Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Tue, 12 Aug 2003 02:10:49 -0300 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Robert Stumpf, II <[log in to unmask]>:
>I have been wondering what makes some composers, such as Bruch, on a
>lower tier as compared to many of his contemporaries such as Mahler,
>Tchaikovsky and Brahms.
Nothing. In many cases that may be just a temporary judice. I've
known at least one person who began to listen seriously and even
fanatically to Bruch after feeling tired of Mahler's rhetorics.
>Listening to Bruch is eventually not involving because of the
>predictability due to the relationship with the tonal center. He fears
>to travel far from it. Mahler, on the other hand, has no such fear and
>takes us on a more interesting journey.
Don't think so. Bruch's music is not always "predictable". But if tonal
"predictibility" is a musical value, then Ravel's "Bolero" would be a
mediocre work, like many Schubert's Lieder.
Pablo Massa
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|