Not keen on the 19th Century [or late 18th for that matter]
Posted by: stephenjohn on 27 October 2002
Is there anybody else out there who's not that keen on music from the 19th Century or late 18th for that matter, Beethoven's late string quartets exepted.
There is a huge gap in my collection, for example, I have more Bach than all music from the next 150 years after he died put together, then I've got a reasonable amount of 20th century stuff. I have no Mendlesohn [sp?], Schubert, Schumman, Chopin etc. I have some Brahms, Bruckner etc which I don't really like. Hayden, Mozart, Beethoven [late string quartets excepted] don't do that much for me. There is a massive body of music out there that I just don't appreciate. I really wish that I did because I know that I'm missing out on so much.
So am I alone in this wierdness?
Posted on: 27 October 2002 by Former member
I go through phases. For some while I've found that (and I apologise if this sounds pretentious) I don't seem to connect emotionally with music from this era (though I've never been a huge fan of late 18th century stuff).
There are exceptions - Schubert piano and chamber works, Berlioz, some Rimsky-Korsakov, late Brahms piano stuff...
I've never been very fond of late romantic, but I did hear Bruckner's 9th on the radio the other day and thoroughly enjoyed it...so maybe I'm coming out of it.
Posted on: 27 October 2002 by aybee
And I thought it was just me. No I have tried but so much seems musically bloated; more instruments, bigger orchestras, longer compositions. An orchestra attempting to imitate a storm at sea... bah!
But then I do enjoy Mahler - Ooops that blows my case:-)
Alan
Posted on: 27 October 2002 by Phil Barry
Didn't Bach write more music than the combined output of all (European/American) composers combined did in the next 150 years?
Regards.
Phil
Posted on: 27 October 2002 by Former member
What you, and I, listen for in 20th century and contemporary music is completely different from the 19th century style. If you're a fan of Stravinsky, Boulez, or Messiaen: their music is more about sound and rhythm than melody and harmony. This is generally what separates the two eras.
You're aware of all the music that you're missing, but it probably won't appeal to you as much. You might describe it as overly dramatic or too 'easily' accessible.
Posted on: 28 October 2002 by --duncan--
Hi stephenjohn
Not weird at all. You are just saying you don't like (Austro-german) romantic music. This is a small proportion of all of 'classical'/art/whatever music. It happens to be a high-profile genre, but over the last thirty years people have increasingly realised that there is far more out there than Mozart/Beethoven/Wagner.
It's similar to saying 'I don't like impressionist paintings'. This happend to be a very popular style, but most people would understand if it's not your cup to tea.
As you hint, many here will feel you are missing out on some fabulous stuff. Perhaps you will grow to like it, perhaps not. I feel the same about late John Coltrane. Every five years or so I have another try...but I'm still not getting it.
duncan
Posted on: 28 October 2002 by stephenjohn
Hi
it's nice to know I'm not alone. Sadly the division in this house is total. My wife calls what I like 'tuneless' [C20th] or 'too fancy' [early C18th and beyond]. She also has taken offence when I've asked her not to speak until a particular piece is over. Strange huh
Posted on: 28 October 2002 by Former member
I guess she'll never understand why you like that music unless she takes the time. Maybe explain why you dislike the other music; tell her why
that music appeals to you. She can't be forced to like it though hehe
Posted on: 29 October 2002 by David Hobbs-Mallyon
quote:
Didn't Bach write more music than the combined output of all (European/American) composers combined did in the next 150 years?
No he didn't. He might have had more children (>20) than all the other composers in the next 150 years though.
David
