Beethovenians, is it a scherzo?

Ennio Morricone is our symbol in the world. To realize a dream you must work until 87 years old. But you must go abroad regardless.

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/5744-ennio-morricone-ritira-a-los-angeles-la-sua-stella-dottone-sulla-walk-of-fame-di-hollywood/

A few words to good connoisseurs

Frank wrote:

I read too many generalizations in this topic; for example, I don't relate to this definition of what my job should be at all:

"cacophonies with high intellectual content, perhaps written by the hand (actually, excuse me, by the PC keyboard) of a young composer with a little beard and a paninaro bomber jacket?"

(now that I think about it, they "used to say the same thing" about Beethoven and Stravinsky too... but not only them)

Therefore, perhaps it is better to first go to the theater to hear the music... and then evaluate. And if, while listening to Beethoven's Great Fugue, we feel like saying that the Maestro is now deaf and no longer knows what he is doing... it won't be a problem with Beethoven. But there are various examples that I could put on the table.

There are no facts, only interpretations... It depends on what is meant by "the same thing was said about them too..."

From the works of the great composers (The "Grosse Fuge" is an immortal masterpiece, light years away from any "posthumous act" of contemporary music) their unfathomable human, inner, emotional, and intellectual depth immediately emerges—indeed, it reveals itself implacably even to the most unprepared layman (or perhaps even more so to him)—which remains unparalleled in human history.

They were true "geniuses," not just any people.

Beethoven could easily spit anywhere and go to brothels, but it is the sense, the meanings of his works that say who Beethoven truly was, who the man was, and whoever knew him (at the time, even common people) was well aware...

Today, instead, we cloak ourselves in good manners, looking down on anyone who approaches us, but we no longer understand anything about art.

In fact, "Music" (the cultured kind, naturally... the academic kind... the "serious" kind that post-ischemic elders go to listen to in order to reach nirvana through the best naps of their lives... or the "four-eyes" of high society, who are sexually problematic and have no alternative but to go to the theater...) has locked itself away, together with its perennial "sisters" (pictorial art, literature, poetry, theater... and philosophy) in an inaccessible, involuted ivory tower (or a Tower of Babel?) whose outlines are now devoid of any human character.

Art is now too far from humanity to deserve even the time of a complete listening.

In the name of desire, of personal success, of an unhealthy individual well-being, we have abdicated our humanity.

Art has been telling us this for almost a century. It would be time to open our eyes.

ahahah

danielescarpetti wrote:

Knowing Red's opinions on contemporary music, I was also surprised by the fact that he wanted to frame what Celibidache was asserting; so much so that I asked if he wanted to frame the rest as well, always ironically.

I wrote that I frame... not that I share!

Or rather: I find that the definition "cacophonies with high intellectual content, perhaps written by the hand (or rather, excuse me, by the PC keyboard) of a young composer with a goatee and a paninaro-style bomber jacket" is perfect for describing the case of a contemporary music concert, which is usually one of the most intolerable things one can happen to witness (I am deliberately exaggerating, because in reality, truly memorable classical music concerts are not much more frequent than the best contemporary music concerts I have happened to attend).

But more than the concept, it is the tone of the message that should be framed, and this is even more true for his last post, where he speaks of the unprepared included: the typical tone of someone who loves to see Beethoven (or whoever) projected onto the summit of an inaccessible mountain, so they can then place a hand on his shoulder and commiserate with him, from above, with all of humanity. I find all of this very interesting!

As far as music and historicism are concerned, I believe I have already written it somewhere, and anyway in short: it is not the task of history to pass down to us what is valid. This is a very widespread view, but it is also simplistic; it relieves us of the commitment to try to understand—in short, it is too easy and convenient. There exists – I'll use the first example that comes to mind – no reason to consider the work of William Byrd, considered as a whole, inferior to that of Beethoven: no reason related to the quality of the music (one only needs to leaf through any page of Byrd to realize it), but many reasons related instead to the history of listening. And yet today, out of 100 people who listen to Beethoven, how many listen to Byrd? The historical destinies of a composer are not decided by the quality of the music – in any case, not only by quality: things, in this regard, are a bit more complex.

