahms and Wagner had been).


That's an interesting historical account that I read about too. But I never really understood why Schoenberg and Stravinsky felt that way about each other. Schoenberg was already well in advance with his atonal techniques and Stravinsky had his own language that gained much wider success. I can only speculate.


----------



## Guest (Nov 19, 2015)

Dawood said:


> I read somewhere once - I would imagine in a book on Shostakovich that the holy time (this was a Freudian slip that I've decided to keep) he and Stravinsky met they briefly agreed on how little they liked Puccini...


Kudos to both


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

ArtMusic said:


> That's an interesting historical account that I read about too. But I never really understood why Schoenberg and Stravinsky felt that way about each other. Schoenberg was already well in advance with his atonal techniques and Stravinsky had his own language that gained much wider success. I can only speculate.


Schoenberg, who rightly detested the nonsensical term atonal, did not believe in linear musical progress.

Stravinsky, who later (according to Craft) considered Schoenberg a "great composer," was dismissive of many of his contemporaries and rivals. Furthermore, one can hardly say that his Neoclassical works, the subject of this discussion, "gained much wider success," unless we are talking about the contemporary reception of his peers, for they were hardly much more popular than Schoenberg's works.

Even today many listeners dislike all Stravinsky aside from the three early ballets.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> Schoenberg, who rightly detested the nonsensical term atonal, did not believe in linear musical progress.
> 
> Stravinsky, who later (according to Craft) considered Schoenberg a "great composer," was dismissive of many of his contemporaries and rivals. Furthermore, one can hardly say that his Neoclassical works, the subject of this discussion, "gained much wider success," unless we are talking about the contemporary reception of his peers, for they were hardly much more popular than Schoenberg's works.
> 
> Even today many listeners dislike all Stravinsky aside from the three early ballets.


Interesting they had this opaque reception to each other. Stravinsky had more public "official" awards nonetheless.


----------



## waldvogel (Jul 10, 2011)

Although we don't think of them as contemporaries, Mendelssohn was only four years older than Wagner. When called upon to conduct Mendelssohn's music, Wagner would put on gloves, presumably to keep his hands from touching this Jewish music.


----------



## waldvogel (Jul 10, 2011)

Two of the greatest composers of solo piano music are Schumann and Chopin. But while Schumann enthusiastically admired Chopin's music, Chopin had no use for Schumann's.

Was it just jealousy? Chopin had to deal with rivalry from Robert as a composer (with a possible loss of sheet music sales), and from Clara as a performer.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Strange Magic said:


> Prokofiev, as a certified egomaniac as well as an overflowing musical fountain, often had nasty things to say about other composers or their works, and the payback from other composers was just as vigorous. P wrote that he and Rachmaninoff hated one another, the ill-will largely resulting from a serious disagreement on remarks P made to R following R's memorial performance of a Scriabin work, following Scriabin's early death. P also said that Ravel was the only composer in France who knew what he was doing. He boasted of sleeping through a performance of Sibelius' second symphony.
> 
> I have also seen suggestions that Bartok was less than enthusiastic about Shostakovich, especially denouncing S' seventh symphony (Leningrad). Also, Brahms and Tchaikovsky heartily disliked one another's music, but evidently after confessing that fact to one another over dinner and drinks, proceeded to find that they personally got on famously. Hugo Wolf was probably literally insane with hatred of Brahms.
> 
> Behavior very like people in general, methinks, overall.


I'd say though, it's easier to be open-minded as a listener than composer. When you're a creator, you need very particular ideas about what art or music should be like, so you can create something that is very particular and that you believe in strongly. You also need to be as critical as you can, to keep working to a high standard, while listeners do best when they suspend, to some extent, their critical faculties (which often just means suspending their preoccupations and expectations).


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Chordalrock said:


> I'd say though, it's easier to be open-minded as a listener than composer. When you're a creator, you need very particular ideas about what art or music should be like, so you can create something that is very particular and that you believe in strongly. You also need to be as critical as you can, to keep working to a high standard, while listeners do best when they suspend, to some extent, their critical faculties (which often just means suspending their preoccupations and expectations).


