Is the "Compositional Power" of Traditional Composers True? - Beethoven, Brahms, and the other side of the myth

The masters of classical music, especially Beethoven and Brahms, are often praised for their "compositional" skills. But is this really true? Isn't it just an assumption? There is an anecdote that Beethoven had poor calculation ability. Let's take an interesting look at the world of musical analysis, including Schenker's theory, while reexamining their "compositional powers.

1. ambiguous evaluation axis of "compositional ability

First, what exactly is "compositional beauty"? Generally speaking, it often refers to the formal beauty of a piece of music, the development of a theme, a sense of unity, and a well-balanced arrangement of phrases. However, these are not things that can be objectively measured, and to a large extent they are based on "post-analysis" by music critics and scholars.

For example, the last movement (Passacaglia) of Brahms' Fourth Symphony is praised as "perfectly composed," but this is because later critics read "strict variation form," and it does not necessarily mean that Brahms himself consciously composed it to "show off his compositional skills.

2. Beethoven's Computational Ability Problem and "Instinctive Compositional Ability"

While Beethoven was a genius composer, anecdotal evidence suggests that he had difficulty with calculation. His letters and notes frequently show simple arithmetical errors; for example, there are traces of mistaken number of bars in the score and repeated rewritings to correct the rhythmic allotments.

In one famous episode, he often made a mistake in the number of pages in a score, which was pointed out by his publisher. Beethoven was also not good at managing money, often miscalculating payments and repeatedly asking friends for loans. These anecdotes suggest that he relied on his intuition rather than mathematical precision in composing his music.

3. the Schenkerian theory and the "constructiveness" gobbledygook

In the world of music analysis, the "Schenker Theory" proposed by Heinrich Schenker is particularly well known. According to this theory, the works of great composers hide deep structures (Urlinie and Bassbrechung) behind superficial melodies and harmonic progressions.

Using this, both Beethoven's sonatas and Brahms' symphonies appear to be supported by "brilliant compositional forces. The problem, however, is that this theory is so arbitrary. If we apply Schenker's theory, in fact, we can explain almost any piece of music as "excellently composed. In other words, the theory itself is built on the premise that "works by great composers have good composition.

Schenker is not alone in this kind of "gobbledygook. Donald Tovey, for example, has hailed Brahms' music as "a master of counterpoint," but in fact Brahms did not push his counterpoint technique that far to the forefront. Charles Rosen also emphasizes the "mathematical beauty" of Mozart's works, but this is just a kind of post-interpretation.

4. summary: is "compositional power" the composer's or the critic's?

While Beethoven's and Brahms' "compositional skills" are certainly admired, the following problems exist with their reputation.

Compositional power" is a vague concept with no objective measure.

Given Beethoven's poor calculation ability, it is difficult to say that he consciously designed elaborate structures.

Schenker theory and other forms of musical analysis exist to discover the "goodness of composition," and are often post-interpreted.

Other music critics also conveniently analyze the composer's works to justify their own theories.

After all, compositional quality may be "something that critics discover. Of course, the music of Beethoven and Brahms is still wonderful, but their "compositional virtuosity" should not be spoken of as a myth, and a more skeptical viewpoint is necessary.