I got locked out!

[John H White]

Hello Mark and Alan,
    As one of your oldest "customers" from the time that Unsung Composers was just an off shoot of the Raff Forum, I wanted to add my thanks to you both for deciding to continue this most informative forum, albeit in a slightly truncated form which hopefully will be more manageable by yourselves and your new antipodean colleague. However, having had computer troubles lately, when I did get round to reading your welcome back thread I just couldn't find a way adding my own comment, even when I tried manually logging myself in. Then I noticed a padlock symbol against it and eventually came to the conclusion that I'd missed the boat.
Anyway, I'd still like to thank you both for keeping the Forum going all these years. I've certainly learnt quite a bit from it and been introduced to some new (to me) interesting music, most notably by Rufinatscha. Whilst for me the 19th Century will always remain the golden age of western music of all types, I shall be sorry to miss references to contemporaries of my beloved Haydn and Mozart. In my opinion, Haydn's Sturm und Drang symphonies appear as some of the earliest manifestations of the Romantic Movement in music. I'm afraid my taste is still rather biassed towards the Classico-Romantic Style as exemplified by the Lachner brothers and various pupils and contemporaries of Beethoven. As for post 1900 music, do people like Joseph Suk, George Lloyd, Richard Wetz, Felix Weingartner, Wilhelm Furtwangler and Don Gillis still count as Romantics?
      Cheers,
           John.

[semloh]

I am sure Mark or Alan will respond in full measure, John, but in the meantime may I suggest that the composers you mention would be likely to qualify at least in terms of style since, on the whole (to paraphrase the definition) their work employs dissonance (if at all) with restraint, relies principally on 19th century models of harmony and construction, and prominently features melody. I don't think anyone would argue that Suk and Lloyd, in particular, are not romantics in that sense. In fact (and I realise that I may be alone in this), I tend to think of George Lloyd as a 20thC Beethoven, at least in terms of his symphonic work! Sturm und drang and all!

[ahinton]

I suppose that it's not for me to say, but such problem as there may be here strikes me, at least, as being one of defining what music from the early 19th century onwards could be seen (and, for that matter, by whom) to qualify as falling within some kind of definition of "Romantic" rather than whether a particular forum such as this one announces a preference to concentrate its energies on such music alone. Certain other musical persuasions have arguably "come and gone" (total serialism, anyone?) in a way that I don't think could ever be said of the "Romantic" one in music and today's musical environment is such that we can no longer say that we inhabit only this, that or the other current musical "movement" because so many co-exist in time; this is not that new a phenomenon, of course - it's quite some time now since the music of Brian Ferneyhough, for example, was rubbing shoulders contemporaneously with late Rubbra, Finnissy, Tippett, George Lloyd, Simpson, Berkeley, Lutyens, Payne, Bill Hopkins, Maconchy, Searle, Richard Rodney Bennett et al - and that's only in Britain. Speaking personally (albeit without suggesting any kind of "agenda" on my part), I would be loath to contemplate a situation in which "Romantic" composers were to be shoehorned into a specific period of time that has long since expired. "Romantic" is undoubtedly a broad church and I see no reason to demolish its nave, close off its crypt or reduce the size of its altar.

[Alan Howe]

Well, I'm pretty sure we know what we'll be allowing - and I'm equally sure you'll be pleased with our decision, John. As for the wider debate, it's gone on too long already and so I'm locking this thread too. Mark has said it all here:
http://www.unsungcomposers.com/forum/index.php/topic,3682.45.html