Sergi Prokofiev
Orchestral Suite
'Love for Three Oranges' (1919)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0AkO...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daVtV...eature=related
Printable View
Sergi Prokofiev
Orchestral Suite
'Love for Three Oranges' (1919)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0AkO...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daVtV...eature=related
Why let your obvious political talent be wasted along with your excellent musicology broths Robert?Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnx2CpKtnDk
:lol:
Yanni,
The only waste would be to divert our attention from the subject of this thread which is, as you know, 'The Manufacture of Mozart'. Perhaps THERE'S the politics, Yanni ? But 200 years of obfuscation, invention and fiction are not removed in a day, or even a few days, are they Yanni ?
Some music from the kind hearted, generous, open minded and free spirited people of Greece -
Opa ! Opa ! The friendly people of Greece.
Greek Dance Mix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxqEQOb5Azs
Quote:
Originally Posted by yanni
The Black and White Mozart Show.
(Le Chevalier de Saint George, the "Black Mozart", a pupil of "Gossec" as well).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvSYa...eature=related
Alternatively, here is an article on Rousseau and his influence on theology by one of the most prominent 20th cent theologists, Karl Barth:
http://intellectusfidei.blogspot.com...-rousseau.html
Ah, yes ! And the Caribbean islands were disputed by both France and Britain in the 18th century. (Including Guadeloupe where St. George came from). From 1759 to 1763 that island was in the hands of the British colonialists (i.e. during the time of St George's early childhood). The island finally ending up in the hands of the French. Yet another example of the East India Companies and their role in the history of music. St. George's father was in fact an estate holder on the island of Gaudeloupe.
It's surprising how people say, 'Ah, but that is Mozart's style. When, in fact, the style we know as 'Mozart' belonged to numerous composers although they and their music are virtually unknown today.
As for Gossec, well, (cough, cough !) he was involved in the careers of both St Germain and Mozart. Indeed, the 'Mozart Requiem' is built on the design of Gossec. And Gossec (like so many of the first professors of the Paris Conservatory of Music) had a role in the music of Mozart, and even of Beethoven.
Chevalier de St George. Chevalier Mozart. etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yanni
Yes, Karl Barth is noted for his writings on Mozart. As for theology, I always think the Reformation can be compared to a great train that has passed through a now derelict station. We were either on that train or we were not. (I am glad many were). Besides, theology is what man thinks about God while the Bible is what God thinks about man. One is static while the other is dynamic. And which, to me, exposes the silliness of dogmatic conservatistism. There is a season for everything. As for the others, they are still analysing the platform and the ticket office !
Quote:
Originally Posted by yanni
What would Dalai Lama have to say on this matter, I wonder!
:angel:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
'Le Nozze di Figaro'
English Baroque and Soloists
Gardiner
Cosa Sento
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43Tyq...eature=related
As a philosophy Buddhism is interesting. But it is not and never has been a religion. Has it ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by yanni
Well, Buddha certainly was a philosophe honest and enlightened enough to avoid preaching his doctrines pretending to be God himself speaking.
And buddhists are still kind enough not to laugh openly at those who do preach such primitive notions.
:smilielol5: (I am not a buddhist)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Yes, that's right.
Meanwhile, back at the manufacture of Mozart.....
Rgds
Quote:
Originally Posted by yanni
Further to your valuable continuous input, Robert, the Mozart manufacture subject has closed successfully.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
For our mutual benefit therefore I suggest we concentrate hereafter on evaluating the new music of last opera hit, Gluck's Le Cinesi (revised), staged simultaneously in Peking, New York and Athens as from December last and still continuing with great success.
Maestro's Sax selection of primadona, Mme Papandreckulla from Transylvania , has truly enchanted the Peking audience in particular. At a discount of about 10%, tickets worth some 50 billion US dollars (equivalent) have already been sold there.
An amazing performance!
:dupe:
Cheers!
OK Yanni,
Thanks for your input. And for that of others.
Ralph Vaughan Williams
'The Lark Ascending'
(Excerpt)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-J39...eature=related
- conclusion -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5HhL...eature=related
If you don't mind, I would rather "end Mozart" with oboe:
How about this little piece by youknowwho-"Cimarosa" aka "Casanova" (aka "Giuseppe Maria Diodatti" too. For his detailed biography see http://www.classicsonline.com/compos...Maria_Diodati/):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHv74dxSYSU
Yanni,
Thank you for the Cimarosa.
Thank you for this view of yours. In an increasingly complicated world we are left with simplicity.
Cantata 62
Opening
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWwZN...eature=related
What can be simpler for a "manufactured music" researcher than reducing the late 18th opera composers to their arithmetic minimum?
