Hey all,

I don't know about others, but this is something I really enjoy thinking about and thought I would start a topic about it. Just yesterday I was thinking about the careers the great composers have had and what could be considered critical works based on their ability to show the composers growth. Particularly I love looking at composers first works. Seeing the early stages of their musical development and comparing it to what was to come.

Pick your favorite composer and name the works that demonstrate real growth or progress in their work. What was their first work? What was their most successful? What was happening in their life during their last pieces? Feel free to share. Obviously there are so many greats it is difficult to know about all of them, but feel free to share the stories that surround the careers of your favorite. I would love to read your responses.

Should "first works" include juvenilia, or commence with a composer's first published works?

Steven

I might propose the juvenilia as opposed to the first published works, as the entirity of Bach's Clavierubung is clearly a mature work, in spite of its status as his first published oeuvre.

Okay I'll take a stab at it:

Brahms

The early works show two influences - poetry and the piano. Everything from Op. 1 to 7 is either a song or piano piece. Being a pianist and avid fan of poetry, it makes perfect sense that Brahms would begin in those "comfort zones."

Soon, however, he decided to be a composer, and his output begins to be a little more experimental.

So, Brahms decides to learn how to write for strings by writing a piano trio (op. 8), two orchestral serenades (opp. 11 and 16), and a first attempt at a symphony which became the first piano concerto (op. 15). Then he follows it up with a string sextet (Op. 18). He continues to write vocal music the whole time (it paid the bills, since he often made a living as a choral conductor.)

He then decides to get better at composing. I've heard that Schumann suggested a good way to improve would be to write variations, so we get four sets of variations (opp. 21/1, 21/2, 23, and 24.)

He also continues to work on his string writing, composing two piano quartets, the piano quintet, and another string sextet. He delves into the cello with the Op. 38 sonata, and explores the horn in Op. 40.

Now ready for a bigger orchestral work, he writes a lot more songs and his important works involving chorus and orchestra (German Requiem, Rinaldo, the Alto Rhapsody, the Schicksalslied, and the Triumphlied, opp. 45, 50, 53, 54, and 55, respectively.)

Then he tackles variation writing for the orchestra in the Haydn Variations (op. 56a), puts together a bunch of string quartets (opp. 51/1, 51/2, and 67) and BAM...

Op. 68, Symphony #1. It's good, so he writes a dozen more songs to pay the bills and BAM...

Op. 73, Symphony #2.

Now he's confident and feels like he could write anything, so he does:

Op. 76 - Piano Pieces
Op. 77 - Violin Concerto
Op. 78 - Violin Sonata
Op. 79 - Rhapsodies for Piano
Op. 80 and 81 - The two orchestral overtures
Op. 82 - Nanie
Op. 83 - 2nd Piano Concerto

Now he's just showing off, and he continues to write in a variety of formats, focusing on larger works and songs until he meets Muhlfeld and then...

Clarinet Music (op. 114, 115, and 120)
Piano Music (Op. 116, 117, 118, 119)

The great master having proven himself, he turns introspective in these clarinet and solo piano works, closing out with the Op. 121 "Four Serious Songs" and the 11 Choral preludes for Organ.

The sad part is that music history books have done Brahms a great disservice, labeling him the champion of "absolute music." But Brahms always returned to the voice and explicit world of words over and over again in his career.

And just as his career began with piano music (op. 1), a friend (Schumann), and songs (Op. 3); his career ends with piano music (Op. 119), a friend (op. 120), and songs (op. 121).

Ah... the Op. 122 Chorale Preludes.

Bach's last composition was also written for the organ, but Franck -alas- was fulfilling a commission to write for the harmonium, which he did not complete. The now hated harmonium was considerably more respected by the French then, and Franck couldn't help but write decent music for it. (Ew, IMHO, it's not always the best Franck, signal to noise ratio will be a matter for debate.)

I will not fully elaborate but we can all be assured that Scriabin's musical output went through a huge metamorphosis. His early works up to maybe op. 31 were still quite rather Chopinesque. From op 32 up until maybe op 46 we see Scriabin in his middle period experimenting with his harmony. Such pieces are his poems from op 32 and even his etudes from op 42 are not composed purely in the romantic style. Beginning with Sonata no. 5 we hear Scriabin evolving into his last period, which would be a one filled with creativity, life, obscurity, and mysticism. Notable compositions are his obvious Black Mass Sonata and his masterpiece, the Poem of Fire. His last period, which was a rather quite complex and scary one, has been only given a small peek at due to his premature death. An example would be his 5 preludes from op 74 and preliminary sketches of his Prefatory Action for his would-be 'Mysterium.' Scriabin differs immensely between these periods. No one can expect the creator of op 8 no. 12 to be the same genius behind The Black Mass Sonata. He was quite a character, a genius without a doubt.

I disagree that there is a lack of organic wholeness to his output. He was always experimental with harmony, voice-leading and form. I'll post later in greater detail. Look at the pianistic writing, polyrythms, and declamatory style of the 7th sonata and tell me that it is inconceivably written by the same composer as the 2nd and 3rd sonatas, Op. 8 etudes, and the Op. 28 Fantasy. I would further argue that the Op. 28 Fantasy, earlier preludes, and poems have already demonstrated the beginnings of a different harmonic language and that it is NOT a stepwise function. He didn't wake up one day and decide to use chromatically altered 13ths.

^ I agree with you. I was definitely not intending to analyze the compositional structure behind the development of his music, but more just the sound in general. Without a doubt Scriabin's sound in music would never be the same after his discoveries in mysticism and ideology. Regarding the structure of his music, I am sure you are right in that it is possible to trace his development way before his mature sonatas, but I in no way even tried to explain that, too much work.