The Manufacture of Mozart

[Musicology]

Yanni,

You neither can nor need to check what Niemetscheck wrote of 'Don Giovanni' in 1797/8. And yet you repeatedly ask me to. Is it not fair to ask people to do things you are willing and prepared to do yourself ?

You say 'Leroux's overwhelmingly persauding words, so well fitting to (your) timeline and long established views are more than enough for me'. Yanni, that is fine. But you might forgive others who want rather more than these. And who do not have long established views. I think it fairest to say your views of Leroux are based on things more solid than that.

There is, in German literature, a strange book attributed to one August Klingemann (1777-1831) entitled 'Die Nachtwachen des Bonaventura' (1804) which was published in the early 19th century with various allusions to the music of Mozart and to other individuals whose great reputations were, shall we say (?), 'manufactured'. Whose authorship has long been mysterious and whose true author is still a matter of controversy. I recommend its contents for you to study on this subject although I'm not aware of anyone reading it in any other sense than a vivid series of strange stories. One of a number of other sources of the same kind as Leroux. Another would be the satirical writings of the librettist Casti. And even the Tales of Hoffmann, etc. There are in fact a series of unusual references to the manufactured career of Mozart in early 19th century literature. The Frankenstein myth of Mary Shelley is another. None of them in themselves proof of anything. But, when added to other information, they are consistent with the idea of manufactured phenomenon being a major part in human affairs. So that the 19th century, within a few decades, had a fashion for the bizzare which we see in theatre and publications generally.

Thanks for saying Gluck's music archive has been dispersed.

There were many individuals capable of buying music and amassing vast quantities of it. As you will agree. But in the case of Mozart we are not dealing with grand and haphazard project of arbitrarily buying music from countless sources. But of a specific project whose real aim was to draw together music and to create by the input of a series of talented composers and editors (this with the aid of publishers and propagandists) a body of music identifiable (we think) to only one composer. W.A. Mozart. Thus requiring music editors, sympathetic publishers, propagandists, early biographers, exaggerated testimonials and the usual editing out of virtually all of Mozart's musical contemporaries. So that editorial control of what was published in textbooks on the subject of music and musical achievement could be and was slowly achieved in terms of 18th century 'musical history'. To achieve this, virtually without criticism control on what is taught and believed on music as a whole during that period. Even involving (as we see) the suppression of the careers of countless composers and their works and the marginalisation of the work of others. To ignore, in fact, music as it really existed in Mozart's time. To create, in fact, a character (or small group of musical characters) who would be members of a musical 'pantheon', this towering over all others. To consider oneself educated in these matters by reference to a handful of composers from the hundreds and thousands who have lived. They and their music. All of this to obtain the desired effect. Of a Mozart who would literally dominate the musical landscape of western Europe and of our education in that area. An industry, in fact, patronised by the successors of those who were party to it in the first place and virtually a counterfeit of fact and reality. The negation of musicology and of musical biography in its critical sense. Since the Mozart myth exists most successfully when it fails to accept or ever to examine its own inherent contradictions.

How shall we describe a body of teachings which is rarely subjected to criticism in any detail ? As we see here in the inflated life, career and 'genius' status of one W.A. Mozart ? Though that body of teachings is revered as being a product of our western culture and of 'experts' patronised and admired which enjoys high status in textbooks, journal articles, music publications and so on ? A paradigm, in fact. No more subject to detailed criticism of its publications than the dogmas of pagan Greece or Rome. For, as says the movie 'Amadeus', 'all you have heard is true'.

The important thing here is not to believe one must be 'right'. But to make available a contrary view and to let others form their own judgement having had the chance to examine it for themselves from both sides.


Regards

Fugue
BWV 849

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLoMs...D26D4A47388279

[yanni]

"Fair" as "right" or "fair" as "white coloured-blue eyed-blonde"?

The particular adjective should be removed from the english language!

Cheers!

[Musicology]

You have a good point Yanni. But, to me, every word can be well used or abused and it's a question of using them appropriately, within their right context, and understanding them in the same.

We must each reserve the right to judge them, for sure.

p.s. England is sunny today for the first time in many weeks. I have planted some potatoes this morning. lol !

Cheers

"Fair" as "right" or "fair" as "white coloured-blue eyed-blonde"?

The particular adjective should be removed from the english language!

Cheers!

Orchestral Suite No. 1
Opening Overture

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

G.F. Handel
'Arrival of the Queen of Sheba'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkx2F...eature=related

[yanni]

Funny thing how such silly words pop up to make any serious post read like another joke on blondes!

Thus returning to "Bagge's baguette":

Have you had the chance ever to read Mirabeau's letters from Berlin?

