The opinion of experts

[Mario]

In the discussions above Beethoven and Britten have been mentioned. Britten apparently said 'The rot set in with Beethoven' [it came up in an undergrad exam paper where students were invited to 'discuss']. Stravinsky was scathing about Britten (not to mention many other of his contemporaries, including Messiaen) saying 'he did little to advance the compositional process', meaning exactly what?

Answering the original post, I would definitely avoid regarding composers, maybe especially the great ones, as being experts!

I’ve always had great respect for the views of IS – his music is unknown to me so maybe he should be next after Haydn (whose “Matin” is utterly delightful, but what a lot of surprises this symphony had – concertante, recitative, viola/d bass concerto – wonderful!).

If in my initial journey of discovery, I’m to regard Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Tchaikovsky and Wagner with suspicion or derision or cynicism, then I think my head will explode.

Maybe due to my limited musical knowledge it is not my place to say this, but isn’t there a limit to criticism? Just asking…

Mario

[french frank]

Maybe due to my limited musical knowledge it is not my place to say this, but isn’t there a limit to criticism? Just asking…

Mario

Perhaps it's just that not all criticism is is useful to all people. It depends what you want to know. I'm not sure I know whether criticism can be based purely on knowledge, or whether individual taste and prejudice play an essential part in critical writing - or advice.

In answer to Richard, of course composers are experts in composition but their expertise may not be what an eager seeker after knowledge is after. A car mechanic may be an expert, but you ask of him that he puts your car right, not that he explains the technical details of how he achieved it. In terms of the expounding of knowledge, who is the giver and who the receiver? I just dabble at the edges of what I find appealing - but many/most music lovers are more ambitious than that.

[teamsaint]

I’ve always had great respect for the views of IS – his music is unknown to me so maybe he should be next after Haydn (whose “Matin” is utterly delightful, but what a lot of surprises this symphony had – concertante, recitative, viola/d bass concerto – wonderful!).

If in my initial journey of discovery, I’m to regard Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Tchaikovsky and Wagner with suspicion or derision or cynicism, then I think my head will explode.

Maybe due to my limited musical knowledge it is not my place to say this, but isn’t there a limit to criticism? Just asking…

Mario

Have you ever read anything decent on literary and cultural critical theory, Mario ?

[Mario]

Perhaps it's just that not all criticism is is useful to all people. It depends what you want to know. I'm not sure I know whether criticism can be based purely on knowledge, or whether individual taste and prejudice play an essential part in critical writing - or advice.

In answer to Richard, of course composers are experts in composition but their expertise may not be what an eager seeker after knowledge is after. A car mechanic may be an expert, but you ask of him that he puts your car right, not that he explains the technical details of how he achieved it. In terms of the expounding of knowledge, who is the giver and who the receiver? I just dabble at the edges of what I find appealing - but many/most music lovers are more ambitious than that.

FF, for the first time (I think) I disagree. May I please say why?

Quite a number of years ago (it may have been a Prom concert and maybe even when I lived in London), Oliver Knussen (whose music I honestly do not know a single note of), performed the Eroica.

It was stunning! I would love to get a copy of it.

Maybe because of their in-depth knowledge of music theory, such as counterpoint and modulations, etc (which I do not know yet), they may be able to see better what the composer was getting at.

I simply find it very difficult to accept that composers cannot enlighten us with their knowledge of other composers’ works. I understand Beethoven was very complimentary of Rossini’s music.

To be serious for a moment, I’m stunned that Stravinsky was so “scathing” in his attack on Britten (as was Britten on his criticism of Beethoven) and I still find it difficult to accept his premise that Beethoven’s 9/4 is just a vulgar march (I’m paraphrasing), but otherwise, going back to my OP, how can I possibly ignore what IS has to say about music?

Mario

[Mario]

Have you ever read anything decent on literary and cultural critical theory, Mario ?

ts forgive me, but I'm confused.

Are you saying that all criticism is bunk, or that all criticism is acceptable and there is never enough of it?

My reply would be if the former, no I don't agree, if the latter, then the critic must have some semblance of qualification to be critical.

I have no right to insist that a medieval manuscript be printed in colour, but I have a right to demand that it be printed clearly.

Mario

[Mario]

Sorry folks, important event coming up.

Kick-off in an hour!

Mario

[teamsaint]

ts forgive me, but I'm confused.

Are you saying that all criticism is bunk, or that all criticism is acceptable and there is never enough of it?

My reply would be if the former, no I don't agree, if the latter, then the critic must have some semblance of qualification to be critical.

I have no right to insist that a medieval manuscript be printed in colour, but I have a right to demand that it be printed clearly.

Mario

I’m simply asking if you have read around critical theory at all ? I’m not suggesting either of the extremes that you mention.

[french frank]

FF, for the first time (I think) I disagree. May I please say why?

Quite a number of years ago (it may have been a Prom concert and maybe even when I lived in London), Oliver Knussen (whose music I honestly do not know a single note of), performed the Eroica.

It was stunning! I would love to get a copy of it.

Mario? Mario? Oh, dear he's gone… well, on the Knussen point I think such insights that a composer can give into another composer's work (or his own) is bound to be valuable, and at the least interesting. But performance isn't quite the same as expressing an opinion or value judgement. Insights more easily demonstrated than explained? Or being the subject of a more extended talk. But when it amounts to the kind of value judgements as have been quoted - this is a terrible, talentless piece of pomposity - I'm less sure of the value to the listener.

[ardcarp]

well, on the Knussen point I think such insights that a composer can give into another composer's work (or his own) is bound to be valuable, and at the least interesting. But performance isn't quite the same as expressing an opinion or value judgement. Insights more easily demonstrated than explained? Or being the subject of a more extended talk. But when it amounts to the kind of value judgements as have been quoted - this is a terrible, talentless piece of pomposity - I'm less sure of the value to the listener.

