Who Is the Greatest of Them All?
The Times‘ music critic, Anthony Tommasini, as many undoubtedly know, has been embarked over the past two weeks in a quixotic, but intriguing effort to select the ten greatest classical music composers. He has announced his Oscar choices here. Along the way Tommasini has made a number of insightful comments, in articles, videos, and blog posts, on the composers he has considered. Interestingly, he suggests that it would have been easier to name the top five or the top twenty than to struggle with the limitations of ten.
It will come as no surprise that Bach tops the list. Tommasini writes:
My top spot goes to Bach, for his matchless combination of masterly musical engineering (as one reader put it) and profound expressivity. Since writing about Bach in the first article of this series I have been thinking more about the perception that he was considered old-fashioned in his day. Haydn was 18 when Bach died, in 1750, and Classicism was stirring. Bach was surely aware of the new trends. Yet he reacted by digging deeper into his way of doing things. In his austerely beautiful “Art of Fugue,” left incomplete at his death, Bach reduced complex counterpoint to its bare essentials, not even indicating the instrument (or instruments) for which these works were composed.
On his own terms he could be plenty modern. Though Bach never wrote an opera, he demonstrated visceral flair for drama in his sacred choral works, as in the crowd scenes in the Passions where people cry out with chilling vehemence for Jesus to be crucified. In keyboard works like the Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue, Bach anticipated the rhapsodic Romantic fervor of Liszt, even Rachmaninoff. And as I tried to show in the first video for this project, through his chorales alone Bach explored the far reaches of tonal harmony.
To my considerable delight Giuseppe Verdi ranked eighth on the list. and, of all the comments that I read, here is the one that most warmed my Italianate heart:
Verdi should not be blamed for his own popularity nor tainted by the excessive devotion of the most fanatical opera buffs. Those who dispute the sophistication of his craft don’t know what they’re talking about.
Let me defer to a rather authoritative voice, that of Stravinsky. In his book “Poetics of Music,” Stravinsky challenges the assertion that the early Verdi works, steeped in the traditions of Italian opera and thick with oom-pah-pah arias, are somehow negligible, and that only with the more experimental operas of his later years did Verdi reach his potential.
“I know that I am going counter to the general opinion that sees Verdi’s best work in the deterioration of the genius that gave us ‘Rigoletto,’ ‘Il Trovatore,’ ‘Aida’ and ‘La Traviata,’ ” Stravinsky wrote. But, he added, “I maintain that there is more substance and true invention in the aria ‘La donna è mobile,’ for example, in which this elite saw nothing but deplorable facility, than in the rhetoric and vociferations of the ‘Ring.’ ”
I disagree with Stravinsky about Wagner’s “Ring” cycle. But the elite he was referring to were his fellow composers, and Stravinsky’s astute defense of Verdi shook up contemporary music circles.
Viva Verdi!
He seems to have a real predilection for opera, which probably explains what I think is the only real surprise on his list, Verdi (so I’d say that you focused in on the most interesting entry). The only other surprise (a pleasant one) was Debussy’s high ranking.
Arturo Toscanini also thought that Verdi was one of the greatest, or so I”ve read.
Debussy is like cotton candy. Looks bigger than it really is.
Let Karl Barth have the final word: In heaven, the angels play Bach before the throne of God; off duty, they play Mozart.
Larry,
yes, indeed; but in the shower they belt out Verdi arias!
Top 10 list is a gimmick to sell books, papers, cds, tv shows, etc. There are always suckers for them. We’ll never rid of them, though I wish their makers could at least list 10 things without ranking them. But that wouldn’t sell as much, would it?
That said, Tommasini misses a chance to provoke serious thinking. It’s entirely predictable that Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven make up the top 3 of his list. The names could be placed in a different order and few people would complain. A parallel is ranking US presidents: Washington, Lincoln, and FDR are almost always in the top 3.
The difference, however, is that there are solid criteria behind presidential rankings (e.g., a major crisis and how a president dealt with it). It’s lots more subjective in music, and this is where Tommasini misses his chance. He doesn’t even let known what his criteria are. Or perhaps he’d discussed them elsewhere but doesn’t give a summary here. The lone criterion I spot is not to offend any major musical country. “There must be a French: ah, Debussy.” “What’s about the Russians? Okay dokay, Stravinsky.”
With one exception, his choices are generally safe. The safe choice for the last spot would have been Mahler, the culmination of the Romantic symphony. But Bartok over Mahler, Handel, or Schoeberg? At last he succeeds in generating some mild controversy.
It’s strange that such an unmusical language as German would be associated with so many musical geniuses. Perhaps there’s a compensation mechanism at work.
I remember an essay by the British historian and journalist Paul Johnson which attempted to rank the European nations in a variety of cultural categories. England was tops in drama, Italy in opera, Russia and England in the novel, Germany in philosophy and symphonic music, etc. But he concluded that France, though rarely the clear leader in any category, was usually a solid second or third and for overall consistency and breadth that nation’s culture became his favored choice. Of course we can pick and choose but if I had to choose one culture I think I would agree with Johnson.
