Mozart in English

[Musicology]

Patrick,

Please calm down. Piero Melagrani was a teacher of Political Science who studied the subject of whether Mozart learned music from Padre Martini no more than you, Patrick Bateman, have done. Melagrani merely repeated what others had said before him. Countless times. Providing no evidence whatsoever.

But if you have some evidence of the 14 years old Mozart learning composition in Bologna from Padre Martini please provide it here. None exists. It has never existed. And I know a few music articles posted on this thread speaking of this very subject which you and the entire musical public appear not to have read.

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.

It is surely an amazing fact that in more than 200 years of Mozart related research (which is everywhere seen as being presided over by experts and which is patronised and sponsored by major corporations) nobody ever examined or wrote on the musical contents of the operatic score of ‘The Marriage of Figaro’ (1786) used at its premiere on 1st May 1786 - but which is held today in two separated volumes in the Austrian National Library there in Vienna. (Quite a fate for one of the most famous operas in musical history, you may agree !).

In fact, it was not until the late British music researcher Alan Tyson skimmed through those two volumes and wrote to recommend their study without further delay that, eventually (in 2008) two Italian researchers Agostino Taboga and Luca Bianchini, while visiting Austria, decided to pay for a complete microfiche to be made - the first ever made of this famous score - and took the results back to examine and analyse their contents - reaching the remarkable conclusion after close examination of both text and music this is a rather clumsy musical arrangement. (Bianchini being an expert on 18th century opera over many years. And the musical analysis and text further assisted by Anna Trombetta). These volumes are beyond reasonable doubt music that was composed by others earlier that was hastily arranged later by W.A. Mozart for May 1786 for a newly set Italian text by Lorenzo da Ponte. Thus they are derived from an earlier German musical version. Both the music and text are derived from an earlier version that was composed and written by others. But this arrangement was pawned off as being Mozart’s and da Ponte’s own original achievement in Vienna of May of 1786. The arrangement we find here being so poor (musically and textually) that it was withdrawn only a few performances later to hissing and booing from the Vienna audience. Because it is almost unperformable. A fact refered to in newspapers of the time in the Austrian capital but ignored, as so much else in 'Mozart Studies'. Such facts are simply not convenient. The English version of this article includes other notes by me.

http://www.mediafire.com/?p1dbvzi779ankzy

Dear Edward,

Thank you for raising questions on two Mozart family musical notebooks which you have seen for yourself and which, you say, prove that Nannerl and Wolfgang ''were being taught music during their early years. And which are said to prove ''they were also composing works of their own''. And thank you for asking me to answer your points here, so that readers can see for themselves the truth (or otherwise) of these things.

I am of course very happy to oblige. Please post here yourself if you have further problems. But, in the meantime -

In reply to your first question, Mozart’s first public appearance dates from 1761. When he was 5 years old. In Salzburg. But, before we start to eulogise and float away in raptures at such an early date Wolfgang’s role at that time was that of a childhood dancer, with dozens of others. This was for a play where he appeared on the 1st and again 3rd September 1761 in a play called ‘Sigismundus Hungariae’ by Salzburg teacher and prefect Marian Wimmer. With its incidental music supplied by local composer Eberlin. In fact the total production was dominated by the appearance of the town’s children, only some of whom were actually pupils at that school. But all of them were ‘geniuses’, of course. A school play, in fact.

In further reply to your question, (since you believe Wolfgang was undergoing musical instruction and was starting to compose in those early years) reference is made by you to two surviving books. First of which is one written for Nannerl Mozart, his older sister. Which, as it happens, first surfaced 103 years after Mozart's birth and which contains minuets and other short pieces in the hands of numerous visitors to Salzburg, including a set of 12 variations. Each of these variations by another composer. The original theme is assumed to be by Leopold Mozart, her father. And it’s in this book made for Nannerl where we find what are called the ‘first’ compositions of Wolfgang, her younger brother. These two works are listed today as KV4 (a Minuet in F Major) and as KV6 (a Sonata for Harpischord and Violin - which was written in to the book during the Mozart family visit to Paris 3 years later, 1764). But KV4 is not in the hand of Wolfgang at all. Not here in this book. It was merely attributed to him by his father who, after writing it there adds ‘Di Wolfgango Mozart, 11 May 1762’ and, again with KV6 which is written in Leopold’s handwriting there with the inscription ‘16 July 1764’.

