Despite the impression of Mozart's music on people, his music did have a more casual tone than composers such as Bach and later Beethoven. Mozart's music is rife with self-plagiarizing and formulaic use of musical form, as well as a strict adherence to tonal rules and basic counterpoint. It is reasonable to assume that Mozart held a less adventurous view of music than other composers.
However, this strict adherence to tonality suggests that while Mozart may not have been terribly creative, he was very skilled in the mass production of well-written music. He knew exactly what he was doing as he was writing. This strict adherence to the rules, of course, did not allow him the creative freedom that other composers took, which led to the aforementioned self-plagiarizing and use of formula.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think you bring up an interesting point about the level of creativity (or lack thereof) that Mozart incorporates into his music. While an experienced and educated ear can distinguish Mozart’s "strict adherence to the rules", speaking from purely a novice perspective I was completely unaware of Mozart's lack of creativity. I had always assumed that because growing up I learned about Mozart in the context that he was one of the best composers ever, that his work was in fact very innovative. This assumption was furthered upon watching clips of Mozart in class. When he is at the piano and creates a livelier, interesting tune on the spot of a march than the composer of the piece. However, after reading your argument I am forced to listen to his music more critically and compare his work with that of his contemporaries. In addition, I am curious as to why Mozart became so popular, arguably more popular than most of his contemporaries if he did not exercise the same or higher level of creative liberties as they did? If his music is in fact less complex and even contains “self-plagiarizing”, why was he more successful than some of his contemporaries?
ReplyDelete