<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Performer&#8217;s Perspective- Mahler 3, a shout-out</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2010/02/09/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-shout-out/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2010/02/09/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-shout-out/</link>
	<description>Music, opinion, life as a performing musician</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 07:43:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kenneth Woods</title>
		<link>http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2010/02/09/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-shout-out/comment-page-1/#comment-182322</link>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Woods</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Feb 2012 14:19:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/?p=1371#comment-182322</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-180074&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;@tyner white &lt;/a&gt; 

I forgot to respond to your mention of Brahms 2 and Mahler 1. You&#039;re not the first to note the similarity of that passage (bar 234-242 for those of you checking at home) of the Brahms to the opening of Mahler 1. People often smile and say something about it to their stand partner in rehearsal. In my own score, from many years ago, are the words &quot;Beeth 4! (Mahler?)&quot; The two pieces (Brahms 2 and Mahler 1) are 10 years apart exactly- the Brahms was still new (and the composer still very much alive). It&#039;s funny that Mahler says of the opening of the symphony that it is not music at all, but the sound of nature. Would Brahms have approved. 

So, is it a question of Brahms and Mahler both referring to the same passage in Beethoven, or Mahler citing both? What would it tell us about Mahler if his whole symphonic output started with a quote from Brahms? &quot;I&#039;m next&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="#comment-180074" rel="nofollow">@tyner white </a> </p>
<p>I forgot to respond to your mention of Brahms 2 and Mahler 1. You&#8217;re not the first to note the similarity of that passage (bar 234-242 for those of you checking at home) of the Brahms to the opening of Mahler 1. People often smile and say something about it to their stand partner in rehearsal. In my own score, from many years ago, are the words &#8220;Beeth 4! (Mahler?)&#8221; The two pieces (Brahms 2 and Mahler 1) are 10 years apart exactly- the Brahms was still new (and the composer still very much alive). It&#8217;s funny that Mahler says of the opening of the symphony that it is not music at all, but the sound of nature. Would Brahms have approved. </p>
<p>So, is it a question of Brahms and Mahler both referring to the same passage in Beethoven, or Mahler citing both? What would it tell us about Mahler if his whole symphonic output started with a quote from Brahms? &#8220;I&#8217;m next&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kenneth Woods</title>
		<link>http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2010/02/09/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-shout-out/comment-page-1/#comment-181342</link>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Woods</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 12:35:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/?p=1371#comment-181342</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-180074&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;@tyner white &lt;/a&gt; 

Very interesting comment, Tyner. Thanks for writing.

I&#039;d never noticed the similarity with the Horn Trio- very interesting. If it is intentional, the question would be why? What does the Horn Trio tell us about Mahler 2? Something to think about.

The link between Schumann 3 and Brahms 3 is more explicit than simply the rhythm- at bar 449 of the Schumann, you can hear the main theme of Brahms 3, pitches (transposed), rhythm and all.

Again, many thanks for the very interesting thoughts

Ken</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="#comment-180074" rel="nofollow">@tyner white </a> </p>
<p>Very interesting comment, Tyner. Thanks for writing.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d never noticed the similarity with the Horn Trio- very interesting. If it is intentional, the question would be why? What does the Horn Trio tell us about Mahler 2? Something to think about.</p>
<p>The link between Schumann 3 and Brahms 3 is more explicit than simply the rhythm- at bar 449 of the Schumann, you can hear the main theme of Brahms 3, pitches (transposed), rhythm and all.</p>
<p>Again, many thanks for the very interesting thoughts</p>
<p>Ken</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Lawrence</title>
		<link>http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2010/02/09/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-shout-out/comment-page-1/#comment-181208</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Lawrence</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 03:28:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/?p=1371#comment-181208</guid>
		<description>Great article.  I went to the web looking for someone commenting on the virtual pirating of the Brahms finale theme, and was pleased to find this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article.  I went to the web looking for someone commenting on the virtual pirating of the Brahms finale theme, and was pleased to find this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tyner white</title>
		<link>http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2010/02/09/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-shout-out/comment-page-1/#comment-180074</link>
		<dc:creator>tyner white</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 19:34:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/?p=1371#comment-180074</guid>
		<description>Thank you for going into this quotelerism in detail, it deserves attention because it is an aspect of extended family which music offers us (the Mahler of Sy3 would doubtless agree).  I was a little shocked when Bill McGloghlin pointed out this example on his program, and wondered why I hadn&#039;t noticed it.   I had also missed one pointed out by Peter Schickele, Brahms quoting the initial rhythm from Schumann 3 in his 3.  Some of us (maybe including me) who are family-maldeveloped need this training input from our composer friends who are a surrogate extended family.

