For your blog post due Tuesday, January 14 at 9 am, please
consider our class discussion as led by Prof. O’Leary from the afternoon on Monday,
January 13, and comment in 250-500 words on the following points:
· What did you know
about today’s subject before the listening and/or discussion session?
· What did you find
most surprising about today’s subject?
· What would you
like to know more about after experiencing today’s class?
Your post should be placed directly in the comments to this blog
entry, and is due at 9 am on Tuesday, January 14.
I was aware of some of the “lore” surrounding Beethoven’s Symphony No. 3 before today’s class– the story of how Beethoven wrote Symphony No. 3 for Napoleon, but crossed his name off the title page in a fit of rage after he heard the news of Napoleon declaring himself emperor. I didn’t know the bit Professor O’Leary said about how Symphony No. 3 was originally supposed to titled after Napoleon, not dedicated, which I thought was interesting. I have heard Symphony No. 3 before, and I learned about the first movement in Music History 101 and Music of the Romantic Era, and I think I might have learned about the second movement in a music theory class at some point. Professor O’Leary touched on the beautiful and sublime, which I have had the privilege of hearing him speak on before. We read some of ETA Hoffman’s writings in Romantic Music History, which spoke most specifically on Symphony No. 5, but still addressed Beethoven and the sublime. I’m also familiar with the horn excerpt from the trio in the third movement, the second part of which is a very popular low horn excerpt.
ReplyDeleteThe thing I found most surprising about today’s class was how Beethoven’s opinion of Napoleon seemed to go back and forth regularly for many years. I didn’t realize that there were multiple shifts in Beethoven’s opinion, rather than just the one that happened when he wrote Eroica. I also thought the different reasons Professor O’Leary posited on why exactly this was were interesting, especially the comparison of how perhaps Beethoven is a conqueror of the symphony in the same way that Napoleon was a conqueror of Europe.
After today’s class, I’m curious about Beethoven’s more specific thoughts on transcendental idealism; I think someone asked a question at the end of class about how some of Beethoven’s symphonies don’t seem very aligned with transcendental idealism, but seem entertaining and conventional, like how a lot of Symphony No. 7 feels like dance music, for example. I wonder what exactly Beethoven thought about this philosophy related to his compositions; I’m sure he employs certain ways of Enlightenment thinking in all of his symphonies, but I am curious about how it varies from one to another, and if he has any letters or essays addressing the subject.
I knew some rough background information on the third symphony in music history classes before, but I haven’t gotten into details until today’s lecture. For example, I learned that Beethoven is the symbol of the beginning of the romantic era, but I don’t know that he has already begun to confront the patronage system that early - he was only composing the third of his nine symphonies at that time - not to even think about connected this phenomenon to the Enlightenment. Prof. O’Leary commented that the third symphony is not only reflecting Beethoven's own understanding of music but also acting as the turning point of music history. This is really an astonishing statement. Since for me the only thing I was clear before is “Eroica” is just a celebrated symphony but nothing more special.
ReplyDeleteThe facts surprised me about the third symphony most is definitely the complicated relationship between Beethoven and Buonaparte under the Enlightenment background. Since Beethoven is born in the Enlightenment period, his idea is full of the concept of liberation, and he approved them into his music. One important feature is he composed music that is fascinating on its own structure, the harmony, the patterns of the notes, and all the purely musical elements that could be analyzed, but not composed to please certain audiences. He made his music more sublime, which means rough, terrifying, but at the same time is pleasurable. He broadened the narrow definition and function of music use the ideas given by Enlightenment, that “Enlightenment has always aimed at liberating human beings from fear and installing them as masters” (Theodor Adorno, “Dialectic of Enlightenment”). Beethoven originally decided to dedicate the third symphony to Napoleon, who was the Hero in France and all of Europe, the one who is meant to be on the new society’s side. Thus, when Napoleon and his government betrayed the revolution and the Enlightenment, Beethoven was infuriated and he crossed out the formal name of the symphony. The interesting part is, Beethoven did not make this decision as outright as I think before. In fact, he was actually hesitating for a long time, and his impressions of Napoleon have also been erratic. The second movement is a funeral, and at last, Beethoven named this symphony “Eroica”, dedicated to the heroes, but not to Napoleon.
