Die Weihe des Hauses Opus 124

Daniele,

I would also like to say one thing that I have already told you: do not feel bad about not knowing how to read a score (unless you want to play an instrument). To listen to and experience music, one needs mind-heart-will-dedication. And you - I know well - have it all.

That being said . . .

1) the 'complexity' of a piece is made up of many factors: formal aspect, harmony... What a score analysis can provide at a glance is a count of the actual parts. If it is a comparison of this type, whatever you deem appropriate, I hope it can satisfy you Carlos. I would have to spend half an hour on one page when it would cost him half a minute.

2) even if a check as mentioned above showed that "on paper" opus 124 is not the most complex symphonic piece, your sensations which you primarily listen to - and rightly so! - would continue to attest to the contrary.

3) but wasn't Beethoven's motto (one of his mottos) "Always simpler!"?

Listen to me my friend, frankly I don't know where you deduce that Beethoven's motto was that one.

What seems very clear to me, however - and in these days you, who follow the music lessons on Radio tre, cannot help but acknowledge this to me - was Beethoven's ability to know how to create - and this in all his supposed styles - monumental things from the simplest and most insignificant of things. In his final years of life, he knew how to reach insurmountable heights in this regard. All combined with a sublime beauty. If we agree - as I think - on this, the discussion can also be considered concluded here, because, in the end, this is the most important thing.

Regarding my convictions in this matter about the Overture we are talking about here, such remain. Anyway, I take credit for having drawn attention to a symphonic piece by Beethoven which, despite its great value, is not known and does not have the fame of the other overtures, even though it deserves it all, if not more.

I hope that our Director and Maestro, in his career which I wish him to be splendid, knows how to make use of all this, impacting and enhancing this piece as it deserves.

With this, I send you a warm greeting... and I thank you from the bottom of my heart!

danielescarpetti wrote:

Regarding my convictions concerning the Overture we are discussing here, they remain unchanged. [...] I hope that our Director and Maestro, in a career that I wish him to be splendid, knows how to make use of all this, recording and enhancing this piece as it deserves.

Here... I was about to respond differently, referring to an earlier post regarding the complexity of the score, but after these two "pearls" perhaps it is not worth it...

danielescarpetti wrote:

With this, I send you warm greetings... and I thank you from the bottom of my heart!

Likewise. Bye!

danielescarpetti wrote:

ps: Xenakis, it's definitely my fault, but I didn't understand your question. Try again if you like!

Reading your writings, you often resort to the concept of style (compositional, obviously), but when it is described specifically and this idea deviates from what you have formed in your mind, you seem to ignore it.

Compositional style is made up of elements that can be deduced in many ways, from the score to a great listening capacity.

In Beethoven's case, a series of characteristics makes a piece classifiable as his first, second, or third style... as for what he could not do, we cannot pronounce ourselves.

That then a set of characteristics, findable in the score, is not perceived as such... it is linked to the personal perceptive/receptive aspect, and it is right that it be so... but the technique and compositional devices are those of a composer who (even in the Ninth) had by then already changed his stylistic signature. The elements are specifically described a few posts up... I would have expected someone to say that many of those traits were not findable. That did not happen, but it is not a problem, I don't have to convince anyone... whoever reads will form their own idea on the subject and hopefully without relying solely on the forum—not that there is anything wrong with it, but what needs to be seen and heard has already been left to us by Beethoven."},

Xenakis wrote:

(...) I would have expected someone to say that many of those traits were not found. It didn't happen, but it's not a problem (...) what there is to see and hear has already been left to us by Beethoven.

Wise words. The problem is knowing how to read it...

Xenakis wrote:

Reading your writings, you often resort to the concept of style (compositional, obviously), but when it is described specifically and this idea deviates from what you have formed in your mind, you seem to ignore it.

Compositional style is made up of elements that can be deduced in many ways, from the score to a great capacity for listening.

In Beethoven's case, a series of characteristics makes a piece classifiable as his first, second, or third style... as for what he could not do, we cannot pronounce ourselves.

