He spends the first 20 minutes explaining his theory that Mozart did not complete the minuet, for which there is no evidence whatsoever. His "smoking gun" is that a phrase is slightly changed to start on the tonic rather than the third? Do I have to list the hundreds of examples in Mozart's pieces where one could make the same argument? Also, there are many moments in the music of every great composer that seem "less satisfying" than their usual genius, but that certainly doesn't mean some other lesser composer must have jumped in and written those measures. Levin is extremely knowledgeable, a great performer, and an amazing improvisor, but he's falling into the old musicologist trap of making ridiculous conjectures.
Those lucky Harvard music students! Unfortunately I rarely if ever attended a lecture as a former music student in the two biggest conservatories in Australia, that approached this level of intellectual insight, curiosity and mastery. And this costs nothing to attend...
As a musician I thought I would enjoy this, but I find Robert Levin's communicative style almost unbearable. There is so much linguistic beating around the bush and needlessly extravagant language, whilst at the same time seeming fragmented and scatty. The overblown and pretentious delivery doesn't help either. I can follow him, but it isn't enjoyable to listen to at all. He feels like a chore to listen to. He really needs to work on his communication style. Obviously topics like these are naturally complicated, so he should endeavor to make it as clear and straightforward as possible where he can. Ockham's Razor, 'Do not multiply beyond necessity'
Levin really knows mozart's style and has done enogh research to be able to answer the question what makes Mozart great and what is good versus creative composition.wow .a brilliant pianist .his take on the pathetique too , just fascinating.recapitulation as self-recognition. this man knows the meanings behind music. wow. ive found my nadia boulanger.maybe this is common with good theory students. i missed out.
Despite the unappreciative comments on this page, some of which may be based on sound knowledge, I enjoyed the forensic examination and illumination of Mozart's processes and left the lecture better informed and entertained.
I agree that Levin calls an impressive amount of deep knowledge about Mozart's Style his own and has a very tasteful and meticulous ability to write music in the style of Mozart. I can perfectly follow his argumentations on Stadler's completion of Mozarts chromatic Minuet. But I have to say that Levin is totally on a wrong path when he comments upon the completion of the g-minor piano sonata and describes the weaknesses of this completion by showing the tension and dramatic sharpening in Beethoven's Pathétique sonata. How can it be that Levin mixes these two composers up so easily? Isn't he aware of the totally different characters of these two creatives? You cannot say, Beethoven does soemthing in a certain way and therefore it has to be in a similar way at Mozart. Beethoven's teleological formal thinking is so different from the more associative and assemblage-like one of Mozart's. I really don't think, that it's adequate to argue about anything in Mozart's music by looking for what Beethoven would have done. That doesn't work at all in my opinion.
"Fascination of horror"... Loved that expression. Levin's completion of Requiem involving the Amen Fugue is my favorite completion. I wish it was played by more orchestras. His passion on the subject is inspiring to watch for even someone outside the field like myself.
Could it be possible to upload the scores on the slides and put the link to them in the description? I think many of us would enjoy reading the scores in this highly informative lecture.