We must also apologise for the fact that the 'Mozart' works previously known as KV1, KV2, KV3 and KV5 were finally found (though only after 1860, you see) not to be by W.A. Mozart. Cough. Cough !

The second notebook, which is still generally believed to have been made for Wolfgang, has survived complete. And what could be more convincing than the fact that on its first page is an inscription made in Leopold Mozart’s hand, ‘ To my dear son Wolfgang Amade on his sixth name day, from his father Leopold Mozart. Salzburg. Salzburg. 31st October 1762.’. That sounds convincing, doesn't it ? I mean, it looks great !!!

In fact, this notebook (according to those who have closely studied it) contains 135 musical pieces. Which Wolfgang's proud father may be imagined as compiling for his prodigious and rapidly learning son. A strange fact of which is the relatively recent discovery that all 135 pieces are ordered in exactly the same keys as the Inventions and Sinfonias of a certain J.S. Bach. What chance is there of that ? A strange fact, you may agree ? And are further sub-divided into 25 ‘suites’. The music itself is drawn not from Wolfgang Mozart, nor from Leopold or Nannerl, but (as it happens) has been taken from part of a musical work that had been published back in 1752 (4 years before Mozart’s birth) by a certain Count Stolberg-Vernigerode. (About whom we will hear more later). And the actual composers represented here include music by Johann Friedrich Grafe (1711-87), Conrade Hurlesusche (1696-1765), G.P. Telemann (1681-1767), Johann Adolf Hasse, and others. So none of this music is actually by W.A. Mozart. Sorry about that. !

But no sooner have been disappointed than we now run in to fresh problems. Herman Abert (whose biography of Mozart is well known) wrote an article on this very ‘Mozart Notebook of 1762’ which proved disappointing for him because it has since been discovered the whole notebook was actually written years before Wolfgang Mozart was born - around 1750 - and therefore already existed 6 years before the genius started composing. Unless of course he was composing before the moment of his conception. Sorry about that. ! Furthermore, this notebook has been proved to be a fake by a detailed analysis made of its contents by Wolfgang Plath, also of its paper type, and other music related matters. On which the same Wolfgang Plath wrote a much less well publicised and appreciated article, ‘Leopold Mozart’s Notebook for Wolfgang of 1762 - A Falsification’. Plath, of course, spent decades trying to make sense of Mozart's handwriting. But the verdict on this notebook is not disputed. By anyone. Sorry about that !

Apart from this, you may be sure ‘everything you’ve heard is true’. Honest !

[yanni]

Who done it?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My only disagreement is on your –and Dan Brown’s- “All roads lead to Rome” convenient focus on the identity of “the manufacturer”:

Compared to “arts and sciences” and relative institutions (coincidentaly all under a Cochin or "Cassini" or "Caussin" or Cocchi(!) at the time) serving the interests of the Royal House of France, church, including Rome, had a secondary role only.
(Following Galileo, even Rome understood and adopted “sciences” and they were themselves into the use of art for their propaganda fide long before.)

When you carefully examine each and every of my “Saint Germain” aliases, you’ll realise that british interests were not neglected when they (Strict Observance) partitioned “their world”, thus you’ll be able at least to explain Gluck’s irish successes at the time of Luis XVI and wife “removal” (and also strengthen your rather weak "transition of power to other societies" post 1773 argument).

I say “at least” because the “cover up” was and remains much broader than just music, so broad in fact as to still tip today the balance between “truth” and “common good” in favour of the latter, as all “too big to fail” lies still do.

Read my research thru, starting with “Poe decoded.Announcement!” thread to trace :

a)Rome’s minor, if any, participation inthe creation of a new religion suitable for their-agreed upon- rebelious "New World"

as well as

b)“Rousseau’s” (and not only) claim to the role of “protector” to the throne of France (eversince 1601), bearing also in mind his “Pierre Michel Hennin",head of Secret du Roi and royal treasurer, persona.

Consider “Collini” and “Hennin” also to at least absolve Voltaire: He, like most other luminaries, was just another tool in "Rousseau's" hands.

