Would Beethoven have loved Van Gogh...

[Preston]

I think my opinion after several years of back and forth on this is that in a technical sense Beethoven is doubtless classical, in Prof. Rosen's sense, but still that in a wider cultural sense he strongly embodied the romantic tendencies of his time. That is why he "pairs" better with artists like Turner and Van Gogh. It would not be as accurate, I believe, to "pair" him with a painter like J. L. David, who is a classicist and a close contemporary of his. The spiritual and emotional connection would not be there as it is in Turner and Van Gogh.

I agree. Beethoven was surely not a "catchy" musician, probably the most "non catchy" I have ever heard, like Van Gogh as an artist. While I am no musician I feel that from what I have read Beethoven differed from the classical style. Everything I have read says that he captured the style of Haydn and Mozart in his early music, somewhat, but he was very different from the classical style. Like Van Gogh to Impressionism.

Kind Regards,
Preston

[Peter]

I think my opinion after several years of back and forth on this is that in a technical sense Beethoven is doubtless classical, in Prof. Rosen's sense, but still that in a wider cultural sense he strongly embodied the romantic tendencies of his time. That is why he "pairs" better with artists like Turner and Van Gogh. It would not be as accurate, I believe, to "pair" him with a painter like J. L. David, who is a classicist and a close contemporary of his. The spiritual and emotional connection would not be there as it is in Turner and Van Gogh.

That's fair enough Chaszz. I think as a person Beethoven did embody many Romantic traits and he was in sympathy with the literature, philosophy and freer thinking of his time where Romanticism had its roots. As a musical style though, his art remained (and in fact became more so) bedded in the Classical traditions and interestingly he was not in sympathy with the new musical style emerging in the works of Spohr, Weber and Rossini, nor with the flashy virtuoso pianists who were the darlings of the Romantic concert hall. The contemporary composer he most admired was Cherubini, now considered a conservative and traditionalist figure.

[Preston]

they ARE soul-brothers. Only wearing different glasses.

Chaszz, there is something I have wanted to say for a while, I just never got around to it. Those are very touching words.

[Ateach Asc]

LVB & VVG

Does the VVG Starry Night invoke for anyone the very opening phrases of the LVB 9th?

The better question might perhaps be do geniuses have common visions regardless of their mediums?

[Preston]

The better question might perhaps be do geniuses have common visions regardless of their mediums?

I feel that is an interesting question and for me a tough one to answer but I will give it a shot, . Hope that this makes some sense. I feel that they do have similar thoughts and ideas depending on the type of genius they are. For example, one thing a spiritual genius seeks is a point of purity, so to say. That means that most extreme spiritual geniuses are probably similar with their thoughts and feelings because they would be at a very similar point of mind, in my opinion. This is one reason I think Beethoven would have been fond of Van Gogh.

It is like monks in a monastery living in solitude. They are going to be somewhat similar, because of their similar ways and beliefs.

[Chaszz]

Similiar yes, but different to some extent because of their media. The texture of stone, the color and physical feel of paint, the associations of words or the sounds of an orchestra with all its different instruments, will each inspire an artist in a personal way. In addition to what he or she has to say from inside, the medium will inspire further based on its instrinsic properties which are different from any other medium. The best example for me personally is Rembrandt's use of paint textures to express the feel of human skin and the personality within. I cannot think of any analogous use of any other medium to do what he alone was able to with built-up paint textures.

[DavidO]

Had he been able to see it with OUR eyes, which are accustomed to modern art, he might have loved it. But with his early 19th century tastes, he probably would have found it too extreme to understand.

Agree. For some weird reason, genius artists (composers, painters, writers) often have startling & modern tastes only with regard to their own creations, but often not with regard to others' art that surrounds them. Beethoven, while certainly an awesome revolutionary in so much of his own composing, seemed to have rather a staid, even reactionary taste in literature (I'd love to hear what he might have thought about, say, Wordsworth -- who was so akin to him in many ways -- or Shelley).

It's fun to muse on what Beethoven, had he been living in recent times, would have thought of "Andrei Rublev" or "The Good Soldier" or even Brancusi's Rooster (all of which struck out in new directions).