:smile5:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Yanni,
Yesterday I made the following note -
'If the Mozart of convention was to be expressed in terms of mathematical probability (i.e. the chance of a musical 'genius' being born, composing hundreds of masterpieces etc). and of him living the eventful but short life which is attributed to him by convention we would be reduced to rows of zeros against those things occurring. But no sooner are we convinced of their reality than we describe them as 'miraculous'. This miracle, however, is cancelled out within moments by a stone equally sharp as itself, by us realising that a body of surviving documents (letters, testimonies, anecdotes, reports, diaries and musical manuscripts) so exhaustive in content, so chronologically relevant but so improbable in having survived has survived - forcing us to describe their own survival as at least equally miraculous and improbable. Since neither the 'genius' of Mozart nor these surviving writings in praise of his life and career find any equivalent in the entire body of western musicological literature. And so not one but a DOUBLE miracle confronts us, having, by the sheer scale of their musical and biographical claims, and by the survival of all these manuscripts, created a paradigm - which seldom, if ever, is called in to real question or criticism. And, as for the origin of these testimonies and of these manuscripts, (whether biased, exaggerated or fraudulent), we simply never ask'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yanni
You'll never manage to "uncover" Mozart while keeping Cocchi's "secret" intact.
:smile5:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Yanni,
It must be destiny, or fate, or my ignorance (and that of everyone else) which allows you exclusively the privilege of revealing 'Cocchi's Secret'.
As for myself, I am happy to know that all things that are hidden can be and will be revealed in the fullness of time.
Regards
Quote:
Originally Posted by yanni
Musical history website 'Musical Revisionism' still under construction over the next few weeks. But here, at least, is the construction site -
http://www.musicalrevisionism.info/
LOL !
Not at all:
Think of yourself as the first ever daring musicologist who, looking for Mozart's manufacturer in the stars above, fell accidentaly in the stale pond of history and coudn't get out fast enough.
I never really expected you to question my last revelations on "Cimarosa" and "Diodatti" as the next aliases of Gioachino Cocchi following "Casanova".
:bday_2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Yanni,
In my opinion this subject of W.A. Mozart consists of two parts. The first showing why he, Mozart of Salzburg, was not (and could not have been) the composer of most of the works attributed to him. That he was not a 'musical genius', in fact. And the second to show how his huge status, which has for so long come to dominate what we are taught and believe on this period of musical history, was concocted. To obtain control, in fact, of musicology. As pantheons of our culture tend to do. A project which, you may agree, has been hugely successful if able to be proved true.
It has not been my aim to replace one musical idol with another. Since that would be to miss the point.
As for Giachino Cocchi, I will always and gladly learn from you. But you wish to attribute to him, and him exclusively, the musical works of more composers than makes sense to me. And this is simply not right. To me, Cocchi was part of a musical network of real importance in the Mozart story, for sure. An important part, for sure. But there are lives and careers as important as his own in this story.
As for questioning your revelations on Cimarosa, let them be accompanied by some solid evidence and they will certainly be worthy of being described by me too in that way.
Yanni, you will of course be welcome to the new website I'm trying to make on 'Musical Revisionism'.
Regards
p.s. Whose 'birthday' are you refering to in your last post ?
If Cocchi wanted to "obtain control of Musicology", as you say, then the burden to explain why current musicology ignores him (and whether he plus aliases wrote their own music or not) falls on you alone.
As for "Cimarosa" and "Casanova", his last music aliases:
Having checked their few solid biographic-travel data in my mastertimeline I am well satisfied that this is so and that, in what concerns him, musicology still is a world wide conspiracy bordering opera buffa: I don't need or care convince anybody!
You see, only I have a name and an explanation for the myths "Le comte de Saint Germain", "The opera phantom" and "Casanova".
His political influence and diplomatic skill allowed him not just to survive but to keep on staging his operas in Austria and lower Italy till 1800 or so to then stage his next death (as Cimarosa).
Tell your italian friends it's no use hiding their heads in the sand: It's not "in" anymore to mimick their french, german and brit colleagues.
"Their" music is his alone!
Want to prove it? Go ahead (and you are equally wellcome to disprove it ofcourse)!
Best of luck with your new site.
BTW "Birthday" refers to your baptism in my pond!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Yanni,
Your 'quotes' are departing from reality. Search this thread. I've never said that Cocchi wanted to "obtain control of Musicology". Have I ? No, not once. In fact I've repeatedly said he, Cocchi was part of a network of composers. I have even suggested that diplomats do not write operas and that children do not write piano concertos. Have I ever said Cocchi wanted to obtain control of Musicology ? No, not once ! So, thanks attributing the 'quote' to me but you must surely agree I've never said this in the first place. Why are you 'quoting' me on what I've never once said ?? And, until you can show us differently -
Cimarosa died in 1801.
