Is the later work of a composer better than his early work?
Most wines get better by preserving them for some years in a wine cellar, although this is not the case for all of them.
Could we also suppose that a composer - forgive me the unrespectable analogy - gets better as years go by?
I would like to write a short text about this because I have a somewhat unexpected opinion about this:
For me the early work of a composer is often his best work.
Of course we could never speak in general terms about this topic, and there are undoubtedly composers who actually get better by getting older.
Everything depends on the criteria we use to value a composition:
These criteria can be:
To me, the originality and invention of the themes and an ingenious harmonic and contrapuntal work are by far the most important parameters in music.
I think this is why I often find the early work of composers the best.
Once heard for example the theme of Bach’s famous Toccata in d minor, it is hard to forget it. Bach was hardly 20 years old when he wrote or - better - improvised this.
I just think young composers are often surprised about their own invention and you can often feel a real joy in the music of young composers, even if it concerns a composition in a minor key.
In my article ‘ratio vs intuition’ I write about the supremacy of intuition over rationality.
It often occurs to me that I find the compositions of experienced composers too much ‘worked out’ and not spontaneous enough. There has been too much thinking and puzzling.
After all, music is only for our ‘amusement’ in the real sense of the word. It is such a strange thing, not to be taken too seriously and at the same time ‘artium omnium musica suprema est’, music enlightens our souls in this temporarily world more than any other art.
Most wines get better by preserving them for some years in a wine cellar, although this is not the case for all of them.
Could we also suppose that a composer - forgive me the unrespectable analogy - gets better as years go by?
I would like to write a short text about this because I have a somewhat unexpected opinion about this:
For me the early work of a composer is often his best work.
Of course we could never speak in general terms about this topic, and there are undoubtedly composers who actually get better by getting older.
Everything depends on the criteria we use to value a composition:
These criteria can be:
- How inventive is the music?
- How balanced is the form?
- How rich is the harmonic and contrapuntal progression?
- How clever is the instrumentation?
- Etc…
To me, the originality and invention of the themes and an ingenious harmonic and contrapuntal work are by far the most important parameters in music.
I think this is why I often find the early work of composers the best.
Once heard for example the theme of Bach’s famous Toccata in d minor, it is hard to forget it. Bach was hardly 20 years old when he wrote or - better - improvised this.
I just think young composers are often surprised about their own invention and you can often feel a real joy in the music of young composers, even if it concerns a composition in a minor key.
In my article ‘ratio vs intuition’ I write about the supremacy of intuition over rationality.
It often occurs to me that I find the compositions of experienced composers too much ‘worked out’ and not spontaneous enough. There has been too much thinking and puzzling.
After all, music is only for our ‘amusement’ in the real sense of the word. It is such a strange thing, not to be taken too seriously and at the same time ‘artium omnium musica suprema est’, music enlightens our souls in this temporarily world more than any other art.