I think Mozart hurt La Clemenza di Tito by turning it into a 2 act opera. The sections that Mazzolà cut from Metastasio’s original libretto weren’t essential to the bare bones plot, but they helped flesh out the characters and give them more spice and personality. In the original libretto, Annio and Servilia get a lot more stage time, balancing out the annoying parts with Sesto and Vitellia. Also in the original libretto, Sesto and Annio swap cloaks, upon which is tied a crimson ribbon to identify fellow conspirators, and Annio gets arrested as a result. Tito jumps the gun to blame Annio, who is later exonerated, which explains why Tito becomes so hesitant to condemn Sesto. He was wrong about Annio and wants to be wrong again about Sesto too. Tito is less spontaneously magnanimous in the original libretto, making him a little bit more believable as a character. I like what Mozart did in condensing successive arias into duets and trios, which is why I’m disappointed that the original second act was so badly mutilated. There was such a missed opportunity for a trio between Servilia, Tito & Annio in which Servilia & Tito take turns denouncing Annio as a traitor, while Annio begs for mercy. It’s also a shame to lose Vitellia’s schizophrenic aria “Come potesti, o Dio!” in which she vacillates between hatred for Sesto and hatred for herself. I also don’t understand why Mozart wrote “S’altro che lagrime” like a lullaby. It’s fiery, angry, in a minor key and practically screamed at an insufferable Vitellia in Gluck, which is how it should be. Overall, Mozart’s music for this opera is very good, but it suffers dramatically from the mutilated libretto. All that said, Mozart’s chorus “Che del ciel che degli Dei” is divine perfection.
IIRC, H. C. Robbins Landon once wrote that Tito contains "about an hour of Mozart's finest music", which sounds like a compliment until you realize that it's more than two hours long...
Rewriting this because apparently the provenance of Mozart's scatological songs aren't clear, but I suppose choosing any one of those songs was (too) low hanging fruit. It's an interesting choice. I like La Clemenza di Tito! It's very silly, like the vast majority of opera plots.
I can agree only partially. Sure, Tito is a bore. But Vittellia and Sesto are musically wonderful characterised roles. Listen to Della Jones and Cecilia Bartoli under Hogwood. That's exciting as hell. In toto La clemenza contains some of Mozart's finest music... If it's embarrassing, then on a very high level.
Leopold II (incidentally, Marie Antoinette's brother) opposed torture and the death penalty, so maybe Mozart's opera calling for clemency did some good after all! I enjoyed your takedown of the ridiculous plot, though.
I do not fully agree. Absurd plots are almost the rule in most operas serias (see Handel, Vivaldi ...). And very few operas are listenable from A to Z. It is not specific to La Clemenza di Tito. And the magic of a few arias is well enough to justify the acquisition of such a work.
That's not the point. The absurdity (and the embarrassment) does not lie in the plot as much as it does in the impossibility of even Mozart making these characters sympathetic or believable. He was the wrong man for this particular job.
I dissent. There are dozens of 18th century Clemenzas out there, including one by Gluck, but Mozart's is the only viable one I've ever heard. (I've heard two of the others.)Most of it is charming and there are two duets in the first act, especially "Ah, perdona al primo affetto" which deserves a triple encore; pure heaven. Vitellia, like it or not, is a great dramatic creation and though Sesto is an idiot his "Parto" aria is genuinely moving. The first act finale is haunting. No other composer could have made as much out of it as Mozart did even though Tito remains a cardboard character. In that sense it's a triumph. Clemenza was very popular in early 19th century Italy. Cosi fan tutte, for its misogny is pretty embarrassing, let's face it. No, Mozart's real embarrassment, age aside and no excuse, is that snooze fest "Il Sogno di Scipione." Guaranteed to send anyone to dreamland.
@DavesClassicalGuide I understand your point of view. I think you could argue that applies to Cosi which is chock full of great and sublime music, a wonderful Serenade or divertimento for voices. My hesitation is that we can be too ready to apply modern mores to works of an earlier culture instead of trying to understand them.
