Curious Dislikes

If the "fault lies with you", what do we have to debate here? Our problems, whichever they are, cannot become issues for general discussion.

By the way, I am not "flat wrong", since even this notion of "taste" cannot be like a "blind date". Knowledge, education and further investigation guide us to learn to appreciate and, eventually experience the pleasures of the object of Art (even of Life). The way you (and quite a few others) describe what you "like" is like a "symptom" or "accidental reaction". What it happens with me is that I enjoy (more and in a better way) what I may comprehend (further). The more I can get into it, the more I can "enjoy" it. Of course, there is always the "entertaining" side of any Art, where the auteur wishes to please us with various means, but, even in this case, to acknowledge (to identify and recognise) the fact that the work functions in this way, it is a further consolidation of what you may simply like.

The difference with the "alien or the computer which could manage that" is that, whenever we humans can manage to follow the process of appreciation, we can be more enlightened and guided to what we are about to face.

By the way, I "love, find myself moved, experience joy and feel glad to be alive", because I know why I enjoy (or not) this object of Art/Music.

Parla

Actually, Eliza, I'm participating and I have not misunderstood the "nature of the thread". However, I'm still wondering, if you accept the fact that Mozart's two works in question are undisputed masterpieces and the "fault lies with you" only, what you are actually looking for. The reasons of your "failure"? I don't think anyone here or anywhere can really help you. It's your prerogative to like or dislike anything and an absolutely personal issue.

There is nothing "mysterious" about the very nature of taste itself. We simply don't care to know. If you dig it, you'll find more than you expected. However, as a very (if not absolutely) personal issue, you alone can find the answer(s).

As for "We have the music: it is usually enough", are you sure you actually have the music, let alone if this is enough (even usually)?

Parla

Very interesting post and extremely pertinent. This is a place where we can exchange our experiences freely: the valuable asset is our views that we won't find anyplace else. On the other hand, a really competent and huge treatise on any work from WAM's output is just two steps way on the shelves or rather two clicks away on your computer.

If I were a reviewer I'd use a forum like this to go under some kind of therapy by writting things I am not able to do professionaly. No need to be politically correct or go by the book!This a market where we can trade our experiences not the papers we might write on this or that aspect of classical music. There are better and specific places to this, mainly those related to academic matters.

Who on earth would say that Mozart's Clarinet Quintet is not a great work? Everyone can come up w/ dozens of pages dissertating about the complexity and greatness of that piece: but this is not what this thread intends to debate if I got Eliza's post right.

Having said that, I'd like to share my experience on this subject. First, such dislikes may occur due to a wrong approach to the work: badly performed and/or badly recorded. Later on, you come back to that piece through another reading and start enjoying it. This is rare though.

Another wrong approach occurs when you are not prepared or rather, don't want to dive into this or that work: don't want to insist: keep knocking till the door opens to you. Start listening to Mahler, don't get the picture (vast I must say) and label him as a poor composer. It's very common you meet people who say that they don't like Berg, Bruckner, Bartók, Webern.....but never tried properly to get their message.

A slight variation of the wrong approach mentioned above occurs when you forget the circumstances and/or the purposes of a work and jump to wrong conclusions. Music written to entertain guests, to celebrate dates or to be used as a pedagogical tool are liable to be misunderstood.

But dislikes may occur when you know the composer well, admire the writting of the work, grasp the message but disagree with the majority or the common sense and simply don't like it. This is, I guess, what Eliza talked about. It's our idiosyncrasies at work: it happens more often than our educated minds want to admit.

Regarding the mentioned "dislikes": WAM's clarinet quintet and clarinet concerto, I have to admit that I've never been enthusiastic about them either. As a matter of fact, I've never been enthusiastic about most of WAM's popular output. But we must take into account that that's what they were written for.

The great Mozart for me is to be found in his pre-Beetovenian piano sonatas, his string quintets (K. 515/516), Puchberg Trio K. 563, Serenade Gran Partita ..........and mainly his choral works and operas where imo he really excells: Great Mass in C, Requiem, Magic Flute, Don Giovanni.......

But to get bak to the subjet, let me add some "dislikes"of mine. First, belive it or not. I've never got to good terms w/ Brahms' 3rd symphony. And I love the other three, mainly the 2nd and 4th.

Another: Ravel's Bolero: boring to death for me! But in this case I have the support of the composer himself. I read somewhere that when a friend of the composer told him that Bolero was his masterwork he replied something like: "... but this is just a long crescendo!" Couldn't agree more: who cares for such a piece when you have his piano trio, his string quartet, his piano concerto for left hand, his "La valse".......to enjoy?

And the list goes on..........