For your blog post due tomorrow (Wednesday, January 8 at 9 am), please consider our class
discussion from the afternoon on Tuesday, January 7, 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 Wednesday, January 8 at 9 am.
I learned some background information about today’s subject in music history classes before. The features of classic music like the rounded binary and the sonata form - basically the exposition, the development, and the recapitulation - have been taught in 101 class. Other ideas like the typical style of Beethoven, how some of his own characteristic and genius has been applied to his music, and how the symphonies was developed during the 18th century have also been discussed in the music in the Romantic era class. Furthermore, history 347 works on instruments that also gave me a brief idea of how the orchestra or the concept of “orchestration” started. However, when I can relate and piece all this information together onto Beethoven’s second symphony today, it is really amazing. There are also things discussed today that are new or refreshing to me, which gives me a better understanding of how the second symphony worked under that particular time. The discussion of the spaces for orchestra performing is definitely helpful and interesting, for example, Theater-an-der-Wein is the theatre that played both straight dramas (drama might include music) and operas (drama with music), the symphony is always placed at the end of the program for a concert, and it is always performed in the early morning of a day like 7 or 7:30 am.
ReplyDeleteI’ve never had a chance to listen to the second symphony in its entirety before, and I really enjoyed today’s listening, especially when I was reading the score along with the music. It is fun to find the special points, most likely a transition, a fugue pattern, a key changing, or a cadence in the score. I’d like to listen to it again on my own, with the score by my hand and try to get more details about it. I’m also interested in how the contemporary and modern critics think about this symphony. We have already gone through some sharp criticism about this symphony in class, but I think there might be other critics that stand on different points of view, and the critics should also be changed through these two hundred years.
Before this class, I was aware of some of the things we talked about from music history 101. I knew that, for example, Beethoven was keen on the idea on becoming a well-known composer. I knew that he didn’t want to just be another lost musician in history, and this is what drove him to not only continue playing piano, but also compose music. I think that this is also why he was so ambitious in his inventive use of style – even though this is not so prevalent in Symphony no. 2, written during the “Early” Beethoven period. I also knew the basic sonata form from my basic theory classes – although I can always use a refresher on the minutia – and of course the rounded binary form.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most surprising parts about the lecture from today for me was learning how Beethoven’s station at the Theater an der Wien allowed him to make his music more public through the monthly academies that he held there. Since the whole purpose of the theater was to capture a larger public audience, it was a neat example of the shift of the role of the artist from servant to independence.
I would love to continue to explore the role of the symphony in western classical music as we get into the 19th century, and its shift in importance in relation to the opera. I think that it will also allow us to see the way Beethoven bends and breaks the rules of the generic sonata form to create pieces that are more and more inventive and revolutionary!
I'm going to go with "didn't know" again so I can review and remember. I hope that's ok!
ReplyDeleteI didn't know that Beethoven was employed at a theater as a director of music. I'm not surprised he was a little lax in his duties. The free access to the theater and orchestra for an academy must have been worth it - for a few years!
I always thought Beethoven wrote symphonies in order to show his skill and versatility as a composer. Revolutionize one more genre! What, like it's hard? I didn't know that Beethoven wanted to write symphonies in some part because they were performed in large public concerts (as opposed to solo sonatas and chamber works, performed in the music rooms of nobles) and he wanted to be famous with the public as well as the aristocracy. (I guess I'd previously thought the motivation for public concerts was primarily money rather than primarily fame.)
When listening to his symphonies, I've always heard Beethoven playing with form, but I hadn't written down and sketched out the forms - and then compared to Mozart. I found that part of class really interesting. With regards to sonata form, I'd heard of the second theme being quieter and calmer than the first, but not of both themes being quieter and calmer that the transition and closing material. This is a very helpful hint for hearing form.