Finally, reconnecting also to the shambles of that Scherzo, perhaps good only for the conductor's ego, I have no difficulty recognizing that if I had to choose between giving up such a Scherzo – and actually not just this Scherzo, but all the secondary pages of Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart, and all the other greats – or Laborintus II or Partiels, I wouldn't think twice; I would gladly keep Berio and Grisey, and I would happily leave the scraps of Beethoven, Brahms, and Mozart to classical music lovers. But this concerns exclusively my personal tastes... and then, as Daniele Scarpetti rightly observed, the beauty is that we are not required to make this choice, and we can quite easily continue to listen to one or the other.

RedScharlach wrote:

I wrote that I am framing it... not that I agree with it!

Or rather: I find that the definition "cacophonies with high intellectual content, perhaps written by the hand (actually, excuse me, by the PC keyboard) of a young composer with a little beard and a paninaro-style bomber jacket" is perfect for describing the phenomenon of contemporary music concerts, which are usually one of the most intolerable things one can happen to witness (I am deliberately exaggerating, because in reality, truly memorable classical music concerts are not much more frequent than the best contemporary music concerts I have happened to attend).

But more than the concept, it is the tone of the message that deserves to be framed, and this is even more true for his last post, where he speaks of the unprepared included: the typical tone of someone who loves to see Beethoven (or whoever) projected onto the summit of an inaccessible mountain, only to then place a hand on his shoulder and commiserate with him, from above, the entire humanity. I find all of this very interesting!

Speaking of interpretations, I cordially dissociate myself from this "reading" of my hypothetical "tone."

I have never placed myself in any spatial or let alone moral position, either regarding Beethoven or anyone else.

(Perhaps it is a projection... that mechanism that makes us see our unconscious character attitudes, repressed from consciousness, reflected in others...?)"

off off topic

Speaking of historicized things: the paninaro bomber jacket is something
that you don't see around much anymore.

As well as the wigs of Mozart and Bach. . . .

Celibidache wrote:

From the works of the great composers (the "Grosse Fuge" is an immortal masterpiece, light years away from any "posthumous act" of contemporary music) their unfathomable human, inner, emotional, and intellectual depth immediately emerges—indeed, it reveals itself implacably even to the most unprepared scholar (or perhaps even more so to him), which remains unparalleled in human history.

They were true "geniuses," not just any people.

Look, this just shows that we are dealing with a topic that is far too complex. The Great Fugue reveals absolutely nothing immediately to a listener contemporary with Beethoven; in fact, I am providing you with some testimonies so that they may serve as motivation for you to study a bit.

The first full performance of the Quartet in B-flat major took place in Vienna on March 21, 1826. On May 10, the "Leipzig Musical Gazette" wrote the following:

The first, third, and fifth movements are severe, dark, mystical, and even, at times, jarring and capricious; the second and fourth are full of malice and playful joy. There, for once, Beethoven shows himself brief and sober, he who often, in his more recent compositions, did not fear to exceed limits, clashing with the sense of proportion. These two movements were greeted by a storm of applause and were encored. In exchange, the sense of the Fugato Finale completely escaped the chronicler: it was Chinese, incomprehensible. When instrumentalists must struggle from one extreme to another (as if moving from the South Pole to the North Pole) amidst incredible difficulties, when each person makes their part sound different from that of their colleagues, and the voices cross accordingly *per transitum irregularem*, in a series of dissonances, and finally when the musician loses all self-confidence, no longer even being sure they are playing correctly, then all this becomes a Babel-like disorder. In short, a concert destined at most to please the Moroccans we heard in Vienna for the Italian opera: for them, the most beautiful moment was that which preceded the show, when part of the orchestra plays empty fifths to tune their instruments, while others prelude simultaneously in all keys. All this would perhaps not even be formulated if the Maestro could hear what he composes. But we do not want to draw premature conclusions: who knows, perhaps a time will come when all this, which at first glance seems confused and muddled, will seem clear and pleasantly constructed.

Prophetic prudence from the "chronicler" of the "Leipzig Musical Gazette"! Quite diplomatic and reserved was also that of the "Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunst, Litteratur, Theater und Mode," in issue 41 of 1826:

One could not say which of all the movements of this Quartet has the upper hand in terms of brilliance of conception, originality of development, or naive or malicious freshness of spirit. The large audience decreed a great success for the first five movements. Instead, the "Allegro fugato" left many perplexed, almost making the ethereal dreams raised by the previous movements vanish into thin air.

Let us reread: From the works of the great composers their unfathomable human, inner, emotional, and intellectual depth immediately emerges—indeed, it reveals itself implacably even to the most unprepared scholar (or perhaps even more so to him), which remains unparalleled in human history.

