Late works

[makropulos]

"Late works " cannot be defined satisfactorily otherwise but as works composed in late stages or at the end of a composer's output (not life: Sibelius!). That doesn't say anything about these works' quality or their stylistic contents.
Indeed I don't regard Berg's as "late" works, Beethoven was developing a "new" style (hence op.135 is much more classical than 130-133), Mahler 9/10/LvdE might be called a late style, as it's a result of realisation of his own mortality, but is Strauss' contemporary Rosenkavalier then a "late work"?

This is interesting. If late works can only be defined satisfactorily as works composed at the end of a composer's output, then surely Mahler 9/10 etc. are just that, as are Beethoven's late works, and the last works of Janacek, Bartok and many others (including Schubert and Mozart). I don't quite understand why - given your definition - what stops Berg's final works being described as "late works"?

[Roehre]

This is interesting. If late works can only be defined satisfactorily as works composed at the end of a composer's output, then surely Mahler 9/10 etc. are just that, as are Beethoven's late works, and the last works of Janacek, Bartok and many others (including Schubert and Mozart). I don't quite understand why - given your definition - what stops Berg's final works being described as "late works"?

of course Berg's last works are late works, but makes it stylistically any sense?
of course Arriaga's Symphony is a late work, but does that epithet stylistically make any sense?
Of course Lekeu's last work is a late work, but does it make stylistically any sense?
Of course Schubert's last sonatas and his string quintet are late works but does that make sense, or calling Mozart's Requiem a late work?
of course Bach's Kunst der Fuge is a late (and unfinished) work, but does that make any sense stylistically ?

Mahler 9/10/LvdE as "late" works stylistically makes sense as there there is a stylistical difference between this trilogy and Mahler's earlier works, caused by very specific circumstances; hence an exception confirming the rule.

The term "late work" is vacuus, as it does not say anything else than it's composed at the the end of a composer's career.

It is void of any other quality. And that's exactly the opposite of what Sondheim implies.

[DublinJimbo]

I know Richard Strauss has already been mentioned as not fitting into Sondheim's notion, but he needs to be mentioned again. His Vier letzte Lieder is prime example of a composer blossoming towards the end of his life. There's nothing second-rate about it, despite being written by an 84-year-old and being by any definition one cares to come up with 'late'.

[Demetrius]

"Late works " cannot be defined satisfactorily otherwise but as works composed in late stages or at the end of a composer's output (not life: Sibelius!). That doesn't say anything about these works' quality or their stylistic contents.
Indeed I don't regard Berg's as "late" works, Beethoven was developing a "new" style (hence op.135 is much more classical than 130-133), Mahler 9/10/LvdE might be called a late style, as it's a result of realisation of his own mortality, but is Strauss' contemporary Rosenkavalier then a "late work"?

The definition of "late work" in the sense of Sondheim's remark pretty much depends on what he believes to be the reason for the suggested decline of artists towards the end. If he thinks that it's due to a natural loss of faculties (even creative ones) when one approaches old age, then Mozart and even Beethoven will not be among the examples for or against the theory. If he thinks that there is some spiritual sense of coming death that curbs the potential for greatness in artists in their last months, then Mozart and Beethoven are back in the game.

Did he give any reason? I'm generally reluctant to subscribe to anything, so I can't read the full article.