Cocchi died in 1796.
Myslivececk died in 1781.
Rousseau died in 1778.
Baron Grimm died in 1807.
etc etc.
The problems are mounting for you Yanni. Unless you can link the musical and non-musical careers of all these individuals and can provide proofs of them being aliases of the same person I'm not sure what to advise. And the same is true of the 'stage managed' death of Cimarosa. Since, according to you, the works of Myslivecek and of Cimarosa are works of the same person. Of a diplomat, you say ? Not forgetting, of course, symphonies, sonatas, keyboard music and everything else.
Well, you have been generous in allowing me membership of your 'pond'. I prefer to think that G. Cocchi was G. Cocchi, that Myslivecek was Myslivececk, that Rousseau was Rousseau, that Baron Grimm was Baron Grimm, and that all of these were members of a network that included MANY others besides them. Of a fraternity, in fact. Until I see evidence to the contrary that is what I believe and will continue to believe. Since the evidence clearly indicates this. And none contradicts it.
In reply to the rhetorical question of why musicology 'ignores' G. Cocchi I see no evidence of it doing so. As for myself, I've not ignored him - for weeks. He was, in my view, a composer. But you think differently. You credit him with the careers of at least 5 men. Besides being a diplomat. And I am saying this is simply not true.
Regards
Cocchi created the Mozart myth (to separate and conceal his music personae from his others aliases) and everybody then took off a piece of his music as their own to then establish their "national" musics.
Your "evidence" is as fictionary as his other "myths".
Live with that if you so chose and good luck!
Thanks for your opinion.
Your evidence is 'thinner than a soup made from the shadow of a chicken' !
Regards
Robert
Quote:
Originally Posted by yanni
You have accomplished your mission bravely, Robert, and your "two Nissen" invention almost succeeded.
Re my evidence being thin, Google statistics prove otherwise.
Enjoy your broth!
Yanni,
Paul Wranitsky (and his brother Anton Wranitsky) were both composers of Mozart's time. They too are musical 'aliases' of G. Cocchi, I suppose ? And how about Vanhal, Cartellieri, Sarti, Salieri, and literally dozens of others ? They too are aliases of 'G. Cocchi', right ?
Really, I refuse to replace one fiction with another when the music speaks for itself, this repeatedly confirmed by biographical and other information which rarely if ever features in Mozart publications.
Cocchi deserves a place. But not the one you see determined to invent for him. And, just to correct the record, I certainly did not invent the 'Two Nissen Theory'. But this fact too I have repeatedly said here on this thread. As you know. (Why do you insist on attributing to me things I have never said ? It robs you of the credit you deserve).
Anyway, you are entitled to your views and me to mine. Let others decide for themselves.
Regards
Robert Newman
Quote:
Originally Posted by yanni
As for the 'two Nissen' theory I never invented it. On this thread you can see what I said about it no less than 5 times ! As usual you're 'inventing' aren't you Yanni ? Two days in a row. First 'quoting' things I never said and now crediting me with a theory I never invented ! It's poor stuff Yanni and it does your credibility no good.
Why not be fair and honest ?
But it's your choice.
Regards
Salieri was certainly a diffferent person and as for the others, I have had no grounds to check them as possible aliases of Cocchi (who, as Comte de Saint Germain, is said to have used a thousand aliases).
An associate-correspondent of yours invented the two Nissens, as you have admitted, but you never bothered to check the truth of his "story". You are thus,as a declared Mozart buster, equally or more responsible for circulating this fiction.
You and anybody else may decide as they please on the matter, in the meantime google statistics favour my revelations only.
Good luck with your myths!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Having just checked and included in my mastertimeline Wranitsky's 1784-1790 data (from http://www.wranitzky.com/biography.htm) , I can now confirm that he too is another alias of Augustin Henri Cochin-Melchior Grimm-Cluck-Muslivecek-Mirabeau-Chastellux-Casanova-abbe Raynal-abbe Galiani etc etc, ie Gioachino Cocchi.
Whoever wishes to confirm or dispute it, may repeat the excersise (for each and every alias as listed above. Gossec and Baron Bache may be included but there is no relevant reference to be found for them in my timeline for the specific period) at his leisure: All data are on the web (their deaths to be discounted as fictitious)!
My regards to all musicology "scholars"!
There are no serious biographic data on "Jean Baptiste Vanhal" but his works, his two or three operas in particular as well as his "story" , a myth, his few Vienna and Dresden appearances/disappearances, speak for themselves: Yes, he was another Cocchi alias as well!
