Which is more appropriate: Is Mahler considered more representative of the late 19th century or early 20th?

With Mahler's birth-death dates of 1860 – 1911, you are, in one manner of speaking, technically correct from both perspectives. He was a true late romantic composer, ‘high’ in extreme chromaticism, did live and compose in the early 20th Century, and he did to a degree later incorporate the even more chromatic ‘modernism’ of his colleagues Schoenberg and Webern. (Tsk, Tsk -- it was so thoughtless of the man to not die neatly at the century mark to accommodate musicologists and historians. Beethoven and Debussy were likewise extremely non-accommodating in fitting in neatly by dates or aesthetic.)

Stylistically, Mahler IS that late romantic "high chromaticism" of the fin du siècle 1800's throughout all of his work, and he became progressively more so over time. ~ Placing the high chromatic style in a context, Schoenberg's pre-serial octet, "Verklärte Nacht" dates from 1899.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfEHohHuoNU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdAN4AzU940&feature...

Mahler’s Ninth symphony is a highly self-conscious 'farewell to all that,' a looking back, including a very Baroque era ornament , a turn, as a crucial an primary element of that score - Mahler's aggressive statement of longing for the old world and old music while acknowledging all around him was changing, the old 'ways' dying off.

I think of Das Lied von der Erde as his true and rage-filled ‘farewell,’ written as it was after he got confirmation of a frail heart and a certainty he would not live a longer life. It sounds strikingly 'impressionistic' by dint of its use of pentatonic scales – a direct tip to the Chinese poetry which is set. (The pentatonics are mixed / fused with tonality, as Debussy so consistently did,) but Das Lied is by aesthetic and harmonic procedure certainly and overwhelmingly late romantic by all its musical means and expressions.

The nearly infamous and also gorgeous Adagio from the uncompleted 10th Symphony directly acknowledges the direction of harmony going on all about Mahler at that time, veering into near serialism ala Schoenberg and his students Berg and Webern (those staggering pyramid stack-ups becoming a vertical of all twelve pitches being one element of that highly chromatic late romantic piece,)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CGxEkT6-DI

but it too is still firmly cemented in the musical aesthetic and language Mahler wrote in and developed throughout his life.

Ergo, he is highly representative truly and throughout his career of late 19th century Romanticism, regardless of dates. In Academia, the only correct general categorization for Mahler is "Romantic."

Now here is something both extremely interesting and confusing.

Mahler: 1860 – 1911

Debussy: 1862 – 1918

In music history / musicology, as per definition by era Debussy is 'modern period'. Academically, the "modern" era was adjusted to start at 1890 (done sometime in the 1970's) to accommodate that first of modern composers, Debussy. What gives, especially in light of those two sets of above dates? Even the earliest of Debussys’ music was calculatedly turning its back on the Germanic / Romantic influence and that most vehemently meant Debussy did a wholesale dump of the prevalent musical vocabulary, configuration and procedures of the Germanic / late romantic. From the outset, he was writing 'modern' music.

Similarly, we have

Beethoven 1770 – 1827 - who, regardless of mis-read and bad textbooks, is resoundingly a 'classical' composer through and through // and Schubert 1797 – 1828, who is very 'classicist' but truly historic, by his musical m.o. always categorized as 'early romantic.' // and Carl Maria von Weber 1786 –1826 whose m.o. has him 'romantic' all the way from the get-go.

Academia then, is first and very generally 'neatly' about dates, but most importantly it very much takes into account aesthetic and musical procedure.

Best regards.

P.s. Transitional is NOT the applicable word here, simply because the man happened to live into the 20th century. A slight resemblence to Debussy in one work and an acknowledgement / tribute to the first Viennese serial school in another does not make a composer 'a transitional' one. A transitional composer is a Florentt Schmitt 1870 – 1958, or Karol Szymanowski 1882 - 1937, the music of each clearly showing mixed stylistic attributes of different periods and many 'schools;' or the late romantic Carl Nielsen 1865 - 1931 who not by dates but through compositional style progressed from late romanticism to progressive tonality and later works without a tinge of romantic procedure or aesthetic.

P.p.s. In case you haven't noticed, Yahoo answers seems generally, of late, to be becoming Yahoo Guesses and "I thinks," ie. opinion vs. established and agreed upon Fact.

Mahler was a transitional figure. As a documentary on Mahler put it, he was the last step before Schoenberg and the 20th century.

The best answer is that he was a transitional figure. However, if you had to choose, I'd put him as late 19th century.

i think of your handgun is alluring with the engravings, yet I additionally think of it extremely is rather undesirable for somebody to p.c.. the firearm for you. maximum suitable is to place your hand on distinctive weapons and get a experience for their grips, weight, and so on. The handgun which you have may be heavy, however the load additionally facilitates administration the kick which makes it extra comfortable to shoot. before calling it a end including your handgun, you ought to attempt some .38 specific which could have a plenty softer kick than the .357. For self protection, be certain which you do use .38 specific +P, or .357. yet for purely entertainment capturing, .38 specific is purely nice and it could additionally be modern-day in hollow element which makes it an ok self protection around.