Bernard Chasan <[log in to unmask]> writes:

>Patrick Nilsson on the superiority of late works:
>
>>Yes, I believe it is applicable to composers since I do appreciate the late
>>Mozart more with Die Zauberflote and The Clarinet Concerto; I do appreciate
>>the late Beethoven and his late string quartets more and I do appreciate
>>more the late Strauss when he is creating Vier Letzte Lieder.
>
>I can hardly argue with Patrick's cited late works, but at the same
>time there are gems in the early works of the masters which should not be
>overlookedin the quest for seasoned wisdom.  Good examples are the early
>string trios of Beethoven, or his infinitely inventive and quirky opus 10
>piano sonatas.  These should not be dismissed as mere preludes to what came
>later.

One should also remember that the Pathetique and Moonlight are also
relatively early Beethoven.

>I have listened to the Bartok Quartets for years, but never paid
>much attention to the first until recently - a big mistake.  I could
>also mention Zemlinsky's beautiful Clarinet Trio, and Schoenberg's early
>quartets and orchestral music, but of course to even mention the S word is
>to cause gnashing of teeth and rending of garments on this list, so I will
>refrain.

Thank goodness.

Yes, it stands to reason that a composer's talent will tend to develop
over time, and greater works will usually be the payoff.  One wonders what
Mozart, Schubert, Mendelssohn, and Chopin (all of whom died in their 30s)
would have done had they reached as far as middle age.  But there are also
those composers who are generally better known for their early works
(Stravinsky comes to mind).

Jocelyn Wang
Culver Chamber Music Series