18

Mozart was and is one of the most influential musicians and today nearly everyone knows his name and probably some of his famous compositions. During his lifetime he certainly was a well known musician at least in the royal courts of Europe. But would a common person in Europe or the Holy Roman Empire like a farmer or a tavern owner have heard Mozart's music during his lifetime?

Would they have even heard about him or did his name and music spread much later?

CKA
  • 379
  • 3
  • 8
  • 4
    Rather like this question (which means I don't know the answer either, and am curious now as well). – T.E.D. Mar 09 '23 at 23:17
  • Mozart wrote a lot of dance music - for the court, but according to this it was published, and sold well. No doubt printed music was comparatively expensive, but if professional dance bands played it, it could conceivably have been heard by the general public. – Kate Bunting Mar 10 '23 at 09:46
  • 2
    During 19th century, with the expansion of bourgeoisie, cheap instruments and magazines (the latter included sheet music), the answer would be yes. During 18th century I would say no, but maybe somebody else has sources to put a good answer. – Santiago Mar 10 '23 at 12:29

3 Answers3

9

Mozart lived in Modern Europe (died 1791, soon after the French Revolution); not in medieval, obscure times. Mozart's music was sold (print music sheets), adapted, re-arranged, played by memory, played at home, on the streets, on theaters, etc., during his lifetime enough so that most people in Central European countries would have heard it. Most people would have listened to enough Mozart to recognize his personal style, top melodies, etc.

Music prints were generally available (see: earliest Mozart editions) and although expensive, people copied them themselves at home very cheaply (also, cheap copies were sold). Playing the violin was quite popular, and playing the piano was to become very popular very soon (think 1810). Small string orchestras were also very common in all the German-speaking area to play symphonies and such.

Mozart was a famous child prodigy touring courts, and then, later in life he become "a normal composer". Although famous (think like a Kardashian), he often struggled financially, just like any musician, because at the time, music was not yet an industry and was not perceived as something "useful" people paid for.

Evargalo
  • 5,873
  • 1
  • 29
  • 33
James
  • 2,655
  • 6
  • 16
  • 3
    This looks like a good answer but can add sources? – Lars Bosteen Mar 10 '23 at 13:20
  • I'm a musician and for fun I had and additional look at Incidents in the Life of Mozart. The Musical Times and Singing Class Circular , Dec. 1, 1869, Vol. 14, No. 322 (Dec.1, 1869), pp. 295-297 https://www.jstor.org/stable/3353093 – James Mar 10 '23 at 14:37
  • German-speaking central Europe- maybe. But if you were to include the rest of Europe (from Ireland to European parts of Russia) - most likely - no. – Moishe Kohan Mar 10 '23 at 15:04
  • Weird that you've got me making mental comparisons between Mozart and Little Stevie Wonder/Stevie Wonder. – T.E.D. Mar 10 '23 at 15:31
  • 1791 is only two years after the French Revolution! – Kate Bunting Mar 10 '23 at 16:32
  • Oh yes, thanks for your comment. In my mind I was assuming 12 years apart. – James Mar 10 '23 at 17:12
  • 1
    @KateBunting More like two years into the French Revolution. The King still had his head. – Spencer Mar 10 '23 at 17:58
  • 11
    Those "most people" comments seem a bit dubious. It's estimated that in 1800, in the Austrian Empire, only about 3.2% of the population was urbanized. The highest rate in Europe was in the Netherlands, which was 28.6% urbanized. Were people in villages and in the countryside able to purchase sheet music? Where were those small string orchestras performing? – Juhasz Mar 10 '23 at 18:12
  • Classical music has never been an "exclusive urban thing". Although biggest concert halls are today in cities, classical music has always had spready social diffusion thanks to the church and popular (folk) music. You can even argue that land-owner aristocracts, with their litte castles and courts, were a major patrons of music and other arts. I'm not an expert in Austria-Hungary, but I feel this would be particularly true there. – James Mar 13 '23 at 07:56
  • @MoisheKohanonstrike Mozart's published music was sold in Paris and London. Mozart went to those cities and gave concerts. Mozart was well known in western Europe. – phoog Jul 18 '23 at 12:32
  • I agree with @Juhasz. Urban/rural aside, classical music was not likely to have been widely available to those who had little disposable income. Classical music was becoming available to the growing middle class, but "most people" would have been playing and hearing peasant music of the sort that occasionally appears in classical compositions to provide pastoral color or even comedy. Ensemble music was overwhelmingly an urban affair. – phoog Jul 18 '23 at 12:38
  • @phoog "Most people" is sloppy language, and the OP almost certainly did not mean "50.1% of the human race". It's arguing based on a technicality, but the fault lies in the lack of precision in the question, not with this answer. – cmw Jul 18 '23 at 20:45
  • @cmw "most people" first appears in this answer, not the question. The poster of this question probably meant "more than half of the population of central Europe," and even if he meant "more than half of the population of central Europe having disposable income," it's an extraordinary claim. Could even half of the Viennese bourgeoisie recognize his personal style or tip melodies? The imprecision in this answer goes far beyond that in tbe question. – phoog Jul 18 '23 at 22:19
  • @phoog The question isn't even asking whether they'd recognize him: "But would a common person in Europe or the Holy Roman Empire like a farmer or a tavern owner have heard Mozart's music during his lifetime?" – cmw Jul 18 '23 at 22:22
  • @cmw I wrote "the poster of this question" when I meant to write "the poster of this answer. It is the unsupported implausible speculation in the answer to which I am taking exception; the fact that the statement goes beyond what the question asks doesn't make it any less speculative or implausible. – phoog Jul 18 '23 at 22:35
  • @phoog: My guess is that Mozart's concerts in Paris and London were attended by gentry and, maybe some lawyers/bankers/industrialists. I cannot imagine attendance by farmers/tavern owners. If you mean that Mozart's music was well-known in a narrow circle of people, I would agree. But this is not what the OP was asking. – Moishe Kohan Jul 20 '23 at 12:19
5