Being a violist myself, it makes me so happy to imagine Beethoven playing the viola parts to Don Giovanni, Marriage of Figaro, and various symphonies by Haydn and Mozart. I've played some of those too; they're still frequently programmed today. Some things haven't changed! Sometimes good things last. This was the most surprising moment of class today. A pleasant surprise!
I knew that opera overtures used to be a signal for the audience to find their seats and settle down, and that people frequently kept talking during them. I also knew that symphonies were typically programmed first on concerts (as opposed to today, where they're last). I hadn't put two and two together and imagined people talking during symphonies! I had no idea that the number of symphonies composed by the end of the 1700s was over 13,000. I also didn't know that there was much of a symphonic culture in America before the 1800s. I'd be interested to read more about the history of classical music in the Americas.
The idea that both music for prayer and music for entertainment merged together into the symphony just seems poetic and correct to me. As far as I'm concerned, a symphony can have the whole world in it.
I had actually never listened to Beethoven’s Symphony No. 2 in its entirety before today, so I didn’t know very much at all about this work before coming to class. One of the things I was most aware of that we talked about was the function of the symphony in the mid to late 18th century; I previously learned that it was common for a symphony, or the first movement of a symphony, to open a concert that would seem quite long by today’s standards, and have a wide variety of pieces. I did not know that Beethoven would put on these concerts for his own music, because when I learned about this, it was geared toward a slightly earlier time period. Additionally, I was also familiar with sonata form before today’s class.
ReplyDeleteThe thing I found most surprising from today’s class was that a lot of aspects of Symphony No. 2 fit into norms of the Classic Era while “pushing the envelope” in the direction of innovation and change, and generally how Beethoven’s compositional style came to be known as. It was interesting to see the clear attributes from symphonies of the previous decade while also hearing differences that are much more pronounced in his later symphonies. We talked today about how Beethoven’s melody in the third movement is much more reliant on rhythmic material than melodic content, which was basically what the entire Symphony No. 5 class was about in Music History 101. I also thought it was fascinating to learn that the word “symphony” has Greek roots from the words “together” and “sounding.” Fun facts are fun!
I found it interesting to compare Beethoven’s Symphony No. 2 to Mozart’s Symphony No. 40, and I’m curious about how Mozart fit into Beethoven’s music education. I feel like in the music theory classes I’ve taken, Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven are referred to as a “big three” of sorts, but I wonder about how Beethoven learned about and thought about the composers who came before him. The composers who succeeded Beethoven certainly thought about him a lot, so I’m just curious if Beethoven did the same.
Since I wasn’t at the listening session or discussion, I listened on my own to Toscanini’s version of Symphony no. 2 with the NBC symphony. This was really my first time listening to the symphony; I wasn’t even familiar with any of the main themes. The symphony is structured in four movements, which was a pretty common occurrence in Beethoven’s early work.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, Symphony no. 2 is a wonderful, lightweight work. Like most of Beethoven’s early work, it is very much defined by robust rhythm. Even the relatively slow second movement has a strong pulse. The mood is quite upbeat and cheerful. The excessive amount of staccato throughout the work contributes to the extreme energy. The harmonic language is also relatively simple and straightforward. This early symphony in no way predicts the complexity, depth or seriousness of Beethoven’s later style. He remains influenced by the more traditional Classical style of Haydn and Mozart, even though his humor is significantly coarser.
The “weightiest” section of the piece is the first movement’s slow and majestic introduction, but the solemnity is short-lived: the music soon “takes off” into a hyper-rhythmic, driving, and bombastic Allegro. The second movement (Larghetto) has quite beautiful melodies. There is still no hint of darkness, and the mood could be described as wistful and tender. To me, the main theme resembles Christmas songs.
