Hi there,
I'm a British writer/researcher on the life, career and reputation of W.A. Mozart (1756-1791) and am 15 years or so in to writing a highly controversial book on the subject. I'm based in London.
I am specially interested in the relationship between writers of Mozart's time with the Jesuit Order, since, it seems to me, 'Enlightenment' philosophers such as Voltaire and Rousseau (both hugely important to the Mozart story) were themselves strangely allied during their own lifetimes with the controlling aims of Jesuit Order, even beyond 1773. Indeed, the 'Englightenment' as a movement seems to have been a Jesuit-led strategy which flourished after the same Jesuit Order was officially annulled in 1773. So that the rise of what is generally called 'secularism' in the name of the 'Enlightenment' was very much controlled, orchestrated, and even defined by the deliberate rise of adoration for Rousseau and Voltaire (both of whom had close relationships to the Jesuits and to the fraternities which emerged after 1773). Mozart's relationship with the Encyclopaedists, Diderot, Grimm and others, D'Epinay and others are clear evidence of such a relationship. In 1778 Mozart's Paris patron during his stay there was the same Baron Grimm.
I am sure (and have much supporting evidence) that the musical career of Mozart was almost entirely manufactured, falsified, even from the time of his childhood onward by the fraternities of the Holy Roman Empire, this involving the supply to Mozart (even after his death in 1791) of music he never composed but which, being published and performed in his name as 'evidence of his genius', eventually, led to a Mozart-dominated musicology, the hijacking of historical reality, the destruction of musicology itself, and the control of what is taught and believed on music in this important period of musical history. The musical evidence (from manuscripts etc etc) is now very clear. And other researchers are increasingly agreeing with this view.
In my research over the past 15 years or so I have become more and more certain of all the above. Certain too that the secret fraternities of western Europe (such as the Rosicrucians, the Freemasons, the Illuminatists) have invented idols of their own, of which Mozart was one, so that they could, by controlling their mythical status in the academic world, shape and even define our 'education' far more than is generally realised.
Best wishes
It is not an easy thing to accept that our cultural education is largely nonsense. But this is truly the case with the history of music as far as Mozart is concerned. The sheer volume of evidence is now overwhelming. Mozart, 'genius of Salzburg' was really a musician of no great talent. His story begins long before his birth and his myth was being manufactured even decades after his death. By the elites who controlled culture during his own time and beyond it. The scale of corruption, the exaggerations and falsehoods that form part of 'Mozart studies' are so many that it took years to appreciate they were part of a cultural Counter-Reformation that was begun long, long before Mozart's time.
In fact, the Jesuit Order, created a few years before the Council of Trent in the 16th century, rose to become the schoolmasters of Catholic Europe, utterly dominating education, censorship, etc. It was within this context that the 'Counter Reformation' began. A Counter Reformation which included control of publishing, even of art and culture itself.
With growing protests against Jesuit domination (coming even from within the Catholic Church itself) it was clear by the early 18th century that the days of their control were numbered. The mass of complaints against the quality of their education, their corruption in politics and in other areas, were so many in Portugal, France, Germany and elsewhere that their explusion from those countries was certain. Starting with Portugal, then France, and finally culminating with their outright ban by the Papacy in 1773. But not before they had set in motion a new strategy of educational control. The 'Enlightenment' (of which their employees, Voltaire and Rousseau were the two foundations). This entirely shifting the emphasis of learning and literature across most of Europe. The life and career of Mozart are to be understood in this context. Mozart's father (himself Jesuit educated) is only one of the dozens of links which lead to the inescapable conclusion that Mozart's career was almost entirely manufactured. He was no musical genius and wrote, at most, half a dozen works of his own. These on no great musical value. The truth hidden, buried under the propaganda.
The truth is dozens of early 'Mozart' works are not his. That's a plain fact. A fact recognised (grudgingly) in textbook after textbook. But the lies and exaggerations continued. Even the operas 'Le Nozze di Figaro' (1786), 'Don Giovanni' and the 'Magic Flute' are not by Mozart. In fact, Figaro is a hastily made arrangement of a work first written to a German text by others the year before as we can see if we actually examine the manuscript today held at the National Library in Vienna. A work arranged by Mozart's colleague Lorenzo da Ponte and staged in Mozart's name in Vienna that year. But not a work by Mozart. Mozart was a musical fantasy created by those who, in the name of 'Vienna, city of music' sought to control musicology, and they did so. Using the talents of composers whose names are today hardly known. Vienna hardly knew this man. It was all invented. He was the creation of fraternities of the late Holy Roman Empire. The Requiem, the Clarinet Concerto, the Piano Concertos, hundreds of symphonies, sonatas, and even operas are not by Mozart. And the lies continued to be told by publishers and propagandists even in to the earliest biographies.
For almost 200 years the science of musicology has been hijacked by those who now control the 'music industry'. An industry which never questions the assumptions on which the Mozart myth is based. The result has been the destruction of the science of musicology itself. A science first founded by the German JN Forkel. A science which warned against commerce taking over from art by its ruthless appeal to mass culture. (It was Forkel who first brought the attention of the musical world to the ignored works of J.S. Bach and which the Viennese were ignorant of, even in the late 18th century). Musicology, the study of music of high quality that is of value for music students, was overwhelmed by the rise of the cult of Mozart. And, today, despite his giant reputation of Mozart (together with that of Haydn and Beethoven - whose own stories are little known) the result is a generation of students who know virtually nothing of music by Mozart's own contemporaries. Dumbed down by the dominant myth of 'Amadeus'. A pack of lies foisted on innocent students of musical history.
We do not know if historical fact and a total revision of musical history by those preside over this, one of the great myths of western civilization. But one thing is sure. From a documentary point of view (i.e. after detailed study of the musical manuscripts themselves and many other areas of research) the Mozart domination of music is a grotesque distortion of reality which deserves to be exposed.
Have you heard of Vanhal ? Myslivececek ? Wranitsky ? These are only three of about 40 unknown composers who wrote the music today attributed to Mozart. The truth of which has been hidden, buried under mountains of half truths and foisted on students who know no better. The rest, as they say, is the mass media. The corporate fraud that is Mozart.
Regards
Reply With Quote
Shakespeare was an Italian of Jewish descent, Leonardo DaVinci was African, Michelangelo was a lesbian, albino, Inuit dwarf and the music of Mozart (and undoubtedly Haydn and Beethoven as well) was produced by a consortium of composers with the goal of inventing the German/Austrian "genius" to counter the Italian/Catholic domination of music (as if Bach, Handel, Telemann, and Gluck had not already achieved this
). The reality is that disputing such arguments are a waste of time... and most of us here are not that familiar with musicology and the history to counter the proofs presented as "facts"... nor do we have the time nor desire to verify such assertions... yet undoubtedly these same proofs can be easily shredded by the average first year student of musicology. I've seen the same conspiracy theory presented at any number of music discussion boards... and the same rapidly countered with facts to the contrary by those who do know their music history. The OP knows this is true which is why he is pathetically reduced to attempting to sell his wacked-out theories on an internet site devoted to literature rather than attempting to presenting the same in a serious gathering of musicologists.
Originally Posted by stlukesguild
