... Mozart Slanderer

... was only aware of being Mozart.

Marebu wrote:

I read....

Where?

Stradivari wrote:

... was only aware of being Mozart.

Uhm... I don't think that's what it's about: the awareness of one's own artistic measure in the sense to which you seem to allude did not yet belong to the sensibility of an 18th-century musician. Mozart is not Beethoven.

I wrote "Mozart", I did not mention the word Genius

Stradivari wrote:

I wrote "Mozart", I did not mention the word Genius

Neither did I.

...so clarify the nature of your note, otherwise it remains substantially useless.

Stradivari wrote:

...so clarify the nature of your note, otherwise it remains substantially useless.

Regardless of the fact that you too could clarify yours (excuse me, eh...?), mine consists precisely of what I have written; and to be precise: I do not believe that Mozart spoke ill of certain colleagues (and that he did so is beyond doubt) because he was "aware of being Mozart" (that is, in some way "better" or "superior," setting aside whether he was a Genius or not), but for other contingent reasons, linked to his culture, to various prejudices imparted by his paternal education, and to the events of his life: in which he went from being considered a sideshow child prodigy, to achieving clamorous but short-lived successes (as long as he was alive), to practically having to beg at various courts for positions firmly held by others. Mozart was loved, and to an increasing extent, only many years after his death, when German Romanticism saw in him a sort of precursor to national pride (at the expense, above all, of Italian hegemony in European musical culture).

Besides, in the most detailed and authoritative biographies, a very precise human and historical picture of Mozart and the context in which he lived emerges, so I do not believe there is much room for personal opinions.

I had understood correctly, I stick to the idea that Mozart was aware of having an edge over others and this is evident especially from the letters he writes (see those addressed to his father).

You put it on the piano level ...the others towards Mozart. But to understand a person's behavior, one must look at the opposite process, and for that purpose, an excellent place to look is precisely the letters, because that is where Mozart truly tells his story.

I have read Mozart's letters (and not just those to his father), but the idea that he believed he had an edge over others seems like a simplification to me. Furthermore, even assuming he believed he was "the best," the letters only testify to his subjective perception in relation to his own interests and his own way of doing or understanding his work; finally, for various reasons, we know too little about the music of many of Mozart's "rivals" (including Cambini, for example), and history tells us that he himself does not summarize, or exhaust, the music of his time; rather, he was only one interpreter among others (in the same way Bach was in his time), regardless of his extraordinary value, talent, etc.

... I am timidly inserting myself

CromaDiBrera wrote:

the letters only testify to his subjective perception in relation to his own interests and his own way of doing or understanding his work

Don't you think this affects one's behavior? The historian tells what happens (like a news report), perhaps the letters (which I haven't read) could make known the reason for certain actions.

...I am asking.

Where?

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Cambini

CromaDiBrera wrote:

Uhm... I don't think that's what it's about: the awareness of one's own artistic measure in the sense you seem to be alluding to did not yet belong to the sensibility of an 18th-century musician. Mozart is not Beethoven.

This, eventually, seen from the audience's side, not the musician's. The consideration of the musician as it has reached us from the Romantic period concerns how the musician was perceived, certainly not how the musician considered themselves within society. Mozart, without a doubt, did not consider himself any less than Beethoven did or Monteverdi did, despite the three musicians being embedded in their contemporary societies in absolutely different ways.

As for the question of the topic, it seems to me that the text itself is a bit rambling and simplistic. First of all, the excerpt that was cited comes after a part where it is testified that Cambini had been in Paris for at least 5 years and his music had notable success. The fact that Mozart attributed the cancellation of his concert to Cambini is not a "slander" like those he was insinuated of directing toward rivals (which instead concerned, as far as one can understand, the value of their music), but rather a legitimate suspicion that Cambini himself, in order to avoid comparison with his colleague, preferred to have the performance canceled, taking advantage of his established fame, at least in Paris. As for the rivalry with Salieri, the fact that Wikipedia cites it as a matter of fact makes me suspect that the editor of those notes is a bit lazy because so much has been spun around the Mozart-Salieri rivalry that it has become almost a cliché (thanks also to Pushkin's famous book and Milos Forman's film), but it really seems that it has no great historical foundation. So, I would say that the discussion is based on premises that are at least doubtful...

Carlos wrote:

This, eventually, seen from the audience's perspective, not the musician's.

Right... However, from what I have read in various letters and documents, it seems to me that Mozart's attitude was more often one of competition over opportunities to gain vital space (i.e., work) held by others, when it was very difficult for him to obtain any (because they were few, but perhaps also because he was too provincial to be a skilled courtier), rather than superiority toward his colleagues as musicians.

In particular, I have always been struck by the fact that Mozart never enjoyed the patronage of court protectors (despite having frequented many) like almost all of his colleagues (Salieri, for example, was "protected" by Gassmann); and I imagine that this might explain several things about certain attitudes of his toward some colleagues (especially a sort of "exclusion complex"). Perhaps because, in his dizzying wandering from child prodigy following his father, he knew well how contemptuous the aristocracy could be toward musicians, even if good manners were maintained; and he could not feel sympathy, with the irreverent spontaneity acquired especially from his mother, for those colleagues who, in those same environments, had known how to bow enough to establish themselves permanently. My theory, obviously.

Salieri. From the documents I have read, it seems that the relationships with the master of Legnago (and with his friend Cavalieri) were of respectful cordiality; nor does it appear that Mozart ever despised Salieri's work, even if the musicality of the two was very different: Salieri, among other things, was primarily dedicated to more or less "serious" theater, in the style of Gluck; therefore, perhaps, there were not many occasions for direct comparison... For example: Salieri wrote only two concertos, and quite ugly ones at that, for piano and orchestra; Mozart, on the other hand, had practically no rivals in the genre; but what Salieri expressed in opera seria was much greater than what Mozart achieved; in general, Salieri's attention to instrumental music is concentrated in a few significant examples, while in Mozart it is monumental; Salieri succeeded in being the best teacher of all time (Beethoven, Schubert, Meyerbeer, Liszt were his pupils), while Mozart derived little satisfaction from teaching... Salieri's sacred music is abundant but truly of little effect (at least for our modern taste), however sincerely felt; whereas Mozart produced several spine-tingling works (from the Ave Verum to a couple of masses, in addition to the Requiem). Salieri was a particularly cultured and refined man ("worldly," as Totò would say), Mozart was undoubtedly on another level... In short, I imagine that their distance in everything (and Salieri's position at court, unreachable for Mozart) never put them in real competition.

P.S. Anyway, for those who have curiosity, time, desire, etc., this is a little "thing" by Salieri (the real one, not the one from the film...). Regardless of the writing quality, the allusion to the two lovers entrusted to flute and oboe is enough to understand that he wasn't just a grim "periwigged old man"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jH-B7hKNGaQ

Open content (youtube)