Having said that/those, I&#039;d like to offer competing &quot;quotes&quot; I noticed since being alerted this this issue.

The first three Mahler symphonies all start with Brahms!  While your reference to Beethoven 4 is good, please also look at the rondo theme of Brahms 2 finale, with two falling fourths comparable to Mahler&#039;s, and especially at the end of the development where the mood is very quiet and these fourths are heard slowly, with a half-step between them as in the Mahler, prior to the final reentry of the rondo theme.  I find the mood there more similar to Mahler 4 than the Beethoven.

Now look at the finale of the Horn Trio op. 40 where the main theme leads to three strident upward fourths and a series of triplet running notes-- and compare this to the opening theme in the basses in Mahler 2-- eleven exactly matching notes.  To be sure, Mahler writes &quot;Todtenfeier&quot; in 1889 or so, when Brahms was still living, long before marriage to Alma, but it&#039;s interesting to note an anecdote in Alma&#039;s memoirs where Gustav is madly searching for one more instrumentalist because he wants to run through the 
trio op. 40 one particular night-- it shows he was interested in the work.

Re Brahms and Mahler 3: I have seen an account in the travelogue section of the Chicago Tribune a decade ago, about places Mahler frequented on vacation in the Alps, telling of times when he would go to see Brahms and I think even went hiking with him looking at trees and mountains (all that stuff he told Walter he had put into the Third Symphony).  This is when Brahms is dying of cigar cancer and God or music or whatever has sent Gustav out to try to keep him going for a few more opus numbers.  (This is the same Gustav who was a veteran at battling death and had spent a year at age 13 trying to keep his younger brother Ernst alive through reading aloud, playing music etc.   Analogous to trying to keep a symphony alive to the &quot;age&quot; of 100 minutes?)

Anyway, try this: after the Brahms quote &quot;collapses into crisis&quot; as you put it-- maybe the crisis of how to get the old man out of bed?-- we hear &quot;Hey!  Johannes Brahms!  Let&#039;s go mo-o-o-o-u-u-u-ntaining!&quot; (I dunno, maybe the original is &quot;Gehn wir be-e-e-e-e-e-rgsteigen&quot; or something?).   And there&#039;s a shrill trumpet scream, &quot;Jo-han-nes BRAAAAAAAAAaaahms!&quot;  And eventually he got him going and looking at some more trees and we got op. 120 etc.

