Mimi Ezust wrote:

>Which time of composition? When the idea first hits and it goes into a
>notebook as a fragment? When it is being worked on in a contrapuntal way,
>as Bartok did in his quartets? When it comes up as material later reworked
>and used in a different form, as Beethoven did? When it is rearranged, an
>entire movement dropped and another added as Mahler did? What time frame
>are we talking about for this emotional feeling?

 From my experience as a composer, at all those times there is the
emotional feeling.  However, it is more prominent when the idea first
comes to my head.

>Music isn't composed directly from raw emotion, except in those cheap
>pseudo-biographical films.  It is an intellectual as well as an emotional
>experience.  I don't even see how it would be possible for a composer to
>write under the influence of a strong emotional surge.  People in the heat
>of emotion are seldom able to organize their work.

No offence, but you have no idea.  Inspiration is a crazy thing and if
it comes in a surge of emotion, so be it.  Also, the fact that it comes at
the same time as the emotion doesn't make it worse, only more volatile and
harder to write down.  You'll be surprised at hearing this, but 99% of the
time, the BEST ideas come during surges of emotion or during flashes of
inspiration.  However, like I said, these ideas are fleeting and hard to
capture.

>Raw emotions you want? Then maybe baby cries and screams would pass
>as music for you...  plain unadorned sobs and sniffles would be the most
>effective since they would carry the most immediate and recognizable
>emotional power.

You have to remember that music is a language and _anything_ you can
express in English can be expressed in music...  even the feeling of "plain
unadorned sobs and sniffles." The fact is that nobody fluent enough in
music (in both the emotional and technical aspects) has come along and
produced the stuff to the degree of universal understanding.  I feel that
it is possible though.

>Music is much more than those raw sounds.  That's what makes it art, and
>makes it memorable.  That's what makes it complicated and deep.  It's more
>than just an emotional outcry, a passing angst or giggle.  And the best
>part of music is that it can say so many different things at the same time.
>It takes the talent, experience and discipline of a great composer to make
>music that's lasting and meaningful.

Somehow it always annoys me when emotion in music, as well as the entire
romantic period is given a bad rap.  (Mimi, I know you didn't say that,
but I'm saying in general.) Music has to be the most effective language in
communicating emotion, and the idea of bashing it's strength makes no sense
to me.  I admit that it is really cool to listen to a well-written fugue or
a fascinating chord progression.  However, these things generally pale to
a well-written, heart- felt melody.  The best kind of music is not
determined by it's structure or its feats of technical mastery.  The best
kind of music is the kind that sends shocks running up your spine, the kind
that grabs you right at the heart, and has you sitting at the edge of your
seat.  In short, the best kind of music is the kind that when it is over
leaves you wanting to hear more, and leaves wishing that the song would
never end.  If the composer has done this then he has succeeded in
communicating.  If not he has succeeded in entertaining, and maybe
intriguing.

What composers are generally to produce this response? I have found that
Beethoven, Haydn, the Romantics (especially Franck, Bruckner, Dvorak,
Borodin, Kalinnikov, Mahler, and Tchaikovsky), Prokofiev, Shostakovich,
Bach, Berg, Rachmaninov, etc...  In general, most composers have the
ability to do this, but the aforementioned are especially adept.  Some
will be dismayed at my exclusion of Mozart.  I concede that his music is
_perfectly_ crafted.  However, at the risk of sounding biased, very little
manages to go beyond the superficial level in terms of emotion.  (Beethoven
and Haydn showed that it was possible for a classical composer to enter
these realms.)

There you have it; emotion in music.  I'm sorry I couldn't smooth anything
over with Don's wit, but the idea is there.  Music and emotion are
symbiotic.  Therefore with a good composer, the more emotion, the more the
music thrives.  Remember above all that music is a language, and that the
purpose of languages is to communicate.  The irony is that all languages
except music are lacking when it comes to expressing emotion, which if
people understood would solve many of the world's problems.  Therefore,
music should have understandable emotion.

Joseph Sowa
[log in to unmask]