This video was a great relief. I thought it was only I who couldn't make sense of this opera. Feel better about it now. Love the arias Parto, Parto and Non più di fiori.
Not sure I'd go as far as to call it embarrassing, but I've always found the Concerto for three pianos and orchestra, K. 242 to be one of Mozart's least inspired works.
Oh, God....3 seconds into this video, I knew, I should have had a bottle of tranquilizers at hand...a WHOLE BOTTLE! Well, I can absolutely follow the musico-dramatic mishaps and absurdities outlined by David, but I can't agree with the final verdict of this being Mozart most embarrassing work...not with so much gorgeous music in it! When it comes to ridiculosity in respect to the plot, it (almost) seems coherent compared to fx Mitridate, not to speak of Idomeneo with the Kraken-like seemonster, or the absurd plot twists in the denouement of the Abduction - "Oh, is that your father? He was the one who expelled me from my country of birth.", "What would your predicament have been, if he had been in my shoes?", "Oh, we would sorely have had to regret our situation", "Yes, you would, indeed....but luckily, I am not him, not by any means an autocrat like him. On the contrary, I am the enlightened, benign, osmanic ruler, whose example, by the way, your kings and emperors could learn from!" (notch, notch, wink, wink, did you get that, Joseph?). All rejoice, except the cardboard caricature of the overseer, Osmin, who leaves the stage as the fuming Turk, he is! Mozart's problem is in La Clemenza, that he is competing with himself and his congenial collaboration with Da Ponte, that raised comic opera, or maybe more precise: operatic comedy of human errors, to hitherto unattained heights, that maybe in the centuries, that followed, once in a while, was equalled (Rossini's Barbiere, Verdi's Falstaff), but never surpassed! The Mozart/da Ponte collaborative efforts left it for everyone to see the Opera seria for what it were: a fossilated relict of a world long gone. Mozart's return to the genre can definately be seen as a misjudgement, a mistake and/or a failure - but downright to classify it as an embarassement veers on over-egging the pudding, me thinks!
I'm amazed that no one seems to get my point here. It's not that plot is bad. The embarrassment lies precisely in lavishing music of such quality on such unworthy characters. Mozart's earlier operas also have ludicrous plots--most operas do--but either the characters rise to the level of the music, however absurd the situations, or the whole affair is of a lower (or different) order generally. Here, the whole enterprise is hopeless.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Maybe it might be with us, operabuffs, that we are so used to disregard silly (and outreageous) plots, that we compare to the proverbial frog: put into boiling water, the frog per reflex jumps out of the water (David), put into cold water, that is gradually heated, it gets boiled (us)!
None of the others are in the regularly recurring repertory. Out of all of those dozens, including Gluck's, only Mozart's is. Doesn't that speak for itself?
idk. tito makes me cry, especially tito's 1st aria where he forgives the couple and thhe finale. my personal pick, although im a mozart fanboy iis the requiem. cant get into it
I don't think it's a "bad" opera, but certainly not up to standard. Its flaws arise from circumstance; Mozart had minimal time to complete it and even sought help from a student to do so. It was also sandwiched between two other operas that he seemed to dedicate a lot more effort into (Don Giovanni, Magic Flute). I enjoy parts of it but I don't specifically seek to listen to it over and over like his other operas.
Hi Dave! IMHO the quality of certain Titus' pieces (the ouverture, the choruses, a duet and at least a couple of arias) justifies at the end the work itself. What I find actually embarassing in his output (I mean, the combination of music and plot) is La Finta Giardiniera. The premise sounds like this: "The story follows Count Belfiore and the Marchioness Violante Onesti, who were lovers before Belfiore stabbed Violante in a fit of rage...". Honestly... who can seriously follow the rest after such an assumption as beginning? All best
I think the overture is one of Mozart's worst pieces of music in any form. It's beyond perfunctory. As I said in the video, Mozart at 10 (or whenever he wrote Giardiniera) gets a pass.
