Tony Duggan, Re: Mahler:

>And the final version of the First Symphony should NEVER be called "Titan".
>Though try telling that to record companies and concert promoters who love
>their Mahler Symphonies to have titles, which none of them actually do if
>the composer's wishes are to be respected.  Not even "Resurrection" for
>Number 2 and certainly not "Symphony of a Thousand" for Number 8.

In my experience, where I have to catalog and record these things,
nicknames of famous pieces are very very rarely authentic, that is to
say, named by the composer.  "Jupiter", "Ressurection" most of the Haydn
Qts and Syms, AFAIK all gained nicknames (as we call them around here)
later, sometimes from critics, friends, conductors, etc.  So if we were to
respect the composers' wishes (if that means "naming conventions") pieces'
nicknames would rarely be used at all (there are of course exceptions
"Eroica" et al.).

Although Mahler 1 -is- a little different, since there are different
versions and all that.  But all the same, a nickname is what something
is commonly called, whether it is proper or not (usually not).  It does
add some color to the names sometimes (although "Jupiter" for Mozart 41
always bugs me for some reason...unneccarily programatic IMO).

It is also useful.  More people, even musical/musically educated ones,
are more likely to know what you're saying if you refer to Haydn's "Tost
Quartets" and not his "Quartets, Op.  64".

Anyway.  This is something I deal with so I've given it too much thought.
Obviously.

Bob, er...Robert Thomas Kasenchak, Jr.