Having said all that:

I still don’t believe he called all the shots after 1787: He was quite old already and his Russian “personae” had won him over, he had disagreed with Necker, given up France and his conscience propably troubled him. (His "Raynal" identity and itinerary still troubles me nevertheless!)

“Other forces” had the upper hand by then, knew all about him, whereas he still wanted to keep the family’s royal secret intact, was insitutionaly and privately indebted, thus staged his “deaths” (but propably not those of his eternal IOUs).

“Moz-art” (or Dali's obelisk ridden elephants) says it all but so does the silence of another “Collini”, scholar on enlightment, and many others as well, inlcuding many silent descendants

If you want to have your book ever published you might think it over-where Truth ends- again.

Your thoughts.

[Musicology]

Yanni,

If I may give some constructive advice (?) - when you write on subjects that are full of obscure and unverified speculations you should add light, and not take it away. You should speak clearly. As if you are in broad daylight. Then people will always be interested in what you say and write. It provides proof you have something worth saying. Your last post is unfortunately as obscure as usual.

Let me give you an example. The 'British' to whom you are refering are, in fact, not British at all. They are elites of an internationalist and unelected dynasty. Since the dynasty that ruled at that time was of 'German' origin. The elites thereof. I am so glad we sorted that out. No more relevant to British or German people than the Royal visit to Dublin.

You see my point ? You have obviously been reading too much of Herr von Goethe ! (The 'supreme genius of modern German literature').

CPE Bach
Symphony
Wq 182/6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuQ0g...eature=related

[yanni]

Don't think you can teach me anything, Robert, not after picking a tiny 'winner' out of my lengthy post to then distort/falsify my re words even,to enhance the effect:

Never spoke of 'The British' as you say but of 'british interests' only, functioning within, with the approval and for the interest of your elite/royalty running the country then...and later on.

Shame on you!

[Musicology]

Yanni,

I have stopped thinking I can teach you anything.

We really must not confuse 'British interests' with those of the British. They are totally different. One is an unelected corporation/dynasty and a parasite on mankind while the British are the men and women of this island.

Glad we sorted that out !

Don't think you can teach me anything, Robert, not after picking a tiny 'winner' out of my lengthy post to then distort/falsify my re words even,to enhance the effect:

Never spoke of 'The British' as you say but of 'british interests' only, functioning within, with the approval and for the interest of your elite/royalty running the country then...and later on.

Shame on you!

Dear Edward,

Thank you for replying to my post here of this morning. I'm glad to learn it was helpful. You ask of Mozart's education generally. But, since you might think I'm being prejudiced here is a quote from one of the most widely consulted Mozart biographies. By Herman Abert. (Revised several times since then and used widely by those who write on Mozart). A standard textbook, in fact. We are told there -

''Mozart’s education is shrouded in mystery. We do not know whether he attended school in Salzburg, and, if so, which school''.

and this -

''There is very little evidence Mozart read any German literature as a youth''.

(Herman Abert - ‘Mozart’ p. 68)

But that’s all right. We find the same glaring gap with his alleged musical education also. There is literally no limit to our gullibility on Mozart. That is, with him supposedly learning keyboard, composition or any musical subject at all. All very strange, of course. Since here too there is nothing. This is of course to be interpreted as certain proof that he, the 'wunderkind', must have been a genius. And we all believe that, don't we ? Of course we do. Let's hold on to our seats as the show hits the road. (Faked musical notebooks written 6 years before his birth notwithstanding, of course). Or, as the apostle Thomas once famously said - 'Lord, help my unbelief' !

I would post longer on this brief subject but my next door neighbour’s cat is now getting ready to fly a 747 passenger jet to Rio from London and has asked me to buy him some kippers at the fish shop. Duty calls !

[Patrick_Bateman]

I think Musicology's surname is Salieri

[Musicology]

Thank you Patrick Bateman,

Cognitive dissonance has shaped your last post. The awful realisation that what you've been taught and believed (and what is widely believed as convention) is grossly incompatible with the evidence. The good news is however you're nearly half way to realising there may be a solution. But that solution will come after first realising, for sure, there is a problem. (Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to realise there really is a problem. Without which the situation remains).