Mirabeau was in Berlin, till late 1786 reporting to Calonne in Paris, and noone really knows the return route he next took.

What is sure however is
-he had "inside knowledge" on "Baron Bagge" and his Berlin theatrical performances at the time (before December the 5th),
-included "ridiculous" Bagge in his correspondence to the French General Controler of Finance and that...
-some 34 years later, ie around 1820 or so, someone went to great lenghts to have this correspondence translated and published in London.

Correct me if I am wrong but,this same December, "Mozart's" Figaro was staged in Prague while Mozart himself was still in Vienna. (Figaro was staged 11th December by Bondini, while Mozart left Vienna for Prague January 8th).

Mirabeau-Bagge returned Paris last days of January (Louis Barthou, p126, to then decide going to Brunswick May 1787, p129 but went instead, as Raynal, to Russia for a while)

Lastly: Whenever I mention the title of a book or article, I always accompany it with a quotation of the specific part or parts of relevance to my subject which, may I remind you, never was Mozart, but my own genealogy.

Based in Athens, I have no chance of finding in a public library highly specialised and rare books on Mozart.

It's only reasonable for me to assume that you, with Mozart in your focus for the past fifteen years, have already a long database on him with clippings from various books as well, thus I asked you to provide the specific Niemetcheck reference to Mozart's Don Giovanni but you refused.

But then, you always mention booktitles but never quote parts therefrom in you posts here, don't you?

As I said, your methodology leads nowhere!

Cheers!

[Musicology]

Yanni,

I will try to obtain a translated text of Niemetscheck and will let you know when I do. But your claim that I never quote from the books I refer to is contradicted by my posts. Take for example those of the past few days -

“In 1966, Tomislav Volek undertook to examine the question [of Niemetsheck's personal relationship with Mozart came to the conclusion that Niemetscheck probably had never had any personal contact with Mozart - Source - Tomislav Volek, Meznama tvar F.X. Nemecka / Das unbekannte Angesicht von F.X. Niemetschek, in: Hudebni rozhledy 19.Praha 1966, Nr.14, S.427ff

and again -

'The history of music is usually studied from its creative aspect - how masterpieces of western culture came in to being, how composers advanced the state of the art, how major works were received. The underside is rarely discussed - who paid for the music, who profited, who organised it, and why. The history of the music business is a half-glimpsed enigma, unknown to modern managers and undiscussed in polite society. The term itself is impolite, invoking images of fat, ash-flecked agents in loud suits. The truth is necessarily more complex. Some of the most successful operators practiced an almost saintly devotion to artists and their art. Others were outright villains, in it for what they could get. Both types took the greatest care to cover their traces. The music business imposes a stringent vow of silence that is designed to protect the myth of the immaculate artist'.

('Managers, Maestros and the Corporate Murder of Classical Music - When the Music Stops' - Norman Lebrecht - 1996)

and, again -

http://www.aproposmozart.com/Braunei....rev.Index.pdf

These are just a few examples.

Thanks for your comments which I will examine closely later.

Robert

Here is a spring morning !

Prelude and Fugue in C Sharp Major
BWV 848

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-c8W...eature=related

The Prague performances of 'Le Nozze di Figaro' date from December 1786. (That is, some 7 months after their disastrous premiere in Vienna). And, between the premiere in Vienna in May of that year and these performances in Prague the opera score was massively edited, by others. Being restored, in fact, to the work from which Mozart and da Ponte had first adapted it earlier. With the disastrous Italian text/music relationship of the Vienna ‘premiere’ improved.

//

Here is an article on Bagge from the 'Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians' which may be of interest. We may both agree it is hugely inaccurate in many parts and says little of Bagge's real life. But it at least offers a list of interesting, known relationships and some dates.

Bagge [Bach], Baron de [Ennal, Charles-Ernest

(b Fockenhof, Kurland, 14 Feb 1722; d Paris, 24 March 1791). French dilettante, amateur violinist and composer, patron of the arts and instrument collector. A magnificent and very wealthy nobleman, he both amused and astounded his contemporaries. M. Audinot in his comic opera La musicomanie (1779), and possibly E.T.A. Hoffmann in his tale Die Serapionsbrüder (1819), attempted to evoke his strange personality, emphasizing its ridiculous nature. At the death of his father, a landed nobleman, in 1747, Bagge inherited a large fortune which enabled him to study the violin in Italy with Tartini. (1) By 1750 he had settled in Paris; in the following year he was awarded the title chambellan du Roi de Prusse (then Frederick II) and married the daughter of the Swiss banker Jacob Maudry. With Maudry's death in 1762 the very large inheritance proved a source of contention to the ill-matched couple and they soon separated. Bagge later attempted to gain possession of the inheritance of Mme Maudry, who had died in 1767, and the resulting lawsuits scandalized Paris until the Parlement decided in his wife's favour in 1773.