That a set of characteristics, findable in the score, is not perceived as such... is linked to the personal perceptive/receptive aspect, and it is right that it be so... but the technique and compositional devices are those of a composer who (even in the Ninth) had by then already changed his stylistic signature. The elements are specifically described a few posts up... I would have expected someone to say that many of those traits were not findable. This did not happen, but it is not a problem; I do not need to convince anyone... whoever reads will form their own idea on the subject and hopefully without relying solely on the forum—not that there is anything wrong with that—but what there is to see and hear has already been left to us by Beethoven.

You are right, and you have so much right that you could sell it. Everything you say is true and, for my part, I can only repeat what has already been said with my partial excuse:

I do not know, and therefore I cannot enter into the merits of certain issues due to my total ignorance; thus, if someone like Frank—because I assume you are referring to the characteristics enunciated by him—tells me and gives me that list, I can only take note of it and stop.

However, I entrust my judgments to my ears—as I have already said—and also to those who—professionals in general—know much more than I do. Regarding "The Consecration of the House," I reported those opinions; regarding the Ninth, I entrust everything to my ears.

So, they tell me that if, undoubtedly, there is an enormous leap between the stylistic signature of the Ninth and that of the previous symphonies, the same can be said between the stylistic signature of the late Quartets and the late Sonatas—much more complex/e—and the Ninth.

I justify this by the fact that the Ninth, although being virtually Beethoven's last symphonic work, had a much earlier and troubled genesis. If Beethoven had lived longer, it is to be presumed, I would say with total certainty that, even in the symphonic field, he would have reached that milestone given his intentions to return to composing works with large orchestra and, given his characteristics: to always go beyond and always renew.

Regarding the Ninth specifically, I find that the first movement certainly opens in a shocking manner, but then the development, all in all, continues to be quite traditional. The second movement—aside from the anticipation of the Adagio—does not seem so innovative to me, while the third—this one is indeed an absolute masterpiece—is late style. The fourth, this too has shocking traits, but also many that are not.

Am I wrong? Most likely, which is something one can never expect from someone like me. But this is what my ears tell me.

But I cannot go any further...!

[warning: I have read Daniele's message that immediately precedes this one. However, I am deliberately not taking it into account because that opens other 'windows' of discussion: interesting yes, but I would also like to, first, close the one that Daniele and Carlos have already closed]

Yes Daniele:

«Beethoven knew how to create monumental things from the simplest and most insignificant things». On this, I agree. Giovanni Bietti, in the Music Lessons you cited, truly hits the mark.

For me too, the discussion can end here. I thank you and Carlos.

However, I want to pick it up again – in a few days, in other terms – with a question for Carlos.

The credit you give yourself, for having drawn attention to The Consecration of the House, I also give to you. And I am also grateful to you for truly making me discover it (which is different from knowing that it exists). The fact that I am listening to it a lot these days is because it gives me a lot: it's because I have a great need for the strength of this Overture. In this period, it is my life companion.

A musical work can – sometimes – become such a thing.

The motto "ever simpler!" I read on some page of Riezler's Beethoven. And I "drank it in" without thinking too much about it. Our Armando (who instead only drinks water from mountain springs!) could tell us instantly how reliable it is.

Perhaps Armando is very busy these days but, if he reads this, I greet him from the heart and... I dare to quote one of his statements from some time ago.

To someone asking which was, in personal judgment, the best work by Beethoven making separate rankings by genre, Armando, regarding the Overtures, replied [quoting from memory] "Here I have no doubts: opus 124... But we must realize the miracle that Beethoven has performed!"

greetings again. To everyone!

LucaCavaliere wrote:

(...) I would also like, first, to close what Daniele and Carlos have already closed.

Look, I want to say, for the sake of clarity, that my "closing" has a very precise reason and lies in the value I give to the term "discussion." Clearly, no one claims to change the opinions of their interlocutors through a few lines on a forum, but naturally, this is a wonderful opportunity to compare them, along with the research conducted and, why not, respective personal tastes. When faced with certain subjects, particularly Beethoven, whom I have studied for a long time and with tireless attention, I always become passionate and seize every opportunity both to learn something new and to share the little that I know.

That being said, I found the discussion very interesting, at least until the person who opened it said three things that, in my opinion, did not go together, namely 1) that they are unable to read a score, 2) that their opinions remain those expressed at the beginning, 3) that they hope I "make use of all this, valuing the piece as it deserves."