@DavesClassicalGuide Gosh, I think the Clemenza overture is delightful. It's effect of cascading pealing bells, without actually using them, and the compact form just exudes celebration. Mozart was 18 when he wrote Finta Giardinera, but I don't blame him for the inept, unspeakably childish plot.
He had more time with Idomeneo, including time for brow-beating the librettist. The result is one of his finest scores - as music. The seria form is foreign to us. Mozart knew it wasn’t for him, either. But the music! Viz “Andrò ramingo e solo,” is as great as anything he ever wrote. And certainly for a kid of 24-25.
"Trying circumstances" have nothing to do with musical results. It wouldn't be the last time commentators resort to mental gymnastics to excuse the inexcusable.
As you were announcing the title of Mozart's Most Embarrassing Work, you opened your mouth and I thought "La clemenza di Tito" and you said "La clemenza di Tito." It was like ESP. Of course, you had said it earlier today, but it took a while for the neural pulses to travel from Connecticut to Montana. Or maybe we just happen to agree 100% on this one! There are some performances of La clemenza that I do like. I am fond of the Ponnelle video with everybody smothered in wigs at the Teatro Olimpico di Verona. I also like the René Jacobs recording. But every other time I have tried to watch or listen, I have failed, and not for want of trying. For years I blamed this on the fact that Mozart got out of Prague and left Süssmeyer to compose the recitatives. So you have nuggets of genius floating in a sea of mediocrity. But now you have made me think that Mozart got revenge on the whole project by putting the most beautiful music in the mouth of one of the least likable characters in all opera. So maybe Sussmeyer tried to save the opera by making the recitatives as sincere as possible, but he was no match for a prodigious saboteur.
Mmhh...can there possibly be an embarrassing opinion piece by Dave Hurwitz? I didn't think so before, but it had to come to Mozart to prove me wrong. I would put it that way: Many people got harmed when trying to be musically smarter than Mozart. So that's not an embarassement at all but rather a proof, that we are all human. With that one exception.....
I totally agree. There are no exceptions - but one. That's not too much for mankind, isn't it? I can't help feeling that way, although I know it sounds silly and probably is. At least a religion that does do no harm to anyone, I hope.
I still have the Ponnelle with the - as i just sadly found out already deceased - for me unforgettable Neblett and Troyanos on VHS, and liked watching it, about 5 times. It's campy, very theatrical and in a great setting. Directing could be better though, the ouverture scene is very uninspired. Only found about 45 minutes worth to copy to an audio cassette in it, way more then in a lot of more respected works/opera's by other composers. More then Fidelio for example. But it's isn't a masterpiece by far. Mozart would have been better in composing another 8 or 9 concert aria's then getting this done. It's pretty grotesk to have all this adolescent impulsive love and hate plotting set in ancient Rome in the court of the emperor. Especially this Sextus character is just a high school clumsy love sick nitwit, but quite loveable. I don't know if the role is always played by women, the Levine/Ponelle version is all i've ever heard/seen, if not the prison scene in the end must be pretty gay looking. So to my embarrassment, as a guilty pleasure, i rather enjoy it.
I agree it's nonsense, but I love 'LCDT' - the psychological disconnect of Vitellia reflects a similar break in the Queen of the Night. In TMF, people rave about it, excusing the schism. They actually supply the rationale and say, 'Wasn't Mozart brilliant to think of that!?'
Thank you so much for this, Dave. Tito really is utter nonsense, but worse, it is dry as dust, and I have never listened all the way through in one sitting. I would not have thought to nominate Tito, but as Mozart's most embarrassing work, but the instant you named it, I had to agree. I admit to a love-hate relationship with The Magic Flute. I fell in love with the Klemperer recording when I was about 12 and gave no thought to the plot. Now that I realize how pathetic the plot is, I still enjoy music (minus the Grand Poobah parts). One of the virtues of the Klemperer is that sans dialogue it's easier to ignore the story line.