After the separation Bagge devoted himself entirely to music, and exercised considerable influence on Parisian musical life as concert organizer, patron, performer, composer and teacher. Every Friday in his hotel on the Rue de La Feuillade he held a concert at which his protégés performed; on one of these occasions in 1783 Kreutzer gave the first performance of one of Bagge's violin concertos. He travelled in 1778 to England and in 1784 to Vienna, where he performed before Mozart. In 1790, having left France at the outbreak of the Revolution, he was appointed Kammerherr to Friedrich Wilhelm II in Berlin. His death in the following year was accompanied by rumours that he had been poisoned by his mistress, though several public disclaimers later that year discredit the accusation.

Bagge was a freemason and belonged to two of the Parisian lodges with the most active music programmes: the celebrated Loge Olympique and particularly Les Neuf Soeurs, where he was director of concerts and organized the musical side of Voltaire's initiation. His talent as a violinist and particularly his technical capabilities were perhaps not so negligible as earlier writers have maintained. He showed special skill in performing ascending and descending scales on a single string using only one finger of the left hand. His compositions, though hardly original, reveal sureness of taste and irreproachable workmanship. He was criticized for his nervous twitches and strange attitudes while performing; the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung (iii, 1800, col.841) recalled of his playing that

No Baron can ever have made such horrible grimaces the moment he took violin and bow in hand. His face, his muscles, the whole of his body underwent most painful contortions, and, as his playing increased in animation, the sounds that proceeded could only be likened to the wailing of a cat.

This doubtless gave rise to the ambiguous compliment paid by the Emperor Joseph II (‘My dear Baron, I have never heard anyone play the violin quite like you’), and the quatrain under one of his portraits:

Du Dieu de l'harmonie adorateur fidèle,
Son zèle impetueux ne saurait s'arrêter;
Dans l'art du violon il n'a point de modèle
Et personne jamais n’osera l’imiter.

As a patron Bagge was extraordinarily generous. Although he favoured artists who were also freemasons (Kreutzer, Viotti, Duport, Capron and Gossec), or who were closely linked with the order (Gaviniès and Boccherini), he nevertheless helped only deserving musicians. He insisted, however, on giving lessons to the violinists among them, paying them to accept his tuition, and was thus able to boast of himself as leader of the French violin school. His private collection of violins was prodigious, and included instruments by Stradivari, Amati and Gasparo da Salò, which he generously conferred on his ‘pupils’. This collection, as well as his large music library which he freely extended to other musicians, reverted at his death to his wife together with the rest of his largely depleted estate, and has since been untraced.
Several portraits of Bagge are known, one of them engraved by Nicolas Cochin (reproduced in Terry) and another portraying him with a violin ‘comme un ménétrier’.

WORKS

all printed works published in Paris

Orch: 3 sinfonie (1788); 4 vn concs., all (n.d.); vn conc., F-Pn; 2 symphonies concertantes, D-Bsb
Chbr: 6 quatuors concertants, str qt, op.1 (1773); 6 trio, 2 vn, b (n.d.); Airs de Marlborough variés, hpd, vn (n.d.); 2 str qts, 4 str qnts, collab. ?F. Fiorillo, destroyed
Cantata, 1786, for accession of Friedrich Wilhelm II, D-Bsb


BIBLIOGRAPHY

FétisB
GerberL

L. Petit de Bachaumont and others: Mémoires secrets, xx (London, 1783), 83–4
F. Marpurg: Legende einiger Musikheiligen (Cologne [recte Breslau], 1786), 224–5, 277ff
P. Smith: ‘Les élèves du Baron de Bagge’, RGMP, xii (1845)
G. Cucuel: ‘Le Baron de Bagge et son temps’, Année musicale, i (1911), 145–86
C.S. Terry: ‘Baron Bach’, ML, xii (1931), 130–39
C.M. Carroll: ‘A Beneficent Poseur: Charles Ernest, Baron de Bagge’, RMFC, xvi (1976), 24–36
R.J.V. Cotte: Les musiciens franc-maçons à la cour de Versailles et à Paris sous l'ancien régime (doctorat d'Etat, diss., 1982, F-Pn)
R.J.V. Cotte: La musique maçonnique et ses musiciens (Paris, 2/1987), 72–4

/

R

[yanni]

Awfully sorry for not specifying "relevant" quotations supporting your-eager but unfounded-"scholarly" conclusions such as:

There were many individuals capable of buying music and amassing vast quantities of it. As you will agree. But in the case of Mozart we are not dealing with grand and haphazard project of arbitrarily buying music from countless sources. But of a specific project whose real aim was to draw together music and to create by the input of a series of talented composers and editors (this with the aid of publishers and propagandists) a body of music identifiable (we think) to only one composer. W.A. Mozart.