P.S.  &quot;How can one go back to the structural logic of a Brahms symphony after experiencing something as wild as the first movement of Mahler 3?&quot;  Maybe Mahler 4 is the answer to that (and also to Beethoven 4).   He sorted out the material and put the radical stuff in 3, the Haydncompliant (and the vocal finale a la Beethoven) in 4.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for going into this quotelerism in detail, it deserves attention because it is an aspect of extended family which music offers us (the Mahler of Sy3 would doubtless agree).  I was a little shocked when Bill McGloghlin pointed out this example on his program, and wondered why I hadn&#8217;t noticed it.   I had also missed one pointed out by Peter Schickele, Brahms quoting the initial rhythm from Schumann 3 in his 3.  Some of us (maybe including me) who are family-maldeveloped need this training input from our composer friends who are a surrogate extended family.</p>
<p>Having said that/those, I&#8217;d like to offer competing &#8220;quotes&#8221; I noticed since being alerted this this issue.</p>
<p>The first three Mahler symphonies all start with Brahms!  While your reference to Beethoven 4 is good, please also look at the rondo theme of Brahms 2 finale, with two falling fourths comparable to Mahler&#8217;s, and especially at the end of the development where the mood is very quiet and these fourths are heard slowly, with a half-step between them as in the Mahler, prior to the final reentry of the rondo theme.  I find the mood there more similar to Mahler 4 than the Beethoven.</p>
<p>Now look at the finale of the Horn Trio op. 40 where the main theme leads to three strident upward fourths and a series of triplet running notes&#8211; and compare this to the opening theme in the basses in Mahler 2&#8211; eleven exactly matching notes.  To be sure, Mahler writes &#8220;Todtenfeier&#8221; in 1889 or so, when Brahms was still living, long before marriage to Alma, but it&#8217;s interesting to note an anecdote in Alma&#8217;s memoirs where Gustav is madly searching for one more instrumentalist because he wants to run through the<br />
trio op. 40 one particular night&#8211; it shows he was interested in the work.</p>
<p>Re Brahms and Mahler 3: I have seen an account in the travelogue section of the Chicago Tribune a decade ago, about places Mahler frequented on vacation in the Alps, telling of times when he would go to see Brahms and I think even went hiking with him looking at trees and mountains (all that stuff he told Walter he had put into the Third Symphony).  This is when Brahms is dying of cigar cancer and God or music or whatever has sent Gustav out to try to keep him going for a few more opus numbers.  (This is the same Gustav who was a veteran at battling death and had spent a year at age 13 trying to keep his younger brother Ernst alive through reading aloud, playing music etc.   Analogous to trying to keep a symphony alive to the &#8220;age&#8221; of 100 minutes?)</p>
<p>Anyway, try this: after the Brahms quote &#8220;collapses into crisis&#8221; as you put it&#8211; maybe the crisis of how to get the old man out of bed?&#8211; we hear &#8220;Hey!  Johannes Brahms!  Let&#8217;s go mo-o-o-o-u-u-u-ntaining!&#8221; (I dunno, maybe the original is &#8220;Gehn wir be-e-e-e-e-e-rgsteigen&#8221; or something?).   And there&#8217;s a shrill trumpet scream, &#8220;Jo-han-nes BRAAAAAAAAAaaahms!&#8221;  And eventually he got him going and looking at some more trees and we got op. 120 etc.</p>
<p>P.S.  &#8220;How can one go back to the structural logic of a Brahms symphony after experiencing something as wild as the first movement of Mahler 3?&#8221;  Maybe Mahler 4 is the answer to that (and also to Beethoven 4).   He sorted out the material and put the radical stuff in 3, the Haydncompliant (and the vocal finale a la Beethoven) in 4.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kenneth Woods- A View From the Podium &#187; Composer&#8217;s Perspective- Gregson on Mahler (and Gregson)</title>
		<link>http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2010/02/09/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-shout-out/comment-page-1/#comment-88023</link>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Woods- A View From the Podium &#187; Composer&#8217;s Perspective- Gregson on Mahler (and Gregson)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:33:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/?p=1371#comment-88023</guid>
		<description>[...] The flip side of this is that, as we’ve already been discussing in this series, Mahler was an almost obsessive shouter-outer, quoting and referencing other works all the time, whether they be Brahms, Rott, Beethoven, or any [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The flip side of this is that, as we’ve already been discussing in this series, Mahler was an almost obsessive shouter-outer, quoting and referencing other works all the time, whether they be Brahms, Rott, Beethoven, or any [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 馬勒三 &#171; 永遠等待：Life in transition</title>
		<link>http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2010/02/09/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-shout-out/comment-page-1/#comment-86282</link>
		<dc:creator>馬勒三 &#171; 永遠等待：Life in transition</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 15:59:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/?p=1371#comment-86282</guid>
		<description>[...] 事緣，前一天聽家人說，會去聽馬勒三。剛好那天晚上我有點空，也很久沒聽港樂的音樂會。何況，下個月轉部門（到人稱敝機構的「地獄中的地獄」）後，也不知何時再有空，於是便決定去聽了。 中學初聽古典音樂時，也為馬勒交響曲的磅礡氣勢所震懾。但當時愛故作老成，喜聽第九和第十，對早期那些興趣沒那麼大，即使買了唱片也沒好好聽過。第三也不例外，只對其個半小時的長度和開首的圓號旋律略有印象。（以前唱片買得多，反倒聽得不專心，如今找mp3那麼容易，怪不得什麼音樂也沒大印象。）趁這機會，當天我也先上網看一些資料，從新認識一下這首作品，而非只知道這是馬勒其中一首交響曲。除了那些關於牧神初醒，自然各物以至人類、天使之言，到最終愛的樂章的介紹外，指揮家Kenneth Woods對本曲與前人的對話之解說也開了我眼界，對其在音樂史脈絡的位置更有掌握。 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 事緣，前一天聽家人說，會去聽馬勒三。剛好那天晚上我有點空，也很久沒聽港樂的音樂會。何況，下個月轉部門（到人稱敝機構的「地獄中的地獄」）後，也不知何時再有空，於是便決定去聽了。 中學初聽古典音樂時，也為馬勒交響曲的磅礡氣勢所震懾。但當時愛故作老成，喜聽第九和第十，對早期那些興趣沒那麼大，即使買了唱片也沒好好聽過。第三也不例外，只對其個半小時的長度和開首的圓號旋律略有印象。（以前唱片買得多，反倒聽得不專心，如今找mp3那麼容易，怪不得什麼音樂也沒大印象。）趁這機會，當天我也先上網看一些資料，從新認識一下這首作品，而非只知道這是馬勒其中一首交響曲。除了那些關於牧神初醒，自然各物以至人類、天使之言，到最終愛的樂章的介紹外，指揮家Kenneth Woods對本曲與前人的對話之解說也開了我眼界，對其在音樂史脈絡的位置更有掌握。 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2010/02/09/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-shout-out/comment-page-1/#comment-85900</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:25:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/?p=1371#comment-85900</guid>
		<description>Ken- 
The latest blog is very interesting, because you use the language that matches the gesture. Nothing subtle like an exclamation - but a shout-out - a statement of intent, laying down the gauntlet, even a declaration of war! Dionysus claims back what Apollo has stolen from him. Mahler thought of Brahms as feeble in some way, effeminate, lacking balls as we said this afternoon. Mahler&#039;s music is ballsy!
 
It also bears a resemblance to a big tune from Brahms Academic Festival overture and I think all these themes may share a common source in the revolutionary student song &quot;Wir hatten gebauet ein stattliches Haus&quot;. Peter Franklin makes the connection also with Rott and Mahler&#039;s student days too. But this all makes sense - here we have revolutionary fervour and youthful solidarity, What Brahms had made academically acceptable in his overture and which also found a respectable place in the veiled protestantism of his first symphony, Mahler here wrests back as the &quot;Weckruf&quot; - a summoning of primitive Dionysian energy to release a creative earthquake.
 
As you said - when you hear that first movement as a riposte to Brahms&#039; traditionalism and conservatism, its revolutionary energy seems more obvious than ever. Of course, by the end Mahler has rediscovered the Apollonian beauty which this first movement had simply trampled  upon. But Mahler&#039;s vision is all-encompassing, true-to-life - and not simply bourgeois and polite. Mahler wanted to go on protest marches, to shout out and rebel  - but what a vision to steer that youthful vitality and energy towards the resolution of that finale. It is a rebellion aimed at restoring the spiritual and the ideal....turning the money-lenders out of the temple, and the conservatives from their seats of power. Wow - what a composer that is!
 
Peter</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ken-<br />
The latest blog is very interesting, because you use the language that matches the gesture. Nothing subtle like an exclamation &#8211; but a shout-out &#8211; a statement of intent, laying down the gauntlet, even a declaration of war! Dionysus claims back what Apollo has stolen from him. Mahler thought of Brahms as feeble in some way, effeminate, lacking balls as we said this afternoon. Mahler&#8217;s music is ballsy!</p>
<p>It also bears a resemblance to a big tune from Brahms Academic Festival overture and I think all these themes may share a common source in the revolutionary student song &#8220;Wir hatten gebauet ein stattliches Haus&#8221;. Peter Franklin makes the connection also with Rott and Mahler&#8217;s student days too. But this all makes sense &#8211; here we have revolutionary fervour and youthful solidarity, What Brahms had made academically acceptable in his overture and which also found a respectable place in the veiled protestantism of his first symphony, Mahler here wrests back as the &#8220;Weckruf&#8221; &#8211; a summoning of primitive Dionysian energy to release a creative earthquake.</p>
<p>As you said &#8211; when you hear that first movement as a riposte to Brahms&#8217; traditionalism and conservatism, its revolutionary energy seems more obvious than ever. Of course, by the end Mahler has rediscovered the Apollonian beauty which this first movement had simply trampled  upon. But Mahler&#8217;s vision is all-encompassing, true-to-life &#8211; and not simply bourgeois and polite. Mahler wanted to go on protest marches, to shout out and rebel  &#8211; but what a vision to steer that youthful vitality and energy towards the resolution of that finale. It is a rebellion aimed at restoring the spiritual and the ideal&#8230;.turning the money-lenders out of the temple, and the conservatives from their seats of power. Wow &#8211; what a composer that is!</p>
<p>Peter</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Erik K</title>
		<link>http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2010/02/09/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-shout-out/comment-page-1/#comment-85746</link>
		<dc:creator>Erik K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:05:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/?p=1371#comment-85746</guid>
		<description>Wonderful post, as always.  One possible contender for the 20th-century quotation crown with Shostakovich is Charles Ives...the 2nd symphony makes my head explode.

Am I reading correctly that this concert will feature a work IN ADDITION to the Mahler?  Very old school.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wonderful post, as always.  One possible contender for the 20th-century quotation crown with Shostakovich is Charles Ives&#8230;the 2nd symphony makes my head explode.</p>
<p>Am I reading correctly that this concert will feature a work IN ADDITION to the Mahler?  Very old school.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mitch F</title>
		<link>http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2010/02/09/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-shout-out/comment-page-1/#comment-85712</link>
		<dc:creator>Mitch F</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:35:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/?p=1371#comment-85712</guid>
		<description>There&#039;s another instance of a Mahler-Brahms shout-out -- I like that lingo, Ken! -- but one with which Mahler was perhaps not eager even to hint at.  Why did Mahler eliminate the Blumine movement from the predecessor of his Symphony No. 1?  One of the speakers at a recent Colorado MahlerFest maintained that possibly the main reason was the trumpet solo&#039;s striking resemblance to the main theme of Brahms 1:  the very theme you link to above, where you talk about the opening of Mahler 3.  According to the speaker, Mahler may have excised Blumine because the obvious similarity to the Brahms would have made him appear derivative, even plagiaristic.  The music is at least similar, it must be admitted.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s another instance of a Mahler-Brahms shout-out &#8212; I like that lingo, Ken! &#8212; but one with which Mahler was perhaps not eager even to hint at.  Why did Mahler eliminate the Blumine movement from the predecessor of his Symphony No. 1?  One of the speakers at a recent Colorado MahlerFest maintained that possibly the main reason was the trumpet solo&#8217;s striking resemblance to the main theme of Brahms 1:  the very theme you link to above, where you talk about the opening of Mahler 3.  According to the speaker, Mahler may have excised Blumine because the obvious similarity to the Brahms would have made him appear derivative, even plagiaristic.  The music is at least similar, it must be admitted.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