Tickets to the première of the Magic Flute in 1791 were available at the theater's normal prices, which were, when it opened four years earlier, as low as 7 Kreuzer for the gallery. A box seating eight people was 5 florins or 37.5 Kreuzer per person.

In a letter of 1777, Mozart writes of the price of copying a sheet of music being between 6 and 24 Kreuzer. I couldn't find data for the cost of everyday items in 1790s Vienna, but I suppose that it isn't unreasonable to think that a tavern owner could afford such prices. The theater and the piece Schikaneder commissioned for it were, after all, directed toward a different market from that of the Italian opera of the nobility.

phoog
  • 170
  • 1
  • 5
1

What is important to add to the other answers is that Mozart music became popular before the emergence of modern democratizing mass media (like radio and television). This has two somewhat contradictory consequences:

  • Few of the people living at a distance further then a few hours walk from a nearby theater would have a possibility to ever hear Mozart's music played
  • In absence of television and radio, theaters and wandering actors/musicians were the main source of mass entertainment, and Mozart could be considered as a public celebrity equivalent to Lady Gaga or Justin Bieber in modern times, rather than a classical musician, appreciated mostly to upper classes. (No offense intended - if you prefer, you may compare him to Whitney Houston or Leonard Cohen.)

As the other answers have pointed out, the access to mass entertainment was somewhat popularized from XVII-th to XIX-th century due to the expansion of small bourgeoisie (equivalent of modern class.) However, I would think that lower classes also had access to theaters - in the same way as more than two centuries earlier they had already had access to Shakespear's Globe theater.

Those living in the countryside might have heard of Mozart via wandering musicians. Pushkin in Mozart and Salieri, published in 1832, describes a (fictional) scene where Mozart is amused by a blind street violinist rendition of Mozart's music (translation borrowed from here):

Mozart

Just now. I had
Something to show you; I was on my way,
But passing by an inn, all of a sudden
I heard a violin... My friend Salieri,
In your whole life you haven't heard anything
So funny: this blind fiddler in the inn
Was playing the "voi che sapete". Wondrous!
I couldn't keep myself from bringing him
To treat you to his art.
Entrez, maestro!

(Enter a blind old man with a violin.)

Some Mozart, now!

(The old man plays an aria from Don Giovanni; Mozart roars with laughter.)

Roger V.
  • 3,747
  • 14
  • 30