Started by
Viola
Member
Member
Viola wrote:Where would I have written that Brahms is a wretch?
You didn't write it, but it is so. I am telling you. If you want, we can talk about the alcoholic Beethoven, the womanizer Mozart, etc. All ethically "admirable"... if that is a parameter for evaluating a piece of music. Oh well. And what if you didn't know the author of a piece?
Member
But don't we want to take a step back and discuss the theme proposed by Viola!?... the Italian twentieth century!
Daniele has already asked, and I reiterate.
How I would like to have my say on painters and alcoholics!... But I will refrain.
Please return serenely to the topic of the discussion.
We would all benefit from it.
Me first, as I practically know nothing about the Italian '00s.
Thank you.
Member
Gianni22 wrote:You didn't write it, but that's how it is. I'm telling you. If you want, we can talk about the alcoholic Beethoven, the womanizer Mozart, etc.
_____
No one is perfect. :-)
_____
All ethically "admirable"... if that is a parameter for evaluating a piece of music. Well then. And what if you didn't know the author of a piece?
_____
With Stravinsky, it certainly would have benefited me.
____
Member
Viola wrote:_____
Con Stravinskij mi avrebbe sicuramente giovato.
____
As you have often happened to hear before, your parameters are only linked by taste. If ethics is a selection parameter, you should disavow half of the composers you like. You yourself disavow it... at your pleasure.
Honestly, I am pleased to get to know your tastes... too bad that Stravinsky does not need us to be listed among the giants of the 1900s. Dear Luca, as you can see we are on theme... it is not I who am turning a deaf ear.
Since a contribution is requested, Dallapiccola is certainly one to know
Member
Dear Viola, I had missed this detail
>Dear Abate,
> I didn't know.
At the risk of sounding pedantic, but it is the second time you have been told (aside from the first time, when we all read and signed the regulations before registering).
I would say to also listen to Luca and return to the subject.
...I don't know, crazy idea
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categoria:Compositori_italiani_del_XX_secolo
Now it is just a matter of establishing who is more "ethical" ....
Moderator
Dear friends, I have read and although I find the subject interesting, I will not participate actively because my "hands are itching."
Either the debate remains civil, meaning ABOVE ALL respecting the differences of others, or I make it civil by default.
In the forum there are enthusiasts, professionals, composers, performers, and musicologists; even if it is convenient for us not to think so, everyone is involved with different points of view on the matter. If we do not keep this well in mind, it will be easy to create misunderstandings of all kinds.
I remember that the forum is interesting because everyone puts their knowledge into play with mutual respect.
I do not intervene regarding the content, but if the form does not match what is expected, I close the topic and whoever slips up is left somewhat adrift... trying environments that are perhaps a bit more mediocre but allow space for a certain gratuitous aggressiveness. A typical case is that after a few months of being adrift, the banned user reappears with a different alias (any reference is purely coincidental), stays on the straight and narrow for a while, but then... as they say? Ah, a leopard can't change its spots.
For the most intolerant, I have finished my sermon... since I have written a lot, I remind everyone that it is not advisable to discuss this intervention publicly... if you want, you can even call me, but avoid making me use the ban button.
Lately I haven't had much time; I hate investing time in writing these things that should be obvious; at this moment I should have written a good post on the subject, but I ran out of time.
The subject is The immense (hidden) legacy of the Italian 20th Century
Thank you in advance for your cooperation
Member
Gianni22 wrote:As you have often already happened to hear, your parameters are only linked by taste. If ethics is a selection parameter, you should disavow half of the composers you like. You yourself disavow it... at your own pleasure.
Honestly, I am pleased to get to know your tastes... too bad that Stravinsky does not need us to be listed among the giants of the 1900s. Dear Luca, as you can see we are on theme... it is not I who am turning a deaf ear.
Since a contribution is requested, Dallapiccola is certainly one to know
At this point the dedication begins (how much I love dedications!)
To the moderator Luca (moderators always first),
to the great Celibidache,
to Gianni22, who always reads me with pleasure.
https://youtu.be/Adsb2HokV6I
To understand the legacy of the 20th century, one must listen to the music of the 21st century
It might be cliché, but it's true. How many people listen to pieces composed in this century? So, what do we want to talk about?
Member
jack wrote:. How many listen to pieces composed in this century?
I do my best and the forum has a section dedicated specifically to the music of this century.
It seems to me that one of the legacies is a certain "theatricality" that emerges from many composers. I suggest not basing your listening only on the most renowned ones, there are many interesting composers... just go on YouTube.
Moderator
Alfredo Casella was supposed to be the subject of my bachelor's thesis; I have always been fascinated by the Italian early twentieth century and wanted to understand a bit more about it. Alas, I embarked on a project too large for me, the analysis of his Orfeo, and after a while, I was forced to wave the white flag. I was left with some interesting listens, an Orfeo by Poliziano in the BUR edition, and the idea that the rediscovery of that repertoire should have started from the musical world, not the academic one.
