I wanted to ask your opinion regarding the Mozart/Haydn dichotomy. It is natural that the styles of these two composers are different, but do you notice any evident differences in their compositional method? For example, I find that Haydn has affinities with Beethoven and Clementi, in the sense that after the first measure of each of his pieces, the "development" begins, i.e., the construction of themes and transitions using minimal initial material from which the rest derives.
Analyzing Mozart, on the other hand, I have noticed that the sections are very different from one another in structure; it almost seems as if he wrote separate fragments with a certain degree of affinity and glued everything together with cadences (a kind of puzzle). In this regard, I find it difficult to relate him to Bach, as Rosen does (I think the relationship between Bachian counterpoint and the Classical style is much more evident in Clementi), or to Haydn (but also to Bach and Beethoven) since the method is completely different.
I believe it is quite evident just by observing the scores of these two greats, where one notices a homogeneous writing in Haydn and a heterogeneous writing in Mozart. I noticed the same difference in an analytical comparison between Donatoni and Berio.
(...) in the compositional method, do you notice any evident differences? (...)
(...) it almost seems as if our [composer] wrote separate fragments with a certain degree of affinity and glued everything together with cadences (a kind of puzzle); in this case, I find it difficult to relate him to Bach as Rosen does instead (I think the relationship between Bachian counterpoint and classical style is much more evident in Clementi) and to Haydn (but also to Bach and Beethoven), given that the method is completely different.
from analysis alone, one cannot trace back to the compositional "method." The only way to have certainty is to deal with sketches. But even if we only make hypotheses, it is worth emphasizing how the compositional method of a composer who leaves no sketches or about whom we have no specific evidence regarding their compositional method remains inscrutable.
F
Feldman
Member
Reply 3 by Feldman
Posts
171
thallo wrote:
from analysis alone, one cannot trace back to the compositional "method." The only way to have certainty is to deal with sketches. But even if we only make hypotheses, it is worth emphasizing how the compositional method of a composer who leaves no sketches or for whom we have no specific evidence regarding their compositional method remains inscrutable.
In effect, now that you mention it, I read a long time ago a comparative analysis essay by Salvatore Sciarrino, where he precisely reconstructed Mozart's compositional method starting from the few remaining sketches. Indeed, in the final piece, thematic fragments already present in the notes appeared but in a different order: this proves his tendency to construct form with a copy-paste approach, a method (according to Sciarrino) that was very hasty, which allowed the composer to finish the work quickly (this would explain not only Mozart's great musicality, certainly superior to that of many of his colleagues, but also the remarkable output in just a few years of life!)
While analytical studies on Beethoven's sketches have demonstrated how many sequential and consequential steps were taken to arrive at a single complete theme, all starting from minimal motivic units! The same can be said of Haydn... what do you say regarding this matter?
I will give you the name of the essay; you should find it in the "Riv. Italiana di Musicologia": Sciarrino, Salvatore: Mozart svelato? Una possibile ricostruzione del suo metodo compositivo.
Like other Mozarts, he used to lay out the bicinium first and then fill in the harmonic parts, obviously based on the figured bass numbering that he wrote down initially.
If you look at the original parts of the Requiem, it is very evident
In fact, now that you mention it, I read a comparative analysis essay by Salvatore Sciarrino quite some time ago, where he reconstructed Mozart's compositional method starting from the few remaining sketches. Indeed, in the final piece, thematic fragments already present in the notes appeared but in a different order: this proves his tendency to construct form through a copy-paste approach, a method (according to Sciarrino) that was very hasty, which allowed the composer to finish the work quickly (this would explain not only Mozart's great musicality, certainly superior to that of many of his colleagues, but also his remarkable output in just a few years of life!)
While analytical studies on Beethoven's sketches have demonstrated how many sequential and consequential steps were taken to arrive at a single complete theme, all starting from minimal motivic units! The same can be said of Haydn... what do you say regarding this matter?
I will give you the name of the essay; you should find it in the "Riv. Italiana di Musicologia": Sciarrino, Salvatore: Mozart svelato? Una possibile ricostruzione del suo metodo compositivo.
I don't have the chance to look for it and read it for now; in fact, these days I have a thousand things to do and I should do another thousand... I have never been interested in the study of sketches, I don't have a good philological background (alas) ...
Thinking about Bach and always speaking of Mozart, if we look at the symphonies (even those from the first peak), it is noted that there are beautiful contrapuntal sections, obviously born from the exposition material, so, even with all its spontaneity... a minimum amount of reasoning.
Interesting to "discover" that in the end Mozart "calculated" more than we imagine
F
Feldman
Member
Reply 10 by Feldman
Posts
171
thallo wrote:
I don't have the chance to look for it and examine it for now; in fact, these days I have a thousand things to do and I should do another thousand... I have never been interested in the study of sketches, I don't have a good philological background (alas) ...
I have never tried to do it, but if you read that essay, Sciarrino leads you through the definitive step-by-step reconstruction, showing the sketches and tracing all the changes made by Mozart to arrive at the final result. It is very interesting.
F
Feldman
Member
Reply 11 by Feldman
Posts
171
The thread you linked is really beautiful.
Talking about Mozart means talking about a genius who always sought to mask rationality in his works.
I still remember an interview given to Ennio Morricone some time ago in which he said that, in his opinion, "Mozart's strength lies in tematism, while Beethoven's lies in the development of the theme". Indeed, observing Mozartian phraseology, one can understand how attentive this composer was to melodic construction, its development through juxtapositions, and its "masking" with heterogeneous thematic formulas.