The magic flute is absolutely the worst best opera ever written. I hate it so much and I find it so boring but also so absurdly beautiful that it makes my head spin. But Clemenza di Tito is probably the right pick. It's also very boring.
a Canadian writer in a book on Mozart (Mozart recounted in 50 masterpieces) about the finale of the piano concerto no. 21 (Elvira Madigan) said "this is obviously a piece where Mozart was in a hurry to finish as soon as possible......! very short movement, not very elaborate, briefly after the two movements which preceded it, here is a sloppy finale.....(urgently....?)'', and regarding the clemency of titus let us remember although Mozart only had three weeks to complete the work, due to material obligations, Mozart was very in debt at that time......
But Mozart frequently put pieces together almost instantly. I believe it was the Linz symphony where he wrote to his father that he had a concert that week and he'd better write the new symphony for it! The finale of Mozart's PC21 seems well up to standard and in no way perfunctory. Sure, it has Mozart's typical abrupt ending, but that's his usual way - say what he has to say and stop, not a note wasted. So I can't agree with the Canadian writer.
I think Mozart hurt La Clemenza di Tito by turning it into a 2 act opera. The sections that Mazzolà cut from Metastasio’s original libretto weren’t essential to the bare bones plot, but they helped flesh out the characters and give them more spice and personality. In the original libretto, Annio and Servilia get a lot more stage time, balancing out the annoying parts with Sesto and Vitellia.
Also in the original libretto, Sesto and Annio swap cloaks, upon which is tied a crimson ribbon to identify fellow conspirators, and Annio gets arrested as a result. Tito jumps the gun to blame Annio, who is later exonerated, which explains why Tito becomes so hesitant to condemn Sesto. He was wrong about Annio and wants to be wrong again about Sesto too. Tito is less spontaneously magnanimous in the original libretto, making him a little bit more believable as a character.
I like what Mozart did in condensing successive arias into duets and trios, which is why I’m disappointed that the original second act was so badly mutilated. There was such a missed opportunity for a trio between Servilia, Tito & Annio in which Servilia & Tito take turns denouncing Annio as a traitor, while Annio begs for mercy. It’s also a shame to lose Vitellia’s schizophrenic aria “Come potesti, o Dio!” in which she vacillates between hatred for Sesto and hatred for herself. I also don’t understand why Mozart wrote “S’altro che lagrime” like a lullaby. It’s fiery, angry, in a minor key and practically screamed at an insufferable Vitellia in Gluck, which is how it should be. Overall, Mozart’s music for this opera is very good, but it suffers dramatically from the mutilated libretto. All that said, Mozart’s chorus “Che del ciel che degli Dei” is divine perfection.
IIRC, H. C. Robbins Landon once wrote that Tito contains "about an hour of Mozart's finest music", which sounds like a compliment until you realize that it's more than two hours long...
Rewriting this because apparently the provenance of Mozart's scatological songs aren't clear, but I suppose choosing any one of those songs was (too) low hanging fruit. It's an interesting choice. I like La Clemenza di Tito! It's very silly, like the vast majority of opera plots.
A good scatological song is nothing to be embarrassed about.
I can agree only partially. Sure, Tito is a bore. But Vittellia and Sesto are musically wonderful characterised roles. Listen to Della Jones and Cecilia Bartoli under Hogwood. That's exciting as hell. In toto La clemenza contains some of Mozart's finest music... If it's embarrassing, then on a very high level.
OK. It's a major, high level embarrassment.
@@DavesClassicalGuide 😅😂
@@DavesClassicalGuideOK, if you put it on that footing, I have to agree.
Leopold II (incidentally, Marie Antoinette's brother) opposed torture and the death penalty, so maybe Mozart's opera calling for clemency did some good after all! I enjoyed your takedown of the ridiculous plot, though.
I do not fully agree. Absurd plots are almost the rule in most operas serias (see Handel, Vivaldi ...). And very few operas are listenable from A to Z. It is not specific to La Clemenza di Tito. And the magic of a few arias is well enough to justify the acquisition of such a work.
That's not the point. The absurdity (and the embarrassment) does not lie in the plot as much as it does in the impossibility of even Mozart making these characters sympathetic or believable. He was the wrong man for this particular job.