Re Antonio Casimir Cartellieri (* 27. September 1772 in Danzig; † 2. September 1807 in Liebshausen, Böhmen) if his birth date is correct, he may well have been one of Cocchi's sons as his 1793 presence in Vienna and his 1796connections to prince Lobkowitz indicate. Sometime in 1795, Cartellieri is supposed to have taught music to Beethoven (his two or three year senior, Beethoven was baptised 17 December 1770) however, which rather spoils the "story": He was propably an alias of Cocchi as well!
The same* for Sarti http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Sarti!
Now tell me about the others "dozens" Robert!
Three cheers and a half for the science of Musicology!
*Possibly Cocchi's brother.
Yanni,
My suggestion is -
Why not study the life and music of the composer, G. Cocchi ?
In the meantime here is another important name in the Mozart story - no doubt yet another alias of your G. Cocchi, yes ? :smilewinkgrin:
'A. Rosetti'
Horn Concerto in E-flat major
(Murray C47): (c.1782)
I. Allegro moderato
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEw23...eature=related
Not forgetting -
J.M. Kraus
March
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwpzD...eature=related
(The relationship of this work by Kraus re-arranged in 1789 in Sweden of the March in 'Mozart's' Idomeneo of 8 years earlier is pure coincidence, of course ! And, the fact Kraus lived close to Mozart for months in Vienna - that too is pure coincidence. Like all the rest. LOL)
'W.A. Mozart' (actually J.M. Kraus) - Munich - January 1781
March
Idomeneo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys1wW9bXxVw
Honestly, Yanni, 'Mozart's' music is the product of MANY composers, arrangers, music editors etc.
And here is Cartellieri - the real composer of the 'Mozart' Clarinet Concerto (KV622)
Casimir Anton Cartellieri (1772-1807)
Concerto for 2 Clarinets
Adagio Pastorale
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6DVRzBsLbQ
Studying the story of G.Cocchi is what I have been doing for the better part of some five years now and as for Rosetti, his alias, he has been already discussed but, in obvious lack of names for your next dozen, you suddenly forgot all about it.
The "swedish Mozart" Kraus's work, his contacts with Gluck, padre Martini and Mozart, his selection of many wind instruments (flute, obeo, bassons, horns), his lost works and his two distinct periods (jesuit-lutheran) leave little doubt of his true identity (which practicaly vanishes when Swedens politics are examined in parallel to those of France at the time).
Of interest his choice to use himself another alias for a work of his, published 1787 in Paris, as Giuseppe Cambini- whose biography is less blessed with detail than "first national musician of Sweden's" Kraus.
:smile5:
Anyoneelse from your dozens?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Yanni,
My subject is Mozart and his bogus career. A career which used the input of MANY composers. As is indisputably correct.
But good luck on your Cocchi (whose musical achievements were far, far greater than those of any Mozart). He must have been a very, very busy composer/diplomat, yes ? It becomes ridiculous, in fact.
Regards
Go ahead, do your duty as a brit musicologist, prove me wrong by providing evidence to the contrary for any single one of my hero's aliases.
If my "Melchior Grimm" and "Rousseau" seem too difficult (in view of their high google stats) you may select any other.
What has become ridiculous in the meantime is your theory on Mozart's manufacture accompanied by (besides your two Nissens) a pile of bogus theories as to his "manufacturers" lacking any evidence whatsoever. (They collapsed of course during our discussion in this thread.)
Cocchi (and family), along with neoclassicism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassicism), taught the younger european nations of his time theater and music, that's a fact, and if you or anybody else have difficulty to digest it, well, milk of magnesia might help!
BTW Cocchi's excellent relations to Sweden were transferred somehow to the next french "Saint Germain", his nephew "Jean d'Anastasi"*, chevalier de l'ordre Wasa, "armenian" consul of Sweden and Norway to Egypt as from 1826, previously employed by the british consulate in Alex, a partner later of consul Henry Salt in collecting and trading antiquities, papyri in particular . He is known today as Caussin de Perceval jr but also signed as Cochini at the time as well. For more details see "Two works by Poe decoded" herein.
If magnesia doesn't help, call me for another recipy.
Hope you soon recover!
Antonios Emm. Kokkinis.
*Also referred to as Jean d'Anastaisi, Jean d'Athanasi, Giovanni or Johann d'Anastasi or D'Anastasy, Ivan Afanassiev, Jannis or Yanni etc.
Belzoni worked under his supervision. Cooperated with Champollion.
Thanks. Somehow I don't think any of us are profiting from this conversation any more. G. Cocchi has had more than enough our time.
Regards
Cheerio then!
''Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these''.
J.S. Bach
Cantata 11
Chorale Finale
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDWeTVbkft8