To my ears, Haydn's music, although far from unpleasant, has always seemed overcerebral: it fails to enage my emotions.
Haydn afficionados tell me that this is quite in order: Haydn appeals to one's 'sense of form' (whatever that is) and intellect. I have also been told (rather peevishly, on an old BAL) that Haydn 'will never appeal to the intellectually lazy'.
I can't think of a single memorable melody that J.H. ever wrote, though I've heard all his London symphonies, as well as the 'named' symphonies.
Would it be fair to say that Haydn is easier to admire than he is to love?
I fear, even more than Mozart, he is another composer I am fated never to 'get'.
Haydn afficionados tell me that this is quite in order: Haydn appeals to one's 'sense of form' (whatever that is) and intellect. I have also been told (rather peevishly, on an old BAL) that Haydn 'will never appeal to the intellectually lazy'.
I can't think of a single memorable melody that J.H. ever wrote, though I've heard all his London symphonies, as well as the 'named' symphonies.
Would it be fair to say that Haydn is easier to admire than he is to love?
I fear, even more than Mozart, he is another composer I am fated never to 'get'.
Comment