Steve Schwartz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Bill Pirkle replies to me:
>
>>What does one mean by describing a composition as whimsical,
>>schizophrenic, cynical, serious, etc?
>
>Several things, I believe.  In part, in the case of music with text or
>story, one might be influenced by the text or story.  Enough music of this
>type might form a conventional emotional "cluster" to which a listener
>might refer an "abstract" piece of music.  For example, can anyone tell
>me the emotion of the famous slow movement of the Beethoven fourth piano
>concerto? Can you also tell me how you arrived at that conclusion? I know
>somebody (was it Liszt?) thought it represented Orpheus taming the savage
>beasts.  I have no idea how he came up with it.

Oh yes, it is so much it can be a matter of taste what values one finds
in an artwork, of what kind of reflexions one comes up with.  And "De
Gustibus..." is written an my wall.  But I like the fourth concerto,
for its very Beethovenian sence, refined emotional while still giving an
intellectual charge and a good portion of humour.  Speaking of good humour,
is one of the characteristica that makes me like a piece, and persons as
well.  As humour is a sign of having a critical distance to oneself and
ones work.  That can be found to great extent in Beethoven, and in many
good composers.  Yes even Wagner, who has to bear the mark of being a great
ego, includes very fine humour (and I am not just talking about
"Meistersinger").

I hope I have told my opinion on Beethovens lofty work without buttering
him up.

>From what I know of Beethovens concertos I think they are very good to
study, and I am working on them still. I haven't finished listening to the
third concerto yet. I haven't studied the 4. concerto yet, so, I could say
to know more about the 3rd. Also the third is easier accessable.

So is the 5th:-)

Mats Norrman
[log in to unmask]