Oh dear Felix....

[Stanfordian]

Damn fine for a middle-aged or elderly one for that matter!

For all that the Op 80 is impressive, I still much prefer the Octet, which he wrote when he was knocking on Life's door: it never fails to astonish me - something that that Quartet just doesn't, alas.

I recall a musicologist (could have been H.C. Robbins Landon or R. Larry Todd) saying that Mendelssohn could have been as young as 14 or 15 when he wrote the Octet. Certainly an amazing prodigy! I rarely play the Octet these days as I over-played it for several months and it was too common for my liking on recital programmes I had attended.

[Dave2002]

I will when I get the chance. I was listening to the Emersons, not a quartet I have much time for in general but there was a Youtube of it with a score. Part of the reason I'm not keen on Mendelssohn is connected with part of the reason I'm not very keen on Brahms - the classicism that Vox Humana mentions: whatever "progressive" aspects there are in Brahms they occur almost exclusively within conventional forms, and that kind of tension between form and material doesn't interest me as much as the idea of new materials demanding and creating new forms. I don't really know what "expert opinion" has to say on Mendelssohn, I'm just responding to what I hear like everyone else.

That's an interesting way to view things, though I wonder if a form of post justification. I do like a lot of Brahms and some Mendelssohn, and even Tchaikovsky. I know there are people who try to explain their likes/dislikes in terms of forms/standards etc. but sometimes it's just instinctive surely.

[Serial_Apologist]

That's an interesting way to view things, though I wonder if a form of post justification. I do like a lot of Brahms and some Mendelssohn, and even Tchaikovsky. I know there are people who try to explain their likes/dislikes in terms of forms/standards etc. but sometimes it's just instinctive surely.

But surely that in turn begs the question as to whether forms are any more or less "instinctive" than the means of articulation (speech, music etc) which frame them. The potential for articulation is mostly inborn, (mostly apart from in some brain damaged), but it has to have the framework, whether that's gramar, syntax or musical means, to be enabled. Those frameworks evolve culturally and historically alongside the evolving brain, wouldn't one say? - rendering any separation of "the instinctive" from the arena within which the human capacities express themselves undialectical (for want of a better word!)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I recall a musicologist (could have been H.C. Robbins Landon or R Larry Todd) saying that Mendelssohn could have been as young as 14 or 15 when he wrote the Octet. Certainly an amazing prodigy! I rarely play the Octet these days as I over-played it for several months and it is too common for my liking on recital programmes I attended.

Interesting - I spent six weeks every year for six years using the Octet as a work for analysis with 17-year-old "A"-level students, and the work just "grew" each year: unlike many pieces, which gave up all their secrets and delights after a couple of years, this was one I was still finding new joys from when I stopped teaching. The way he plays with and teases audience expectations of structure and harmony, the instrumental mastery (and generosity), and the irrepressible melodic invention - these would have been a source of pride for any composer in their twenties, thirties, and forties. The incidental point that this was from a teenager makes it all the more miraculous.

I get great, great pleasure from the Italian Symphony, the Violin Concerto, the Piano Trios, and the Piano Concertos especially - and much to enjoy in many of his other Chamber and Orchestral works, too. But his solo keyboard Music and anything involving a voice/voices ... not for me, alas.

[jayne lee wilson]

If you love those famous early works like the Octet or the Dream Overture remember that by 1830, he’d also composed Symphonies 1 & 5, String Quartets Op.12 and 13, Quintet Op.18, Op.25 Piano Concerto…. and before them, he’d written a number of, effectively, “apprentice” works in chamber & orchestral genres to which he assigned no opus number; so while certainly very young, these mid-to-late-1820s pieces are the work of an experienced composer.

I love his music so much I’m always convinced that it’s only because many listeners don’t know, say, the A minor quintet or the stormy and songful 1st Symphony** well enough that they don’t love those too.(**1824! pre-Octet - early on when conducting it in London Mendelssohn replaced the original scherzo with that of the Octet itself, but restored the first one later. Both are included on the LSO/JEG album).

The Op.18 Quintet’s astonishing 1st movement has such has expansive proliferation of beautiful, memorable ideas, you begin to realise why Hans Keller thought so highly of it, as of the chamber music generally. Op. 12, 13 and 18 have a melodic inspiration, formally inventiveness and in the case of the quartets, concise intensity that should find them swiftly joining the Octet in your musical heart of hearts.

(With this emphasis on prodigious achievement, let's not forget the Violin Concerto, so inspired and innovative as it is, is positively middle-aged-to-late Mendelssohn, 1838-44... I wonder how it would strike us to hear it for the first time now! Pretty mind-blowing, I would think...)

[Serial_Apologist]

If you love those famous early works like the Octet or the Dream Overture remember that by 1830, he’d also composed Symphonies 1 & 5, String Quartets Op.12 and 13, Quintet Op.18, Op.25 Piano Concerto…. and before them, he’d written a number of, effectively, “apprentice” works in chamber & orchestral genres to which he assigned no opus number; so while certainly very young, these mid-to-late-1820s pieces are the work of an experienced composer.

I love his music so much I’m always convinced that it’s only because many listeners don’t know, say, the A minor quintet or the stormy and songful 1st Symphony** well enough that they don’t love those too.(**1824! pre-Octet - early on when conducting it in London Mendelssohn replaced the original scherzo with that of the Octet itself, but restored the first one later. Both are included on the LSO/JEG album).

The Op.18 Quintet’s astonishing 1st movement has such has expansive proliferation of beautiful, memorable ideas, you begin to realise why Hans Keller thought so highly of it, as of the chamber music generally. Op. 12, 13 and 18 have a melodic inspiration, formally inventiveness and in the case of the quartets, concise intensity that should find them swiftly joining the Octet in your musical heart of hearts.