You have to first identify the "many individuals", then compare their "ammassing" capacity to France's, Napoli's and Vienna's to then come to "Gluck-Rousseau-Grimm-Myslivecek-Cocchi etc" and the "specific project..." AT THE TIME(before 1780), FIND THE REASON THEN WHY IT (REFORM OPERA basically) was thrown on Mozart's lap around 1785-6, TO THEN proceed to post 1815 political events and explain thereby the "universal accord" to pass the whole inexplicable, highly distorted already and out of all proportions, very hot potato, to Mozart thereafter.

Alternatively, you should plant onions and garlic alongside your potatoes. It might prove more usefull and certainly more healthy.

BTW The whole thing on Bagge you quote from Grove is only a very minor part of the post 1815 fiction (based on post 1783-Chastellux's return from USA-"inputs" from Paris. Gossec and Gavinier where aliases of "Bagge" etc etc)

Cheers

[Musicology]

Yanni,

My knowledge of what you mean by 'reform opera' has not changed over the past few days. Maybe you can tell me what you mean ? But it may be quicker if you listen to some of the operas of Myslievececk, Sarti, Gazzaniga, and so on during the time of this supposed 'reform' - as already suggested last time we spoke of it. You believe 'Gluck' was the spearhead of a 'reform' of opera. In fact, 'Gluck's' music was not a reform. It was simply an expansion of an increasingly controlled music industry into Paris. An industry which was increasingly under the control of the 'enlightenment' philosophy of Voltaire and Rousseau. Whose aim was to obtain control across Europe of the performing arts across most of Europe. Including music. You should examine the history of opera in England at this time. The role of operatic ballet under Noverre, also the careers of Gallini, Viotti, Cowper and others. Who used Paris and Italy as a recruiting base. The 'enlightenment', Yanni, was as much due to the control of the British Empire and the merchants of the East India Company and the Dutch East India Company as the Holy Roman Empire. Since these two things were merging at this time. The patrons of opera and music at this time were already working towards the control of the performing arts.

As for collectors of large volumes of music, these included the chapels of many princes of the Holy Roman Empire. Such as Bonn, Regensburg, Esterhazy and so on.

Yes, as said, the Grove Dictionary provides only a standard account of Bagge. Bagge was certainly as important as Grimm in a musical sense.

What is hidden from appreciation in standard biographies of music and musician is the role of the fraternities (religious and occultist) and the way they merged during the late 18th century. Plus the role of those who patronised the arts. Many of them aristocrats and princes themselves. These things all fusing with the 'enlightenment' and with the union of these different fraternal strands under the Illuminatists etc. Culminating in the Council of Vienna (1815 onwards) and the restoration of the Jesuit Order. So that, eventually, all these things merged. And the music industry (which emerged in the early 19th century) began to control the writing of textbooks, omitting inconvenient biographical and musical facts, elevating a handful of composers to god-like status in a 'pantheon', as we see in pagan times. And, as for the facts of history, well, these were conveniently 'altered' and revised. So that we end more ignorant of reality than if we knew nothing at all. One result of which is the destruction of musicology, as such, and the rise of sheer commercialism.

Awfully sorry for not specifying "relevant" quotations supporting your-eager but unfounded-"scholarly" conclusions such as:

There were many individuals capable of buying music and amassing vast quantities of it. As you will agree. But in the case of Mozart we are not dealing with grand and haphazard project of arbitrarily buying music from countless sources. But of a specific project whose real aim was to draw together music and to create by the input of a series of talented composers and editors (this with the aid of publishers and propagandists) a body of music identifiable (we think) to only one composer. W.A. Mozart.

You have to first identify the "many individuals", then compare their "ammassing" capacity to France's, Napoli's and Vienna's to then come to "Gluck-Rousseau-Grimm-Myslivecek-Cocchi etc" and the "specific project..." AT THE TIME(before 1780), FIND THE REASON THEN WHY IT (REFORM OPERA basically) was thrown on Mozart's lap around 1785-6, TO THEN proceed to post 1815 political events and explain thereby the "universal accord" to pass the whole inexplicable, highly distorted already and out of all proportions, very hot potato, to Mozart thereafter.

Alternatively, you should plant onions and garlic alongside your potatoes. It might prove more usefull and certainly more healthy.

BTW The whole thing on Bagge you quote from Grove is only a very minor part of the post 1815 fiction (based on post 1783-Chastellux's return from USA-"inputs" from Paris. Gossec and Gavinier where aliases of "Bagge" etc etc)

Cheers

[yanni]

I don't need to explain(In fact I already did herein) what reform opera was meant to be (music serving the lyrics, don't you rmember, for a specific message to get through) and the mere fact you suggest "listen to the music" demonstrates you are indeed still unaware of the difference.

The enlightment became a common goal AFTER Britain lost their West Indies but the "established commercial interests" existed before that and collaborated to the fact.

For the minor role of the Holy Roman Empire" I have already spoken. The same for fraternities.

Chapels indeed employed famous musiciens (who nevertheless may have had their own ideas at the time, serving other, non religious patrons as well) but had little or nothing to do with opera or even chamber music, their task being to praise the Lord exclusively.

My previous guide to your road to fame, or at least to truth, stands as is.

Cheers.

[Musicology]

Thank you Yanni,

I understand what you mean by 'reform opera' although the 'reform' that it represents was more advertising and hyperbole than substance. Still, yes, I do understand what you mean.

On the 'enlightenment' we differ. I agree completely with you in certain respects. The commercial interests of Europe are a major factor. And the British Empire was itself a major factor. As already said. The Northern Venice of London, in fact. But this secular movement was a new method of uniting people. A new tool of propaganda, in fact. The end of direct church control of society and the beginnings of what SEEMED to be secularised society. A secularised society which was run more by fraternities and hidden interests of the ruling elite than theologians and bishops. At least, on the surface. The secularised society of the Encyclopaedists, of Voltaire, Rousseau etc. Whose relationship with the British elites, with the mercantile power that was England cannot be ignored.

A letter of Mozart (28th December 1782, to his father in Salzburg. "I was working on a very difficult task--a Bardic song by Denis on Gibraltar. It is a secret, for a Hungarian lady wants thus to honor Denis." "Yes, I have heard of England's triumph at Gibraltar, and, indeed, with great joy (for you know well that I am an arch-Englishman)."

There is, Yanni, absolutely no doubt that Mozart's contacts in England were extensive. They included the Prime Minister of England, the Prince of Wales, numerous high ranking land owners, archbishops etc. Most of them connected with the Catholic nobility. And with the fraternities which, in the mid-18th century onwards were supporters of Jacobinism and of an attempt to restore England to the papacy. Indeed, that movement was close to success and it had been a major factor within the British establishment since the time when the Venetians founded the British mercantile empire. The occultist/fraternity infiltration of the British government was very real. They literally controlled the Royal Society from the time of its foundation, for example. The formation of Freemasony in England (itself another form of occultism seen earlier in Venice), and its export to Germany, Italy and elsewhere was a growing movement itself. Secularism had many attractions to the elites of England. Whose slave trading companies and whose quest for imperial control of other nations is a plain fact of history. Unlike yourself I believe that fraternities had a very major role in this movement. That it was, from the start, part of the counter-reformation. Exportable, as we see here in England. So that it would be absurd to study the history of the period without being aware of both the Holy Roman Empire and also the 'Englightenment'. They both merged, after all. At least, they did so in this vital area of culture. Of which music was a vital part.

We might one day discuss the life and career of your Cocchi. A career, I think, which is part of this same British Empire/Venetian idea. Occultism, in fact. Thinly veiled, of course. Since Cocchi was a definite link for Mozart's career and nothing I have found contradicts that fact.

You describe the role of the Holy Roman Empire as being 'minor'. Well, what about Earl Cowper ? The Englishman who lived for decades in Florence and who was a major musical impresario and patron, knighted as a baron of the Holy Roman Empire, although he was English. Or various ambassadors of Britain including the Ambassador to Vienna, Keith. These were vitally important in the Mozart story. And in the propagation of Mozart. Again, the idea of Vienna as 'city of music'. This cannot be separated from the Holy Roman Empire, whose capital city it was. And then we have the affair of the Requiem, announced as proof positive that Mozart had died as a loyal son of the Roman Catholic Church. And an employee of the Cathedral.

No, you believe the role of the 'Holy Roman Empire' in the career of Mozart was minor. When, we see, his association from the start was organised by a Prince Archbishop of Salzburg. And, decades later, in the 19th century, when the Mozarteum (the centre for the study of Mozart was opened in Salzburg) it was patronised by the Prince Archbishop of Salzburg. The ecclesiastical links with Mozart are indisputable. And they included his award of the Order of the Golden Spur in Rome, by the Pope himself. But you believe the Role of the Holy Roman Empire was minor.