So, I say, what are we talking about? If a person is unable to read a score and "relies on their ear," their opinions must be questioned, by them first, if they engage in a discussion on a forum of musicians (the fact that they continuously quote musicology texts means little to me: I have perhaps read more, and my opinions are based on what I have read, but above all, on the scores I have studied). Furthermore, what should I make use of, if I may ask? The opinions of a person who is unable to read a score and who, "by ear," tells me that said score (which they cannot read) is the Beethovenian symphonic masterpiece?

Well, for me, at that point, the discussion was over. And it remains so, without rancor obviously...

LucaCavaliere wrote:

For me too, the discussion can end here. I thank you and Carlos. However, I want to resume it – in a few days' time, in other words – with a question for Carlos.

Gladly, whenever you want.

I think that, as with Xenakis, I can tell you that you are completely right, in your case even more so: I am a person who is completely out of place.

I humbly apologize to everyone and please forgive me if you can!

In my opinion, Daniele, it's not a matter of being out of place; you are very passionate about Beethoven and you let yourself be carried away a lot by passion and sometimes by taste, there is nothing wrong with that.

However, when one tries to trace something objective, unfortunately, one must descend into the technical aspects. Frank provided a list a kilometer long... even at the level of mere listening, one can hear a chromatic progression... and it can be heard regardless of whether we know how to give it a label, and in effect, this is: a label.

If a series of circumstances related to compositional technique, aesthetics, etc... cause this work to fall into a certain stylistic context... what is the problem? It neither takes away from nor adds to your (our) ability to enjoy it, nor to the composer... at most, it serves us (we, the posterity) to orient ourselves in that sea of music that Beethoven himself produced.

Hello Everyone.

First of all, a little service announcement: our section remains free from mandatory registration, and this is because, since the section has a direct link from my website's home page, some users were finding a "not found" page even though it was regularly online. (Thanks to Simone for having excluded the Beethovenian part).

Well. Part two, it rightly seems to me that everyone can and must contribute, according to their own inclination, to the success of the forum. It seems to me that you all do so in an appropriate way, certainly not the late Daniele.

Part three. To return to the subject, obviously I also agree with Carlos and Xenakis, although Daniele's genuine and subjective passion is immediately gratifying (and corroborating). Daniele, do not cease to harass us with your precision! You are truly useful. In my small way, here is an absolutely non-subjective contribution: the sketches described by Nottebohm, with the inherent musical examples. Regarding these sketches, still far from the definitive version, Nottebohm dealt extensively with them in Zweite Beethoveniana, chapter XLIII, from page 395. From the sketches we can conclude that, while leaving aside the majestic introduction, which is still far from the final version, the overture would have originally had a different setting.

Here is Nottebohm's description:

…………….Approaches to an overture that Beethoven rejected and of which one sounds like this (Overtura. Allegro.) http://www.lvbeethoven-music.it/Beethoven-Mp3/Biamonti/Biamonti742-1.mp3; furthermore, indications of various kinds, which allow for a connection with the text for "Die Weihe des Hauses". After the completion of the chorus, work begins on an overture in C major. Between a number of disconnected passages, to which the following belong only in relation to the introductory movement of the overture, http://www.lvbeethoven-music.it/Beethoven-Mp3/Biamonti/Biamonti742-2.mp3, a longer draft appears, http://www.lvbeethoven-music.it/Beethoven-Mp3/Biamonti/Biamonti742-3.mp3 from which it can be seen how the current introductory movement of the Overture Op. 124 should have been connected with an unknown main movement. This was therefore the originally planned overture. The theme underlying the main movement had, initially, in a broken sketch, a somewhat different version. http://www.lvbeethoven-music.it/Beethoven-Mp3/Biamonti/Biamonti742-4.mp3

Beethoven now leaves the work on this main movement, but not that of the introductory movement. A new work begins to become noticeable. A new theme is established, in which we soon recognize the theme of the Allegro movement of the Overture Op. 124. Some of the first attempts Beethoven made with this theme may stand here. http://www.lvbeethoven-music.it/Beethoven-Mp3/Biamonti/Biamonti742-5.mp3

Later, indications of the development of the theme appear. The introductory movement of the earlier overture was carried over to the new work, and so the Overture Op. 124 received an introductory movement that was originally intended for another work.

