Jump to content

Norman Lebretch article.


King Mark

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 25
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes? ...he doesn what?

Now I read that article, and it seems to me that this guy just puts his opinion on the table, supporting it with vague arguments (like, Horner, Shore and Zimmer being Williams clones... :mrgreen: ). Of course his points are not completely false, but he interprets them to much too high an extent.

And, halfway through his article he doesn't say any word about Williams anymore, instead he begins telling how inventive and impressive the Golden Age film music was. Sure, there's truth to that, but it stands in no real relation to the point he was trying to make from the beginning of the article.

Just my 0,02€

-Chris

:) TTT :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dammit,my post got mosly erased..

Anyways,I assume this dude is a revered classical purist guru who obviously despises Williams, using "some" truth mixed with utter nonsense to get "his" point across.And like you said,it is totally irrelevent to the point of the article,he basically went out of his way to damage Williams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:) What an infuriating article! :mrgreen: Yet another perfect example of classical snobbery (and indeed snubbery!)

He seems to quote Williams performances and affiliations with Yo-Yo Ma & Perlman out of contempt.

Stupid little man, will have to check out his own webpage to see what else he has to say! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that this pretentious wind-bag doesn't mention the parallel between John William's extensive use (and reinvention) of Leit Motif's throughout his many works and that of Richard Wagner's operas, considered to be masterpieces of Western Art. Not only does JW take up Wagner's torch, he elaborates upon it such that is enthralls a whole generation.

If this guy had actually gotten his head out of his arse and stopped bashing everything that has come out after the year 1930, maybe he would have seen this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I'm tired and not at my best, but I read that article and had to respond. I should have waited and thought about what to write, I missed so many oportunities and different arguments I could have used, but I had to write instantly. Here's what I wrote (minus my signature)

"What John Williams did to the modern movie score was to reduce it to a string of cliches and strip it of musical character."

Are you mad? Williams gives each of his films a different character. Speaking as a fellow composer, his musical palette is unparalleled in the film world, and he surpasses most classical composers I know of in leaps and bounds. You say he sounds like different composers of the past? We all do. Even composers like Sibelius have sounded, if not ripped off, Tchaikovsky to name one. Stravinsky stole Korsakov's orchestrations and then built upon it at a later date, not to mention that the firebird and other earlier compositions were basically stolen folk music. I suppose you would berate Rachmaninov and Puccini for not being ahead of their time but sounding like the romantic composers of the past!?! People like you make me sick. You attack the one person who loves what he is doing, is humble to boot, and has simply made it for himself. It makes me sick to hear the likes of you berate film composers because they are not of the mettle of their classical counterparts. Please! Half the stuff the classical purists are composing now doesn't even make any sense, nor does it sound like music. Some is amazing, don't get me wrong, most is plain trash.

Williams has scored some of the most memorable themes and indeed, scores to date. And that is including scores by such Golden Age composers like Korngold, Steiner, Friedhoffer, Herrmann, Waxman, Raksin and others. Williams's orchestrations are incredible. None of the other film composers working nowadays can match his orchestration skills, let alone come up with one memorable theme after another.

He has his own compositional technique for his classical music, but when it comes to film, he has about 20 styles. At least he can delve into each style of composition to give us a fresh, yes indeed, a fresh score for each film, not something he has already written as is the case with 90% of film composers nowadays. Even your esteemed Korngold, who is a great composer, sounded the same in most of his scores. Some of the melodies in different films even sounded like they were based on each other. Neither Horner, nor Shore, and I can't believe you mentioned Zimmer, who does not even compose his own music, will ever have what Williams has. And none of them would be who they are without Williams. Film music right now would be without the magic of Harry Potter and ET, without the elegance of Schindler's List and Angela's Ashes and without the evocative exhilaration, to put it in your words, of Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Arc and their sequels.

Simply put, he is a genius. Whether you want to bash him or not, he always will be loved, respected and admired.

And yes, he is the most famous living composer, but more importantly, he is the most deserving of that honor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry if I seemed too harsh or anything, but I can't stand these stupid Naxos Opera Queens/Classical Purists!!!! More like Classical Analists!!!! I mean they are so Anal Retentive, they can't sit down for fear of sucking up the furniture!!!!! :D banghead banghead banghead banghead

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well done, ocelot!

Gustav Mahler put basis to the "modern-day" symphony structures and they are being utilized by many composers ever since. Among others, even Prokofiev and Rimsky-Korsakov both had acquired Mahler's techniques (as heard in his symphonies) and it would have been interesting to watch what their compositions would be like hadn't Mahler lived and inspired them. Williams never ever denied predilection for Mahler's style and it is reflected in his many works. Accusing Williams of blind borrowing from the masters of the past era is totally unfair and untrue then. Dvorak, Bruckner, Elgar, Josef Suk,... - they all did in a less or more perceptible way what Johnny is now being bashed for.

