Late works

[Lento]

The late work of most first-rate artists is second-rate, according to Stephen Sondheim, citing Stravinsky and Picasso as exceptions. That's quite a claim, but one (being a person who in truth would often rather listen to early Beethoven, say, than late) I have some degree of sympathy with, possibly. (Times paywall, I'm afraid).

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/arts/stage/theatre/article4380358.ece

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Stravinsky (and Beethoven and Matisse) demonstrates the falsity of Sondheim's claim. And if Picasso's last works are "second rate", then it's second-rate Picasso, which is still better than most other Artists' best stuff.

[antongould]

Bruckner 9 wasn't IMVVHO too bad......

[Richard Barrett]

I think he was saying that Picasso was an exception though... but these "exceptions" in musical terms would have to include also Monteverdi and Bach and Handel and Haydn (and Mozart and Schubert but maybe they don't count) and Wagner and Bruckner and Mahler and Debussy and Berg and Cage and Carter and Messiaen and Nono, well I could go on, there is no rule about late works.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I think he was saying that Picasso was an exception though... but these "exceptions" in musical terms would have to include also Monteverdi and Bach and Handel and Haydn (and Mozart and Schubert but maybe they don't count) and Wagner and Bruckner and Mahler and Debussy and Berg and Cage and Carter and Messiaen and Nono, well I could go on, there is no rule about late works.

Yes - including no rule about what is meant by "late"; as you say, different with a Mozart, Pergolesi, Boulanger than with a Carter or anyone still writing after their 85th birthday. (Not to mention "deadlines" for submissions!)

I think Sondheim has produced some of the most interesting and rewarding works fro the Musical Theatre, but here he seems to be repeating similar comments from other interviews he's given over the past quarter-century or so, usually in the context of why he's written so little in that time.

[teamsaint]

just wait till EdgeleyRob gets home from work and sees this....

I'm putting on some Dvorak to help calm me down.

[ahinton]

I think he was saying that Picasso was an exception though... but these "exceptions" in musical terms would have to include also Monteverdi and Bach and Handel and Haydn (and Mozart and Schubert but maybe they don't count) and Wagner and Bruckner and Mahler and Debussy and Berg and Cage and Carter and Messiaen and Nono, well I could go on, there is no rule about late works.

Quite. You could go on, but of course you'd have no need to, as you've made the point well by demonstrating that such a statement borders on sheer nonsense; indeed, the "exceptions" might be those composers who actually did write less interesting works in their final years.

"Second rate? - well, Strauss did say of himself that he was one of the better composers of the second rank; the prospect of Vier Letzte Lieder being considered as a second-rate work is, however, surely about as laughable as it gets...

[Richard Barrett]

usually in the context of why he's written so little in that time.

aha...

I presume he hasn't read Edward Said's On Late Style, itself indebted to Adorno's insightful writings on Beethoven.

[Tevot]

The late work of most first-rate artists is second-rate, according to Stephen Sondheim, citing Stravinsky and Picasso as exceptions.

Subjective is it not !? Interesting that he sets up Aunt Sallies. I beg to differ Lento but late Beethoven ( sonatas 27-32) and the quartets mean so much to me. On a larger canvas Bruckner 7,8 and 9. Is Das Lied von der Erde a weak work? Heck...

You're not being a cheeky troll are you !?

Best Wishes,

Tevot

[Serial_Apologist]

I can think of several composers whose later works, following early promise and/or influence have been a disappointment to me - Kurt Weill comes most prominently to mind for me - but whether or not his American period music represents a fall-off in musical qualities was probably for him more a matter of conscious creative change of direction than of quality.

[Richard Barrett]

I can think of several composers whose later works, following early promise and/or influence have been a disappointment to me

Well yes. The point is there are no grounds for coming down on either side of this generalisation.

[ahinton]

I can think of several composers whose later works, following early promise and/or influence have been a disappointment to me - Kurt Weill comes most prominently to mind for me - but whether or not his American period music represents a fall-off in musical qualities was probably for him more a matter of conscious creative change of direction than of quality.

OK, but how many in the overall scenario would you reckon to have fallen off during theit latter years?

Strauss wrote his last completed work at the age of 84. If one considers, for example (and OK, it's only one aspect of what's under discussion), the work of those who have continued to compose after reaching that age, are there really many glaring examples of weakness? Did, for example, le Flem, Ornstein, Brian, Sorabji et al reveal such loss of imaginative power at that point? Did Carter, who went on writing until he was almost two decades beyond 84? No - such am assertion really doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

[ahinton]

Well yes. The point is there are no grounds for coming down on either side of this generalisation.

Isn't there? A generalisation it is, for sure (and its value is determined by that fact), but wouldn't you say that the real "exceptions" are those composers who actually could be said to accord to Sondheim's assertion?

It would be good if composers themselves tried to ignore it, because none can know at the time of writing which of his/her works will ultimately turn out to be "late" ones in any case; was the work of Guillaume Lekeu who died in 1894 and Lili Boulanger who was born in that year (two composers whose lives added together come to less than half a century) beginning to deteriorate as they entered their respective 20s? If such examples are deemed not to count, what would be the minimum lifespan to qualify here?

[Black Swan]

I think the idea of late works being less than earlier works is as said subjective.
I am listening now to a very fine recording of Sibelius 7. Maybe this would not be considered late. And I am a huge fan of Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra and he knew at the time that he was terminal so definite for a late work that the composer knew would be such. I also agree with the previous comment about late Beethoven which I would not do without the Sonatas and String Quartets.

[Richard Tarleton]

Verdi began Otello at 71, Falstaff at 76.