I find the fifth sketch very interesting, where B. tries to intertwine the fugato theme in different ways. (I haven't read everything carefully, but it seems strangely that only Frank makes reference to the Missa Solemnis as a symphonic example of late Beethoven) (You know I have no respect for Lenz and his arbitrary division of B.'s work: late and not third!)

I can provide a very summary translation within the limits of my meager intellectual and linguistic abilities

............................................... an Overture that Beethoven sketched and thus one of these sounds like this: Overtura. Allegro. Distant hints of a theme that do not yet foreshadow the themes of "Die Weihe des Hauses". After having completed the writing of the chorus (WoO 98), Beethoven began working on an overture in C major. Among a certain number of irrelevant sketches, a series of notes regarding the phrase of the introduction to the Overture appears, here is a longer sketch. From which it is to be learned that the introductory phrase we know from Overture Op. 124 is connected to an unknown and unused section. This was thus the form that Beethoven organized for the Overture. This [is] the main proposition, first as a descending theme; in a detached sketch, another version. Beethoven left the work on this main proposition, leaving it still linked to that other introductory phrase. A new idea made its way into his work and became perceptible. A new theme appears, a theme that everyone among us immediately recognizes as the phrase of the allegro of Overture Op. 124. Some of the first ideas that Beethoven approaches with this theme are right here in this sketch. The final sketches show to the"},

hints at the development of the theme. The introductory phrase of the Ouverture was taken from even earlier notes, giving rise to the definitive work, and thus the Ouverture Op. 124 had a new introductory phrase, which was certainly conceived some time before for a different work.

Now I wish you a good night, dear friends.

danielescarpetti wrote:

(...) are a completely out of place person.

But no! That was absolutely not the meaning of my speech, of course not! I only wanted to say that when comparing views, it is good to "weigh" the importance that the respective considerations may have within each discussion and if, as in your case, one is aware of starting at a disadvantage (in terms of knowledge base, only in that sense! obviously) it is stimulating for everyone to be ready to revise their own position.

I'll give you a "jocular" example: I have always said that, for me, the "most beautiful piece in the world" is Brahms' Intermezzo op. 118 no. 2. It is solely and exclusively a matter of personal taste, combined with a good dose of emotion and who knows what else, but I know very well that I would be sliced into pieces at the first turn if I tried to maintain this position in a context that is somewhat more than "pop"!

Your preference for The Rite of Spring is absolutely sacrosanct, but your so heated thesis perhaps does not hold up to a discussion that involves analyzing all its compositional aspects, perhaps in relation to other masterpieces by B., as we have done here.

That's all. No one is ever out of place until they decide to be. Bye!

Dear Armando and dear all, the reasons that drove me and continue to drive me to write in music forums are essentially two, one selfish and the other altruistic – although it remains absolutely difficult to determine where one ends and the other begins -. The first is an urgent need to engage with others who have and share my passion for music; the second is because, even while considering myself the lowliest of humble servants of musical art, I had and have the presumption of being able to say something useful, and this, above all, to young people. In these years, someone has thanked me by telling me that my writings helped them with their university thesis and, if I have managed to win even one person over to the love of this music, I can consider myself lucky and happy. It therefore costs me much effort to give up participating in these discussions; however, aware of my great limitations, it is obvious that faced with motivations that, essentially, silence me, I can only take note, agree, and withdraw in good order.

The discussion in particular that I proposed here was certainly a great mistake on my part – a mistake dictated by my great passion – which, however, if you reread it, I then tried to correct, saying that the Ouverture “The Consecration of the House” is one of Beethoven's greatest masterpieces – and not the greatest – but that anyway, endorsed by "important" opinions, I believe it is the only true Beethovenian symphonic work that can be linked to the third style, constituting a bridge toward those works that unfortunately never came to be, and attempting, as far as I am able to justify it, and justifying also – always within my limits – why the Ninth cannot be completely considered as such.

