Most classical music lovers, are familiar with the expression, WAGNER isn't for everyone: WHY, is this?

a cross cut from another singer. Wagner isn't for everyone to sing, either.

As mimi pointed out, many people have traded in volume for beauty of sound, and that is simply boring,if not off-putting. Even the opera fans of the times commented on how singing Wagner was sure to ruin voices, and add to the general declline of the beautiful singing voice ( bel canto).

Apart from the harmonic excursions, another point was that one couldn't walk away from a performance, humming a tune. ( Okay, maybe Senta's Ballad from Flying Dutchman, or the opening phrase of Lohengrin's Entrance " Mein lieber Schwan", but not really much else, huh? Toyotoho doesn't qualify as a tune) The passivity of attending a performance is enhanced if you can't take a tune away. Certainly, RW wanted that all-subsuming attention to his work, he demanded it of his family and Chancellery, but I don't know if he really expected the Everyman Opera Attendee to do the same. For EOA, it's frustrating not to be so involved.

Then there's simply the density of the orchestral writing. It's phenomenal, it was original, far-reaching, all of that. Have you ever sat through a whole Ring cycle live? Let alone tried to perform in one?

You might want to bring along the earplugs, just to soften the blow.

That's the beauty of the Bayreuth hall- you pack the orchestra into the pit down below and pop a lid over the top to dampen those sound ( shock) waves. the singers have a wonderfully easy time.

Anywhere else it's hard on the ears as well as the rest of the body. You are engulfed in sound waves. they are truly physical phenomena, and it can wear one out quickly without practising stamina and endurance.

If you are EOA you have nowhere to run and hide, where we singers can get off stage for a couple of minutes.

So apart from the political and intellectual grounds, there is also the physical discomfort to be taken into account for the statement, Wagner isn't for everyone.

It is odd that Wagner arouses this kind of feeling. Why it should be is possibly an amalgam of reasons. There is the sheer length of his operas for one thing. The fact that they don't break up easily into recatative and aria. Although it is possibly to extract some parts ( Isolde's Liebestod, Brunnhilde's Immolation scene, some arias from Tannhauser) it isn't really possible for there to be 'highlights' from a Wagner opera to enable the novice to come to grips with him (orchestral overtures, Dawn and Siegfried's Rhine Journey and the everpresent 'Ride' etc., always excepted)

Then, it is perceived that those operas are full of lengthy hours of boredom with minutes of good 'bits' in between (Rossini had a pithy comment on this which I can't immediately bring to mind)

I did wonder whether it could be that the fact that he was almost enirely an opera composer has anything to do with it. How many people, I mused, listen to Beethoven but never hear Fidelio, or Mozart and don't bother with the operas. Then, I realised, that Verdi and Puccini are much the same but don't seem to arouse the same dislike (although I seem to remember Dr. John being fairly disparaging about the former)

There is also the non-musical perceived issues. His alleged anti-semitism and adulation by the Nazis in general and Hitler in particular still have a resonance with some people.

We all have our likes and dislikes. My wife, as I have mentioned before here, is a musical person, but cannot stand Bach or baroque music in general. But these personal likes and dislikes don't arouse the same virulence of feelings as RW, they remain just that, personal.

So in direct answer to your question, I don't have any explanation!

Hey - "I'm" not for everyone - and neither are you or anyone else. Some things/people are attractive at *prima vista* - and either remain a love, or fade just as fast. Other things have to *grow* on you - and with that hope, sometimes we give things a long time to develop - sometimes yes, sometimes no. I dated a Mr. Right Now for a long time - until I married Mr. Right (36 years today!). There are folks on this forum who love obscure Baroque composers - not me, thank you. I am sure they are wonderful - just not my taste. I have *enthusiasms* for which I attend conventions - everything has its Geek Meet. Oh well.

Back to Wagner specifically - I had a good undergrad music history teacher who instilled curiosity in us. I listen to many things because of him. And as a graduate Music Theory student - I also had a professor who best the living heck out of works, so that I never want to hear them again - 40 years alter. Pleasant guy - just way too high-pressure; I am sure that other people have similar stories. And I had the musicology version of John Houseman at Boston University - scared us to death - and I love things because he was a scary person, but instilled LOVE in us. I have heard a fair deal of Wagner recorded - and a fair amount live. This summer, the Bard College Conservatory summer festival is devoted to Wagner - I will be there a LOT - Leon Botstein is a genius - and I will think of YOU Alberich - this is truly a few weeks you would revel in. After this festival, I am sure that I will have an entirely new level of appreciation

Wagner's music is especially oriented towards German Nationalists or those who otherwise have a special love for Germany. Wagner was pretty innovative at synthesizing a patriotic german style of music in a classical context, but if you are say, British, or some of other non-German nationality this may not mean anything to you. Many of the greats, such as Beethoven, Schumann, and Mendelssohn were German as well so maybe this is a reason many attribute Wagner's music so much importance.

Verdi is at least as great a composer of opera as Wagner, and is "for everyone", but he is Italian, and so does not get as much hype from respected Germans.