[Chaszz]

Agree. For some weird reason, genius artists (composers, painters, writers) often have startling & modern tastes only with regard to their own creations, but often not with regard to others' art that surrounds them. Beethoven, while certainly an awesome revolutionary in so much of his own composing, seemed to have rather a staid, even reactionary taste in literature (I'd love to hear what he might have thought about, say, Wordsworth -- who was so akin to him in many ways -- or Shelley).

It's fun to muse on what Beethoven, had he been living in recent times, would have thought of "Andrei Rublev" or "The Good Soldier" or even Brancusi's Rooster (all of which struck out in new directions).

Also, as Peter has pointed out many times, the older Beethoven didn't even like the new music of his time, Romantic music, and was a classicist, who, however startling his innovations, continued and enlarged the classical style of Haydn and Mozart.

[Preston]

Is it not safe to say that Beethoven may have been a style of his own. Meaning that he was neither classical or romantic. I am not a musicologist, by any means, but everything I have read says that Beethoven mastered the classical style in his early period. Now I realize that he could have continued working with the classical style in many different forms and ways, but I don't feel that is true. I don't really think it would still be considered classical style to change what was considered the classical style by Haydn or Mozart. While Beethoven's music may have some similarities to the classical style, he was definitely not writing like Haydn or Mozart, who not only invented the classical style, I think, but mastered it also. Even Haydn said that he did not understand Beethoven's middle period works. So does that not show us that Beethoven's music differed from the classical style?

So the question I have is, was Beethoven neither classical or romantic but a style of his own?

[Chaszz]

Is it not safe to say that Beethoven may have been a style of his own. Meaning that he was neither classical or romantic. I am not a musicologist, by any means, but everything I have read says that Beethoven mastered the classical style in his early period. Now I realize that he could have continued working with the classical style in many different forms and ways, but I don't feel that is true. I don't really think it would still be considered classical style to change what was considered the classical style by Haydn or Mozart. While Beethoven's music may have some similarities to the classical style, he was definitely not writing like Haydn or Mozart, who not only invented the classical style, I think, but mastered it also. Even Haydn said that he did not understand Beethoven's middle period works. So does that not show us that Beethoven's music differed from the classical style?

So the question I have is, was Beethoven neither classical or romantic but a style of his own?

Well, I'm sure Peter will have something to say about this, as we've been over it many times. An important book which considers this matter is "The Classical Style: Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven," by the musicologist and pianist Prof. Charles Rosen. The title tells you what he thinks.

My own opinion is that Beethoven was a classicist who did not write in the musical style defined as Romantic, but did compose music in the Classical style which nevertheless strongly expressed the Romantic feelings and worldview of his time. But personally I also have no objection to his being considered in a category all his own.

[Peter]

Is it not safe to say that Beethoven may have been a style of his own. Meaning that he was neither classical or romantic. I am not a musicologist, by any means, but everything I have read says that Beethoven mastered the classical style in his early period. Now I realize that he could have continued working with the classical style in many different forms and ways, but I don't feel that is true. I don't really think it would still be considered classical style to change what was considered the classical style by Haydn or Mozart. While Beethoven's music may have some similarities to the classical style, he was definitely not writing like Haydn or Mozart, who not only invented the classical style, I think, but mastered it also. Even Haydn said that he did not understand Beethoven's middle period works. So does that not show us that Beethoven's music differed from the classical style?

So the question I have is, was Beethoven neither classical or romantic but a style of his own?

Chaszz has answered your point pretty well and the book by Charles Rosen is a must if you want to really understand this complex matter - but be warned it is pretty technical and assumes a knowledge of harmony. The fundamental difference between a classical composer and a Romantic composer is the approach to form and tonality - it is this that is used in musical terms to define the different styles and Rosen demonstrates with numerous examples just how classical Beethoven was! In fact contrary to popular belief he became more so - his earliest works occasionally display Romantic tendencies - works such as Adelaide or the slow movements of some of the sonatas - but he became much stricter in form, even harping back to the Baroque in the late works.

[Preston]

That is why he "pairs" better with artists like Turner and Van Gogh. It would not be as accurate, I believe, to "pair" him with a painter like J. L. David, who is a classicist and a close contemporary of his. The spiritual and emotional connection would not be there as it is in Turner and Van Gogh.

but he became much stricter in form, even harping back to the Baroque in the late works.

