Mozart in English

Your answer, 'just increasing the problems', confirms my original position that you are in fact 'defining....your limits as narrow as it suits 'you' and your 'cover all other lies' subject!'!

You see, Mozart problematic (life details, music) is not exclusive but covers his associates/promoters/manufacturers and his contemporary and previous composers as well- they are all more problematic than M in fact-and unless they are also examined along with M, no clarity can be reached on 18th cent musicmasters.

So, go ahead and define your research limits as narrow as it suits 'you' and your 'cover all other lies' subject!

Yes, I reserve the right to define/limit myself to the subject of W.A. Mozart and the manufacture of his musical reputation. Which, when shown, illustrates that it is a case study of an issue that is far larger and which you already suspect yourself. Anything that is of relevance to illustrating this case study on Mozart is relevant here. What is not directly relevant is the failed idea that JS Bach was Handel, that Josef Haydn was Casanova and countless other examples of your speculations. This thread is on Mozart. As I have said no less than twenty different times on this thread. Mozart is an almost ideal case study to illustrate that the history of music of which we are familiar is largely nonsense. That is its value. Post something on Mozart and please learn to respect the subject of this thread. Thank You.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yanni

Your answer, 'just increasing the problems', confirms my original position that you are in fact 'defining....your limits as narrow as it suits 'you' and your 'cover all other lies' subject!'!

You see, Mozart problematic (life details, music) is not exclusive but covers his associates/promoters/manufacturers and his contemporary and previous composers as well- they are all more problematic than M in fact-and unless they are also examined along with M, no clarity can be reached on 18th cent musicmasters.

So, go ahead and define your research limits as narrow as it suits 'you' and your 'cover all other lies' subject!

---

As you have never managed to live up to your- online, in this forum-commitment to prove that JSBach was ever on record in a different place at any given time than GFHandel, my re 'failed idea' and 'other examples of speculations' seem solid enough, particularly when also listing already as #1 in some six million google hits (such as "Beethoven+Koch", or even "Beethoven +puzzle").

So, go ahead and define your research limits as narrow as it suits 'you' and your 'cover all other lies' subject!

Yanni,

Thank You.

I know what I am speaking about. And, perhaps more importantly, I know what is a diversion from it. (Intended or unintended). The Mozart of convention (the one we generally see and hear about) is the product of a belief system that is alien to most people. And which few suspect. But which has kidnapped the fair and open study of musical history almost since it first came to dominate the subject academically and culturally - replacing the fair and honest study of evidence with unquestioned fairy stories and myths. This was deliberate. It still is. And it's not confined to western music history. It is part of the myth making of western civilization. That is why this single case of Mozart and his career has to be presented slowly and why I cannot spend my life continually repeating that other subjects are of secondary importance.

Your posts are as welcome as others. In certain areas they may have value in their own right. But if they are not of obvious relevance to the main subject of Mozart I have no time or energy to keep reminding you of it.

Best wishes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yanni

As you have never managed to live up to your- online, in this forum-commitment to prove that JSBach was ever on record in a different place at any given time than GFHandel, my re 'failed idea' and 'other examples of speculations' seem solid enough, particularly when also listing already as #1 in some six million google hits (such as "Beethoven+Koch", or even "Beethoven +puzzle").

So, go ahead and define your research limits as narrow as it suits 'you' and your 'cover all other lies' subject!

---

Whatever you say!

So, go ahead and define your research limits as narrow as it suits 'you' and your 'cover all other lies' subject!

I already have. The flexibility of this thread allows me to repeat myself to Yanni twenty one times consecutively. With best wishes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yanni

Whatever you say!

So, go ahead and define your research limits as narrow as it suits 'you' and your 'cover all other lies' subject!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Musicology

I already have. The flexibility of this thread allows me to repeat myself to Yanni twenty one times consecutively. With best wishes.

---

All you do is repeat the same spiel. You don't put forward ANY evidence whatever and only allude to possible findings that may reveal discrepancies.

Pathetic effort for 15+ years work.

Patrick Bateman,

Thank you for another generous and complimentary post ! In my last I repeatedly advised you visit the Austrian National Library to examine the musical score used at the premiere of 'Le Nozze di Figaro' (1786) in Vienna and also refered to numerous other works of Mozart's last Vienna decade. You have also seen articles earlier on this thread on Mozart's early musical tours, and even on his faked musical exam for entrance to the Bologna Academy in Italy. Which you may read at some time. They may help.

Shall I post links to several articles already published on this thread ? Since your amnesia seems to be specially bad today, yes ? Or, shall we call it a specially severe return of 'Cognitive Dissonance' ? Mozart was virtually unknown in Vienna. Contrary to popular belief. So says all the actual evidence.