If there is one thing I always try to keep distinct – though I don't know to what extent I succeed – it is "technical" considerations from personal tastes. If I had said the same things here, instead of this overture, for "The Creatures of Prometheus," I would have first and foremost said an enormous nonsense and then confused tastes with the true value of a work. But that was not the case; indeed, we are all in agreement that it is a Beethovenian masterpiece, on which we can discuss and compare ourselves, while remaining firm on one thing: that as always, in the end, one can change one's mind just as one cannot, and both options are right and sacrosanct.

I, for example, would have many things to say to Carlos regarding his questioning the equation third style = masterpiece or putting on the same level and making comparable the values of works from the early styles – I continue to define them as such for convenience – with those of the last. But I did not think – even somewhat knowing him – that it was the case to do so.

Carlos, I don't know by what parameters – for me this remains a mystery – certain people seem likable to us and others not. The fact is that you have always been likable to me despite your character, let's say, not simple, no offense intended. When I wished you a wonderful career and hoped that you would take something from this discussion, I did not mean to tell you that I was right and hoped you were convinced. I meant that I hope when, like many other great conductors of the past and present, you too decide to record the Nine Symphonies, you will take this jewel into consideration and you will not do, like others who have recorded the other overtures and not this one. That is what I meant!

A warm greeting to all of you!

Aside from the fact that I feel a bit responsible because I am the one who brought the discussion as objectively as possible.

danielescarpetti wrote:

si speri che quando, come tanti altri grandi direttori del passato e del presente, anche tu deciderai di incidere le Nove sinfonie, terra in considerazione questo gioiello e non farai come gli altri che hanno inciso le altre ouverture e non questa.

Una buona domanda (forse) è: perché un'opera della portata nei termini in cui è descritta ha riscosso pochi consensi e ha poche interpretazioni?

E voglio precisare che non la voglio mettere sul valore dell’opera ma su quant’altro può influire sulla scelta di un’opera piuttosto che un'altra.

Dal mio punto di vista non siamo all’epoca di Bach, per cui delle opere possono rimanere dimenticate fino a quando il buon Mendelssohn si è “svegliato”.

Per cui delle ragioni, spero oggettive, ci saranno… a voi l'ardua sentenza

Here's Frank! . . .

you took the words right out of my mouth: this was exactly what I wanted to ask Carlos (letting the discussion 'decant' a little bit).

what could that "something else" (extramusical?) be that disadvantaged opus 124 in terms of marketability?

To me, the comparison seemed very instructive; perhaps a question should have been asked at the beginning, and I don't understand why it wasn't posed.

If it is true that there are many findings in the score of the Ninth, why doesn't someone more expert and technical highlight them, perhaps by taking a movement and saying... retracing the score, from beat x to y there is this element, from w to z there is that other, etc.?

If on one hand it is true that one can say this thing is not true for this reason, on the other hand one can say it is true because there is this finding here... in short, giving life to the famous labels indicated by Xenakis ...

Frank wrote:

Why is it that a work of such magnitude, in the terms in which it is described, has garnered so little consensus and has so few interpretations?

I'll throw out a few hypotheses in the form of questions:

- Too technically difficult?

- A matter of taste?

- A piece too "avant-garde," making it difficult to understand (see: Flight of the Bumblebee?)?

- A piece with too few levels of enjoyment/appreciation?

LucaCavaliere wrote:

You have stolen the words right out of my mouth: that is exactly what I wanted to ask Carlos (leaving a bit of 'decanting' the discussion aside).

What could that "something else" (extramusical?) be that disadvantaged Op. 124 in terms of marketability?

Prompted by this further question, I went to check my discography (I mean the discs I own) because I knew I had a CD (Harnoncourt, Chamber Orchestra of Europe) dedicated exclusively to Beethoven's Overtures... I said to myself "imagine if it wasn't there!", but it isn't there either! It is a Teldec recording, released in 1996 and recorded live (except Coriolan) between 1993 and 1996. Eight overtures (Coriolan, Prometheus, The Ruins of Athens, Fidelio, Leonore I, II, III and, finally, Egmont). "What a disappointment!" I thought. Then, right next to it, another CD, DG, Abbado and Berlin Phil. "Beethoven: Bühnenmusik - Die Weihe des Hauses op. 124 | Leonore Prohaska WoO 96". How wonderful that recording, also live, I believe, from 1993/'94, but released in 1996, of the two incidental pieces, complete. Then I thought that "Grandpa Karajan" could not disappoint me. I have a CD with the Violin Concerto op. 61 (Christian Ferras, if you don't know this recording, run and listen to it!) and there are some of the overtures he recorded. I take out the CD and... "Zur Namensfeier op. 115 | König Stephan op. 117 | Die Weihe des Hauses op. 124", oh yeah! I knew I could count on "old Herby". Moreover, checking carefully, I see there is a DG double CD with eleven overtures, recorded between 1965 and 1969 - from which the three present together with the Violin Concerto are taken, obviously.

