Mahler, Overrated?

[allegroamabile]

It seems that composers like Mahler and Shostakovich are becoming very popular among musical communities, especially with the youth. Is it because their musical tastes have not matured and deepended enough to appreciate the tranquil beauties of composers like Brahms or Mendelssohn. I have heard comments such as "Brahms is Satan, Mahler is our savior" and I look at these very enigmatically. What do you think?

Don't get me wrong, Mahler is a descent composer, but defiantly not at "god" status.

Take no offense Feldmahler.

[vinteuil]

I actually hate the music of Mahler. His techniques (brutalizing lyric melodies, orchestration, etc.) are excellent - and when adopted by Shostakovich, the effect is wonderful, but it just screams overly much, and it's not as refined as I would like. It's clear that he can write music, but I just don't like what he chooses to write.

And I've already made comments on other forums about how I'm probably to be massacred by a herd of raging fanboys.

[allegroamabile]

Ya, long live the music of Brahms and Beethoven!

Let's just say I would be more than happy to see Mahler switch places with Balakirev in the musical totem poll.

[Melodia]

I'm not big on Mahler OR Brahms (outside of the former's 1st Symphony and a few pieces by the later).

I don't see what it has to do with maturing musical tastes though. There's very little I used to like and don't any more (Brhams's Haydn Variations probably fits that...) whereas I'm often finding stuff I didn't used to like I do now.

[ZacPB189]

It seems that composers like Mahler and Shostakovich are becoming very popular among musical communities, especially with the youth. Is it because their musical tastes have not matured and depended enough to appreciate the tranquil beauties of composers like Brahms or Mendelssohn. I have heard comments such as "Brahms is Satan, Mahler is our savior" and I look at these very enigmatically. What do you think?

Don't get me wrong, Mahler is a descent composer, but defiantly not at "god" status.

Take no offense Feldmahler.

NONSENSE! Brahms is THE MUSICAL EQUIVILANT TO Satan (that's my quote by the way, and was meant as a personal feeling, not a forced viewpoint). Of course Mahler's not GOD, but he should be on the very top of the composer totem pole followed by Bruckner, Hans Rott, Schoenberg, and Havergal Brian. Brahms (and ONLY Brahms; I do like Mendelssohn and Beethoven) has no talent and deserves the a place UNDER the bottom of the pole. I like composers who can express themselves, not ones that simply COPY Beethoven (this would be a description of Brahms). I can relate to Mahler, Rott, Brian, and Bruckner better than I can other composers. And to be honest, I really don’t even like Shostikovich.

And I've already made comments on other forums about how I'm probably to be massacred by a herd of raging fanboys.

“Raging fan boys” need to stop and think about why they like Mahler as well for reasons other than “He writes amazing (insert name of instrument) solos!!!” I can even tell you the reasons in which a “worship” (for lack of a better word) Mahler’s music: his spiritual drive (as with Bruckner, Rott, and Brian), his use of Germanic Folklore (like Wagner), the ways he emotionally uses his melodies, motifs, and themes (similar to Wagner’s leitmotifs), and his execution of orchestration and equal treatment of ALL the instruments and voices (as with Schumann, Bruckner (except fot the Harp, which Bruckner didn’t especially like) and Rott, whereas Mozart especially would put huge biases against various groups (Trumpets for Mozart; Valves, cor anglis, trumpets, and percussion for Brahms; contrabassoons for Tchaikovsky). Brahms especially did the opposite of these things, and even hated people that did them.

[steltz]

Uh, oh, this is going to get emotional . . . . .

Seriously, though, without making people hugely upset, just because you think someone has no talent doesn't automatically make him evil, which is the connotation associated with Satan.

Just what about Brahms is evil?

[ZacPB189]

Uh, oh, this is going to get emotional . . . . .

Seriously, though, without making people hugely upset, just because you think someone has no talent doesn't automatically make him evil, which is the connotation associated with Satan.

Just what about Brahms is evil?

Hey, emothins make the world go round, without them, life would be VERY boring. Besides, music and emotion do best together, not apart, another flaw in Brahms.

Brahms is evi because of what he did to people that DID have ALOT of musical talent, especially Hans Rott and Bruckner. Even Mahler was a target of Brahms (read about the history of"Das Klagende Lied"), but it wasn't as severe as Hans Rott (look that one up, too). I may hate Brahms, but I'm not going to to do what he did to Rott! I hate composers who compose with ego: Brahms, most of Wagner (though he is very important to the history of modernizing music), Leonard Bernstein, and more recently John Williams (his ego has been getting bigger for a while now).

[aldona]

Uh, oh, this is going to get emotional . . . . .

Seriously, though, without making people hugely upset, just because you think someone has no talent doesn't automatically make him evil, which is the connotation associated with Satan.

(pulling up a chair, reaching for the popcorn and sitting down to enjoy the show)

It's always interesting and enlightening to watch the discussions that take place on that intersection between "personal preference", "value judgements", "psychological response to the music" and "moral absolutes".