Here is one of the almost unknown and hugely talented men who helped make much of 'Mozart's' music ready for posthumous publication. In Bohemia. (Others elsewhere). Cartellieri in particular the true composer of the the 'Mozart' Clarinet Concerto (KV622). Cartellieri was briefly as famous as Beethoven in Vienna (the two men sharing a concert venue shortly after their arrival there). But I don't want to go too fast. He befriended Beethoven. And, in fact, the 'Eroica' Symphony was eventually dedicated to him.

As for your claim that Mozart's greatness can never be disputed (questioned), I think you have your answer. And will get more of the same if you keep reading (and listening).

Antonio Cartellieri (1772-1807)
Clarinet Concerto
Allegro

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwS3u...eature=related

Best wishes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick_Bateman

All you do is repeat the same spiel. You don't put forward ANY evidence whatever and only allude to possible findings that may reveal discrepancies.

Pathetic effort for 15+ years work.

---

Musicology, you meantion that there is no evidence that Mozart ever toured his gifts and gave concerts (even in his hometown)

This goes against myriad of eyewitness accounts including that of von Goethe.

Goethe mentions several tims that he saw Mozart perform in Frankfurt when the latter was 7. One of these instances was when he was comparing Mendelssohn - whom he also met when Mendelssohn was himself a child prodigy - the 12 year old musical whizz in 1821 to Mozart as a child.

Even a great literary figure like Goethe adored Mozart, having a particular penchant for Don Giovanni and lamented that Mozart never set Faust to music. Goethe was a director of a court theatre during his lifetime and I believe he is a far better judge of music and of Mozart than you or I.

His recollections refute your claims than Mozart never toured around Europe and also damage your vile interpretation of Mozart's operas being lousy.

Why can't you face the overwhelming facts and stop dwelling on very flimsy and scarce 'proof' you believe you have.

Patrick Bateman,

OK, can you provide us details of musical concerts given in Salzburg by W.A. Mozart at any time during his life ? Just one. Not much to ask, is it ? The answers never come from you, do they ? Because the truth is neither you nor anyone else in the entire history of Mozart studies can give us a single example of him performing music in Salzburg for an audience during his whole lifetime. That on top of the fact nobody is on record of teaching him composition, theory, or even playing keyboard. How is that for childhood 'genius' ? And certainly not a single concert given there during his childhood. How about these basic facts, for a start ? If I tell you my next door neighbour's cat is a part time pilot for British Airways, will you believe me ?

As for 'eyewitness' accounts you refer to the account of the 14 years old boy von Goethe in Frankfurt. Whose chief comment was that the boy Mozart wore a sword ! LOL. He (Goethe) did not care for what he actually heard. And Mozart complained at the row that was going on at the time. Because the truth is there was no 'concert' in Frankfurt. There was merely a group of local performers including trumpeters. And he says so. Nor are you aware of the fact that Goethe was claiming to have seen him when he (Goethe) was 14. At an inn. Where, as it just so happens, there were always town musicians playing - there in that Inn. The town musicians, in fact. But don't tell the children, will you ? Mozart was staying there at the time. This is the same J von Goethe who became a major member of the Illuminati. But that fact does not count, of course ! You can delete that fact also. I might mention numerous other members of the same Illuminati who were closely connected with Mozart's career although, of course, this will also mean nothing to you. Baron Van Swieten, for example, in Vienna. One of Mozart's major 'patrons'. The only 'patron' of Mozart's public concerts to sign up to 'his' proposed concerts in 1787 in Vienna was he. Concerts which were abandoned. Don't tell the children, will you ? Since nobody was subcribing to these faked Vienna concerts any more after the events of 1784 and 1785. Which were as faked and invented as his earlier ones. Or what of the Bonn music publisher Simrock ? Also a member of the Bavarian Illuminati. Or how about the Vienna publisher Hoffmeister, (another Vienna publisher of 'Mozart's' music during his last decade, who, as it happens, was also a member of the Illuminati. Or what of von Born, a patron of Leopold and Wolfgang Mozart - himself a member of the Illuminati). Or what of Artaria or Brietkopf and Hartel, or Mollo (the first and last of these being closely associated by the aristocracy with those music factories of Milan, Como and the monasteries of Switzerland).

Goethe was himself a supplier of music years later to the young Felix Mendelssohn. It was all part of the network to make 'great' composers.