As for fraternities, are you suggesting these had no place in the life and career of Mozart ? Surely not. Since, in truth, we see countless proofs of the opposite in Rosicrucianism (a belief very strongly based in Salzburg), plus Freemasonry, and, of course, in many, many illuminatist publishers, managers and propagandists of his time and beyond. How you can say these things are 'minor' has escaped me.

Unless I am mistaken Mr Cocchi was an occulist himself. But perhaps I am mistaken ?

It can be no coincidence, Yanni, that the move to unite Europe, and to unite entire nations, (which everyone knows has been spoken of as a goal of globalism and particularly of the illuminatists since the 18th century) are strikingly similar to those of empires themselves. So that, once again, we cannot ignore these things and can only observe that they involve the unification of disparate fraternities, of which Freemasonry, Rosicrucianism, Illuminatism etc. are obvious examples. These 'secularised' movements uniting with the net effect being to control, to rule from within, to remain, officially, of minor significance, but, in reality, to have a clear and obvious tendency to maintain the power of the elites, to expand them, rather, and to serve the 'status quo'. Whether this is acknowledged by general members of the fraternties at the lower levels of these organisations or not. Since, again, we see evidence of it everywhere and especially in this vital area of culture - the control of what is taught and believed of musical achievement in particular. It is precisely because textbooks tell us nonsense in matters of biography and achievement etc. that we are able to say that some other explanation for these omissions exists. And it does. Since the 'fairy story' must be maintained at all costs. The one invented by those whose control of the music industry has made them in the first place.

It seems to me obvious that banking, commerce, and politics are not the only areas of corruption within our society. Since that of music and the performing arts are and have always been subject to the same corporate and often blatant examples of control and fiction.

Regards

Thanks Yanni. I will post here from time to time. Nice to discuss these things with you.

Best wishes

Robert N.

Aria
'Mache dich, mein Herze, rein'
Matthäus-Passion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF6xVtLL-l8

[yanni]

"Unless I am mistaken Mr Cocchi was an occulist himself. But perhaps I am mistaken ?"

He was much more than that and to assign him just the "occulist" attribute, is in fact a distortion of truth (coming furthermore from the one who has promised to ask his italian friends on "their Cocchis and why they hide them" never to return on the subject).

He was a highly talented, exceptionaly intelligent, extremely hardworking, perfectly balanced, wonderfully disciplined, deeply self motivated and amazingly successfull, civil servant of France, their top "secret agent", who had to wear many hats and associate himself with all sorts, to control and influence them, as his duties demanded.

I have absolutely no doubt that every national archive in every country he "passed through" in his time, still maintains a room full of files on his person where, an army of researchers has been employed in the past to crosscheck and "establish" his multiple aliases as separate individuals (maintaining them from now on is however questionable).

He was well trusted as a diplomat in all "courts" at least till 1786, including USA's but his identity and the controversy in his many aliases had been partly uncovered. He was thereby threatened and propably blackmailed at the time (thus concented to deliver his music archive to Mozart but never mentioned him in his "Koch" music dictionary of 1792) but kept on serving Royal France, totally "drained" already, under yet more aliases, until "Terror" decapitated the Royal couple when he decided to quit and permanently settle in Russia. He was already around 70 at the time.

For the "common good" (his concept) it was decided to "bury" him in a myth, a rather favourable myth at that, "Le comte de Saint Germain", still described as a likeable "good sort", his "charlatan" personality, a professional hazard, suppressed by other comments, all to his favour.

He definitely was a pacifist and definitely proposed "make trade, not war" and practiced "make love instead" in his private life too (rather excessively and indiscriminatly, I might add) !

In short, he was "Flying-throughout his life but was not really a-Dutchman" even if he was a "Heinault" or a "Hennin" for a while!

But did he favour "dreadnought diplomacy to promote trade and conquer" as it then developed (to still apply, wherever possible, today)?

Having studied him "a while", I answer "no, he did not" and challenge anyone to prove me wrong.

Did he apply his "common good" rule on his own person?

He certainly did, perhaps masterminding and certainly silently approving the "removal" of his own son Pavel, to honour previous pacts and avoid another war, but failed , to witness it and die soon after, an unhappy Mathusala, as I believe.

Do return here by all means: Your answer on Cocchi may be the first, but is certainly not the last "promised answer yet to come".

My regards.