But, above everything else, good wins in the end ! Honest.

Rgds


CPE Bach
Double Concerto
3rd Mv't

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zlra...eature=related

I think Musicology's surname is Salieri

[Patrick_Bateman]

Thank you Patrick Bateman,

Cognitive dissonance has shaped your last post. The awful realisation that what you've been taught and believed (and what is widely believed as convention) is grossly incompatible with the evidence. The good news is however you're nearly half way to realising there may be a solution. But that solution will come after first realising, for sure, there is a problem. (Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to realise there really is a problem. Without which the situation remains).

But, above everything else, good wins in the end ! Honest.

Rgds


CPE Bach
Double Concerto
3rd Mv't

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zlra...eature=related

The amusing thing is a lot of what you say is freely divulged by Mozart biographers and musicologists. It is only your perverse interpretation that deviates from the fact.

[Musicology]

Patrick Bateman,

Any interpretation which fails to account for the evidence (especially on basic issues) is by definition perverse. And you can be sure that those things worthy of being believed really need little interpretation of ours. In the case of W.A. Mozart (his life, career and musical achievements) even the basic facts, it seems, have somehow been hidden from you. You have, somehow, been a long term victim of wholesale obscurantism. Thus, now in fog, you have no choice but to believe in the 'genius' of Mozart. It transcends any need to actually examine or appreciate the evidence. But it gets worse. It also has the knock on effect of making you rubbish those who go out of their way to present you with it. And this, in turn, makes it hard for you to answer straight questions.

I believe this alarming track record of yours (which shows no prospect of ending in the near future) qualifies you for membership of the Mozarteum in Salzburg and may also qualify you for big discounts on all Mozart CD's.

(Should you require a letter of recommendation to obtain the former please ask and I will be happy to oblige). In the meantime -

Sinfonia in D
BWV 1045

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scT5a...eature=related

'Freely divulged by Mozart biographers' ? Yes indeed ! I think it is called 'seeing the wood for the trees'. Isn't it amazing how the very opposite is so widely taught and believed ? Honest confession is good for the soul, or what ? LOL

The amusing thing is a lot of what you say is freely divulged by Mozart biographers and musicologists. It is only your perverse interpretation that deviates from the fact.

[WyattGwyon]

Okay Musicology, the point is taken. Many details of Mozart's biography are fabricated. He was raised as a kind of freak-show circus performer after all, so big surprise. What is it you are trying to accomplish again?

Anyway, I have raised the ire of Mozart enthusiasts over the years by asserting that in general, CPE Bach's keyboard concertos are more interesting than Mozart's, that a couple of his Prussian Sonatas are years ahead of most of Mozart's solo keyboard music, and by making other inflammatory statements I'm not sure I really believe. Also by asserting that Mozart wrote enormous quantities of undistinguished music along with the works of true genius.

But seriously dude, what's up?

[yanni]

"Musicology" is using a new approach to the tradition of focusing on Mozart to obscure 18th cent music history. If he didn't, the cultural-national histories of many european countries would have to be rewritten. That's all.

[Musicology]

WyattGwyon,

Many details of Mozart's biography are fabricated. Yes, for sure. And how many people know this ? Virtually none. Because no teachers are telling students of this fact.

You ask what I am trying to accomplish. Let me answer you.

The situation at present is easily described. But you better sit comfortably because the implications are huge. It's as follows -

The history of western music (which includes the lives, careers and music of over 20,000 composers) is dominated, literally, by a few handfuls of 'great' composers. Isn't it ? We are not the first to say this. It's an indisputable fact. Isn't it ? It's dominated by a pantheon, in fact, of 'great' composers. They and 'their' music. Which are published, performed, and eulogised, whether they individually composed it, or not. From Palestrina onwards. And the patrons of these 'great' composers, what of them ? Who, exactly, manufactured this 'history of western music' with which we are familiar other than those who, at that time (and their descendants still now) literally control its content ?

What if............. virtually all 'great' composers of western musical history were manufactured by the supply to them of works they never actually wrote ? Systematically, deliberately and cynically. To control the 'education' of those who like music ? What then ? Well, let's test this thesis. With W.A. Mozart. That would be genuine test case, you may agree. A big project. Surely (you say) you cannot be serious. But I am.