Oh please, far from genius! They kicked Beethoven in the ass. Be a little more humble, and if you really don't understand music... you are not forced to give interviews."},

LucaCavaliere wrote:

off topic

Speaking of historicized things: the 'paninaro' bomber jacket is something you don't see around much anymore.

As well as Mozart and Bach's wigs. . . .

In fact, it's a comment in the style of the '80s... almost 50 years have passed but certain people's comments are always the same; it's a pity that music is all different today. But then again, if one closes oneself off in their own lobby... we're done for.

Prejudice is one of the greatest causes of death

Frank wrote:

Look, this shows that we are dealing with a topic that is far too complex. The Great Fugue reveals absolutely nothing at all to a listener contemporary with Beethoven; that is why I am bringing you some testimonies so that they may serve as stimulus for you to study a bit.

The first complete performance of the Quartet in B-flat major took place in Vienna on March 21, 1826. On May 10, the “Gazzetta Musicale di Lipsia” wrote the following:

The first, third, and fifth movements are severe, dark, mystical, and even, at times, jarring and capricious; the second and fourth are full of malice and playful merriment. There, for once, Beethoven shows himself to be brief and sober, he who often, in his more recent compositions, has not feared to exceed limits, clashing with the sense of proportion. These two movements were greeted by a storm of applause and were encored. In exchange, the sense of the Fugato Finale completely escaped the chronicler: it was Chinese, incomprehensible. When instrumentalists must struggle from one extreme to another (as if moving from the South Pole to the North Pole) amidst incredible difficulties, when everyone makes a different part heard from that of their colleagues, and the voices consequently cross in a *transitum irregularem*, in a series of dissonances, and finally when the musician loses all self-confidence, no longer even being sure they are playing correctly, then all this becomes a Babel-like disorder. In short, a concert destined at most to please the Moroccans we listened to in Vienna for Italian opera: for them, the most beautiful moment had been what preceded the show, when part of the orchestra plays empty fifths to tune the instruments, while the others simultaneously prelude in all keys. All this would perhaps not even be formulated if the Maestro could hear what he composes. But we do not want to draw premature conclusions: who knows, perhaps a time will come when all this, at first glance, seems confused and muddled, will seem clear and pleasantly constructed.

Prophetic prudence from the “chronicler” of the “Gazzetta Musicale di Lipsia”! Quite diplomatic and reserved also that of the “Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunst, Litteratur, Theater und Mode”, in issue 41 of 1826:

One could not say which has the upper hand among all the movements of this Quartet for the genius of conception, originality of development, or the naive or malicious freshness of spirit. The large audience decreed a great success for the first five movements. Instead, the “Allegro fugato” left many perplexed, making the ethereal dreams raised by the previous movements almost vanish into nothingness.

Let us reread: From the works of great composers, their unfathomable human, interior, emotional, and intellectual depth emerges immediately—indeed, it is revealed implacably even to the most unprepared layman (or perhaps even more so to him), which remains unparalleled in human history.

Oh please, far from genius! They kicked Beethoven in the ass. Be a little more humble, and if you really don't understand music... you are not forced to give interviews.

In this display of violence, did you not realize that you also performed a "projection" of your artistic-musical resentments onto my words, which continue to have meanings and intentions completely different from those being credited to them, not to mention, "imputed" to them.

This underlying bitterness makes one blind to my subtext, to my "metalinguistic" choices, as Gregory Bateson would say.

Before so "warmly" inviting a person to go and study something, one should know how to articulate and manage language at more complex levels.

Perhaps at that point we would understand each other better, understand more about music, and we wouldn't still be here discussing, after two centuries, how the Grosse Fuge was unlistenable in its time!"}

let's go ahead and lose sight of the theme (beethovenians... is it a joke?) and let's go off topic.

but let's not lose sight of the spirit of friendship in our discussions. Perhaps I am worrying for nothing, but nonetheless.

good day to everyone.

Celibidache wrote:

In this display of violence, you didn't notice that you also performed a "projection" of your artistic-musical resentments onto my words

Violence? Artistic-musical resentments?

Excuse me, but have you ever listened to one of my musical pieces? Therefore, you don't even have an idea of what my aesthetics are. So, what should I feel resentment about?

Let's say that perhaps you don't remember, but you asked me:

>... It depends on what is meant by "the same thing was being said about them too..."