I don't say and have never said 'Mozart's' operas were lousy. You did. It's another invention of yours. I say they were not music by Mozart. I said they were by other composers. Quite different from what you have just said. And they were bungled arrangements of music made by Mozart. Booed off the stage. Not one 'Mozart' opera was published in his whole lifetime. That too is another fact. And I have twice posted here on the real background to 'Le Nozze di Figaro' of 1786 (which, in fact, was a hastily made arrangement bungled by Mozart of already existing music by others, newly set to Italian words there in Vienna by Lorenzo da Ponte and advertised as having been composed by the bogus 'Kapellemeister' Mozart). So say the actual facts. The documentary evidence, that is. It was the same Lorenzo da Ponte who said (and I repeat it) that Mozart was completely unknown in Vienna and 'never' showed his talents in the Austrian capital. How about that ? Is the picture starting to emerge, at last ? Those are da Ponte's own writings. The man who was associated with the 'genius' for several operas. Argue with him ! And there are others who said the same. It seems you do not like the facts. They cause a certain return of cognitive dissonance although they are facts all the same. You are a consumer of the myth. And nothing else.

You believe one of the most senior members of the Bavarian Illuminati is more reliable on Mozart than I. Fine. But I am basing my views on verifiable evidence with that of others, having examined Mozart's career (real and supposed) over many years, while you are merely repeating hyperbole of the 200 years old myth makers. Hyperbole that is never (by convention) cross-examined. It took over 60 years before they finally published a catalogue of 'Mozart's' supposed music. 60 years after his death, that is. And in the 150 years since that time more than 50 symphonies that were published and performed in Mozart's name have been found not to be his at all. How is that ? I mean, is a picture starting to emerge yet ? And numerous other works in virtually every form. Starting with the childhood minuet KV1 and ending with KV626, the Requiem (on which there is a ton of evidence he never composed it also. This known as early as 1825). There are dozens, even hundreds of false musical attributions. They are the vast majority, in fact. Now, starting with his childhood, you surely see there is major fakery, exaggeration, and downright fabrication going on here, from first to last. Wholesale. As we have already touched on during his Italian tour in 1770. You should stick around to hear more. So, where is the musical 'genius' ? At what point does he start doing his 'genius' thing ? Nowhere. He exists in your monochrome publications.

At least, so says the evidence. You DO look at both sides, don't you ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick_Bateman

Musicology, you meantion that there is no evidence that Mozart ever toured his gifts and gave concerts (even in his hometown)

This goes against myriad of eyewitness accounts including that of von Goethe.

Goethe mentions several tims that he saw Mozart perform in Frankfurt when the latter was 7. One of these instances was when he was comparing Mendelssohn - whom he also met when Mendelssohn was himself a child prodigy - the 12 year old musical whizz in 1821 to Mozart as a child.

Even a great literary figure like Goethe adored Mozart, having a particular penchant for Don Giovanni and lamented that Mozart never set Faust to music. Goethe was a director of a court theatre during his lifetime and I believe he is a far better judge of music and of Mozart than you or I.

His recollections refute your claims than Mozart never toured around Europe and also damage your vile interpretation of Mozart's operas being lousy.

Why can't you face the overwhelming facts and stop dwelling on very flimsy and scarce 'proof' you believe you have.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Musicology

As for 'eyewitness' accounts you refer to the account of the 14 years old boy von Goethe in Frankfurt. Whose chief comment was that the boy Mozart wore a sword ! LOL.

---

I posted accounts on the contrary. Goethe praised Mozart's operas and even desired one to be written by Mozart using Faust as a text. It appears he was fascinated by more than his sword. And yes of course I value the judgement of an erudite and cultured luminary whose works I have read and studied, over a man from London of whom I know nothing.

It's interesting that you reply to all respondents on this thread with your sarcastic jibe regarding 'looking at both sides.'

because it appears you put YOUR twist on every piece of information on the topic so that everything conforms to your ideas and nothing ventures outside of your field of theory.

Goethe's - and others - recollections of Mozart and his playing prove to us that he toured and was damn good at playing music and also at extemporising but of course you laugh that off because of course - without any evidence or justification in your accusations - they must part of the conspiracy surrounding Mozart.

We don't know who taught him music (we can likely agree that his father gave him some musical education for sure) but this does not mean he was not taught. We KNOW after all that the Padre Martini taught him counterpoint.

I think you went into your research wishing to find something controversial and determined to uncover a fraud and it has clouded your interpretation. You are far to obdurate in your debate and your views, which is most unbecoming in a supposed historian.

You are nothing but a charlatan who's sole aim is to marginalise and denigrate the world's greatest musician. You have no interest in truth and it is well apparent in your attitude to the entire discussion. You do not budge an inch. Listening to you anyone would think Mozart was found in the special needs ward of a hospital tapping at a glockenspiel with wet towel and turned into the poster boy for childhood prodigies and immeasurable genius.

You sir are the real fraud.