Analyzing the first movement is a great pleasure. In the exposition, the two themes are hard to sing or remember, which is not like the composers will do as usual, and there’s even another theme of e minor in the development. Beethoven also used some strident chords in the development which could be mostly found in Schoenberg’s works. He didn’t even resolve all these strange elements in the recapitulation. Although this movement is composed in a sonata form, it is still not the classical type, and we can see how Beethoven was trying to break through the limitations in this movement.
Prof.O’Leary pointed out that at the end of the development part, it is the French horn that brings the whole orchestra back to a settled state, which makes me wonder if this could be a metaphor for what was happening in France. Since the symphony is dramatic, I believe that there are many metaphors in the music, and I’d like to explore more on this aspect.
I really loved Professor O’Leary’s guest lecture today, and it made me thrilled about the third symphony. Because of the important oboe excerpts in this piece, I knew it previously, but I have never really dived into the theory and history behind it. I knew that it was the heroic symphony, and that it was very important in the context of the form of the symphony and Beethoven’s development in composing.
ReplyDeleteI found everything that Professor O’Leary said today interesting, and much of it was surprising as well. For example, I was surprised to learn more about the context in which Beethoven composed the piece – the Age of Enlightenment – and how people began to think differently about music during that time period. I think that it’s super interesting to understand that context, because everything that he composed would have been oriented to the world around him. So, if we know more about the world around him, we will know more about his music. I was surprised to learn about his titles and rededications throughout the time that Beethoven received information about Napoleon’s actions across Europe. Since the dedication and title really can alter the meaning of the piece, it seems very important that in the end, Beethoven left the name off and simply called it “Eroica”. Finally, I was really fascinated by how Beethoven really altered sonata form, something that caused critics to have to think a different away about his music and music in general, and would usher this genre into a new era.
I’m super excited for Professor Miyake’s lecture tomorrow on the funeral march, which will shed more light on the symphony as a whole. I also look forward to listening to the whole symphony again with the new understanding that I have from today.
Before today, I had listened to Beethoven's third symphony many times, had heard the story about the title/dedication to Bonaparte, and knew a few general things about the enlightenment and its thinkers/thought (although under no circumstances would I have been capable of quoting anyone).
ReplyDeleteIt was so interesting to hear about the enlightenment in the context of the Eroica (no, I didn't mean to write that the other way around) and to examine the sonata form of the first movement (I wish I had done so before today: I love the piece even more now, and I'm a bit sad I lived without today's knowledge for so long). I don't think the piece means anything different than I previously thought, but knowing the particulars of the form refines and deepens the meaning.
It wasn't surprising, exactly, but tracing the struggling primary theme added so much to my understanding of this movement. I grew up with Beethoven, so it takes conscious effort for me to realize that anything he does is odd. He tends to be my baseline against whom I measure everyone else, including everyone before him.
I want to know more about enlightenment thinking and Beethoven's life. I've compiled quite a reading list from today's lecture: Kant, Hume, Rousseau, and several Beethoven biographies.
Before today’s classes, I had heard Beethoven’s 3rd Symphony (“Eroica”) and knew some of its historical background: Beethoven initially dedicated the symphony to Napoleon Bonaparte, but when he heard the notice that he crowned himself emperor, he aggressively scratched Napoleon’s name off the title page.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I learned a great deal from today’s discussion session with Prof. Jamie O’Leary. I was quite fascinated by the changes in European philosophy around when Beethoven’s 3rd was written. During the Enlightenment age, thinkers wanted to break away from the archaic traditions of aristocracy and patronage. They sought to liberate the human mind to be able to think rationally, solve scientific problems and create lasting works of art. During this period, there was a gradual change in the artistic ideals of Europe as well. The archaic, pre-Enlightenment ideal for an artistic work was that it had to please the “important” people, such as aristocrats and patrons. The inherent fallacy in that ideal is that an artistic work almost never appeals to everyone’s taste. Art desperately needed a change of purpose: instead of seeking to please, the goal of Enlightenment artists was to stimulate the rational mind. They believed that art and music should express ideas and require deep, intellectual analysis. It shouldn’t be immediately understandable. Beethoven’s music from his middle period onward very much fit this new ideal.