What a disgrace, Mr. Lebrecht! You know nothing about music and the fragments that create the body of your assay don't seem to mesh together well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that this pretentious wind-bag doesn't mention the parallel between John William's extensive use (and reinvention) of Leit Motif's throughout his many works and that of Richard Wagner's operas, considered to be masterpieces of Western Art.  Not only does JW take up Wagner's torch,  he elaborates upon it such that is enthralls a whole generation.

Williams only took up the Wagner torch from Rozsa, North and Korngold etc.

"What John Williams did to the modern movie score was to reduce it to a string of cliches and strip it of musical character."

LOL How can he say that and then talk about how great Korngold is who introduced many cliches if not more than Williams did in the golden age. It's a total contradiction.

Are you mad? Williams gives each of his films a different character. Speaking as a fellow composer, his musical palette is unparalleled in the film world, and he surpasses most classical composers I know of in leaps and bounds.

Ohh, I wouldn't be quite that brash. Goldsmith and especially North are quite diverse. Infact, North rarely sounds the same!

You say he sounds like different composers of the past? We all do. Even composers like Sibelius have sounded, if not ripped off, Tchaikovsky to name one. Stravinsky stole Korsakov's orchestrations and then built upon it at a later date, not to mention that the firebird and other earlier compositions were basically stolen folk music.

:D

"Mediocre composers borrow, great composers steal." - Stravinsky

"In Hollywood, Haydn would be called the 'composer' and Brahms the 'arranger' of his Haydn variations" - Stravinsky

And that second quote really hits the heart of the matter. :|

Half the stuff the classical purists are composing now doesn't even make any sense, nor does it sound like music.

You should not be so conservative. :|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Korngold has admited stealing Mendhelsson's (don't know how to spell it) music for Captain Blood.

Well, pretty much has been said about the utter stupidity of the article (I really likd your post, Ocelot) and I really can't add nothing worthy to this discussion.

Let's bombard the mudaf***er with hate mail instead :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno about that, he adapted it because he was out of time. And changed his credit for the whole movie to music adaptor. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...the clothes that he stole from so many classical composers have been fashionably recut by a wave of Williams clones led by the British-educated James Horner (Titanic), the Canadian Howard Shore (Lord of the Rings) and the German Hans Zimmer (Lion King)."  

This is really one of the silliest comments about Williams' music that anyone could write... Shore, Horner and Zimmer are Williams clones? Bwahahahahaaaha! :D

I really hope that, in the academic world of "pure" music critics, there are more intelligent people than this man...

Maurizio -- who's tired to hear always the same critic about Williams' music (i.e.: he "only" steals from classical composers)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys had alot of great responses - I would be curious to see if he responds to your feedback or maybe write a follow up article based on that feedback to defend himself in someway if he can.

Interesting stuff.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, Lebrecht is equally despised in classical music circles, so don't go getting yourselves in a snit assuming that all classical music lovers embrace his views. In fact, Mr. Lebrecht has made a career on naysaying and doom-forecasting. It's what he does.

Korngold did not "steal" any Mendelssohn for Captain Blood. He adapted Mendelssohn's music (which is credited) for the film version of A Midsummer Night's Dream. Faced with time constraints on Blood (his first original score), he had to fall back on Liszt's Prometheus for the duel on the rocks.

I haven't read the article yet, but thought I'd clear the air on Lebrecht's reputation as a world class Cassandra. Didn't want King Mark to burst a blood vessel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He opens the article with the fact that "John Williams is on the wane" because he hasn't won an Oscar in eight years.

So does that mean, by deduction, that Jerry Goldsmith, Elliot Goldenthal, and a host of others, are at the end of their career? Winning an Oscar is a watermark in anyone's career, but even I know it's not mark of waning talent.

Yeah, I couldn't find much basis of merit in the article. Though I did like his assessment of Zimmer and Horner.

Jeff -- tired of reading articles like this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi everybody, just thought I'd let you know that I sent the following message to Norman Lebrecht.

To Norman.

