Mats Norrman  replies to me:

>Bob Draper <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>For me this explains the apparent prodigy of composers like
>>Mozart/Mendellsohn and 10 year old "genius" mathematicians.  What these
>>people have in common is not superior genes.  They have superior social
>>advantage.  Hence we find most doctors are sons of doctors because that's
>>all they know.
>
>Mozart and Mendelssohn were both very socially talented agreed, but I can't
>see how this can make as general rule that they became great composers just
>out of that.  Beethoven was not especially socially talented, but he did
>became a great composer.

Yes, but that underlines the fundamental point I am making.

What makes Beethoven's music enjoyable to listen to dispite the occassional
rough edge, is that it has raw emotion.  Just as with Haydn this emotion
has come from the struggle within to achieve.

I am not the first person to point out that Beethoven's greatness is
due in no small part to his adverse circumstances and his
determination to succeed however.


>Mozart was a composer of his time and traditions agreed, but so was also
>Haydn.  But I can't see any reason to that if one finds Haydn to be the
>greatest composer, bash another talented composer.  The opinion one has
>on Mozart doesn't make Haydn better or worser.

A familiar theme ringing in my ears.  I am not bashing Mozart to elevate
Haydn.  I am responding to those who are telling me that Mozart is the
greatest of all.  These people seem to think it's an open and shut case.
It's not!  I am not alone as other posters have also expressed similar
views.  Also maybe I move in the wrong circles, but I find that those
that dislike Mozart's music and believe him overrated outnumber his
supporters by two to one.

>Just don't mess up Mendelssohn in this!!  Mendelssohn had a truly unique
>tone language, and I think him before his time in many ways.  But please
>tell me: Whom did Mendelssohn ape??

I actually do find Mendelssohn's music often attractive.  If we are
going to award the accolade "child genius" then he's the man who should
get it.  But there is massive evidence of influence in a lot of his music
particularly the string symphonies.  The influence is largely Haydn and
Beethoven but one finds Mozart there as well.

As I explained in my original post, this is natural enough when a child is
pushed forward in this way by well-meaning parents.

>>Only when the brothers Haydn went to the church school in Vienna did they
>>come across written music and then they were approaching puberty.  Joseph
>>did not learn much in composition until his late teens.
>
>No. Haydn did know composition from early age, but in his youth he wasn't
>employed as composer, and most probably he had use the time to earn his
>bread in other ways than composition.

(Dave also mentioned this point and referred me to HC R-L) My main source
is Rosemary Hughes book in the master musicians series.  Referring to
Haydn's time at St Stephens she says "Of teaching in musical theory, he
received hardly any".  She goes on to say that Reutter who was in charge
"couldn't be bothered to give lessons but encourgaged Haydn to arrange
variations on the church music".  Also Haydn "Alone and unaided pored over
such textbooks as Mettheson's 'Der Volkemmene Capellmeister' and Fux's
'Gradus and Parnassum' ".

Hence we have Haydn as largely self-taught and from here his innovation
springs.

Dave also reminded us of the famous quote that Haydn made about Mozart to
his father that his son was the greatest composer on earth etc.

This is anecdotal but I would not be surprised if Haydn said it in support
of his friend.  However, it is a familiar chestnut.  What a pity that we
aren't reminded as often of the things that Mozart said about Haydn for
instance: "No one can do it all to make us laugh to make us cry, no one
that is except Haydn" and to the composer Leopold Kozeluch: "Even if they
melted us together there still would not be enough to make a Haydn"

Good point Wolfie!

Bob Draper
[log in to unmask]