Abendroth Edition

yes that was the only reason

....no?

....no?

....yes? that's just how musical history played.

You can't just say that and expect it to retroactively be true.

But it IS true.

Oh boy

Once, when some one reported to Brahms some fresh sarcasm which Wagner had levelled at him, he exclaimed: "Good heavens! Wagner, honoured and triumphant, takes up most of the highroad. How can I, going my own modest way, be any hindrance or annoyance to him? Why cannot he leave me in peace, since we are never likely to clash?"

And yet Brahms did the exact same thing to Bruckner. It's like rock, paper, scissors with these self-absorbed musicians.

Brahms was just being sarcastic back. Source: I was there

I dunno, Brahms was pretty awkward and obsequious in his letter to Wagner.

Source: I was there

Well, if you say so. Is it true that Bruckner was just pretending to be a naive and emotionally sensitive peasant? I remember an article claiming it was a facade he created to trick people.

Is it true that Bruckner was just pretending to be a naive and emotionally sensitive peasant?

Nah, he was a veritable lamb

Maybe you just fell for his charms?

who gives a shit

i swear the constant war of the romantics posting in this thread is just the same conversation over and over again

I hate to say it, but I think Brahms felt threatened by Bruckner as a symphonist who had a reputation to live up to, so he tried to influence that awful troupe that gathered around him to sway the public's opinion. And I think the only reason it didn't work was because Brahms hated the critics and acolytes pushing the Brahms vs. Wagner narrative even more than the idea of being eclipsed by Bruckner. Brahms was a kind man turned overzealous because of sycophants, but in the end he overcame even them. I do wish they had had a chance (B&B) to have at least one proper, sincere tête-à-tête. That probably would've made them become good friends at the very least.

He never knew I was watching. None of them did.
Would you still be saying that if we were discussing Wagner in the same context, dear schwester?

yes because biographical details are irrelevant, i only care about the music

Produce an analysis and comparison of the harmonic developments present in Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique, Liszt piano sonata, Franck's Symphony in D minor Saint-Saëns's "Organ" Symphony

and* Saint-Saëns's etc

get cracking

not doing your homework assignment for you

Made me think of this, and I can't help but feel that it's probably true:

Although Brahms, whose First Symphony was still uncompleted, had nevertheless been firmly seated on the world's symphonic throne (for had he not been crowned by all critics as Beethoven's heir?) court-conductor Herbeck could not refrain from making the following remark to Bruckner after hearing this work [Second Symphony]: "I assure you if Brahms were capable of writing such a symphony the concert-hall would rock with applause."

Bruckner's 2nd symphony is unbelievably shit, though. Hence why there's multiple editions by Bruckner acolytes which hodgepodge together different ideas in a vain attempt to make it interesting.

Isn't that true for most of Bruckner's symphonies?

Only 1-4 and 8 have major textual differences between the versions.

And of those, only 2 and 8 have Bruckner editors being hugely interventionist. Well, so long as you ignore the old Shalck, Lowe, etc editions from Bruckner's day which everyone has discredited at this point

Apparently they did meet.

In the autumn of 1880 personal friends of Bruckner and Brahms, hoping to end the quarrel between the two masters, agreed to bring them together in a Viennese restaurant. Bruckner, quite amicable, had arrived early and had already had two or three portions of Nudel-soup before Brahms put in an appearance. "Stiff and cold they faced each other across the table," related one of those present. It was an uncomfortable situation and the well-meaning conspirators were highly disappointed. Finally Brahms broke the silence and called for the bill-of-fare. With a forced display of good-nature he cried out: "Now let's see what there is to eat!" He glanced along the list of courses, suddenly looked up, and ordered: "Waiter, bring me smoked ham and dumplings!" Instantly Bruckner joined in, crying, "That's it, Doctor! Smoker ham and dumplings. At least that's something on which we can agree!" The effect of this remark was instantaneous. Everybody shook with laughter. The ice was broken and the remainder of the evening proved to be friendly and jolly.

A real understanding between the two was, of course, impossible. It was a case of temperaments diametrically opposed, conceptions of art basically at variance, in short, an apt illustration of Kipling's phrase "And the twain shall never meet."

Bruckner explained the situation thus: "He is Brahms (hats off!); I am Bruckner; I like my works better. He who wants to be soothed by music will become attached to Brahms; but whoever wants to be carried away by music will find but little satisfaction in his work." Brahms himself had declared before joining the Hanslick camp: "Bruckner is the greatest symphonist of the age." Once after listening to a Bruckner symphony Brahms approached the composer, saying: "I hope you won't feel hurt about it, but I really can't make out what you are trying to get at with your compositions." "Never mind, Doctor," answered Bruckner, "that's perfectly all right. I feel just the same way about your things."

fake fan

Seems like, much like with Tchaikovsky, Brahms was perfectly able to separate a private individual from his public words, and that even those, ultimately managed to gain his appreciation. Much of the derision and schoolgirl playground he said he said trash was brought about, maintained, and inflated by these no-talent sycophants that ran rampant during the late 19th century

public works*; sorry, I'm very sleepy

I'm kinda sad. If it weren't for that dumb "war", fueled by tiny-dicked critics and students trying to influence their superiors via cheap adulation so as to "make a name for themselves" ruined a relationship which could've been compared to that between Tchaikovsky and Grieg, or even Schumann and Brahms themselves.

Sycophants certainly made it worse, but we have to remember Brahms was there since the beginning when he signed the anti-Liszt testament with Joachim in 1860 or whenever it was, effectively starting the dispute between the two camps. Sadly I don't think Brahms ever warmed to Liszt.

Also his 2 is in no way inferior to his 4 or 5

anti-Liszt testament

Yeah, but I feel that was more a declaration of intention regarding the future of german music and less a declaration that these new germans (in spirit, some of them; let's not forget Berlioz was considered part of that group too, no to mention Liszt) were their sworn enemies and musical antithesis. In fact I see Bruckner as a potential bridge between the two "groups" that was, oddly enough, ultimately rejected by both. Don't forget that the Wagnerians were also very harsh and insultingly condescending to him, too, like he was just a child trying to play grownup while everyone around was going aww. Wagner had to recognise his talents and his personal dedication because otherwise he'd lose face, but as usual he's a special case. I am with you in

Sadly I don't think Brahms ever warmed to Liszt.

But I think that's more to do with Liszt being already quite old at that point in his career and only interested in watching from afar as he secretly continued to push structural and harmonic techniques way into the future via small but compelling pieces. He was in his own beautiful little world is what I'm trying to say.