I think your recent article about John Williams shows undue malice based on the composer's posterity. Your voice as a writer seems too sure of itself, as it is only your own opinion. Each person's appreciation of music is different, and for many people, John Williams' music commments slyly on the music of the past, and in a very modern and cutting-edge way. It carries on compositional techniques that would be forgotten if not for film music. These "cliches" should never be abandoned because they are effective unless you are overly concerned with music forging paths into uncharted territory. Korngold was no more of an original artist than Williams, I assure you of this. Williams loves the composers that you think he is ripping off, and builds upon sounds heard before, while setting them with fresh twists and humor. As a classical music reviewer I would think you would be open minded to a composer who composes with the philosophy that even variations on past sounds can be exhilerating and original. If you listen to all of Williams music, you'll hear a lot of journalistic attitude in what he does. He doesn't take himself too seriously, but shows a real love and talent for inspiring with the orchestra. There can't be anything wrong with this. I personally don't credit individual composers for being responsible for any certain sound. Debussy was a logical and inevitable progression from what came before, as is Williams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I'm tired and not at my best, but I read that article and had to respond.  I should have waited and thought about what to write, I missed so many oportunities and different arguments I could have used, but I had to write instantly.  Here's what I wrote (minus my signature)

"What John Williams did to the modern movie score was to reduce it to a string of cliches and strip it of musical character."

Are you mad?  Williams gives each of his films a different character.  Speaking as a fellow composer, his musical palette is unparalleled in the film world, and he surpasses most classical composers I know of in leaps and bounds.  You say he sounds like different composers of the past?  We all do.  Even composers like Sibelius have sounded, if not ripped off, Tchaikovsky to name one.  Stravinsky stole Korsakov's orchestrations and then built upon it at a later date, not to mention that the firebird and other earlier compositions were basically stolen folk music.  I suppose you would berate Rachmaninov and Puccini for not being ahead of their time but sounding like the romantic composers of the past!?!  People like you make me sick.  You attack the one person who loves what he is doing, is humble to boot, and has simply made it for himself.  It makes me sick to hear the likes of you berate film composers because they are not of the mettle of their classical counterparts.  Please!  Half the stuff the classical purists are composing now doesn't even make any sense, nor does it sound like music.  Some is amazing, don't get me wrong, most is plain trash.

Williams has scored some of the most memorable themes and indeed, scores to date.  And that is including scores by such Golden Age composers like Korngold, Steiner, Friedhoffer, Herrmann, Waxman, Raksin and others.  Williams's orchestrations are incredible.  None of the other film composers working nowadays can match his orchestration skills, let alone come up with one memorable theme after another.  

He has his own compositional technique for his classical music, but when it comes to film, he has about 20 styles.  At least he can delve into each style of composition to give us a fresh, yes indeed, a fresh score for each film, not something he has already written as is the case with 90% of film composers nowadays.  Even your esteemed Korngold, who is a great composer, sounded the same in most of his scores.  Some of the melodies in different films even sounded like they were based on each other.  Neither Horner, nor Shore, and I can't believe you mentioned Zimmer, who does not even compose his own music, will ever have what Williams has.  And none of them would be who they are without Williams.  Film music right now would be without the magic of Harry Potter and ET, without the elegance of Schindler's List and Angela's Ashes and without the evocative exhilaration, to put it in your words, of Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Arc and their sequels.  

Simply put, he is a genius.  Whether you want to bash him or not, he always will be loved, respected and admired.  

And yes, he is the most famous living composer, but more importantly, he is the most deserving of that honor.

:) Bravo! Fantastic response!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well OK, Guest, but you're wrong about Korngold. You also undersell Debussy by using him as a comparison. Both of these composers were tremendous innovators, although the music they wrote grew naturally, as you say, out of what came before. That is certainly not the case with Williams. While employing certain modernist techniques from time to time, his basic musical vocabulary (as employed in his film work) is not all that different from what composers were writing a hundred years ago. Williams is a master at what he does, and he is arguably the greatest living film composer, but that doesn't automatically make him a Debussy. (Then again, why should he be?) Your lack of understanding in these matters weakens your argument, although the basic premise that Norman Lebrecht is a narrow-minded asshole is a good one.

Also, it's a sad, sad day when an artist's merits are judged solely on the basis of his having received (or not received) an Oscar. Especially with the Academy's dismal record, of late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I finally read the article. On top of everything else, there are a couple of factual errors and half-truths. Pretty sloppy journalism if you ask me. But the only real damage is done when people read this stuff and take it at face value.

At the end of the day, the article is one man's opinion. He himself states (or rather implies) in his last sentence that he doesn't like Williams. Isn't that as valid a viewpoint as King Mark (or me) calling Lebrecht an imbecile?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 17 years later...
On 11/22/2002 at 11:59 PM, Trumpeteer said:

He opens the article with the fact that "John Williams is on the wane" because he hasn't won an Oscar in eight years.

So does that mean, by deduction, that Jerry Goldsmith, Elliot Goldenthal, and a host of others, are at the end of their career?

This did not age well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.