Scott Lasky wrote:

>Gustav Mahler himself stated, (but I paraphrase here) that each one of
>his symphonies was intended to be "it's own world in and of itself ".

I agree with your paraphrase.  Neville Cardus put it well when he said
that with each symphony Mahler "sheds a skin".

>But his unmistakable signature style was branded strongly upon of all his
>work.  I sight his symphony #5 the as definitive "typical Mahler" example.

I can't agree for one single, solitary moment.  No work of Mahler was
typical.  There are no voices in the Fifth, to sight just one
"untypicality".

>As a composer myself, I believe that Mahler used the basic structures and
>form of his own past works as templates to create many of his new ones,
>whereas Bruckner for example, would constantly revise and rework the same
>piece throughout his lifetime, hence all of different (and unfinished)
>versions of his symphonies.

Mahler revised and revised constantly also.  He was still revising the
Fifth symphony in the months before his death.  In that he and Bruckner
were very similar.

Bruckner's works retain the basic symphonic structure far more than
Mahler's ever do.  Mahler always seems to be looking for ways to make
it go further.

>Mahler like many other composers, had no problem with recycling his own
>thematic material as well.  The theme appearing in the finale of his sym#5
>(see jpeg) has reappeared in various incarnations in many of his works,
>most notably "Des Knaben Wuderhorn".

No it hasn't.  I presume you mean the quotation of the song "Lob des hohen
Verstandes".  In fact that is the one and only time he quotes from that
song.  The other quotes in the last movement of the fifth are from the
previous movement and the second movement.  Again, the only quotes of that
material.

Mahler certainly makes some significant references to other works but
usually only once or twice right through his whole canon.

>The beautiful "adagietto" from his 5th both harmonically and in basic
>structure has served as a template for other of his slow movements.

It could hardly have done that for movements that came before it, though.
I really don't buy that anyway.  The adagietto is an "orchestral song"
(especially when played at the correct speed, which it hardly ever is) and,
in fact, unique in its glorious simplicity.  The great slow movements that
followed it (in the Sixth, Ninth and Tenth) are _infinitely_ more complex.

Tony Duggan, England.
Mahler recordings: survey
http://www.musicweb.force9.co.uk/music/Mahler/