(With this emphasis on prodigious achievement, let's not forget the Violin Concerto, so inspired and innovative as it is, is positively middle-aged-to-late Mendelssohn, 1838-44... I wonder how it would strike us to hear it for the first time now! Pretty mind-blowing, I would think...)

It always strikes me that Richard Strauss must have coped those repeated, rapid-fire woodwind chords at the start of the "Italian" when he composed "Don Juan" 50+ years later. Just thought I'd mention that.

[Dave2002]

But surely that in turn begs the question as to whether forms are any more or less "instinctive" than the means of articulation (speech, music etc) which frame them. The potential for articulation is mostly inborn, (mostly apart from in some brain damaged), but it has to have the framework, whether that's gramar, syntax or musical means, to be enabled. Those frameworks evolve culturally and historically alongside the evolving brain, wouldn't one say? - rendering any separation of "the instinctive" from the arena within which the human capacities express themselves undialectical (for want of a better word!)

I think many PhD theses could be written in various fields exploring these ideas, and there are probably many already.

My original point was to try to show that external "rules", which may be helpful for some people in some situations, do not have to always apply. Thus music may be classified in various categories (too simple, too structured, formless, too complex, repetitive, too short, cacophonous ...) hence some may claim that they only like well structured music - but might get completely caught out by a piece which they find they do like despite their prejudices.

For composers, having knowledge and appreciation of different forms would probably be very helpful, and enable them to create new works which are effective and appropriate. This might be particularly important for composers of theatre and film music, and knowledge and skill with different forms must make composing easier.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

It always strikes me that Richard Strauss must have coped those repeated, rapid-fire woodwind chords at the start of the "Italian" when he composed "Don Juan" 50+ years later. Just thought I'd mention that.

[Braunschlag]

Nah! I reckon he'd been listening to Waxmans Prince Valiant score, the missing Strauss symphonic poem.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Nah! I reckon he'd been listening to Waxmans Prince Valiant score, the missing Strauss symphonic poem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu56XKcFihI

(More Gold than Korn.)

[Richard Barrett]

That's an interesting way to view things, though I wonder if a form of post justification. I do like a lot of Brahms and some Mendelssohn, and even Tchaikovsky. I know there are people who try to explain their likes/dislikes in terms of forms/standards etc. but sometimes it's just instinctive surely.

I wouldn't call it post-justification, just an attempt to explain (to myself, initially) what seems to be "instinctive". Saying something like that is just instinctive basically closes off any further reflection, which I'd prefer not to do, for what I think are obvious reasons: when I "instinctively" respond positively or negatively to some music or other my next response is to ask why. Sometimes it's difficult or impossible to come to a convincing answer, but in this case I think there's something to it. The concept that a musical idea needs to find its own form, rather than fitting into a preexistent one, that is to say that idea and form are two aspects of the same thing, is I think one of the most revolutionary and compelling features of Beethoven's work, and I do find myself being much more strongly attracted to those 19th century composers who took it on board (Berlioz, Wagner, Bruckner) than those who didn't (Mendelssohn, Brahms). On the other hand I have a lot of time for Schubert, who wasn't prepared to go along with Beethoven's formal innovations. I'm working on that...

[vinteuil]

The concept that a musical idea needs to find its own form, rather than fitting into a pre-existent one, that is to say that idea and form are two aspects of the same thing, is I think one of the most revolutionary and compelling features of Beethoven's work, and I do find myself being much more strongly attracted to those 19th century composers who took it on board (Berlioz, Wagner, Bruckner) than those who didn't (Mendelssohn, Brahms)....

... o you old romantic you - just an excuse for sloppiness, some wd say - avoiding the rigours of constraint and the fructifying discipline this produces.

Not one of his best sonnets, but I still think Wordsworth had something to say -

Nuns fret not at their convent’s narrow room;
And hermits are contented with their cells;
And students with their pensive citadels;
Maids at the wheel, the weaver at his loom,
Sit blithe and happy; bees that soar for bloom,
High as the highest Peak of Furness-fells,
Will murmur by the hour in foxglove bells:
In truth the prison, into which we doom
Ourselves, no prison is: and hence for me,
In sundry moods, ’twas pastime to be bound
Within the Sonnet’s scanty plot of ground;
Pleased if some Souls (for such there needs must be)
Who have felt the weight of too much liberty,
Should find brief solace there, as I have found.





.

[Richard Barrett]

just an excuse for sloppiness, some wd say - avoiding the rigours of constraint and the fructifying discipline this produces.

I'll let you be the judge of that! but I think the "rigours of constraint" are greatly overrated. To the idea of building (or inheriting) a retaining wall around something which defines what that thing cannot be, I prefer the idea of a powerful focus on what it can be, while retaining a sense that anything is possible. (I don't think the literary work featuring your namesake would have got very far had it been subject to existing constraints on what a novel ought to be!)

[vinteuil]

... (I don't think the literary work featuring your namesake would have got very far had it been subject to existing constraints on what a novel ought to be!)

... harsh! - but so true. (And of course the work was turned down by the first publishers he approached - notoriously by Gide - and he began by 'self-publishing' it.)

Mind you, the 'novel' has always seemed able to embrace the woolliest and sloppiest approaches to form and structure - from the very start ( I think of the Quixote, of Robinson Crusoe, of Tristram Shandy).

But in music - I think I am most drawn by rigour and discipline rather than splurge - hence my (not too serious) expostulation...



.

[Richard Barrett]

in music - I think I am most drawn by rigour and discipline rather than splurge

So am I! (And so was Beethoven!)