Some of Wagner's music is fun though. For example, the "Flight of the Valkyries" and "Der Meistersinger von Nuremburg".

In conclusion, Wagner is a great composer, but not for everyone. I hope I have explained it well enough.

I think... Perhaps the question can be restated as 'why is Mozart for everyone and Wagner and most other composers aren't?'

Most composers' music appeals very much to a certain group of audience and considerably less so for the rest, imo. Wagner... he demanded a lot with his musical dramas. You are required to pay absolute attention to everything for 3.5-5 hrs, knowing the story being told on stage as well as in the music (thanks to all those Leitmotiv stuff)... Most likely not something that most newbies to the genre would be equipped to handle. I'd say the same (with varying demands) for many other composers like Berlioz or Stravinsky or Ravel or Mahler.

With Mozart (and Bach and Beethoven), he was different in that he managed to appeal to many different groups of audience almost equally. The music is always aesthetically very pleasing (appealing to casual listeners), but Mozart had a way of hiding really interesting musical structures and harmonics in plain sight (that would appeal to the more sophisticated listeners). While often time his music doesn't allow for re-interpretation, the 'message' being conveyed is more complex/multi-layered than it can sound (like the way he contrasts different sentiments between the music and the lyrics to make 'double-speak' jokes in his comic operas).

Just my opinion, of course. Hope you had a good visit with the doctors (and won't have to see 'em again for a long while!). :)

This is a very interesting question, Alberich! I can only speak for myself, but I love Wagner's music. I have to say though, I did not love his music when I was younger. For a long time (in my early teens) I was obsessed with renaissance music, as that was all I had been exposed to. When I first heard Wagner, it was so overwhelming, I think my brain just couldn't process what I had heard!

My next exposure to Wagner was hearing the Ring cycle in it's entirety as an undergraduate. My singing teacher was singing a role, so I decided to go along and hear it... I'm very glad that I did. I was fascinated by his harmonies, and leitmotive. I think the thing that put me off at that point more than anything were the atrocious singers! It seemed quite vulgar - the majority of voices in that instance were trading beauty of tone for volume, and had lost all beauty in their voices, in order to sing that repertoire. I think the vulgarity of their singing really coloured the music (in my naivety). I'm afraid it really affected the whole experience for me!

A couple of years later, I stumbled across the Wesendonck Lieder, and decided to learn them. And at that point I completely fell in love with Wagner's music! I then wrote a thesis on Wagner's music, and as part of that, did a study of Tristan and Isolde. In taking the whole work apart (and also the Wesendonck lieder, and one of Liszt's tone poems in the process), I really began to understand his music, and appreciate it more. I think because there are such long expanses of music with no harmonic 'resolutions', people find it difficult to follow: it doesn't feel symmetrical. I may be wrong, but that's my opinion!

Interestingly, a few years later, I worked on Debussy's Proses Lyriques, and Wagner's influence can be felt profoundly on his first piece (de Reve)...So even if people don't appreciate Wagner in it's purest form, there were many people 'stealing' his best bits!

Hi Alberich!

A very good question, as usual...

Well, I think that in my case, any potential feelings I had for Wagner were effectively annihilated over 10 years ago by a (now ex) boyfriend who was possibly the most evangelical Wagnerite I've ever encountered!

Every weekend (ignoring the fact that I'm obsessed with Baroque music!), this boyfriend would sit me down in front of his TV, and insist that I watch videos of his operas...and lecture me all the way through - so I couldn't even get the chance to sit and actually listen, without interruption! Then he'd quiz me afterwards, to test if I'd actually been paying attention...and quite often, I was caught out, and then he'd get all pissy with me...

Look, I know that he meant well, but I admit that I was put off by his extreme obsession with Wagner (not just the music, but everything about the man himself!) The music itself is quite glorious - my resistance had nothing to do with the music, it was more the "preaching" of my ex and the Wagner-crazy crowd he hung around with. I felt like a real outside - excluded, if you like, from the enchanted circle. So I'm quick to admit that my problems with Wagner all stem from insecurities within myself, not the music itself.

I did try to probe the "mystery" of Wagner - I tried very hard! But I'm afraid this boyfriend's ultra-zealous approach made it very difficult for me.

Besides, you can't "force" yourself to "fall in love" with something when there's no "mojo" to begin with - human or otherwise!

But I would love to understand Wagner more, and I feel that a bit of gentle encouragement (which you've given me, Alberich) will transform me into someone who at least respects and understands Wagner.

And do you know, my ex (who is still a good friend) recently dropped in a wonderful documentary called "The Golden Ring," which examines Solti's 1950s recording of the Ring Cycle...I have to say that I thoroughly enjoyed it!

As my ex used to say, "Wagner is a way of life." I think it definitely goes beyond the music itself...it's a philosophy which I don't (yet) comprehend.

Interesting question Alberich - thank you!

Hafwen xoxox

Alberich, the Duchess is obsessed with Sullivan, I am obsessed with Schumann, and you are obsessed with Wagner.

But anyway, I read on Anya's question how Schumann is not your favorite composer. I could respond to say that Schumann is not for everybody.