In general, I agree, though you are perhaps suggesting that a certain egomania comes with the job of being a composer. And maybe so, though the exceptions might be interesting to consider--De Falla comes to mind, Bruckner, Ravel, Schubert, Haydn--I'm not aware of any criticisms of others from these. It would be fun to attempt to correlate composers' music with their personalities in this regard.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Vaughan Williams didn't think much of Mahler ("a tolerable imitation of a composer"), which I find hilarious because they're two of my favourite composers.


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

Tchaikovsky and Brahms! It was all trash talk there for a bit - they eventually got over it but that was some rough stuff. The romantic era was bad for that sort of thing


----------



## Steatopygous (Jul 5, 2015)

22 posts, and no one has mentioned Salieri and Mozart! Everyone knows Salieri killed Mozart by causing him to be neglected and despised. At least David Weiss does in his entertaining novel, picked up in Shaeffer's play, then movie. 
An elegant fiction, as W.S. Gilbert might have put it.


----------



## Stirling (Nov 18, 2015)

I do not know this "everyone" you speak of.


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

Stirling said:


> I do not know this "everyone" you speak of.


I would imagine that the "everyone knows" refers to the large-scale swallowing of sensationalised bait amongst those who have read the novel or seen the film but know little more:tiphat:


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Headphone Hermit said:


> I would imagine that the "everyone knows" refers to the large-scale swallowing of sensationalised bait amongst those who have read the novel or seen the film but know little more:tiphat:


Are you suggesting, by inference, that Lisztomania, one of my all-time favorite films about a composer, might not be a wholly accurate portrayal of this great man's life? I am shattered!


----------



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

Relations between Shostakovich and Prokofiev were fairly cordial until Prokofiev smugly dismissed the former's Piano Concerto no. 1 when Shostakovich played it on piano at a private gathering at Alexei Tolstoi's house in 1934. According to Tolstoi, Prokofiev was asked for his opinion - _'Well, what can I say?' he began, crossing his legs and draping his arm over the back of the chair. 'This work seemed immature to me, rather formless. As for the material, the concerto seems stylistically too motley for me...and not in very good taste.'_ Allegedly Shostakovich rushed out in tears calling Prokofiev _'a ******* and a scoundrel'_ and even the events of fourteen years later when they were both denounced by Zhdanov never really healed the rift.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

waldvogel said:


> Although we don't think of them as contemporaries, Mendelssohn was only four years older than Wagner. When called upon to conduct Mendelssohn's music, Wagner would put on gloves, presumably to keep his hands from touching this Jewish music.


I have heard that story is apocryphal. It certainly sounds bogus, even allowing for Wagner's views. (Did he really think he'd be contiminated by touching the score?)


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

GreenMamba said:


> I have heard that story is apocryphal. It certainly sounds bogus, even allowing for Wagner's views. (Did he really think he'd be contiminated by touching the score?)


As I recall, it was Berlioz's music, not Wagner's, that he remarked was so impure harmonically that one had to handle the score with gloves. I don't remember Mendelssohn ever remarking on Wagner's music, but I can't have imagined he would have cared for it.


----------



## Steatopygous (Jul 5, 2015)

Strange Magic said:


> Are you suggesting, by inference, that Lisztomania, one of my all-time favorite films about a composer, might not be a wholly accurate portrayal of this great man's life? I am shattered!


No, I'm sure it's genuine, especially the 40-foot phallus (if I recall aright, not having seen this for decades).


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

Mahlerian said:


> As I recall, it was Berlioz's music, not Wagner's, that he remarked was so impure harmonically that one had to handle the score with gloves. I don't remember Mendelssohn ever remarking on Wagner's music, but I can't have imagined he would have cared for it.


I've heard this claim before. But last week, I was reading the chapter by Peirre Citron in _The Cambridge Companion to Berlioz_ and noticed that he said that Berlioz and Mendelsohn met in Rome (and later in Leipzig) and that Mendelssohn "worked tirelessly on his (Berlioz') behalf ... correcting copyists' errors, and conducting the chorus in Romeo et Juliette".

It reminded me of this anecdote - why would someone who allegedly dismissed B's music 'work tirelessly on his behalf'?

As for Mendelssohn commenting on Wagner's music - would he have heard much of it before his death in 1847?


----------