As a farewell gift, a little something freshly "forged":

Mozart’s seven great operas, his brilliant contribution
to music theatre and world culture, are unequalled in
their depth of human characterisation and musical
expression.
Through happy coincidence, all seven opera scores
have survived almost complete in Mozart’s manuscript.
The Packard Humanities Institute (PHI, Los Altos, Ca.)
has embarked on producing a facsimile edition
of the seven autograph scores. Mozart scholars,
libraries and of course all lovers of Mozart’s stage
works now have the opportunity of acquiring these
priceless manuscripts in flawless reproductions.
At the same time, all risks about preserving Mozart’s
legacy for the world of music are taken care of.
The Packard Humanities Institute (PHI) charitable
foundation, known for its philanthropic programmes in
the arts and sciences, has forged an ideal cooperation
for the Mozart project. Under the scholarly direction of
an editorial board (Ulrich Konrad, David Packard,
Wolfgang Rehm, Christoph Wolff; General editor
Dietrich Berke) the International Mozarteum
Foundation Salzburg and the libraries where Mozart’s
manuscripts are held are working together with the
Packard Humanities Institute.
The production of the volumes is exquisite
for the digitalization of the manuscripts
has been undertaken using the latest
technology, which allows for an astounding
level of authenticity and precision in detail.
The printing follows the uncompromisingly
high standards demanded by the edition

[Musicology]

Yanni,

In answer to the question of whether Cocchi was an occultist your answer (as a student of Cocchi and his life) is that he, 'was much more than that'. Is it difficult for you to understand this reply of yours is, shall we say, a classic example of obscurantism ?

So please allow me ask it another way. Is it true Cocchi was an inducted member of various secret societies whose members existed across the lands where Cocchi travelled, all of whom were bound by oaths, whose teachings and whose beliefs were not accessible to ordinary members of the public, and which connected him, Cocchi, to a network of similarly inducted people ? Many of whose members were of direct and indirect influence and importance in his career ?

As to whether Cocchi was 'highly talented, intelligent, extremely hard working, perfectly balanced, wonderfully disciplined' etc. is, you will surely agree, another matter.

Will you please tell us some details of Cocchi's occultism and of the societies and beliefs to which he subscribed ? If you know such things, of course. I mean, over 200 years later these may be a questions you are happy to answer frankly and honestly. So when you say, 'he was much more than that' this is, you may agree, almost meaningless.

Now, regarding the other contents of your post, on 'Mozart's 7 great operas' which, you say, are 'his' brilliant contribution to music theatre and world culture' and, which you also say, 'are unequalled in their depth of human characterisation and musical expression' you join the ranks of the credulous in writing as you do - (though I doubt whether the words are of your own invention) -

'Through happy coincidence, all 7 opera scores have survived almost complete in Mozart's manuscript. The Packard Humanities Institute (PHI, Los Altos, Calif) has embarked on producing a facsimile edition of the 7 autograph scores. Mozart scholars, libraries and of course all lovers of Mozart's stage works now have the opportunity of aquiring these priceless manuscripts in flawless reproductions. At the same time, all risks about preserving Mozart’s legacy for the world of music are taken care of. The Packard Humanities Institute (PHI) charitable foundation, known for its philanthropic programmes in the arts and sciences, has forged an ideal cooperation for the Mozart project. Under the scholarly direction of an editorial board (Ulrich Konrad, David Packard,Wolfgang Rehm, Christoph Wolff; General editor Dietrich Berke) the International Mozarteum Foundation Salzburg and the libraries where Mozart’s manuscripts are held are working together with the Packard Humanities Institute.The production of the volumes is exquisite for the digitalization of the manuscripts has been undertaken using the latest technology, which allows for an astounding level of authenticity and precision in detail. The printing follows the uncompromisingly high standards demanded by the edition’.

Such is your view, Yanni, and such (to be fair) is of course the view of the Packard Humanities Institute, the Mozarteum in Salzburg, the Mozart industry, and (not surprisingly) the music loving consumers of this music. Since they have no reason to suspect differently.

But, since you’ve posted this glowing advertisement for Mozart’s 7 operatic scores (and since I’ve taken the trouble to repeat your post here) and since I am aware of their existence may I ask you one or two questions on these Mozart ‘autograph’ scores ? I promise not to confuse you with many, many questions. In fact, in deference to your expertise, I will ask you only one or two simple ones. Is that OK ?

You see, Yanni, I am aware that I am writing to a student of the life and career of Cocchi. I assume you have not studied this subject of the autograph scores of Mozart’s 7 operas. I assume too that you are impressed by them being reproduced and sold in ‘authenticity and precision’. And I assume, Yanni, this advertisement which you have brought to our attention has persuaded you.

Fine. I will go easy on you. I promise I will burden you with no hard questions. You, Yanni, will have no difficulty in answering only three questions from me. These so simple I have confidence you will be able to reply to them without difficulty. And here they are -

1. Yanni, of these 7 Mozart operatic autographs, would you object if I focus on only one of them ? Just for the sake of discussing them, their reproduction and their commercial sale generally ? Yes or No ?

