The Classical PeriodEras in Ballet, continued
Posted 30 August 2003 - 09:41 AM
My undergraduate music history text (c. 1968) considered the "classical period" in music from Mozart to Beethoven; Mozart began it, Beethoven developed it to its apex. Then the Romantics rebelled against it. I know that's a simplistic summary, but I hope it will do.
In the music history resource that I found on the net (which is an "official" site and looks solid) Beethoven is now his own period.
The classical period (late 18th century) in dance is the age of Noverre, and other creators of the ballet d'action, some of whom worked into the early 19th century.
I thought of Cliff's point on another thread, can one person define a period? And wondered if there were those who know more about music history than I do who could comment further on this, on the historiography of music history. What are people teaching/being taught today? Where is Beethoven?
Posted 30 August 2003 - 10:16 AM
As to what is being taught today, the texts differ from the tests. What I mean is that there is a good deal of material taught in the music literature texts -- information about what was going on in history at the time to so inspire and influence the artists of the day. However, it has been my personal experience that the actual testing of such matters has been sophomoric at best. In one such course, the vast majority of the students flunked the first of four exams, and were allowed to bring home their tests and use their texts to correct their mistakes and thereby bring up their scores. I actually had a professor tell me from then on that if I wrote more than 5 sentences in an essay answer, I would be penalized (so as to make the playing field more even for the rest of the class).
I might seem like I'm digressing somewhat, but my point is that it's a dirty shame more people are not interested in the whole picture of art. I can eat history for breakfast. What kind of family life did Mahler have? Why did Wagner think singing was actually the least important aspect of opera? How did Picasso link up with Stravinsky? How did Haydn get the nickname "Papa?" These are the things students should want to know -- not just be able to regurgitate the driest, most basic facts about these composers.
Posted 30 August 2003 - 10:18 AM
Back to Beethoven, I just found this site (with a discussion board!)
They take the "it doesn't matter, good is good, what period something is is of interest only to music historians" approach.)
Posted 30 August 2003 - 10:35 AM
From roughly 1750 to 1820, artists, architechts, and musicians moved away from the heavily ornamented styles of the Baroque and the Rococo, and instead embraced a clean, uncluttered style they thought reminiscent of Classical Greece. The newly established aristocracies were replacing monarchs and the church as patrons of the arts, and were demanding an impersonal, but tuneful and elegant music. Dances such as the minuet and the gavotte were provided in the forms of entertaining serenades and divertimenti.
At this time the Austrian capital of Vienna became the musical center of Europe, and works of the period are often referred to as being in the Viennese style. Composers came from all over Europe to train in and around Vienna, and gradually they developed and formalized the standard musical forms that were to predominate European musical culture for the next several decades. A reform of the extravagance of Baroque opera was undertaken by Christoph von Gluck. Johann Stamitz contributed greatly to the growth of the orchestra and developed the idea of the orchestral symphony. The Classical period reached its majestic culmination with the masterful symphonies, sonatas, and string quartets by the three great composers of the Viennese school: Franz Joseph Haydn, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, and Ludwig van Beethoven. During the same period, the first voice of the burgeoning Romantic musical ethic can be found in the music of Viennese composer Franz Schubert.
The site that I'd put on Discovering Ballet Music History Resourcesis an outline of material in one of the current standard undergraduates text, A History of Western Music by Donald Jay Grout and Claude Palisca (4th ed.). It has three separate chapters: Early Classical Period (Scarlatti, C.P.E. Bach), Classical Period (Hadyn-Mozart), and then Beethoven.
Beethoven's work was divided into periods as well -- three, if I'm remembering correctly (and I may not be -- I'm writing without checking). As is often the case with "bridge" (a great word) artists, the earlier period was more classical, in this case; the later one more romantic. Other opinions on this welcome, of course.
Posted 30 August 2003 - 01:34 PM
For instance, Beethoven was such a fan, initially of Napoleon. Napoleon started out as the consummate revolutionary. He not only battled for the people, but once the revolution took hold, he gave the people a place to take it -- he gave some 'concrete' to the ideals that other revolutionaries had, in terms of how government and education, etc., should be set up. Prior to him, the folks didn't know what to do with their newfound freedom and anarchy would have taken hold.
But -- Napoleon's power caught up with him. He began to emulate the very things he had once detested. He considered himself higher than the pope.
If you go back and look at art -- portraits of Napoleon throughout his life, you will see a dashing, fearless looking soldier on horseback in the early years. Later on, he looks downright silly, dressing like the early Greeks.
Beethoven got fed up with all of this, and after he had initially written and dedicated a symphony to Napoleon, he -- upon hearing that the latter had declared himself emperor -- tore off the dedication sheet and replaced it with the ambiguous "in memory of a great leader."
Posted 30 August 2003 - 03:07 PM
Other views on Beethoven? Late classical, transition, a "period" all to himself?
Posted 30 August 2003 - 04:14 PM
Well, in Bells Are Ringing, Beethoven is Belmont Park.
Where is Beethoven?
Posted 30 August 2003 - 07:12 PM
In all seriousness, I did take one particular course where the students were so surprised to hear the non-disco version of that symphony. They never knew it was a classical piece. Scary.
I like the idea of Beethoven being a time period all his own. He broke so much ground, not only in terms of his music, but in the image of what a musician should be. Beethoven was the fella to make being a musician a real job, instead of being funded by, and at the mercy of, the royal class. This was a tremendous change in the status of musicians.
Prior to that time, even the greatest musicians/composers had to be very careful about not stepping on royal toes. They got around speaking up for themselves and their people in a variety of ways. With Haydn, it was with diplomacy and humor. With Mozart, it took the form of wit and sarcasm in his operas.
Posted 30 August 2003 - 07:17 PM
Any thought about why this was the case, whereas ballet and theater were sprouting elsewhere?
Posted 30 August 2003 - 07:17 PM
The "transition" period issue is now beginning to fascinate me. I checked Kirstein and he, too, takes neoclassicism/classicism right to the bring of romanticism. I know now that scholars view this differently -- I've come across the term romantic neoclassicism (or neoclassical-romanticism). But I don't know when that change in viewpoint occurred.
Posted 30 August 2003 - 07:27 PM
Posted 30 August 2003 - 07:30 PM
"where did a girl have to go if she wanted to date a musician?"
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases (adblockers may block display):