Talk:Symphony No. 94 (Haydn)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Form, please
If anyone has a detailed analysis of the form and variation of this symphony I would greatly use any information.
[edit] Feeble
Thanks for the compliment, Ashley, but "feeble" is correct. After 1803 the elderly Haydn evidently had heart trouble, and he felt so sick that he couldn't even perform the largely-mental work of musical composition. His legs were uncomfortably swollen due to poor circulation, and the highlight of his day was to reach the point where he was properly dressed and could receive visitors. On the question of whether the elderly Haydn was also senile, biographers seem to be ambivalent.
The point of including "feeble" is that the quotation sounds a little bit empty-headed, and it seems unlikely that Haydn would have so expressed himself during the period of his life when his powers were intact.
The information given above can be found in the Haydn bios cited in the article Joseph Haydn.
Opus33 14:56, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Bored audience?
I've moved this to the talk page:
- It is said that Haydn had become fed up with his audience falling asleep during his concerts. Particularly, he was most annoyed at royalty whom would commission him to write a piece, only to fall asleep during its performance. Adding insult to injury, his pieces were often commissioned for uninteresting galas or simply dinner guests. Haydn wrote "Surprise Symphony" with this in mind.
because it's a classic instance of the "it is said" syndrome and thus violates policy. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_terms. It could legitimately be restored if there is a proper source for it. Opus33 17:15, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
- How about "Many musical historians and biographers speculate that..." [1] [2]. Almost all of them at least say he wasn't fond of his audience falling alseep all the time. I'm sure there's a source for that at least.--Ben 02:35, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
-
- Well, if we said "Many musical historians...", we would still be in violation of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_terms, which is highly recommended reading.
-
- As far as those Web references given by Ben, #2 appears to be incompetent--this person thinks that Prince Eszterhazy heard the Surprise Symphony, which would be quite a feat, since he was already dead when it was composed. #1 specifically labels the "bored audience" tale as speculation--"the audience may be imagined to have comfortably settled...".
-
- The five Haydn biographies I've read make no mention of this tale, and as a result I strongly suspect it is a fiction. Everybody knows the story, of course, because it is told to children, but all sorts of nonsense is told to children. Unfortunately they don't normally check the elementary curriculum for scholarly accuracy. Opus33 19:55, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Various excisions
I removed this from the article as unverified:
- Trivia: Among the symphony's detractors was Charles Ives, who labeled it "easy music for the sissies."
Can we have a context and a reference for this quote? Was Ives specifically citing this symphony, or classical symphonies of this ilk in general? Also, the quote says more about Ives than about the Surprise Symphony. --RobertG ♬ talk 12:36, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
I removed this as requiring more context and discussion:
- and the scherzo became the norm with Beethoven's symphonies.
This contention probably belongs on the discussion of the historical development of the symphony rather than specifically this symphony. --RobertG ♬ talk 12:36, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
I removed this rhythmic discussion as subjective:
- The time signature is 2/4, but rhythmically the music is likely to be felt as being "in one"; i.e. just one beat to the bar. A higher-level beat is defined by the prevalence of four-bar phrases.
It seems a bit original to me. While I see the point being made (the perception of rhythmic ambiguity in the movement as having an effective time signature of either 1/2 or 4/2), Haydn definitely wrote 2/4 and anything else is interpretation unless someone produces a reference otherwise. --RobertG ♬ talk 12:36, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] G major??
I've never seen the song arranged in G major; the common key I've seen is C major. The notes are:
C-C-E-E-G-G-E
F-F-D-D-B-B-G
C-C-E-E-G-G-E
C-C-F#-F#-G
Note that the F#'s are a small modulation to G, but then it returns to C after the modulation. It repeats the same notes, but then, the next note after the G of the second section is an F natural, in C, and the last few notes are:
E-E-G-G-C-C-E
D-D-C-B-A-B-C-C-C
Any clarification?? Georgia guy 01:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I have the score in front of me. The second movement is most definitely C Major. To further confirm this, the second section is in C Minor. Spamguy 20:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Hello Georgia guy, the article already contained the answer to your question: "Andante. This is the surprise movement, a theme and variations in 2/4 time and the subdominant key of C major." Typically, symphony composers don't write all the movements in the same key. Opus33 20:01, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Can anyone help me out with a listening guide for the first movement of the this Symphony No. 94. I am a non-music major and have this as part of an assignment. Thanks.