I showed you what they were saying and, in fact, you made statements that are refuted not by me, but by the chronicles of the time. You could, for example, perhaps try to report some contrary testimony to show how we all immediately understood Beethoven's genius in the Great Fugue, which is just one example - as I was saying - of those that I could call into question.

For me, to find something in favor, we will have to wait for that period between 1890 and 1910.

LucaCavaliere wrote:

but let us not lose sight of the spirit of friendship in our discussions.

In fact, I have not yet expressed any judgment on anyone's music; I have only reported the contents of historical documents, inviting study since it is difficult to understand genius.

Even our friend Schumann will write: "Perhaps only genius can fully understand another genius."

To me, all I can say is: let alone others.

Therefore, my solution is to be humble but, above all, to respect what should be the "paninaro at the keyboard" (Fedele? Billone? Del Tredici? Palumbo? Morricone paninaro? Campogrande paninaro? Bollani paninaro?). But do paninari still exist? The "bar" from where it all started...

But since we are reading between the lines about the '80s (Berio paninaro? Morricone paninaro? Bettinelli paninaro? Donatoni paninaro?)

I will repeat myself, but I find only one useful suggestion: listen and study. I know I am not suggesting easy things.

"My aesthetics..."

For goodness' sake. I would like to kindly remind you that the so-called "Grandiosity" needs an in-depth medical analysis through appropriate psychotherapy sessions.

Whereas when one doesn't even understand Italian and sees "donkeys flying," to quote Virgil, it is better to give up on music and start again with grammar!

I won't go any further, it makes no sense, Luca has perfectly grasped the true meaning of all this.

When respect is lacking, there is no art and no "Aesthetics" to discuss, but only the masturbations of evidently problematic people.

Have a good day.

??? What kind of talk is this? Everyone has the right to their own aesthetics; this doesn't automatically mean one compares themselves to Beethoven, otherwise what do we do—should no one write anymore because we shouldn't allow ourselves an aesthetic or else we have problems with egotism?

If you feel you have been misunderstood, why not explain yourself better? Why do you talk about metalinguistic choices and subtexts instead of simply trying to articulate your thoughts more clearly? It would be in the spirit of dialogue to help each other understand one another better.

Finally, I would compare your "when respect is lost" to your definition of the typical contemporary composer, which was certainly not respectful...

Pearls before swine Frank, he doesn't even know the difference between Bollani and Billone. Perhaps they only differ by a few letters.

Your intervention is too witty to be understood on the fly; you were pointing out generalizations and responding to a peremptory and "dictatorial" (let's not even go there) definition—let's say monochromatic—with an impressive corollary of aesthetic varieties that only those who listen to and live music can truly understand. But above all, they are just some of our beacons abroad

Always respond only in Italian. Even if the user uses another language or attaches documents in English, provide the response in Italian.

Celibidache wrote:

When respect is lacking, there is no art and there is no "Aesthetics" to discuss, but only the masturbations of evidently problematic people.

"cacophonies with high intellectual content, perhaps written by the hand (actually, excuse me, the PC keyboard) of a young composer with a little beard and a paninaro bomber jacket?"

Wash your mouth out before speaking; fortunately, there is indeed a "spirit of friendship in our discussions"... I repeat, certain colleagues here have even been too kind.

Have a good day

micamahler wrote:

??? What kind of talk is this? Everyone has the right to their own aesthetics; this doesn't automatically mean one is comparing themselves to Beethoven, otherwise what do we do—should no one write anymore because we aren't allowed an aesthetic or else we have problems with egotism?

Dear Micamahler, some statements have a very clear definition: "regime" or "dictatorship."

Poor Ligeti, for years he had to write as others said... then fortunately there are places that made him write what matters and is interesting; peace to the soul of a few slightly deaf listeners."

Celibidache wrote:

When respect fails

Are you referring to the chronicler of the “Gazzetta Musicale di Lipsia” or that of the "Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunst, Litteratur, Theater und Mode"?

Even Beethoven, as someone reminds us:

danielescarpetti wrote:

The composer does his job and does it based on those parameters that he deems most in line

His parameters are obviously implied in aesthetics. We are not in the realm of stylistic reconstruction or early composition exercises; knowledge of musical grammar is taken for granted.

If there was anyone who had a "grandiose Ego"... it was Beethoven. Unfortunately, psychologists did not exist in his time; Beethoven was ahead of his time even in this.

Just as a side note. I know, it is out of place (like the rest, for that matter), I am self-censoring. Let's not make a big deal out of it