I like Wagner, well, more accurately Liszt's Wagner transcriptions; I've not explored opera or listened to it. But I would not say that Wagner is one of my extreme favorites.

Each composer "speaks" to a particular person. It is the reason why we all don't love Sullivan, or Schumann, or Wagner. Schumann speaks to me, while, for example, Brahms, absolutely does not. Dose that me I don't like Brahms? No, Brahms is a wonderful composer, I just don't have the firm understanding and love for his music as I do with Schumann.

Wagner is one of the more distinguishable composers. Not everybody enjoys the powerful, heavy emotions evoked.

I would say that the term "not for everybody" can apply to any composer. No one composer speaks to everybody.

--Schumiszt

My reply will probably get me a few thumbs downs but here it is anyway:

I love Wagner ... in spurts. Just like I love Mahler ... in spurts. By that I mean with composers like Wagner and Liszt and Mahler there is little that is subtle, little that is neutral, little that is easy listening pretty. The music requires you to 'take sides', so to speak.

It's like this to me: If I want to listen to perfectly written fluff I listen to Haydn, Mendelssohn and most of Mozart (although Mozart's later works were not fluff). If I want to be dragged through emotional coals I've got my mid-to-later Beethoven and my mid-to-later Mahler and much of Tchaikovsky to listen to. If I want pure virtuoso showmanship and manipulative exuberance I listen to Liszt, Rachmaninoff and much of Chopin.

Some classical listeners don't want to be beaten over the head, don't want to commit the emotional investment required to fully enjoy the composer, musically speaking, and they will symbolically shy away from embracing the likes of a Wagner or Mahler or Stravinsky.

A lot of listeners are simply not interested enough (for any number of reasons) to make the emotional or intellectual investment required to fully enjoy the head-beating, no matter what field of music it is in. Donnie And Marie lovers aren't likely to embrace Pink Floyd, are they? Just as Dolly Parten lovers aren't likely to get into Kurt Weill or Jacques Brel.

As I said in the beginning: I love Wagner ... in spurts, when the mood and my mind are aligned. Tonight I'm filling my head with Mahler's 8th. and Beethoven's 7th. That's where my head wants to be tonight as I start a new painting.

During my lifetime, the means of distributing 'news' and 'communal communication' has expanded by an enormous amount. The result has been a noticeable increase in 'compulsory communal opinion', and the Art of music has not been immune. To those who perhaps fear disparagement, the pressure to conform to this imagined 'community opinion' has increased quite a lot. The role of 'Fashion' has become an increasingly important part of people's lives.

As a Musician, I felt part of this push to conform to communal opinion. Wagner, as a person, was popularly felt [within my 'circle'] to be an arrogant, opinionated despot, and his association with the later-to-appear Nazis was well known, and garnered him added contempt. Somehow, his music was credited with the same character as his perceived personal character, and he thus quickly became 'unfashionable'.

I have rarely heard anybody skillfully attack his abilities as a composer, and I am quite sure this would be almost impossible to do while remaining truthful. On the other hand, the chosen style and content of his music was thought to be 'bombastic, overblown, pompous, melodramatic, etc.'

I realise that even this was a rather serious generalisation, but, as a young man, I was led by fashion to feel it.

[Other Late Romantics - Wolf, Strauss, Mahler, even Brahms, could almost as justly deserve this populist opinion, I suppose. To a limited extent they were ' deserving, particularly amongst the young composers of my generation, but 'poor Wagner' copped most of it, I think.]

I seem to remember, when entering the briefly-fashionable arena of Electronic Music, dreaming up disparaging remarks about Wagner, and receiving appreciative laughter for them. Indeed, the contrast between the two styles of composition was quite marked, so my humour was almost certain to receive applause.

[ I note now that my chosen niche has zero followers. I am certainly not an enthusiast. Wagner still has a considerable appreciative following. My flirtation with Musical Fashion was unrewarding by this measure! I suppose that fashion has no right to decide a 'winner', but fashion doesn't seem to have 'shifted' from avant guarde to Wagner.]

Now I have aged, and have timidly explored the music of Wagner, I still do not feel great love for his music, but am ready to acknowledge his huge talent, his imaginative ideas, his evocative use of chromatic harmony, and his real contribution to what later developed as Atonal Music (Prelude to Tristan).

I suspect that, if given even a week's exposure to this man's music, I might even begin to become addicted to it.

This is in spite of general antipathy to Opera itself!

Wagner was brilliant at what he set out to do. That I cheerfully acknowledge. Perhaps what he set out to do does not fully resonate with me? His intention clearly had extra-musical content, and his fascist-style racial pride was, and is, repugnant to me, but not quite as much as formerly.

In fact I am not certain that I feel much repugnance at all...

'Wagner is not for everyone' is a truism with some substance, whatever the reasons. With the vast field of 'Classical' or 'Art' Music at our feet, this matters little I assert.

If Wagner was a 'Pop' composer, a dislike of his music would probably imply a dislike of Pop music itself!

How lucky are we!