John Smyth wrote in response to my comment about Liszt's music:
>>It's the worst excess of what Romantic-era music has to offer.
>
>"Excess"....I would say you unwittingly described most of the hallmarks
>of Romanticism.
No, Liszt's excesses are of his own making. Yes, there were many composers
in his camp, and I agree that Romantic-era music has much "excess", at
least for my taste. But Liszt leads the pack in that regard. If he had
been born on the same day as Bach, I'm confident that Liszt excesses would
have still been prevalent. Excesses were an intrinsic part of the man.
>Can you really fault Liszt for just being a Romantic?
Of course not. John makes it sound as if Liszt was just following the
leads of other Romantic era composers. I've never thought that Liszt was
a follower. I don't fault Vivaldi for being a baroque composer, or Hanson
for being a tonal 20th century composer, or Dohnyanyi for being a late
romantic composer. My lack of appreciation for most of their output has
nothing to do with time periods. They are simply composers I don't connect
with and couldn't no matter what century they lived in. For what it's
worth, there are many Romantic-era composers whose music I do enjoy.
>And like Wes' remarks, yours sound more like vague recollections of
>critical assessments one would find in outmoded textbooks or periodicals.
John might live the academic life, but I don't. None of my knowledge of
Liszt's music comes from any textbook or periodical. It all comes from
just one source - listening to his music from childhood up to the present
time. Just because John likes Liszt, and Wes and I do not, is hardly
sufficient reason to question the merit of our tastes. I have provided my
subjective reasons for not appreciating Liszt's music and even threw in
some childhood background. Wes provided his reasons as well. I think it
would be a good idea for John to now listen to some Liszt and stop trying
to belittle our feelings and resulting views using his customary academic
posturing and name-dropping: Grout, Jean Clay, and Homer this time.
You know, academia is a very narrow world with only loose connections
to the world the majority live in. Most people who live in that world
unfortunately get their egos caught up in it, and I roundly applaud those,
like William Jenks, who manage to stay above the inherent artificiality.
Don Satz
[log in to unmask]
|