This is a first listen, "Italia", a sort of symphonic poem; here are the notes from Flaminio online http://www.flaminioonline.it/Guide/Casella/Casella-Italia11.html
There would be many things to say; it is a pleasant piece, very easy to listen to; Viola brought up, when speaking of some of Respighi's compositions, the idea of "commercial pieces". It is a complicated discussion to approach in these terms, because no piece by Respighi or Casella can ever be fully commercial, but if we listen to the early 1900s, we cannot expect only Webern and Bartók; we must also expect Mahler and Mascagni. Regarding what is said in the notes I linked, I would add that the first part is very Wagnerian, of the "modal" Wagner of Parsifal, which is often overlooked. From about 0:20, for example, there is this kind of brass chorale, with stepwise motion (that is, for those who don't catch it immediately, there are sustained notes in the high register and scales in the low register) that form continuous dissonances waiting for resolution, the famous defunctionalized sevenths.
Like
da 5:30 these chorale-like fanfares begin, in which you really seem to hear small polyphonic themes that, in fact, are re-proposed and varied throughout the Overture. Well, this is a typical Wagnerian element, typical especially of this latter Wagner, whom I like very much. Also listen at 11:10 to this way of building chromatic tensions with the bass descending by step, in which the tension is much more important than the resolution. And there isn't much that is revolutionary; it's not Tristan; it is a movement of parts that Josquin could have done this way, that Bach could have done in an even more complicated manner. I could build a discourse around it that would perhaps have a beginning but no end. So it remains here as a stream of consciousness, not as an argument :-) just know that I love the Wagnerisms in this piece.
However, I don't want to let the theme of being "commercial" slip away, because I think it is a deeper subject than it seems. Now, in this piece, Casella does what EVERYONE was doing during that period. It is well written, it is pleasant, it credits him almost as part of a national school, but while being aware of the harmonic and orchestral revolutions of the period. This piece is not revolutionary.
So, is it a masterpiece or not?
History with a capital "H" seems to have its own mechanisms. Music history, with a lowercase "h" of unknown magnitude, has its own, and musical historiography has its own still others. If in history there are 100 composers, in music history 20 of them have great success (whether with the public or critics) that makes them "notable," and musical historiography—both contemporary and, above all, subsequent—chooses 5 to name and analyze. By what mechanisms? Well, who knows... generally, the most common mechanism for historiographical success is originality. Public success doesn't work like that; more often it is "similar" things that please the public, which prefers to confirm its own taste rather than change or alter it. Aware of these basic mechanisms, many musicologists and music historians are fascinated in their youth (I was with Casella) by what I call compensatory historiography. Compensatory historiography is, in its own way, a very ethical thing, driven by the idea that scholars should take revenge on mainstream historiography and bring to light forgotten works and authors (thus compensating for injustices). Compensatory historiography always succeeds; it is also one of the reasons why I am not pessimistic about the fates of past and forgotten art, because there will always be a scholar from nowhere eager to make the discovery of the century.
As a matter of fact, and based on my meager personal experience, finding an unpublished composition and deriving something scientific from its analysis is a very complex activity that very few are truly capable of doing. Claudiano De Grassis, a composer from 1780 operating in Frattocchie, probably wrote banal compositions. Claudio Grasso, who finds the Missa Insolemnis by Claudiano De Grassis, if he cannot give true historical weight to his discovery, will probably end up teaching flute in middle schools. To end up teaching Music History at the Conservatory of Cosenza, Claudio Grasso will have to, perhaps, discover that Claudiano De Grassis had, at the very least, a
Musical Cappella in Frattocchie, where he taught music to people better than him and much more famous. When Claudio Grasso manages to get funding for an international conference on Claudiano De Grassis and the musical environment of Frattocchie—that is, when historiography has considered that discovery part of a historical landscape worthy of note—then Claudio Grasso might perhaps have a place as a contract researcher in the History of Music at the free telematics university Nicolò Cusano.
Tutto questo per dire che, ahimé, il valore intrinseco di alcune composizioni del primo '900 italiano non basta per renderle "notevoli" agli occhi della storiografia musicale.
Nonostante questo, tutti i nomi che stiamo facendo, e altri che non abbiamo fatto, sono presenti non solo sui libri di storia della musica ma sui programmi di sala dei teatri italiani ed esteri. Questa è una cosa ottima, migliore di quanto pensiate. Il novecento italiano è suonato, studiato e apprezzato, ovviamente ci sono pezzi più di successo e pezzi meno di successo, e paradossalmente spesso vengono preferiti pezzi più conformi a uno "stile del '900 italiano", a dispetto di altri, e questo a parziale spiegazione del come mai di Respighi si suonino solo e sempre i Pini di Roma (non era solo Mila a dirlo, eh).
Chi avrebbe mai detto, ad esempio, che Casella avesse "scritto" tre pezzi per pianola, ovvero per pianoforte a rullo?