However, it is too little; returning to the discussion on Die Weihe des Hauses; I completely agree. But, "by instinct" as they say, the reason is easily identifiable and concerns that overture like other Beethoven masterpieces which, always, have been preferred in a "ranking" that has at the center of the top list the music we could define with the term "heroic", which even transcends the division into the three styles we have discussed here in recent days, privileging that aspect of Beethovenian poetics, never born and never finished, present in much music of all three periods. Therefore, here is how the "Pathétique" Sonata op. 13 has become more famous and decidedly more performed than the three Op. 10 Sonatas (extraordinary) and the two Op. 14 Sonatas (not to mention the two Op. 27 Sonatas, of which the "Moonlight" is known on a planetary level, while its companion op. 27 no. 1 - which I find decidedly better! - is reserved for an audience of "those in the know"). Thus, the Fourth Symphony has become "territory for a few", present in 90 percent of cases only in complete cycles, because it is sandwiched between the "Eroica" and the Fifth (not to mention the "Pastoral" and the Seventh!); the same fate, moreover, has befallen the Fourth Concerto, hidden by the imposing Third and the "Emperor".

If you think about it, most of the works that have received a name (almost always imposed by the publisher and not chosen by Beethoven) are precisely those that reflect that musical heroism I was talking about and those that have always identified Beethoven, whose most famous portrait is the one in which he glares at the portraitist (as if Beethoven had lived inc*** his whole life, among other things...). I say "most" because op. 11, namely the splendid "Gassenhauer Trio", suffers the same fate as many other pieces, due to very cumbersome neighbors (in this case the already mentioned "Pathétique" op. 13, of the three Violin Sonatas op. 12 - which, being the first three they are, as the first three Piano Sonatas and the first Quartets, "fundamental" regardless - not to mention the two trios op. 70 no. 1 "Ghost Trio" and op. 97 "Archduke").

Now, not to say, but do you have in mind what comes before the Consecration? Beethoven's op. 123 is nothing less than the Missa Solemnis (and op. 125 is the Ninth, as they say - also with a nice name stuck on it, namely "Choral", just so she doesn't lack a posthumous baptism too).

Years ago, when I was a choir director, we prepared for a concert dedicated to Beethoven a magnificent short piece, for choir and orchestra, titled Mehresstille und glückliche fahrt (one of the many attempts by Beethoven to give choristers cold sweats, as they say elsewhere). The piece is truly beautiful and, in its brevity, is a concentrate of "Beethovenism". Does anyone know it? And, those who know it, how many times have they heard it in public or seen it in a record catalog? Very well, take a look at the number of opuses and, along with me, widen your eyes... It is

op. 112! and before that there are the three monuments, namely the three Sonatas opp. 109, 110, 111 and, after, Die Ruinen von Athen, op. 113.

Having said all this, in my opinion, a couple of "clichés" emerge that one always carries with them when talking about a composer and which, at least we musicians, should actually contribute to dismantling. One of these concerns almost all authors and refers to the fact that the final works are always and anyway the best (as if, moreover, the author knew they would be the final works). A similar sort exists for the early works, which, as a debut, are always to be considered, alternatively and depending on who is speaking, omens of future splendors, or fundamental for seeing how much the author himself later deviated from them.

Beethoven also suffers from another very serious burden, namely that he "is" (or was, if you prefer) the musician "with his fist on the table," the musician angry with the world, the musician who scratches... it would instead be enough to remember that he himself considered his Eighth Symphony his favorite to decisively revise these positions. And it would be enough to listen to the few fragments of his Tenth (of which, moreover, there exists a "completed" version that, although it cannot be considered "Beethovenian," is illuminating regarding the direction B. would later have taken), to understand how, yes, the Ninth is to be considered an enormous leap forward, a decidedly innovative piece, but that, probably, for Beethoven was nothing more and nothing less than an experiment (of which even he must not have been very convinced, judging by how he had started the very next symphony).