I can tell you that beyond fair and reasonable doubt W.A. Mozart was a musician of no great talent. Who was built up artificially to be a 'genius' through networks of aristocrats, publishers, fraternity contacts and the usual eulogies to become an idol of western musical culture. So says the evidence. While the facts, the real facts of his life and career are studiously overlooked, ignored, and even suppressed. Wholesale. Deliberately. Time and time again. The same is true of the supposed musical careers of Handel, Haydn, and even Beethoven and Schubert.

So, what 'is' the history of western music ? The answer is it's what 'they' want it to be. And always has been. It is no more representative of musical achievement than the corporate news is of what is really happening in the world. Since in both cases the consumer consumes and the criticism is almost zero. Mozart is a musical paradigm.

Does that matter ? I think it does. The managers of 'musical history' (and even of musicology these days) churn out rehashes of ideas given to them by those they quote what others before them have quoted. They compete only in eulogy. It gives them 30 pieces of silver. They preside over a musical Easter Island, complete with iconic statues and fairy stories.

And music deserves better.

That is the point of it. Musicology has been hijacked long ago. Soon after its birth, in fact. Replaced by corporate fictions. From the Babylonian controllers of western 'civilization', so called. With music as one of its first victims. Music (as in ancient Greece) was considered to be a vital thing to control. So says the evidence.

And, since you ask, what are you are trying to accomplish with your question ? You now have your answer.

Okay Musicology, the point is taken. Many details of Mozart's biography are fabricated. He was raised as a kind of freak-show circus performer after all, so big surprise. What is it you are trying to accomplish again?

Anyway, I have raised the ire of Mozart enthusiasts over the years by asserting that in general, CPE Bach's keyboard concertos are more interesting than Mozart's, that a couple of his Prussian Sonatas are years ahead of most of Mozart's solo keyboard music, and by making other inflammatory statements I'm not sure I really believe. Also by asserting that Mozart wrote enormous quantities of undistinguished music along with the works of true genius.

But seriously dude, what's up?

Yanni,

Take the word 'Government'. What does it mean, actually ?

Govern - To Rule Over
Ment - The Mind

A version of history exists which governs the education of students and which rules over their minds. Institutionally, that is. That's 'mind control' isn't it ? Whether it is pleasurable or not. The one found in the textbooks. Criticism of which is virtually zero.

I can watch a 3D film in a cinema. But, to watch it and to enjoy this artificial effect I must wear those special glasses. Our western 'musical history' is the same. Remove the glasses and we see things as they really are. That is the importance of a critical and modern examination of the Mozart phenomenon. A case study, in fact. And an illustration of the power of dogma.

Mozart's career was almost entirely falsified. Musically speaking. So says the evidence. By the same people, in fact, who control news, publishing and education still today. Mozart is the Isis and Osiris of western musical culture, its Nike and its Macdonalds. There are no 'experts'. We are all paying lip service to a myth. Cleverly constructed by the controllers of western academic culture. The single greatest improvement would be a musicology where criticism is welcomed and where the manipulation of musical and biographical evidence is exposed. The alternative is what we already see. A world turning back to the pagan cultures of ancient antiquity, complete with idols, pantheons, and unquestioned/unaccountable priests.

Music deserves better

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vwZA...eature=related

"Musicology" is using a new approach to the tradition of focusing on Mozart to obscure 18th cent music history. If he didn't, the cultural-national histories of many european countries would have to be rewritten. That's all.

[yanni]

Allow me to once more express my apart-ment, then.

[Patrick_Bateman]

I imagine Musicology types his retorts with legs crossed sat in a beautiful leather Chesterfield, pipe in mouth, wearing a smug and haughty countenance with the belief that he is better than the rest and is the only mortal to have circumvented the mind control that Western music scholars and historians have imposed on the other 6 billion of us.

Are you a Holocaust denier too? Have you visited Atlantis? Did Roger Rabbit assassinate JFK??

Come on enlighten us with more of your crackpot theories.

[ERS]

Salieri - La Fiera di Venezia
Moldavian National Symphony Orchestra

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5rU49jjpyo