Patrick Bateman,

Ask you a straight question and we get no answer ? Again ? So, where did Mozart learn music ? From whom did he learn to compose ? And who taught him to play keyboard and violin ? These are questions repeatedly asked of you but no answers are forthcoming. Can you give details of even a single concert he ever gave in his home city of Salzburg ? I repeat that my next door neighbour's cat is a part time pilot of British Airways.

The short answer is 'Zilch, rien, zero, nil' isn't it ?

Goethe was a paid stooge of the occultist Illuminati. Wasn't he ? Illumined ? LOL. But don't tell the children. Icons are like that. Goethe's works are well known where, exactly ? Nowhere. They are famous for being famous. They are great because everyone says they are great. And everyone has been saying they are great for over 200 years. It gets passes in exams. That means they must be great. LOL. Using that standard everything that is said to be great, even by members of the the Illuminati (who controlled virtually all publishing in Germany from around 1773 onwards) must therefore be great - although nobody can tell us exactly what is 'great' about them. This is your argument. And it's as bankrupt as your answers to the above questions. Don't you think that you should study literature a little more than merely repeating the eulogies of the Illuminati who dominated music and literary publishing during Goethe's lifetime ? It's hilarious.

You don't know who taught Mozart music. Well, isn't that a strange thing ? I don't know who taught my next door neighbour's cat to fly jet airliners also. But it does. And you believe it, don't you ?

May I share with you the fact that 5 lines and spaces are a species of music that is used of western mankind. It is not genetically inherited. It has to be taught and learned. But you cannot tell us how in the case of the 'genius'. Thus, the 'genius' of Mozart lacks a shred of documentary, actual evidence.

You next make the statement that Padre Martini of Bologna taught Mozart musical composition. You are once again talking sheer nonsense. There is NO evidence of Martini teaching Mozart anything. But you haven't read the article by Luca Bianchini (here on this thread) on that very subject. A man who has spent decades studying music written in Italy at that very period (the second half of the 18th century). You believe Martini taught Mozart because everyone says Martini taught Mozart. Can you provide some actual evidence ? No. Once again. Evidence is completely lacking. And what we have is a faked music exam made by Mozart. There in Bologna. We have posted on this already. Your cognitive dissonance is making a fool of you. As the documentary evidence shows. How embarassing for you ! These facts have been known in Italy amongst musicologists ever since the late 19th century. But you do not know them, do you ?

Mozart you describe as 'the world's greatest musician'. Patrick, do everyone a favour. Go to Vienna. Examine the actual score of 'Le Nozze di Figaro'. It's there in the Austrian National Library. It has been extensively studied and we were first to do so. If you cannot go PLEASE ask me and we will happily give you a copy of it all of your own. But stop talking nonsense.

I do not call you a fraud. I say you are highly educated. In the mythology of western culture. And nothing else. Since one side is pointing you to facts and to evidence, while you blunder on with error after error, insult after insult, and not a shred of actual, verifiable evidence. That's a 'Mozartean Education' for you !

Consider this - you don't have a clue what you are talking about in respect of the life, career and musical reputation of W.A. Mozart. You never have. That is the truth.

I don't think you bother reading my posts thoroughly.

Patrick,

Is it possible, just possible, that the history of music is as corrupted, as fallible, as controlled, as manufactured, and as false as the history of warfare, or politics, or any other area of human existence ? Since there is no honest researcher today who believes otherwise. Except those morons who have never cross-examined their own dogmas.

The sheer scale of falsehood in this case (W.A. Mozart) is breathtaking. I don't ask you to believe it just because it's said. But because, in fact, the evidence is overwhelming. Some basic facts of which have already been shared here for men like you, Mr Bateman.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick_Bateman

I don't think you bother reading my posts thoroughly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Musicology

Patrick,

Is it possible, just possible, that the history of music is as corrupted, as fallible, as controlled, as manufactured, and as false as the history of warfare, or politics, or any other area of human existence ? Since there is no honest researcher today who believes otherwise. Except those morons who have never cross-examined their own dogmas.

The sheer scale of falsehood in this case (W.A. Mozart) is breathtaking. I don't ask you to believe it just because it's said. But because, in fact, the evidence is overwhelming. Some basic facts of which have already been shared here for men like you, Mr Bateman.

---

You say Padre Martini taught Mozart nothing in the realm of music. I have read material that says Martini taught him counterpoint (Piero Melograni for example)
Why are you so undeniably right and a fellow music historian who had studied and done their own research so 'clearly' in error??

I'm sorry but you are too cavalier in your attitude. A lot of your argument rests on your own personal interpretation. Which is the only course of action since you are bereft of supportive facts.