After a couple of hours of writing, thinking, rethinking, and rewriting, I realize that the answer to Luca's question has remained hidden between the lines. I reread (again!) and apologize: it must be sought out, but I guarantee it is there!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwsc4FH2BhI

Open content (youtube)

Carlos, where do I need to sign for the joint declaration?

I think the last time I listened to the Overture was in 2003 (I don't remember the exact month and day) at the inauguration of La Fenice in Venice with Muti (an enlightened choice, however, and uncommon). Likewise, I am struck by your Mehresstille und glückliche fahrt; a truly prodigious piece, whose sketches merge with the very first ones of the Ninth.... You were talking about Mehresstille und glückliche fahrt; you know Carlos, an opera practically never performed in its original full instrumentation? Opus 118 - Elegiac Canticle: Sanft wie du lebtest, hast du vollendet. A quartet of voices and a string quartet; the sublime Beethovenian quintessence, light years away from that pissed-off Stieler-esque thing mentioned above. (but I have seen the Schönheitengalerie and Stieler gives his best with the young girls). Precisely, the Elegiac Canticle is always arranged for choir and string orchestra, where the intimacy becomes a sound wave..... Editorial choices on which I cannot express an opinion.

Finally, regarding the Ninth and a half, tending towards the Tenth, Barry Cooper, who is also a friend of Luigi, confided during their last meeting a few months ago that the rethinking of the material is so successful that we will be able to listen to the new version as early as the next concert, which I hoped to organize here in Genoa as early as June, but which for the usual economic-administrative reasons will probably slide to September. (perhaps Cooper will be present nonetheless).

And now, dear Carlos, I leave you with a like too!

Thanks Carlos!

So: I hope I have searched for the answer between the right lines!

It seems to me that what you are saying is that the Beethoven "beatified" by discography, and by the most widespread public taste, is the heroic one, scowling with his fist on the table. Indeed, it seems so to me as well.

And it happened to me once, while listening to the Fourth Piano Concerto or the Violin Concerto, to cross his gaze looking sternly at me from yet another book cover with one of his severe portraits, and finding myself "saying to him" "but no my dear, stay calm... I know, I feel it, that you weren't always like this..."

The fact is that even the Consacrazione [Consecration] seems very 'heroic' to me. It's just that we are in the midst of the splendor of a battle already concluded (and won!). Unlike the Fifth where the light of C+ is not given so "for free" from the beginning, and unlike Coriolan where the drama, the struggle, resolves in defeat.

If there is anything good in what I have said, on the level of the sense of music (for those who do not like the term, excuse me), it seems to me that against opus 124, in the Romantic era, the factor played against it was that... the struggle, fate, adverse fate etc. etc.... are missing. There is only shimmering light from beginning to end. Then, on the level of form, the lack—certainly not of construction - heaven forbid: let's hear the fugato! - but of that particular construction in dialectical becoming (sonata form, opposition of themes) for which Beethoven is venerated by many, could have played against its popularity. That much.

Changing the subject a bit. Once Andras Schiff said "but how can one ask for an encore after the sonata op. 111! What can come after the 111?". He is not wrong. The same question could be asked for the Ninth Symphony. The fact is that out of habit, the audience asks for encores. Once at a Ninth, I had to listen to a "rewind" encore: the Finale re-echoed from the tight dialogue between the male and female soloists (measure 763). Oh well. It happened...

But then, couldn't this Consacrazione be the right encore? As if his enthusiasm were the echo, the extension, of the enthusiasm of the final squeeze of the Ninth?

And couldn't the other work you mentioned be an even more beautiful encore (with the choir!)? Mehresstille und glückliche fahrt !

"Tiefe stille herrst im Wasser". These opening words (Deep silence reigns over the waters) could they not be a bit of a "memory" of that "deep tremolo on the waters" of the opening measures of the Symphony? . . . Of course, a less restless memory.

ciao