Wise words if I may say so FF.

[Mario]

Strange, but I always thought that when a performer gives us his interpretation of a work, isn’t that expressing his opinion and judgement of a piece? What better way to hear what he has to say than to hear him/her play it? When I listen to Barenboim or Schiff talk about a particular passage in a Beethoven sonata, expressing their feelings and ideas as to why it should be played this way or that, aren’t they passing judgement on that passage in giving us their opinion? Action speaks louder than words?

Oh dear, this is all getting too deep for me.

ts asks earlier whether I’ve “read around critical theory”. So I had to look it up and it’s described as,

“a philosophical approach to culture, and especially to literature, that considers the social, historical, and ideological forces and structures which produce and constrain it.”

Ouch! No ts, I haven’t! And you know, I’m beginning to wonder whether this thread has now reached the stage where a deeper intellect is required to take it a stage further, something I’m afraid I cannot provide.

Before embarrassing myself further, I think I’ll bow out quietly and leave it to others better versed than me to continue.

I have learnt much from this thread, and am most grateful to you all.

Mario

[cloughie]

All or Knussen at all?

[Dave2002]

Is there a difference between criticism and commentary? Commentary would report the state of a musical work, whereas criticism would likely also express a value judgement.

Suppose we consider a work we probably know well - say a symphony by Beethoven. Just suppose Beethoven had missed out the last few bars - just put his pen down and stopped, so there was no ending as we know it today. Someone commenting on this might just remark that the work stopped abruptly - whereas a critic might suggest that Beethoven could have finished it, or should have finished it and make suggestions as to how it could be finished.

Suggesting that a composer should have done things differently - that's an imperative which composers are free to ignore.

Sometimes, if the comments are made during a composer's lifetime, a composer might modify his or her ideas and change the music, though that then raises other questions about "what did the composer really want?" - "was the first version the most spontaneous?" - "is the final version definitive?" etc. These are questions asked about works by composers such as Bruckner and Sibelius. What about Schubert and his 8th. Maybe he really didn't want to finish it!

Consider another example. Take a quiet slow movement by almost any composer - perhaps Haydn. Somewhere in the middle of the movement put in one or two extra bars, and then have all the instruments play "whatever they like" in a cacophonous way. A commentator would then simply report that there was an outburst in the middle of the movement, whereas a critic might mention an "unpleaasant outburst". However, perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned Haydn, as others might simply view that as one of his musical jokes. Does that view change if the music was by Mozart rather than Haydn?

Many people we call critics may actually be commentators most of the time, but sometimes they also state their own opinions and value judgements. They appear to have a value in filtering works for appreciation by others, but that doesn't mean that they have to impose their views on those who then listen to or study the works which are commented upon.

[Dave2002]

Is there a difference between criticism and commentary? Commentary would report the state of a musical work, whereas criticism would likely also express a value judgement.

Suppose we consider a work we probably know well - say a symphony by Beethoven. Just suppose Beethoven had missed out the last few bars - just put his pen down and stopped, so there was no ending as we know it today. Someone commenting on this might just remark that the work stopped abruptly - whereas a critic might suggest that Betthoven could have finished it, or should have finished it and make suggestions as to how it could be finished.

Suggesting that a composer should have done things differently - that's an imperative which composers are free to ignore.

Sometimes, if the comments are made during a composer's lifetime, a composer might modify his or her ideas and change the music, though that then raises other questions about "what did the composer really want?" - "was the first version the most spontaneous?" - "is the final version definitive?" etc. These are questions asked about works by composers such as Bruckner, and Sibelius. What about Schubert and his 8th. Maybe he really didn't want to finish it!

Consider another example. Take a quiet slow movement by almost any composer - perhaps Haydn. Somewhere in the middle of the movement put in one or two extra bars, and then have all the instruments play "whatever they like" in a cacophonous way. A commentator would then simply report that there was an outburst in the middle of the movement, whereas a critic might mention an "unpleaasant outburst". However, perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned Haydn, as others might simply view that as one of his musical jokes.

Many people we call critics may actually be commentators most of the time, but sometimes they also state their own opinions and value judgements. They appear to have a value in filtering works for appreciation by others, but that doesn't mean that they have to impose their views on those who then listen or study the works which are commented upon.

In some fields there are clear experts - and it makes sense to weigh their judgements and views higher than others. The current pandemic is one situation in which on the whole we should listen to experts, rather than just arbitrary opinions - though of course one should also evaluate what experts say, and to an extent choose one's experts carefully. Ignoring them does not seem sensible.

[french frank]

Is there a difference between criticism and commentary?

Perhaps analysis is a better word than criticism. Press music critics are paid to give their opinions (as idiosyncratic or compulsive reading as possible). But what do we base our 'judgements' on? Whether we liked or enjoyed something or were profoundly affected by it in some way? That can't be objective if the next person was unmoved and disliked it: we are not saying something about the work but about ourselves. The 'truth' of our opposing views probably lies in bare numbers. If one person took one view and the other 99 took the opposite view, there is some persuasive 'truth' in that. But if only one person in a hundred enjoyed it, is that person wrong? or is the work worthless for that reason?

For me, criticism is placing the work in its time, in its context, in comparing it with similar works and finding it conformist, derivative, innovative &c. Objective, yes, but in a sense limited - possible even sterile! Who cares? The meaningful relationship is between the composer and the listener. A musicologist - I'm not sure, since music isn't my province, but more focused on the technical aspects? Does this extend to passing judgement or being 'a critic'?

[Leinster Lass]

All or Knussen at all?

I hope you don't trigger a wild rumpus!