I’m feeling a tad sheepish here about my classical music knowledge. I did not realized that Mendelssohn’s Symphony No. 2 was written for orchestra, chorus and soloists. I was listening along on Spotify to Mendelssohn symphonies when I suddenly heard singing.
At first I was impressed with Mendelssohn for writing a choral symphony and for writing one that was almost twice as long as any of his other symphonies. Way to go, Felix. Stepping up to Beethoven.
Then I did some research and found that Mendelssohn did not write a choral symphony but that editors had listed this choral piece as his second symphony after he died. While Mendelssohn was alive he never wrote a second symphony, but he did write a third.
The Scottish Symphony was numbered by Mendelssohn as his third. It appears he was intending his Italian Symphony to be the second as it was composed first but then withheld for revisions. We call his Italian Symphony his fourth symphony with the Reformation Symphony being the fifth.
Why don’t we just drop the numbers and go with the titles?
The thing about the so-called Symphony No. 2 is that it does have something of a symphonic structure. There are three clearly defined orchestra sections followed by 10 sections for chorus. That’s not really an oratorio, now is it? It’s not really a symphony either. What? How is that possible? We need to label this piece of music. If we don’t then what value could it possibly have? [Read Sarcasm]
For some reason or another the editors of the past put Mendelssohn’s music into a specific order and gave it numbers even though the numbers weren’t really in the order which he composed the corresponding music.
I’ve no problem with this. The music is the music. Call it whatever you want. Mendelssohn called it Lobgesang which means Hymn of Praise. That works. It also diminishes my idiot complex since it is not a choral symphony that I’d never heard of. However, I’m sure there’s a others out there of which I am unaware.
I’m feeling a tad sheepish here about my classical music knowledge. I did not realized that Mendelssohn’s Symphony No. 2 was written for orchestra, chorus and soloists. I was listening along on Spotify to Mendelssohn symphonies when I suddenly heard singing.
At first I was impressed with Mendelssohn for writing a choral symphony and for writing one that was almost twice as long as any of his other symphonies. Way to go, Felix. Stepping up to Beethoven.
Then I did some research and found that Mendelssohn did not write a choral symphony but that editors had listed this choral piece as his second symphony after he died. While Mendelssohn was alive he never wrote a second symphony, but he did write a third.
The Scottish Symphony was numbered by Mendelssohn as his third. It appears he was intending his Italian Symphony to be the second as it was composed first but then withheld for revisions. We call his Italian Symphony his fourth symphony with the Reformation Symphony being the fifth.
Why don’t we just drop the numbers and go with the titles?
The thing about the so-called Symphony No. 2 is that it does have something of a symphonic structure. There are three clearly defined orchestra sections followed by 10 sections for chorus. That’s not really an oratorio, now is it? It’s not really a symphony either. What? How is that possible? We need to label this piece of music. If we don’t then what value could it possibly have? [Read Sarcasm]
For some reason or another the editors of the past put Mendelssohn’s music into a specific order and gave it numbers even though the numbers weren’t really in the order which he composed the corresponding music.
I’ve no problem with this. The music is the music. Call it whatever you want. Mendelssohn called it Lobgesang which means Hymn of Praise. That works. It also diminishes my idiot complex since it is not a choral symphony that I’d never heard of. However, I’m sure there’s a others out there of which I am unaware.
Comments