Talk:Symphony No. 41 (Mozart)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Brahms key relationships
- It is interesting to note that the four notes that comprise the main theme of the finale movement of the Jupiter Symphony coincide exactly with the keys of Brahms' four symphonies (c minor, D Major, F Major, e minor) - perhaps a subtle indication of the composer's incredible admiration for Mozart's music.
Is there a source for this? It seems to me like too original a conclusion for us to draw on our own. EldKatt (Talk) 18:21, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
The last part of that statement seems incorrect to me. Wouldn't Mozart have used those four notes because of HIS admiration for Brahms, and not the other way around? IHudson 16:53, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well, no, unless I'm misunderstanding you. Mozart died long before Brahms was even born. EldKatt (Talk) 20:37, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry, you are correct. I should have reviewed the composers' dates before making that post. IHudson 03:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I removed the note. It seems like a fluke to me. If someone can find a reference that Brahms intended this, then we can put it back. Brahms had no idea he was going to write four (and only four) symphonies and he wrote them over a period of twenty years. DavidRF 01:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
-
Come on, guys...the relationship between the keys of Brahms' Symphonies and the first four notes of the primary theme of K. 551 is nothing more than coincidence and is at best simply a mnemonic...Nymaestro 03:58, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
For that matter, why don't we also draw a parallel between the key relationships of Schumann's 4 Symphonies? They are Bb-C-Ed-D--which is the "Jupiter" theme a whole step lower? Nymaestro 02:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Unscholarly content--article needs to be rewritten
I am very disappointed with the content of this article. There are many subjective references which do not belong in a Wiki article, such as:
"the symphony carries an Olympian weight to it" "boldness of the first subject" "greatest examples of development in music" (this is a basically meaningless statement) "developed with astounding complexity"
These are stated by the writer as fact, but are subjective statements without references--otherwise known as "original research".
The George Grove quote, while presumably an accurate attribution, is more of a statement about Grove's impression of the work, and not of the work itself.
This article must be rewritten.Nymaestro 04:19, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
- Let's not forget that this is Wikipedia. If you don't have the time to rewrite the article from scratch, why not just delete the bits you don't like? I don't know about you, but with removing the bits you identify as "subjective references," the article becomes quite passable. I have not doublechecked the Grove citation, so I'll leave it alone for now. Jindřichův Smith 23:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