I have thought that Beethoven compares with art, like impressionists works for a while. I looked at some of J.L. David's works and they do tend to have a more "perfected and picturesque style". I could see your point Chaszz that Beethoven is more like a impressionist than the style of painting where the artists tried to make the painting picture like. Are Haydn and Mozart not like the picture like paintings while Beethoven is like an impressionist?

I believe that Beethoven's music is perfect for what he wanted to write, and I mean perfect, not a note displaced. But not like a painting that is picture like perfect. I could imagine that he even follows the strictest of form but even following that strict form he could do things that were non-classical, right??? I also feel that Beethoven's music is far more hard to understand then say Mozart's. I have so much trouble trying to understand it, not saying that I don't pick up on things.

I plan on taking some very serious music courses if I ever get to a four year college, even if I don't I will eventually study, but until then I think it would be best to wait to read Rosen's book.

[Peter]

I have thought that Beethoven compares with art, like impressionists works for a while. I looked at some of J.L. David's works and they do tend to have a more "perfected and picturesque style". I could see your point Chaszz that Beethoven is more like a impressionist than the style of painting where the artists tried to make the painting picture like. Are Haydn and Mozart not like the picture like paintings while Beethoven is like an impressionist?

I believe that Beethoven's music is perfect for what he wanted to write, and I mean perfect, not a note displaced. But not like a painting that is picture like perfect. I could imagine that he even follows the strictest of form but even following that strict form he could do things that were non-classical, right??? I also feel that Beethoven's music is far more hard to understand then say Mozart's. I have so much trouble trying to understand it, not saying that I don't pick up on things.

I plan on taking some very serious music courses if I ever get to a four year college, even if I don't I will eventually study, but until then I think it would be best to wait to read Rosen's book.

Beethoven is not comparable to the Impressionists - his structures are always well defined and his themes (rather than textures) of paramount importance. The composers most usually compared to the Impressionists are Debussy and Ravel precisely because they blur the texture and create atmospheric effects.

The point about classical composers is that they DO NOT weaken the tonal basis or blur the harmonic structure as Romantic composers do - Beethoven simply does not do this! If you need convincing of how important tonality was to Beethoven just listen to the last moments of the 5th symphony where he drums home the tonic key C major for some 50 odd bars! This is admittedly an extreme example but it makes the point.

Beethoven takes the language of Haydn and Mozart and develops and expands it further to its utmost limits. When asked to comment on the music of Sphor, Beethoven found him too chromatic - in other words he objected to blurring the harmonic structure and the weakening of the tonic-dominant relationship which is central to the classical style.

[Preston]

I am not trying to argue, by any means, all I am saying in non technical terms is that I feel that Beethoven's music is more similar to Van Gogh, then to the David painting that is in the attachment (I do not know many artist, so I felt the David picture would do). I am not saying Beethoven was a romantic. I feel Van Gogh definitely focused on structures and textures, heavily, like the other post-impressionist, it is not catchy and grandioso, it has to be looked at differently. This is just my opinion and it may be wrong and probably is, I am not a musicologist, etc., but what I have heard of Beethoven sounds kind of different. I probably should have used post-impressionist in my previous post instead of impressionist.

Kind Regards,
Preston

[Peter]

I am not trying to argue, by any means, all I am saying in non technical terms is that I feel that Beethoven's music is more similar to Van Gogh, then to the David painting that is in the attachment (I do not know many artist, so I felt the David picture would do). I am not saying Beethoven was a romantic. I feel Van Gogh definitely focused on structures and textures, heavily, like the other post-impressionist, it is not catchy and grandioso, it has to be looked at differently. This is just my opinion and it may be wrong and probably is, I am not a musicologist, etc., but what I have heard of Beethoven sounds kind of different. I probably should have used post-impressionist in my previous post instead of impressionist.

Kind Regards,
Preston

It is a very interesting debate Preston - For you Van Gogh's paintings evoke similar feelings and responses as the music of Beethoven and this is perfectly legitimate. However that is a very personal interpretation and we cannot say categorically that the music of Beethoven goes with the art of Van Gogh - it is all in the eye of the beholder and the ear of the listener. Looking at the two examples you provided I actually find the David more evocative of Beethoven - the revolutionary Marat portrayed as hero suggests the Eroica!