You should see what happens when you add religion to the mix. (thinking fondly of interesting times selecting repertoire for the church choir). I call it the "I don't like it, therefore God doesn't like it" syndrome.

Aldona

[geogibson]

Mahler is not so much "over-rated," perhaps, as "over-done"-- like so much else in his time, reaching to encompass metaphysically inspired experiences. His is not Absolute Music, but rather an attempt to write the Music of the Absolute. So, if one enjoys the project of German Idealist Philosophy, listening absorptively to Mahler's ResurrectionSymphony or the Symphony of a Thousand is not to be surprised at. But, not everyone enjoys the Grandiose. As an antidote, try listening to Sibelius... his Fourth Symphony or his Sixth, for a leaner, yet substantial aesthetic. Still, Das Lied von der Erde is a magnificent art-work,... exotic, yes, but not really pretentious, is it?

[allegroamabile]

I really appreciate the passion and fire ZacPB189. I am also an impassioned person and yes, emotion is everything. Too bad our musical taste differ.

I will stand strongly by my word of Mahler being extremely overrated.

[vinteuil]

Incidentally, to sidetrack just a bit - Feldmaler with no h means field-painter in German...it could be some sort of pun.

Thanks for defending your viewpoint intelligently everybody! (I do agree with aldona, by the way.) But, it is so great to see justification instead of blind worship. However I think that the word overdone applies to his music as well as the performances.
To me it feels rather contrived, occasionally a tiny bit self-concious (although not as badly as Berlioz sometimes is - although I prefer Berlioz...), and just forced. Thoughts?

[pocoallegro]

First of all, I am a firm believer in uncovering the merits of each and every composer I come across. This often leads to wonderful other discoveries. Brahms and Mahler both have a place in my heart as well as my head. Brahms was THE master of rythm in the 19th century, obvious in all of his music from the symphonies to the lieder. He was also a consumate craftsman in his technique. Mahler is an entirely different animal. It has taken me many years to appreciate his music. His symphonies are very large scale and I wouldn't recommend starting there if you wish to explore Mahler. The heart of his music is the lieder. I believe there are fewer pieces in all of western music more beautiful than "Ich bin der Welt..." from the Rueckert Lieder and the Adagietto from the fifth symphony. Likewise, the opening of Brahms' Piano Trio No. 1 and the third movement of his third symphony are likewise cornerstones of beauty. I certainly can respect other people's opinions (De gustibus non es disputandem), but I always think that there is a "way in" with every composer. Cheers!

[allegroamabile]

Thanks pocoallegro for reminding me of the beginning of Brahms Piano Trio No. 1. I showed that to a friend once and he nearly fell over. Oh and trust me aldona, the Brahms Variations on a Theme by Haydn is still a magnificient work. Just listen to the ideal beginning of the finale.

I promised myself I would never get a recording of Mahler Five until I have to play it in an orchestra. OVERRATED

Just listen to the sublime sound in the second movement of Brahms's Clarinet Quintet, Op. 115. I do not think Mahler had what it takes to compose music of that much depth and intimacy. Mahler is always "in your face" and I am not very fond of that. I am just saying appreciating Brahms is like enjoying Shakespeare and listening to Mahler is like reading Hemingway.

Brahms received a great deal of criticisim he did not deserve. Tchaikovsky notoriously said, "I played over the music of that scoundrel Brahms. What a giftless bastard! It annoys me that this self-inflated mediocrity is hailed as a genius." I thought Tchaikovsky had much more class than that. I also remember that one nineteenth century music critic compared one cymbol crash of Bruckner being better than all of Brahms's Symphonies and Serenades put together. I think all those comments were said as a reaction from jelousy.

I do have to admit that Mahler must have an enormous amount of intelligence to compose for an orchestra that big for his time period.

[vinteuil]

I am just saying appreciating Brahms is like enjoying Shakespeare and listening to Mahler is like reading Hemingway.

Ouch for Hemingway...
I think a better analogy is that one is the first 200 pages of The Idiot (Dostoevsky), and the other is the rest...

Beauty and complexity as well as inteliigence are what cause people to rate a score. However, this somehow does not determine how great it is. Mahler is certainly complex and intelligent, and, to some, beautiful, which is why he is so well thought of. However...the scores are not coherent, the developements are...and I just don't like the music.

[allegroamabile]

Here is a list of quotes that bash Brahms. It is very painful for me to look at them.

"There are some experiences in life which should not be demanded twice from any man, and one of them is listening to the Brahms Requiem.”~ George Bernard Shaw

“The real Brahms is nothing more than a sentimental voluptuary, rather tiresomely addicted to dressing himself up as Handel or Beethoven and making a prolonged and intolerable noise.”~ George Bernard Shaw

“The Detroit String Quartet played Brahms last night. Brahms lost.”~ Bennett Cerf

Here is a webpage with a list of quotes that praise Mahler. There was simply too many to copy on this page. This is truely mind-bottling and it is making me sick.

BRAHMS is the BEST

http://thinkexist.com/search/searchquot ... rch=mahler