2. If the answer is yes may I choose for the sake of illustration the autograph of ‘The Marriage of Figaro’ (‘Le Nozze di Figaro’) ? One of these 7. This autograph, as you have just said, is being sold today in a wonderfully accurate edition, etc. Have you any objection to me choosing Figaro as one of these 7 ? Yes or No ?

3. Yanni, this autograph now being sold commercially in wonderful detail of Mozart’s opera ‘The Marriage of Figaro’. You may be aware the premiere of that famous opera was (so all the textbooks say) 1st May 1786 in Vienna. Will you please tell us whether this 'Figaro' operatic autograph now being sold in high precision edition existed then, at the time of its Vienna premiere ? A simple yes or no will be enough to start the ball rolling.

Regards (and without frivolity, obscurantism, any artificial flavouring or colouring, and free from any genetically modified contents) - LOL !

Robert

[yanni]

Is that so?

Accepting he was indeed a member of many "secret societies", I then proceeded to explain at length in my previous post that he was as well a top diplomat, serving France as a secret agent and that he employed his "occultism" in this capacity.

You chose to ignore it (as you did other parts of my post concerning your "input" or lack of) to then comment on the quote on Mozart's operas in small print taken from http://www.mozart.gr/PHI_Mozart_eng as if I had something to do with it.

Well, I did not and the only reason I posted it as a farewell gift, was to have your own "musicologist's" comments on the piece, originating from a greek site, a totally false piece, in my opinion.

We agreed, from the beginning of this thread, that Mozart was manufactured, remember?

And it was me who insisted we focus on "opera" with you looking the other way, remember that too?

You selected to "pass" once again and to return the last package to the sender, labelling your own intent furthermore as without frivolity, obscurantism, any artificial flavouring or colouring, and free from any genetically modified contents.

Well, your own actions dispute you....AGAIN!

A true climax of "fairness", hah-hah!

(The floor is yours whenever you are ready).

Cheers.

[Musicology]

Yanni,

I am not asking you to 'accept' anything. But I am asking you once more, as an honest student of Cocchi, to provide if you will some details of the occultism with which Cocchi was associated. If you have details, that is. But, since you even choose to italicise the term 'secret societies' (which implies this term is not one to which you subcribe to in respect of Cocchi) will you edit your post and describe them instead as 'public societies' ? Or shall we end this obscurantism and finally share what we know ?

Thank you for your farewell gift. Time will tell whether you will kindly answer my 3 easy questions on the 'autograph' score of 'Figaro' - one of the 7 'Mozart' scores which are (as you have correctly noted) being advertised and commercially sold as such.

The problem is (and it seems you are not aware of it) this 'Figaro' score and the 6 other operatic 'autographs' are really NOT Mozart 'autographs'. Indeed, the proofs of this are able to be shown. Which I offer to do here if you wish to discuss the subject. I was (and still am) hopeful of you answering my 3 simple questions in your reply. But, if not, thank you for your parting gift and please accept mine. My offer to discuss that subject. Subject, of course, to receiving your reply to these 3 questions.


Regards

BWV 191/1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jouo1gndiLs

Is that so?

Accepting he was indeed a member of many "secret societies", I then proceeded to explain at length in my previous post that he was as well a top diplomat, serving France as a secret agent and that he employed his "occultism" in this capacity.

You chose to ignore it (as you did other parts concerning your "input" or lack of) to then comment on the quote on Mozart's operas in small print taken from http://www.mozart.gr/PHI_Mozart_eng as if I had something to do with it.

Well, I did not and the only reason I posted it as a farewell gift, was to have your own "musicologist's" comments on the piece, originating from a greek site, a totally false piece, in my opinion.

You selected to "pass" and to return the package to the sender, labelling your own intent furthermore as without frivolity, obscurantism, any artificial flavouring or colouring, and free from any genetically modified contents.

Well, your own actions dispute you, once again!

A true climax of "fairness", hah-hah!

Cheers.

[yanni]

I have covered, up to a point, Cocchi's "occultism" in this thread already, have also labelled "secret societies" and their usefullness in governance at the time as well and, should you wish to read more on the subject, my thread on Poe contains many more details for anyone interested.

Now you!

[Musicology]

Yes, Yanni, you have 'covered' Cocchi's occultism to the point of obscurantism. I will ask you no more of it.

And, as for a reply to my three easy questions on the autograph of 'Figaro', do you think I should ask no more of them also ?



Regards

I have covered, up to a point, Cocchi's "occultism" in this thread already, have also labelled "secret societies" and their usefullness in governance at the time as well and, should you wish to read more on the subject, my thread on Poe contains many more details for anyone interested.

Now you!