Classic or Romantic?

[Zon]

Are there any writings from B that suggest how he felt about it? In Thayers, I do not recall any.
Regardless, B brought a new era in music, not matter what you call it.

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by Rod:
What Romantic pieces do you know that sound like Beethoven?

Brahm's 1st Symphony. Just kidding, of course. Is this a trick question? I did not say that Romantic music sounds like Beethoven. Rather, I said that Beethoven's music has a feel for an implied program, a device that is Romantic. That is not to say that Beethoven's music is programmatic in particular but that it has a feel of a program--such as the 3rd, 5th, 6th, and 9th Symphonies. But the inherent structure and balance of those very symphonies, including the traditional harmonic progressions are at the roots of the Classical period.

[Peter]

Originally posted by Sorrano:
Brahm's 1st Symphony. Just kidding, of course. Is this a trick question? I did not say that Romantic music sounds like Beethoven. Rather, I said that Beethoven's music has a feel for an implied program, a device that is Romantic. That is not to say that Beethoven's music is programmatic in particular but that it has a feel of a program--such as the 3rd, 5th, 6th, and 9th Symphonies. But the inherent structure and balance of those very symphonies, including the traditional harmonic progressions are at the roots of the Classical period.

I think the same could be said of Haydn's early Symphonies - le Matin,le Midi, le Soir or the Farewell! Just to confuse things, in the 18th century, Haydn and mozart were often referred to as 'Romantic' composers!

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Peter]

Originally posted by Zon:
Are there any writings from B that suggest how he felt about it? In Thayers, I do not recall any.
Regardless, B brought a new era in music, not matter what you call it.

What about Weber, Sphor, Rossini and Schubert? There influence on the early Romantics was far greater.

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Rod]

Originally posted by Sorrano:
Brahm's 1st Symphony. Just kidding, of course. Is this a trick question? I did not say that Romantic music sounds like Beethoven. Rather, I said that Beethoven's music has a feel for an implied program, a device that is Romantic. That is not to say that Beethoven's music is programmatic in particular but that it has a feel of a program--such as the 3rd, 5th, 6th, and 9th Symphonies. But the inherent structure and balance of those very symphonies, including the traditional harmonic progressions are at the roots of the Classical period.

I think the number of Beethoven works with an 'implied programme' is very small when you think about his whole output. Also he named very few of his instrumental pieces, unlike his successors, for whom such a thing became commonplace. But even then can you tell me what the 'programme' is for the Eroica?!


------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by Rod:
I think the number of Beethoven works with an 'implied programme' is very small when you think about his whole output. Also he named very few of his instrumental pieces, unlike his successors, for whom such a thing became commonplace. But even then can you tell me what the 'programme' is for the Eroica?!

Re-read my post. I said that there is a FEEL for an IMPLIED program. I could easily make up something to go with the symphony, as it lends itself well for that. When I listen, for example, to the Sonata Op. 57 I "hear" a program--anguish, an inner battle--that sort of thing. There is something dynamic about the progression of Beethoven's music that implies that this may not be just absolute music but have some sort of hidden meaning.

[John Rasmussen]

Originally posted by Peter:
What about Weber, Sphor, Rossini and Schubert? There influence on the early Romantics was far greater.

I would not include Rossini among those "early Romantics." The music of his operas was very classical in style, at least until William Tell. Weber and Schubert, though, definitely anticipated the Romantic rush in their different ways. Schubert's piano music, chamber music, and songs were especially influential, as were Weber's operas.

P.S. I still think Weber's hatred for Beethoven was professional jealousy! But it may have been that he and LvB simply were different people aiming at different things.

[Rutradelusasa]

Just a thought here...

Originally posted by John Rasmussen:
P.S. I still think Weber's hatred for Beethoven was professional jealousy! But it may have been that he and LvB simply were different people aiming at different things.

Where did you guys dig out this hatred from Weber towards Beethoven? From every literature I've read regarding Weber I've only read the (not complete) opposite, that means, Weber had great admiral for Beethoven, I know this is off topic, but it's just to get things straight.

[Rod]

Originally posted by Rutradelusasa:
Just a thought here...

Where did you guys dig out this hatred from Weber towards Beethoven? From every literature I've read regarding Weber I've only read the (not complete) opposite, that means, Weber had great admiral for Beethoven, I know this is off topic, but it's just to get things straight.

As I have recently said here, for a long time Weber slandered Beethoven on a regular basis, often in print. Of this there is no doubt. Check Schindler's biography as a section is devoted to this topic. If I've got time I'll dig out some quotes for you.