@@DavesClassicalGuide OK, Dave, but maybe your concept of "embarrassment" should be better explained !
@@philippecassagne3192 Or maybe not!
I dissent. There are dozens of 18th century Clemenzas out there, including one by Gluck, but Mozart's is the only viable one I've ever heard. (I've heard two of the others.)Most of it is charming and there are two duets in the first act, especially "Ah, perdona al primo affetto" which deserves a triple encore; pure heaven. Vitellia, like it or not, is a great dramatic creation and though Sesto is an idiot his "Parto" aria is genuinely moving. The first act finale is haunting. No other composer could have made as much out of it as Mozart did even though Tito remains a cardboard character. In that sense it's a triumph. Clemenza was very popular in early 19th century Italy.
Cosi fan tutte, for its misogny is pretty embarrassing, let's face it.
No, Mozart's real embarrassment, age aside and no excuse, is that snooze fest "Il Sogno di Scipione." Guaranteed to send anyone to dreamland.
Nice try. I agree that Scipione is a snooze, but Tito is an embarrassment precisely because some of the music is genuinely great.
@DavesClassicalGuide I understand your point of view. I think you could argue that applies to Cosi which is chock full of great and sublime music, a wonderful Serenade or divertimento for voices. My hesitation is that we can be too ready to apply modern mores to works of an earlier culture instead of trying to understand them.
This video was a great relief. I thought it was only I who couldn't make sense of this opera. Feel better about it now. Love the arias Parto, Parto and Non più di fiori.
Not sure I'd go as far as to call it embarrassing, but I've always found the Concerto for three pianos and orchestra, K. 242 to be one of Mozart's least inspired works.
Oh, God....3 seconds into this video, I knew, I should have had a bottle of tranquilizers at hand...a WHOLE BOTTLE!
Well, I can absolutely follow the musico-dramatic mishaps and absurdities outlined by David, but I can't agree with the final verdict of this being Mozart most embarrassing work...not with so much gorgeous music in it!
When it comes to ridiculosity in respect to the plot, it (almost) seems coherent compared to fx Mitridate, not to speak of Idomeneo with the Kraken-like seemonster, or the absurd plot twists in the denouement of the Abduction - "Oh, is that your father? He was the one who expelled me from my country of birth.", "What would your predicament have been, if he had been in my shoes?", "Oh, we would sorely have had to regret our situation", "Yes, you would, indeed....but luckily, I am not him, not by any means an autocrat like him. On the contrary, I am the enlightened, benign, osmanic ruler, whose example, by the way, your kings and emperors could learn from!" (notch, notch, wink, wink, did you get that, Joseph?). All rejoice, except the cardboard caricature of the overseer, Osmin, who leaves the stage as the fuming Turk, he is!
Mozart's problem is in La Clemenza, that he is competing with himself and his congenial collaboration with Da Ponte, that raised comic opera, or maybe more precise: operatic comedy of human errors, to hitherto unattained heights, that maybe in the centuries, that followed, once in a while, was equalled (Rossini's Barbiere, Verdi's Falstaff), but never surpassed!
The Mozart/da Ponte collaborative efforts left it for everyone to see the Opera seria for what it were: a fossilated relict of a world long gone.
Mozart's return to the genre can definately be seen as a misjudgement, a mistake and/or a failure - but downright to classify it as an embarassement veers on over-egging the pudding, me thinks!
I'm amazed that no one seems to get my point here. It's not that plot is bad. The embarrassment lies precisely in lavishing music of such quality on such unworthy characters. Mozart's earlier operas also have ludicrous plots--most operas do--but either the characters rise to the level of the music, however absurd the situations, or the whole affair is of a lower (or different) order generally. Here, the whole enterprise is hopeless.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Maybe it might be with us, operabuffs, that we are so used to disregard silly (and outreageous) plots, that we compare to the proverbial frog: put into boiling water, the frog per reflex jumps out of the water (David), put into cold water, that is gradually heated, it gets boiled (us)!
One mustn't forget his Canon in B flat K.231 (K. 382c) who's title can not even be mentioned in polite company!
