Re: Why do you like Mozart's music?


"Simon Roberts" <sdsr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:do4n73013pf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> In article <1134940773.390569.203680@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Michael
> Schaffer says...
>
>>There is something really sad and perverse in the way you try to talk
>>away from people their own grown cultural traditions. When it comes to
>>a large part of the so-called "classical" canon, however, all the
>>arguing in the world can not change the fact that that music actually
>>comes from the German speaking countries of central Europe,
>
> And Italy and England and Russia and....

That is certainly true. During the Renaissance, the musical traditions in
France, England, Franco-Flemish regions, Italian regions, were more
prominent than those in the Germanic world. Germanic prominence only really
begins in the late baroque period, and even then French and Italian music
was still on a comparable level of importance.

Really, if any country contains the deepest roots of European musical
traditions, it is probably France.
>
> and it is
>>our cultural heritage.
>
> Why isn't it the cultural heritage of everyone who knows and cares about
> it?

It is - but I think the above comment is in the context of earlier remarks
of David's about 'unbroken traditions'.
>
>>And no, you are not part of that heritage. That
>>has nothing to do with place of birth or blood. It is just a cultural
>>thing. Following your own definiton of the long unbroen tradition, that
>>is something you do not have, for instance, in America. You only have
>>bits and pieces of it.
>
> "Bits and pieces" of what? When the flood of Europeans who used to
> comprise the
> bulk of American orchestras and conductors and music faculty came to
> America,
> what "bits" did they leave behind?

This was a group of Europeans who migrated to America, which constitutes the
relocation of a group of individuals who came from within a 'tradition', not
a wholescale uprooting of the tradition itself (and even if the latter were
the case, it still would be hardly likely to be 'unbroken').
>
> But more important, haven't you been arguing against the existence of
> "long
> unbroken traditions"? To the extent you have, I agree with you. But to
> the
> extent you're right, you can't say that Americans can't produce conductors
> because they only have "bits and pieces" of "the tradition," and your
> claiming
> it as "our [i.e., European] culture" doesn't make much sense.

I think Michael is saying (though he should speak for himself on this), that
if one subscribes to this idea of 'unbroken tradition' (which he doesn't,
nor do I), then Americans will only have a modified section of that
tradition. The differences in American and European performing and
compositional traditions should demonstrate this.
>
>>Doesn't it strike you as ironic that the horrible HIP thing is much
>>more widespread in the countires with a long tradition of their own,
>>while in the New World, it is still a very rare phenomenon? That is
>>because it doesn't make sense to you guys - as your incessant
>>nonsensical arguing against it shows so brilliantly - and the reason it
>>doesn't make sense is that you don't have the whole picture.
>
> Who are "you guys"? There may be more HIP musicians in Europe, and HIP
> may be
> more mainstream there than here, but why do you suppose that's because it
> "doesn't make sense to you guys" rather than merely because it's a matter
> of
> taste which hasn't caught on here as firmly? More than a handful of
> Americans
> have infiltrated European HIP orchestras and academies, as you surely
> know, some
> American cities have a rather strong HIP culture, while Bilson at Cornell
> may be
> the pre-eminent HIP keyboard teacher. Or are you just referring to David
> Gable
> and SG and assuming (wrongly, as it happens) that both of them are
> American and,
> thus, unable to "get it" because they have learned merely "bits and
> pieces" of
> "the culture"?
>
A lot of HIP (with notable exceptions of course, not least Bilson who you
mention) sprung from performing cultures in countries that were interested
in resurrecting their own early music. In Britain this goes all the way back
to the formation of the Academy of Ancient Music in the 18th century. This
is a generalisation, of course, with many exceptions (for example, the
Briton Christopher Hogwood played a major part in the revival of the Italian
Vivaldi), but there is some truth in it. The early music movement dates back
to the 19th century, centered first upon Paris and Brussels (with the
activities of Jean-Jacques Fetis in both countries' conservatoires), then
London (with Dolmetsch, a Frenchman), later developing in Germany, Holland,
Austria.

Ian


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why do you like Mozarts music?
    ... >Simon Roberts wrote: ... >Saying that European conductors are constantly hired as music directors ... >hire American conductors". ... >young American performing traditions. ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: Why do you like Mozarts music?
    ... > German performing traditions are also distinct. ... > and European and American ... > American classical performance was never cut off from Europe. ... Because traditions aren't 'totally distinct' doesn't mean there isn't some ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: Why do you like Mozarts music?
    ... > German performing traditions are also distinct. ... > and European and American ... > American classical performance was never cut off from Europe. ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: Why do you like Mozarts music?
    ... >>> American orchestras don't hire American conductors is because they only have ... >>> and European and American ... young American performing traditions. ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: Why do you like Mozarts music?
    ... German performing traditions are also distinct. ... music is a public international affair, and European and American ... American classical performance was never cut off from Europe. ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)