------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin


[This message has been edited by Rod (edited October 16, 2002).]

[Amalie]

Originally posted by Chaszz:
If Romanticism is seen not as a purely musical movement, but as a literary, philosphical and political one as well, I think Beethoven's place in it becomes more apparent. Romanticism was at first literary, and began in Germany in the 1770s with the Sturm and Drang movement. The following is from the Columbia Encyclopedia: "With Sturm und Drang, German authors became cultural leaders of Europe, writing literature that was revolutionary in its stress on subjectivity and on the unease of man in contemporary society. The movement was distinguished also by the intensity with which it developed the theme of youthful genius in rebellion against accepted standards, by its enthusiasm for nature, and by its rejection of the rules of 18th-century neoclassical style. The great figure of the movement was Goethe, who wrote its first major drama, Götz von Berlichingen (1773), and its most sensational and representative novel, The Sorrows of Young Werther (1774). Other writers of importance were Klopstock, J. M. R. Lenz, and Friedrich Müller. The last major figure was Schiller, whose Die Räuber and other early plays were also a prelude to romanticism."

Romanticism was in full literary flower by the 1800, and music was late to the table. The American and French revolutions added fuel to the emotional fire. People could actually feel that change was in the air, and the rights and dignity of man were destined to triumph over the ancient order. Beethoven's so-called "heroic" middle period, beginning more or less with the Eroica symphony, was greatly influenced by the new world-view. He stayed with the classical forms, but expanded them to a heroic scale that was obviously a direct expression of the Romantics'(and Beethoven's) vision of the hero breaking the shackles of fate and repressive government. Only in the narrow sense of sonata and other inherited musical forms is he not a Romantic. In his spirit, he is strongly one.
Compare the 3rd Symphony with anything by Haydn and Mozart, and can you say that Beethoven was not expressing the spirit of his time?

In this forum, the guise of Romanticism is that of a rhapsodizing, overly-sentimental musical form with relatively little discipline. This is only one of its strands, and became more evident later in the 19th century. Earlier on, the movement was idealistic, politically revolutionary, and dedicated to the subjective truths of the individual experience. Beethoven was not only truly a part of all this; I think he can be thought of as its greatest exponent.

I think Chaszz has encapsulated the essence of the matter in a post he made last year. Beethoven uses classical forms which are infused by a sublimely romantic spirit.
The whole point here is that if one takes for instance the symphony, I cannot think of any romantic composer who strays away form the strict 3 or 4 movement format of the symphony, so powerful was the hold of the classical past.
Am I right in thinking incredibly that it was only as recently as Sibelius and his great single movement symphony no.7, that composers romantic or otherwise have dared to challenge the classical thinking here?
Until very recently composers of whatever stripe have been reluctant to think outside of the box of musical orthodoxy, say where the symphony is concerned, so it is really not surprising that someone that had such a reverence for classical forms such as Beethoven would be quite happy
with or not see the need for altering the accepted ways of structuring the writing of the symphony.
That does not in my book undermine the claim that infact Beethoven is the greatest of romantic composers in spirit.
I do not disagree that Handel for instance was not attracted to nature and set several literary Acardian myths from antiquity, into his operas, but this is a long way away from the wild romantic conception of nature as a sort of religious communig of the individual soul, an idea that the ancients would have found rather bizarre.
Elements of romanticism may be found in earlier composers, but my point is that all the elements previously described that make up the romantic character really fuse in the character of Beethoven which make him if you will excuse the pun the classic romantic. His bold harmonic and structural explorations helped launch the romantic era in music.

Lysander




[This message has been edited by Amalie (edited July 14, 2003).]

[Rod]

Originally posted by Amalie:

but this is a long way away from the wild romantic conception of nature as a sort of religious communig of the individual soul, an idea that the ancients would have found rather bizarre.

Was the idea of 'spiritualisation' or 'divination' of nature not a pagan concept Amalie?




------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[Chaszz]

Originally posted by Rod:
Was the idea of 'spiritualisation' or 'divination' of nature not a pagan concept Amalie?

Yes, I think the character of Dionysus, the god of wine who was served by frenetic maidens dancing to passionate music, represents wild nature expressed in the human spirit. He is also the god of tragedy, the darker regions of the soul which when uncovered and confronted can lead to catharsis and renewal.

It's nice to see this classical/romantic topic resurrected again, like Dionysus rising in the spring after his ritual death in the autumn. The topic seems to have an immortality of its own.