Both the third and the fourth movements (Scherzo and Allegro molto, respectively) are very happy and humorous! I almost fell off my chair laughing at the fourth movement’s main theme. In fact, the musicologist Robert Greenberg, a professor at San Francisco Conservatory, believes that the opening theme (“short-long”*) of the fourth movement evokes a hiccup, belch or flatulence. This is because Beethoven famously had a lot of gastric trouble during this period of his life! This short-long motif seems to repeat ad-infinitum throughout the movement. It is almost as if he gets a fun idea and then doesn’t know when to quit (but to a good effect, in my opinion)! Beethoven’s dramatic humor can also be found in his heavy use of rhythmic accents and sforzati in the “wrong” place.
So far, I’ve only heard Toscanini, but when I hear other conductors, I will judge them based on whether they make me laugh as hard as Toscanini did! Eliciting laughter and chuckles, in my mind, was at the heart of Beethoven’s intention. I am interested to listen to other versions of the symphony, and I would like to learn more about the history behind it. I also want to conduct an in-depth formal theoretical analysis of the work.
*This refers to the motif with the eighth followed by a quarter note.
Link for Robert Greenberg's analysis: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=15&ved=2ahUKEwiNg8H73fDmAhXBW80KHWwpBL4QFjAOegQIAhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcivilstat.com%2F2014%2F07%2Fhow-to-listen-to-and-understand-great-music-robert-greenberg%2F&usg=AOvVaw2Tki3M3CReQI8BEYsmZn4K
I knew very little about Beethoven’s Symphony No. 2 prior to this class. The movements were recognizable upon re-listening, but I wouldn’t have been able to say much about the Symphony before today. I did, however, know about the Classical Era forms and structure within symphonies, including the minuet and trio structure, sonata form, and rondo form. I also have learned in previous classes how Beethoven challenged these norms, pushing the bounds of tradition. It was interesting to see how he explored this specifically in his second symphony. Contrasting Mozart’s Symphony No. 40 and Beethoven’s Symphony No. 2 was especially informative in this way. Beethoven’s transition and development material was also very interesting in this symphony. Studying the score to aid harmonic analysis ended up being quite a trip. The way Beethoven built harmonic and motivic tension in his works were vaguely familiar to me from other classes I have taken, but looking at it in the context of the Symphony No. 2 helped me to understand this symphony in a much deeper way, which I’m sure will carry to his other symphonic works in the next few weeks.
ReplyDeleteWhat struck me the most in today’s class was the history of the concert hall and concert-going practices of the early 19th century. Learning about the Theatre-an-der-Wine, and how Beethoven worked for Schikaneder while composing his symphonies was very interesting. Beethoven’s use of Academies at the Theatre to promote his works is somewhat of a foreign concept to modern day concert-going practice. I’m curious about the evolution of concert-going practices from the early 19th century and the increasing accessibility and interest of the middle class. I’m also curious about the division between concert halls designed for orchestral performances vs opera houses and how that developed from the early 19th century.
This was my first time listening to Beethoven's Second Symphony in its entirety so I hadn't been entirely sure what to expect. It'll be interesting comparing this more "standard" symphony to his later pieces as he begins to get more and more experimental.
ReplyDeleteIt was interesting hearing about the public attittude towards symphonies at the time, particularly how at the time of the Second Symphony the public was just beginning to get more and more access to classical music through such venues as the Theater an der Wein. I was surprised to hear that attendees of the Concert Spirituale felt they could talk over symphonies and that this attitude was one of the reasons Beethoven often opened his works with bombastic notes.
I also found the discussion of the differences between Mozart and Beethoven really interesting. Before, I'd considered both of their music relatively indistinguishable so I enjoyed hearing their music played next to each other with the differences expounded upon. Mozart's work is, as you put it in class, "more singable in the shower" with his focus on melody and use of one instrument group to carry the melody. Beethoven plays more with melody. giving multiple instrument groups bits and pieces of the melody and playing with audience expectations. Beethoven also emphasizes his transitional areas over his thematic areas.
I'm curious about how the public's taste for symphonies developed over the 18th century. As a member of the information age, it's hard to imagine a time when classical music was so inaccessible for the majority of the people so I'm interested in hearing how it started to "open up" during the 19th century.