anderson@uwvax.ARPA (05/14/84)
From a recent article here: > > How about composers whose music is much worse than it sounds? > I would nominate Vivaldi*, Beethoven, Listz, Verdi, and Mahler. > (Bruckner, Meyerbeer, Franck, Delius, and Resphigi are beneath > consideration!) > > *Of whom Stravinsky said, "He wrote one cncerto 100 times". -- houxm!dis2 I am tired of hearing remarks like this. Music doesn't survive hundreds of years unless there's something to it. What exactly do you mean by "worse than it sounds"? That the music didn't make some sort of music- theoretical or philosophical advance? I suspect it merely means that you don't happen to be into it and/or that you have not studied it in any sense. So please, let's leave blanket condemnations of composers and/or styles to the devotees of "awesomeness" in net.music. David Anderson (one of many) wisc-rsch!anderson
rlr@pyuxn.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (05/14/84)
> > How about composers whose music is much worse than it sounds? > > I would nominate Vivaldi*, Beethoven, Listz, Verdi, and Mahler. > > (Bruckner, Meyerbeer, Franck, Delius, and Resphigi are beneath > > consideration!) > > *Of whom Stravinsky said, "He wrote one cncerto 100 times". > > I am tired of hearing remarks like this. Music doesn't survive hundreds > of years unless there's something to it. What exactly do you mean by > "worse than it sounds"? That the music didn't make some sort of music- > theoretical or philosophical advance? I suspect it merely means that you don't > happen to be into it and/or that you have not studied it in any sense. On the contrary, I think a lot of such condemnation come precisely from such study. Though people can certainly listen to and enjoy whatever they like, those who do analyze what went into musical works have found a number of important things. Such as, although a piece of music may be well-loved and although it has survived for hundreds of years, the composer was a hack and a thief who stole the idea from a struggling, starving, and currently unheard of composer with much more talent. (Imagine that...) > So please, let's leave blanket condemnations of composers and/or styles > to the devotees of "awesomeness" in net.music. No comment. [I'm full of contradictions...] -- Never ASSUME, because when you ASSUME, you make an ASS out of U and ME... Rich Rosen pyuxn!rlr
jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) (05/17/84)
(ugh) > On the contrary, I think a lot of such condemnation come precisely from such > study. Though people can certainly listen to and enjoy whatever they like, > those who do analyze what went into musical works have found a number of > important things. Such as, although a piece of music may be well-loved and > although it has survived for hundreds of years, the composer was a hack and a > thief who stole the idea from a strugging, starving, and currently unheard of > composer with much more talent. (Imagine that...) And analysis is always objective and accurate. Seriously, if a piece is as you describe, the analysis is probably wrong - at least in judging the work a hack job. After all, music is more than just what can be analyzed. (As if I had to tell YOU that, Mr. Rich Rosen. Shame on you! :-) Of course, if you REALLY want to get an argument started, you might give an example... what's repentance, anyway? Jeff Winslow