Chaszz

[This message has been edited by Chaszz (edited July 15, 2003).]

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by Amalie:

The whole point here is that if one takes for instance the symphony, I cannot think of any romantic composer who strays away form the strict 3 or 4 movement format of the symphony, so powerful was the hold of the classical past.
Am I right in thinking incredibly that it was only as recently as Sibelius and his great single movement symphony no.7, that composers romantic or otherwise have dared to challenge the classical thinking here?

[This message has been edited by Amalie (edited July 14, 2003).]

Do not forget Liszt and Strauss' tone poems, whether derived from the Symphony or from the Overture or a combination of the two. I think the major difference between what Sibelius wrote as a one movement symphony and what Liszt and Strauss composed is simply the nomenclature.

[Chaszz]

On some other thread where this topic was discussed, Peter said that use or disuse of sonata form was not the difference between classical and romantic music, because the romantics used sonata form, Perhaps they stretched it out but Beethoven did also. Peter then went on to say the real difference was in the use of harmony, specifically that for contrasting themes, the romantics used the subdominant or other 'flat keys', rather than the dominant (a 'sharp key') used by the classicists.
Just to confirm that I think I know what he means, because my music theory is only elementary, and to illustrate for some members who may not understand: G is the fifth note in the C scale, and the G chord is dominant in the key of C, providing the greatest emotional contrast in a cadence, or return to the base (tonic C chord). G has an F sharp in its scale, thus is a 'sharp' key compared to C. F is the fourth note in the natural C scale, and the F chord is subdominant in the key of C, providing a less dramatic contrast with the C chord. The F scale has a B flat in it, thus being a 'flat' key compared with C. If this is wrong, Peter, please correct me.

So my observation here now is that if this is the real core difference between romantic and classical, I find it a rather minor technical one. The impact of Beethoven's innovations in the philosophy and emotional content of music must surely stand for far more in music history. I say philosophy paricularly as when in the last movement of the 9th symphony, the basses actually comment negatively on the themes of the preceding movements. This is music growing up and becoming aware of itself, sort of like the critic Harold Bloom recently saying that Shakespeare discovered the human personality (somewhat a bit of hype by Mr. Bloom, but you get what I mean).

Technically, Beethoven may be in a category of his own. In terms of the philosophic and emotional development of music, and of the arts in a wider sense, I think he belongs with the Romantics.

[Peter]

Originally posted by Chaszz:
On some other thread where this topic was discussed, Peter said that use or disuse of sonata form was not the difference between classical and romantic music, because the romantics used sonata form, Perhaps they stretched it out but Beethoven did also. Peter then went on to say the real difference was in the use of harmony, specifically that for contrasting themes, the romantics used the subdominant or other 'flat keys', rather than the dominant (a 'sharp key') used by the classicists.
Just to confirm that I think I know what he means, because my music theory is only elementary, and to illustrate for some members who may not understand: G is the fifth note in the C scale, and the G chord is dominant in the key of C, providing the greatest emotional contrast in a cadence, or return to the base (tonic C chord). G has an F sharp in its scale, thus is a 'sharp' key compared to C. F is the fourth note in the natural C scale, and the F chord is subdominant in the key of C, providing a less dramatic contrast with the C chord. The F scale has a B flat in it, thus being a 'flat' key compared with C. If this is wrong, Peter, please correct me.

So my observation here now is that if this is the real core difference between romantic and classical, I find it a rather minor technical one. The impact of Beethoven's innovations in the philosophy and emotional content of music must surely stand for far more in music history. I say philosophy paricularly as when in the last movement of the 9th symphony, the basses actually comment negatively on the themes of the preceding movements. This is music growing up and becoming aware of itself, sort of like the critic Harold Bloom recently saying that Shakespeare discovered the human personality (somewhat a bit of hype by Mr. Bloom, but you get what I mean).

Technically, Beethoven may be in a category of his own. In terms of the philosophic and emotional development of music, and of the arts in a wider sense, I think he belongs with the Romantics.

Yes your harmonic analysis is correct and it may be technical but it is also technical to say Baroque composers wrote in a more contrapuntal style or that Schoenberg used atonality! The point is that each music era has its stylistic characteristics and Beethoven's musical language is classical.

If Beethoven were the great inspiration behind the romantic movement, how come that he was able to write in 1822 that he was out of fashion? His music though revered and respected was indeed out of fashion - not in tune with the upcoming early romantics.

------------------
'Man know thyself'