June 'mo bio?

[The Great Carouser]

A rushed attempt, perhaps fatally flawed....


If you found your way to this BB you have probably heard SOMETHING I've written....


I don't meet Shos' criteria for a 'great composer'.


Critics tend to poo poo my orchestrations.


In my lifetime I made most of my money as a teacher.


My father was a teacher.


After my mother's lessons a violinist took over my musical education.


I lived much of my life in self-imposed exile but my heart would forever be in the nation of my birth and this was reflected in my music.

Who am I? I await Shos' June offering and fear our mutual scores will differ this month.

[shostakovich]

Holy Mackerel, GC! I think you picked a composer we all know and (probably) love. Was his teacher's name Joseph?
Shos

[shostakovich]

Assuming I have the right guy, I checked the net. (er,---- Even if I have the wrong guy, I checked the net) It was (I hope) Adalbert who taught him violin and Josef who taught him composition before he left his homeland.
Shos

<small>[ 06-03-2004, 10:16 PM: Message edited by: shostakovich ]</small>

[bignaf]

everything fits the bill for a very great composer except for the "I don't meet Shos' criteria for a 'great composer'" remark. then again remembering Shos' falacious (IMHO) criteria it might be thay greatest master of all. did the guy live most of his life in the country from which his father originated? did he have a famous girlfriend?

[eaphil]

Can it be said of this composer that he didn't follow his heart regarding his native land?

<small>[ 06-04-2004, 09:26 AM: Message edited by: eaphil ]</small>

[The Great Carouser]

I'm not sure but I think I made this one a mite too simple since almost all the above rings true although eaphil's clue is only true in one sense not the others. Shos you're wrong about Adalbert.

[shostakovich]

OOPS!

<small>[ 06-04-2004, 09:08 PM: Message edited by: shostakovich ]</small>

[The Great Carouser]

Shos has it, congratulations. I expect most of the previous posters do as well although no pm's from them yet.

[The Great Carouser]

*ig has it as well. Congratulations!

[eaphil]

<small>[ 06-07-2004, 08:56 AM: Message edited by: eaphil ]</small>

[eaphil]

The above post is not intended as a clue. It is, in fact, evidence that I very often have no clue regarding bulletin boards. The moment I hit "add reply" I realized that I was not sending a PM to GC about the June bio, but sending my guess as a post to the thread. I quickly hit edit and deleted the message. I hope I was quick enough.

As I told GC, if my guess is correct, I'd hate (again) to give away the answer. If my guess is incorrect, I fear being stupid in front of a crowd. (This is similar to my fear concerning death. It's not that I'm afraid of dying, I just don't want to die stupid. I don't want some guy in Oregon reading his morning newspaper to yell to his wife, "Come here, Mary Jean, you're not going to believe how this bubba down in Mississippi got himself killed.")

[Bones]

What's this doing here? Who looks in the Barracks for a bio? Now we have a new game - "Bio Search." Sheeech! I never look here. I stumbled into here and find what looks like a bio of one of the giants of the composer firmament.

[The Great Carouser]

Bones and eaphil also have it. Congratulations

[shostakovich]

I was listening to a recording of a symphony by Yevgeny (actually a 2-syllable name --- "geny" is one syllable, believe it or not) Svetlanov. In the notes he writes: "When asked which of my compositions is most dear to me I answer without a moment's hesitation: my Symphony. The symphony is about Man, the world around him and present day life." I think that was also the essence of Mahler's feelings about the symphony.

The reason I bring it up here is because of my dictum that no composer can be considered among the "greatest" who did not write symphonies (with the sole exception of Wagner, who is great by dint of his SYMPHONIC overtures and interludes, not so much for pushing the envelope on belting out a "song", and not at all for his exasperating libretti). I make my "greatest" claim because so many composers considered the symphony the ultimate challenge in composing (Beethoven, Brahms, Mahler, Sibelius, to name a few).

Thus, Mr X, who is justifiably admired for the marvelous music he wrote, can not (in my book and others) be in the first rank of the pantheon of composers.
Admittedly Opinionated

[Bones]

I must disagree with Shos. Mr. X redefined an entire genre with his originality and versatility of composition. Unfortunately, I don't have the time right now to expound on this, but in my highly opinionated view, Mr. X ranks near the top on the list of great composers - surely in the top 20, probably close to making the top 10. Certainly above Yevgeny Svetlanov.

<small>[ 06-08-2004, 02:57 PM: Message edited by: Bones ]</small>

[shostakovich]

No problem, Bones. My definition of greatness requires symphonies. Yours doesn't. Mr X was peerless in what he did best. I love his stuff.

And, by the way, my "greatness" criterion is not to be applied to any composer who wrote before the symphony was invented.
Shos

PS: Svetlanov is not automatically great for having written a symphony. The Symphony is not at all bad, though, for anybody who might like to give it a shot.

<small>[ 06-08-2004, 09:10 PM: Message edited by: shostakovich ]</small>

[bignaf]

I agree with Bones.
while to reach the ultimate greatness one must demonstrate greatness in a wide variety of genres, I don't think the symphony is any more exclusive than the others. in fact Wagner is kinda limited since he didn't write in many genres.
therefore, I consider this composer to be a little like Mahler but from the other side. this guy was the greatest at what he did, Mahler wrote some of the most awesome sympohonies and symphonic songs on earth, but not much else.
I think that the assumption the the symphony is any more exclusive than other genres is a false which probably stems from the forces typically involved in perfoming a symphony. but the hammerklavier of Beethoven for example is more complex than any of his symphonies barring the 9th. it doesn't take much more writing a sonata for orchestra than for piano. and writing a sonata for string quarttet is probably the hardest and most subtle (gettin of track) so if anything writing string quartets should be the criterion.

[The Great Carouser]

My quibble with the dictum ("that no composer can be considered among the "greatest" who did not write symphonies (with the sole exception of Wagner, who is great by dint of his SYMPHONIC overtures and interludes, not so much for pushing the envelope on belting out a "song", and not at all for his exasperating libretti).")is two-fold. With Mr.X we have a genius whose works continue to influence us today. The classical period ended with Beethoven and one might argue the same for the romantic period ending with Mr. X. His experiments in harmony and tonality open the door for expressionism, for Debussy, late Brahms, Faure, Tchaichovsky and others up to the present day. So he wasn't a great orchestrator. He obviously found his 'true voice' and his expression of that voice revolutionized not just that instrument but the greater genre. To some extent less is more. Why mess around with many instruments when you are making one or two do the work that others struggle to make 60 or more do half as well? Who knows what might have been had he tired of his 'voice' and decided to devote more of his energy to composing for larger groups? Can you really argue the talent wasn't there?

My second quibble is if you include Wagner on your stated criteria shouldn't R. Strauss make the grade as well?

[bignaf]

Richard Strauss was much more versatile than Wagner.

[shostakovich]

UNCLE !! UNCLE!!

This is from GC's description:


"I don't meet Shos' criteria for a 'great composer'."

I just intended to explain that this meant
Mr X wrote no symphonies. I should have been so succinct.
Shos

<small>[ 06-10-2004, 10:37 PM: Message edited by: shostakovich ]</small>