I very much enjoyed Prof. O’Leary’s detailed analysis of the first movement of the 3rd symphony. While in a normal sonata form (customarily, classical-style symphonies adhered to this form), there would be an exposition comprised of a first theme, a second theme in a new key (dominant or relative major) and a closing “theme”. In the Eroica symphony, however, we don’t actually have a first theme; what we do have is an incomplete theme that stumbles, or gets distracted, three times! The exposition fails in its true musical function, which is to present two coherent themes. The rest of the exposition is rather normal except for the closing, which is relentlessly drawn out. It is true that normally, the closing theme is sort of a celebration of the new key, but, as Prof. O’Leary said, “no one throws a party like Beethoven!” Also, another breach of convention is in the development section—a new theme in E minor emerges, one the audience has never heard before. In the classical style, the development would merely develop ideas already heard, not introduce new ones. These violations of conventions baffled critics of the time, who had no idea how to grapple with such an artistic work.
In summary, I was quite intrigued by the ideas discussed today concerning Beethoven’s Eroica symphony in historical context. I would love to learn more about the effect of the Enlightenment on Romanticism, because Prof. O’Leary believes that Beethoven’s third symphony helped usher in the Romantic musical era. This is a point of confusion for me that I would like to resolve. I would love to know more about the relationship between Romanticism and Enlightenment and where exactly the 3rd symphony fits in. My understanding is that Romantic artists expressed real emotions whereas Enlightenment was trying to break free from this concrete ideal. I would like to know what is different fundamentally about Romanticism from the pre-Enlightenment artistic ideals.
From previous music history/philosophy classes and some score study, I knew vaguely about many of the topics covered by Professor O’Leary today, but not nearly to the extent of the information presented in the lecture. I was vaguely aware of how Beethoven strayed from traditional sonata form in the first movement of Eroica, I vaguely knew about his initial dedication of the symphony to Napoleon, and I knew some basic enlightenment principles and thought.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I was surprised to learn how influenced Beethoven was by the Enlightenment and just how important and influential this movement is to how we understand the evolution of sonata form and the genre of symphony. It was especially interesting to hear about Kant and how his thought related to the music of Beethoven; I had never thought about Beethoven and Kant in the same context before today. I didn’t know the details about Beethoven’s complicated relationship with Napoleon and that Beethoven switched between referencing him and taking his name off the Eroica title page several times. This further insight into the character of Beethoven is very informative (though not definitive) for the hermeneutical aspect of the Eroica Symphony, and is something I would love to know more about. I also enjoyed Professor O’Leary’s bold claim that Beethoven’s dissonance in the development section of the first movement is unparalleled for his time and not seen again until the earlier works of Schoenberg. I’d like to spend more time studying this observation, and more generally how Beethoven’s harmonic innovations impacted composers of the mid to late 19th century as well. I’d love to hear about the legacy of this movement, beginning from 1806 to today.
This was a really energizing and dynamic class and easily one of my favorites so far. I felt like much of the material was made accessible enough that I could understand despite of lack of a serious musical background. I came into the class knowing Eroica was a heroic piece and knowing that it sounded like one, but I couldn't tell you exactly why. I also didn't know how influenced this piece and Beethoven himself was by Enlightenment ideals. The changes the Enlightenment brought to music and artistic taste aren't something I've really seen covered so I enjoyed the discussion on pleasure v. disinterested pleasure, beauty v. sublime, music that conveys emotion v. music that conveys an idea, etc.
ReplyDeleteI also didn't know that Beethoven was in the midst of transitioning away from aristocratic music during this period. It seems like Beethoven did much of his purely aristocratic work from 1790-1803 but started working on his "heroic" compositions in 1801 and planned to have Eroica celebrate the successes of Napoleon. Napoleon's decision to crown himself Emperor is just one possible reason why Beethoven chose not to name the symphony after him, the other reasons being political concerns after Austria's loss at the Battle of Austerlitz and a desire to create something more abstract and thus more in line with Enlightenment ideals. This is a small question but now I just want to know how much Napoleon knew of Beethoven's music and if he ever knew how close he'd come to having his own symphony.