Anton Bruckner

Taxes wrote:

I love both Bruckner and Bach, how about that? Bruckner's ostinato like figures are certainly one of the defining feature in his style, and I personally find it very interesting; among others, it makes for a nice contrast with his forward-looking harmonies.

View Profile | Leave Taxes a shout

moon_musick wrote:

actually, bruckner is far less boring than bach to me. it seems no other composer is as overhyped as bach. surely there's much historical relevance, as to the development of the composition forms and techniques and so on, and i see why his pieces may be appealing to some, but he certainly was no ultimate master praised by the masses and scholars alike. i'm 1/3 through the haenssler edition box and there were few pieces i really enjoyed, especially early cantatas seem like a total pointlessness. i can understand why people like him (my girlfriend does) but i'm really tired of people who compare every composer to him, even those entirely different, like schoenberg or mahler. and while i still prefer mahler and wagner, imo bruckner's repetitiveness is nowhere near the dullness of some pieces by bach.

View Profile | Leave moon_musick a shout

CrazyBucket wrote:

http://www.last.fm/group/Anton+Bruckner

View Profile | Leave CrazyBucket a shout

AnneChovie wrote:

Sometimes his music irritates me in a way no other composers music can. Not even Prokofiev. He seems at times almost incompetent. I am not trying to be mean, really. A lot of his music is very beautiful, and there are works (2nd symphony, the Motets), and bits of his works, that I really do like a lot, but sometimes he gets these moronic loud galloping repeated figures going… somehow Wagner can pull that off, sometimes Bruckner just really doesn’t pull it off. And his defenders tell me “Oh, he was an organist” What the bloody hell does that mean? And wasn’t Bach an organist also? No one ever needs to defend Bach’s music.

View Profile | Leave AnneChovie a shout

Gamester wrote:

Hey! Care to join the new "Classical and Romantic Music" group! Check it out and join if you like! :o)

View Profile | Leave Gamester a shout

MetalManni wrote:

Symphony No. 6, 1st movement FTW!

View Profile | Leave MetalManni a shout

Conservationist wrote:

Bruckner's attitude reminds me of Schopenhauer: seeking quietude through intense realization. Mahler is more neurotic, dramatic.

View Profile | Leave Conservationist a shout

Taxes wrote:

Very interesting article indeed, and remarkably well balanced too, I would have thought that in the context when it was written, that he would have put more emphasis on the similarities between the two. 1940 is still a while before both Bruckner and Mahler reached the peak of popularity that we can see today (and this especially true in the latter case), seems to me that in such a case it would have been very tempting to exaggerate the points of agreement between those two then negliged composers.

View Profile | Leave Taxes a shout

Taxes wrote:

I agree with that, that's probably something that comes from the respective personalities of the two composers. Walter says something in the same vein when he mentions that "at bottom Bruckner's spirit was repose, Mahler's unrest." which he follows with the also very accurate: "Bruckner's musical message stems from the sphere of the saints; in Mahler speaks the impassioned prophet.". So I think that this "social" dimension to Mahler's music in contrast to Bruckner's more introspective character is something that he understood fully.

View Profile | Leave Taxes a shout

zunari wrote:

He died virgin

View Profile | Leave zunari a shout

CreamCat wrote:

Interesting article, Taxes. Although Mahler and Bruckner have undeniable similarities, there is one fundemental difference, I think. Bruckner is a much more "existential" composer in the sense that his music deals with existence itself. At least in his symphonies, there's no room for other persons than the listener. It's you left alone with the mountains and the valleys - while you search for any proof that you actually exist in a psychological sense. Mahler was a much more "social" composer. His music could only exist in between human relations.

View Profile | Leave CreamCat a shout

Taxes wrote:

Some interesting stuff here http://www.uv.es/~calaforr/walter.html, the famous Bruno Walter essay on the nature of Bruckner and Mahler. It's nice to see him note the parenting between Schubert and the two later composers, and unsurprisingly perhaps, his Bruckner Seventh is some of the most Schubertian non Schubert that I've heard. Holy fucking walls of text though, when will you silly German speaking people ever learn? :o

View Profile | Leave Taxes a shout

CreamCat wrote:

Vienna...it's all about cake and hatred.

View Profile | Leave CreamCat a shout

ArousedNinja wrote:

Ok, good. Hug accepted. Also, most of my friends who like to irrationally hate on Bruckner, like me, admit that he was an excellent composer. I don't know, people from Vienna feel entitled to hate on him.

View Profile | Leave ArousedNinja a shout

CreamCat wrote:

ArousedNinja: Believe it or not, I wasn't too serious myself with that comment. *hug*

View Profile | Leave CreamCat a shout

ArousedNinja wrote:

People who are in serious need of a corkscrew.

View Profile | Leave ArousedNinja a shout

Taxes wrote:

No but seriously, what kind of twisted person would someone have to be to dislike something like the Seventh?!

View Profile | Leave Taxes a shout

ArousedNinja wrote:

And CreamFreud, -10 points for those hasty assumptions. I am actually objective enough to appreciate Bruckner's music, and I have listened to his symphonies and 'understood' them. I don't like Bruckner for shallow reasons, and even if I didn't, I'd pretend I do anyway, just to get reactions like yours. But you can 'learn' me any time.

View Profile | Leave ArousedNinja a shout