I will be curious to know your take on the most embarrassing work by Sibelius… (The Maiden in the Tower?) 👍
For some reason this makes me think of Terry Jones as the "maiden in the tower" in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. lol
So this begs the question, are any of the other 40 settings of this Metastasio libretto any better or for that matter, less embarrassing?
Yes, actually.
Pray tell, I'm sure we would all love to know them@@DavesClassicalGuide
None of the others are in the regularly recurring repertory. Out of all of those dozens, including Gluck's, only Mozart's is. Doesn't that speak for itself?
Mozart’s Clemenza was his most performed opera for about 30 years after his death. Chew on that one. Tastes change.
@@thomasdeansfineart149 A meaningless statistic. Exactly how many performances was that? As compared to what?
idk. tito makes me cry, especially tito's 1st aria where he forgives the couple and thhe finale. my personal pick, although im a mozart fanboy iis the requiem. cant get into it
I don't think it's a "bad" opera, but certainly not up to standard. Its flaws arise from circumstance; Mozart had minimal time to complete it and even sought help from a student to do so. It was also sandwiched between two other operas that he seemed to dedicate a lot more effort into (Don Giovanni, Magic Flute). I enjoy parts of it but I don't specifically seek to listen to it over and over like his other operas.
Don't blame circumstance, or rather blame it. I don't care how it got to be what it is. I care about what it is. That's all the matters. No excuses.
Hi Dave! IMHO the quality of certain Titus' pieces (the ouverture, the choruses, a duet and at least a couple of arias) justifies at the end the work itself. What I find actually embarassing in his output (I mean, the combination of music and plot) is La Finta Giardiniera. The premise sounds like this: "The story follows Count Belfiore and the Marchioness Violante Onesti, who were lovers before Belfiore stabbed Violante in a fit of rage...". Honestly... who can seriously follow the rest after such an assumption as beginning? All best
I think the overture is one of Mozart's worst pieces of music in any form. It's beyond perfunctory. As I said in the video, Mozart at 10 (or whenever he wrote Giardiniera) gets a pass.
Got the point. Thank you!
@DavesClassicalGuide Gosh, I think the Clemenza overture is delightful. It's effect of cascading pealing bells, without actually using them, and the compact form just exudes celebration.
Mozart was 18 when he wrote Finta Giardinera, but I don't blame him for the inept, unspeakably childish plot.
Yes. Giardiniera is so confusing.
He had more time with Idomeneo, including time for brow-beating the librettist. The result is one of his finest scores - as music. The seria form is foreign to us. Mozart knew it wasn’t for him, either. But the music! Viz “Andrò ramingo e solo,” is as great as anything he ever wrote. And certainly for a kid of 24-25.
Andrew Porter considered "Tito" a masterpiece and I agree with him, especially considering the trying circumstances of its composition.
"Trying circumstances" have nothing to do with musical results. It wouldn't be the last time commentators resort to mental gymnastics to excuse the inexcusable.
Arias are the oases in the middle of the very dry dessert of the surrounding opera.
As you were announcing the title of Mozart's Most Embarrassing Work, you opened your mouth and I thought "La clemenza di Tito" and you said "La clemenza di Tito." It was like ESP. Of course, you had said it earlier today, but it took a while for the neural pulses to travel from Connecticut to Montana. Or maybe we just happen to agree 100% on this one!
There are some performances of La clemenza that I do like. I am fond of the Ponnelle video with everybody smothered in wigs at the Teatro Olimpico di Verona. I also like the René Jacobs recording. But every other time I have tried to watch or listen, I have failed, and not for want of trying. For years I blamed this on the fact that Mozart got out of Prague and left Süssmeyer to compose the recitatives. So you have nuggets of genius floating in a sea of mediocrity. But now you have made me think that Mozart got revenge on the whole project by putting the most beautiful music in the mouth of one of the least likable characters in all opera. So maybe Sussmeyer tried to save the opera by making the recitatives as sincere as possible, but he was no match for a prodigious saboteur.