Dante hears the Te Deum sung in Latin in Purgatory but in Paradise the angels more often sing in Italian and so he hears “Dio laudamo” (Par 112-14). The lesson I draw is to learn French (and maybe German) for this life, Latin for Purgatory, and Italian for Paradise. I assume t’ll be all rock and roll in Hell so there’s no need for any language skills.
That’s Par XXIV, 112-14.
In the articles leading up to this one Tommasini did give some reasons for certain choices. Debussy and several others were chosen, among other reasons, for their influence. But ISTM that that is a judgment about *other musicians* music, not that of the influencer. I’d have stayed with intrinsic qualities in rating them, such as having every single note count. Bach and Chopin are masters of that, I think, even though in other ways they’re very, very different.
Patrick, German is not an unmusical language – it just needs to be sung . . . viz., Fidelio, lieder by Schubert, Mahler, Schumann, Wolff, Bach cantatas. I will stipulate that Wagner is a strong counter-argument.
Disappointed Janacek (greatest 20th century opera composer by far) didn’t get a spot or even an honorable mention. The mittel-european lobby needs to hire someone to cover the NYT.
Pssshhh… People talking smack on Debussy and its the abortion threads that get 8 million posts. I got your outrage right here, people!
James Englert is disappointed that Janacek didn’t get a spot. My own regret is that Anton Bruckner didn’t. Bruckner has become for me a spiritual companion on the journey. I find the third movement of his unfinished 9th symphony both wrenching and, at last, reconciled. He dedicated the symphony: “dem lieben Gott”
Bravo, Roberto! An impossible task, to be sure!
I have a little momento plaque that tells me Bach gave us God’s Love, Beethoven gave us God’s fire, and Mozart gave us God’s humor.
To be limited to 10 in a world where so many extraordinary composers have shared their gifts with us… you have chosen well.
I suppose that Charles Valentin Alkan has no hopes for making a list as stellar as yours, and that ‘Funeral March for a Pappagallo’ will continue to rest in obscurity, brought out only at elitist musical gatherings to share the limelight with Florence Foster Jenkins et al.
I’ve advocated Schubert publicly in the past, but … I have to say I’m surprised he comes in as high as #4. I also would rather see Prokofiev than Stravinsky on the list, and (apostacy warning) prefer Puccini to Verdi. (I also prefer Bizet – and I have to say that the French are underrepresented on the list if Debussy is the only one to crack it – although admittedly I’m not sure who I’d kick off the list to make room for someone like Bizet or Ravel.)
My experience is that Haydn is played in more symphonic concert programs than any other composer. It’s not clear to me whether or not he ultimately made the Top 10 but I might have rated him as high as #4.
I don’t think being an egomaniac, an anti-Semite or a jerk, or other personality flaws a composer may possess, are valid criteria for judging art. The work should be separable from the person who produced it.
Bach Mozart, Beethoven Schubert, Debussy, Stravinski, Brahms, Verdi Wagner, Bartok
Agree that German is an extremely musical language — in verse and song, not on the streets.
Debussy’s Pelleas is to my mind the supreme masterpiece of French music.
No mention of Gabriel Faure? Edward Elgar? Gustav Mahler?
Britten is a whole world — of course as with Debussy and the great Verdi it is hard to differentiate the strictly musical from the literary and dramatic merits.
Haydn should be on the list. And if we could fuse Schoenberg-Berg-Webern as Simon Rattle did in an amazing Prom last September they would knock out Stravinski or Bartok.
Bizet’s greatness is surely more in the dramatic power of Carmen and its unforgettable heroine (commemorated as I lately saw by a statue outside the bullring in Seville, which is just across from the Tobacco Factory of Act I and the Triana of Act II — small world). I went to a flamenco show and they did a mini-Carmen using Bizet’s music (the Spanish seem excessively grateful to foreign admirers — the figure most prominently venerated in the Alhambra is Washington Irving, and the Hotel Victoria in Ronda has a statue of its valued guest Rilke). Musically, Bizet did not make any dent in the development of the art (a criterion by which only Verdi on the list might be vulnerable).
Fascinating list. I think I’d have given the nod to to Mozart over Beethoven on the basis of opera, tho having recently heard the extraordinary Till Fellner do the last three Beethoven sonatas (ops. 109-11) I’m not so sure. And though neither Mahler nor Bruckner makes the list, if I had to choose, I’d probably pick Mahler over Bruckner, aided by M’s vocal writing, esp. Das Lied von der Erde (I’ve never been as moved by Bruckner’s masses as I should be). Wish I could enjoy Debussy and Pelleas more. Many years ago my mother, dragged to Pelleas by my father, said that the line that summed up best her feeling about the opera was Melisande’s statement: “je ne suis pas heureuse ici.”
I wonder if a similar list, drawn up a century ago, might not have put Wagner near, if not at, the top, given the adulation given him back then by so many people. Bruckner dedicated not only a symphony to God, but also one to Wagner. Me, I think he’s lucky to be on Tommasini’s list at all.
Nicholas,
you are correct, of course, that Bruckner dedicated a symphony to Wagner, and even engaged in “hyperdulia” in his regard. Yet he reserved “latria” for God alone: Soli Deo Gloria!
