Date: |
Fri, 3 Dec 1999 23:42:03 -0800 |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Steve Schwartz wrote:
>Deryk Barker replies to me:
>
>>>Don't get me started on Liszt's symphonies.
>>
>>Why not? I think the Faust Symphony is a masterpiece.
>
>Well, I agree about the first two movements. In fact, the first movement
>may well be my favorite single work by Liszt. However, the finale to me
>"settles." It's as if he lost interest, or perhaps hadn't any idea how to
>portray the program dramatically. To me, it's just arpeggios orchestrated.
>Same for me with the Dante Symphony. Inferno is much more interesting than
>Paradise.
I just wanted to take this opportunity to express my views in both the
thread's original subject matter and this interesting tangent. First of
all, seeing how this is all based on personal opinion, my opinion is that
I like Schumann more than Mendelssohn OR Chopin. Both of these men wrote
wonderful music but it all seems pretty standard to me. I don't really
know how to explain it other than saying that while M and C both wrote a
great deal of great music, they seemed to adhere to this melodic style
which seems pretty "ordinary" to my ears. When I listen to Schumann, I
also hear GREAT music but with this very unique and refreshing style
neither of his major contemporaries could equal.
Regarding the Liszt tangent. I don't see how anyone could compare any of
Liszt's symphonic work to that of Schumann. Sure, Liszt wrote a massive
volume of piano works which I won't comment on but, to me, his symphonic
output is purely and simply garbage. In my opinion Liszt is the king of
pretentious pooh-pooh. I know it is more proper to be understanding of
a composer's intentions than to criticize him/her but I can't bear the
feelings I get when I listen to his stuff.
--Wes Crone
|
|
|