Mmhh...can there possibly be an embarrassing opinion piece by Dave Hurwitz? I didn't think so before, but it had to come to Mozart to prove me wrong. I would put it that way: Many people got harmed when trying to be musically smarter than Mozart. So that's not an embarassement at all but rather a proof, that we are all human. With that one exception.....
There are no exceptions. Ever.
I totally agree. There are no exceptions - but one. That's not too much for mankind, isn't it?
I can't help feeling that way, although I know it sounds silly and probably is. At least a religion that does do no harm to anyone, I hope.
We know that exceptions do sometimes exist. They're mentioned in the saying "It is the exception that proves the rule."
I still have the Ponnelle with the - as i just sadly found out already deceased - for me unforgettable Neblett and Troyanos on VHS, and liked watching it, about 5 times. It's campy, very theatrical and in a great setting. Directing could be better though, the ouverture scene is very uninspired. Only found about 45 minutes worth to copy to an audio cassette in it, way more then in a lot of more respected works/opera's by other composers. More then Fidelio for example. But it's isn't a masterpiece by far. Mozart would have been better in composing another 8 or 9 concert aria's then getting this done. It's pretty grotesk to have all this adolescent impulsive love and hate plotting set in ancient Rome in the court of the emperor. Especially this Sextus character is just a high school clumsy love sick nitwit, but quite loveable. I don't know if the role is always played by women, the Levine/Ponelle version is all i've ever heard/seen, if not the prison scene in the end must be pretty gay looking. So to my embarrassment, as a guilty pleasure, i rather enjoy it.
I literally (almost) fell asleep during the reading of the plot… zzzzz. Tito also his most irrelevant opera…
I love "S'altro che lagrime" also :)
Seems appropriate that Sesto was written for a castrato.
I agree it's nonsense, but I love 'LCDT' - the psychological disconnect of Vitellia reflects a similar break in the Queen of the Night. In TMF, people rave about it, excusing the schism. They actually supply the rationale and say, 'Wasn't Mozart brilliant to think of that!?'
Yes, but the Queen of the Night is a fairy-tale character. Vitellia is supposed to be a person--and a historical one at that!
If you’re going to do Chopin, my suggestion would be his fuge in A minor. Sheesh what a empty piece that is…
Thank you so much for this, Dave. Tito really is utter nonsense, but worse, it is dry as dust, and I have never listened all the way through in one sitting. I would not have thought to nominate Tito, but as Mozart's most embarrassing work, but the instant you named it, I had to agree. I admit to a love-hate relationship with The Magic Flute. I fell in love with the Klemperer recording when I was about 12 and gave no thought to the plot. Now that I realize how pathetic the plot is, I still enjoy music (minus the Grand Poobah parts). One of the virtues of the Klemperer is that sans dialogue it's easier to ignore the story line.
"If you love me you'll kill him".
I volunteer to write the overture for La Clemenza de Donald.
The magic flute is absolutely the worst best opera ever written. I hate it so much and I find it so boring but also so absurdly beautiful that it makes my head spin. But Clemenza di Tito is probably the right pick. It's also very boring.
What about JS Bach's most embarrassing work? Dare you go there?
a Canadian writer in a book on Mozart (Mozart recounted in 50 masterpieces) about the finale of the piano concerto no. 21 (Elvira Madigan) said "this is obviously a piece where Mozart was in a hurry to finish as soon as possible......! very short movement, not very elaborate, briefly after the two movements which preceded it, here is a sloppy finale.....(urgently....?)'', and regarding the clemency of titus let us remember although Mozart only had three weeks to complete the work, due to material obligations, Mozart was very in debt at that time......
Who cares? Junk is junk. No excuses.
But Mozart frequently put pieces together almost instantly. I believe it was the Linz symphony where he wrote to his father that he had a concert that week and he'd better write the new symphony for it! The finale of Mozart's PC21 seems well up to standard and in no way perfunctory. Sure, it has Mozart's typical abrupt ending, but that's his usual way - say what he has to say and stop, not a note wasted. So I can't agree with the Canadian writer.