I also appreciate Bruckner’s motets. Do you know them? and his “Te Deum” is splendid.
I envy your having heard Fellner, who, from all reports, is indeed “extraordinary.” I recently purchased his recording of the Schumann concerto.
Finally, I would tend to place Mozart second (as do the angels). I found this quote from Rossini (no angel he!): “As a student, Rossini was extremely interested in the works of Mozart and Haydn. In later years he would refer to Mozart as “the admiration of my youth, the desperation of my mature years, the consolation of my old age.”
Beethoven’s 5th, so simple a 3 year old can master it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0REJ-lCGiKU
Wow, Jonathan could revolutionize conducting — he is musical to the core, like those stunning Chinese prodigies.
I didn’t have any complaint about the top five — as between Mozart and Beethoven, I thought Tommasini’s take was particularly interesting — that he sat through a program comprised of late 19th century and 20th century works in the first half, and Beethoven played by Serkin in the second, and was struck by how Beethoven still sounded more radical and fresh than the later composers. This has always been my feeling as well — Yes, Mozart did opera too, and brought what I think is a joyful Enlightenment quality of the sheer possibilities of life to his operas in particular — but if you looked at Beethoven work by work, I think you would have to conclude that his greatest simply set the tone and standard by which all subsequent classical music was judged (and rarely matches). If Schubert had lived longer, I expect he might have challenged Beethoven’s rank. I listen to Winterreise over and over again and never tire of it.
The “bottom” five — I might have included Mahler over Verdi, or considered Verdi and Wagner to be flip sides of the same opera coin (which is kind of how Tommasini looked at them). If *I* had to include another romantic, it would have been Tchaikovsky — there were NO Russians besides Stravinsky!
As for additional French composers — I admit to a real preference for French music but also admit that there are probably no French composers who claim the breadth and stature or influence Debussy did.
In addition to Mahler and Tchaikovsky and Bruckner and Janacek and Prokofiev, Tommasini noted that not many had made the case for Britten — I would! I think Britten is a fantastic 20th century composer who has worked his way back into the mainstream over the last 20 years.
Yes, the Bruckner Te Deum is a wonderful piece (borrowing, incidentally, from his 7th — or is the other way round? I don’t know the chronology).
About the Enlightenment quality of Mozart’s operas: there’s a wonderful, wonderful book on the subject. Nicholas Till (no relation to Till Fellner, presumably) Mozart and the Enlightenment: Truth, Beauty and Virtue in Mozart’s operas (Oxford). Among other things, as I remember, Till does a wonderful job situating Mozart, and his operas in particular, in the context of the Catholic Enlightenment of late 18th century Austria (and thus pointing out that there were Enlightenments other than French and English). And I gather from the program notes of two recent (and splendid) DVDs I have (Figaro and Cosi. both from Covent Garden) that Nicholas Hytner, the director, draws heavily on Till’s insights.
Barbara, I am very appreciative of Britten’s work, and put his operas behind only Janacek in the last century. Britten wrote many great songs and folksong arrangements, which are worth seeking out, continuing the work of Vaughn Williams (under-appreciated) and other British song composers. There is a very fine album by Ian Bostridge and Julius Drake called The English Songbook, with ten or so composers represented.
And I’m sure that among the Winterreise recordings you listen to is the one with Britten and Peter Pears.
I thought Dvorak might at least rate an honorable mention, but can’t seen to find him listed even in the Times article comments thread (I could well have missed such a reference though).
Regarding Shostakovich, I recently heard a live performance of the ‘Leningrad’ Seventh by the San Francisco Symphony. I now understand why the Soviet Army was feared for its heavy artillery.
…and why Shostakovich was parodied in Bartok’s “Concerto for Orchestra”.
Antonio,
I share your fondness for Dvorak and would certainly place him in my top 20.
I misspoke above when I said I had a CD of Fellner playing the Schumann concerto, I see it is by Leif Ove Andsnes — also a fine pianist.
Apropos only of memorable experiences. I recently listened to Act 4 of Aida in the von Karajan recording. He brings out splendidly the power of Verdi’s orchestration. And though Bergonzi is elegant, and Tebaldi affecting; Simionato belts it out of the park!
After the big three – with Bach on top, of course – I found Tommasini’s list absurd in the extreme and based essentially on non-musical criteria. How Handel and Haydn could possibly be cut is unfathomable – and in favor of Debussy, Stravinsky, Bartok, Brahms, and Wagner! Good grief! As for Handel, not only is his choral music unsurpassed, even by Bach, for its variety and euphony; not only is he one of the three supreme melodists (the others being Mozart and Schubert) and three supreme dramatists (with only Mozart and Verdi his peers), unparalleled as a creator of character; but he is, among all composers, the greatest humanist, whose sympathy for human experience in the breadth of its highs, lows, and in-betweens is unrivaled in the history of music. I grant Tommasini Verdi, of course, but not the almost blasphemous idea that he and Wagner are”tied as composers” – although such confusion is probably only to be expected from someone who laments not including his “beloved Puccini”.