Category talk:Romantic composers


 * Thus, not all "Romantic" composers are associated with "Romanticism", and some composers who are associated with some aspects of Romanticism the movement are unequivocally not thought of as "Romantic" composers.

Sounds to me like neither can be a subcat of the other! --Jerzy(t) 21:14, 2005 Jan 6 (UTC)

I don't define these terms, I'm just here to document their use. There is a great overlap between them, and they are related, but not the same. What this means is the subject for original research. Stirling Newberry 00:14, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Then you need to document that usage. A painter would no doubt say that romanticism in painting was not the same as romanticism in music and literature, and likewise a writer would insist romantic poetry should not be confused with romantic music and painting. I'm unaware that there's any general usage claiming music is a special exception in the way you say it is. The linked-to Wikipedia page on Romanticism begins by saying, "Romanticism (also the Romantic era or the Romantic period)...", and goes on to equate the two. Philgoetz (talk) 02:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

(I think that if there is a division, it's between the romantic and the pastoral. The romantic seeks to question and cause unrest, while the pastoral seeks to return to the old-time religion, soothe the disquieted, and suppress questioning. The first two pictures on the Wikipedia page for "Romanticism" are romantic, while the third (Philipp Otto Runge, The Morning, 1808) is pastoral. Byron was romantic; Keats was pastoral. Basically the pastoral adopts the new style and subjects, but its meaning displays a neo-classical attitude. German 19th-century romantic music doesn't have a pastoral counterpart that I'm aware of. Perhaps because style and content can't be easily divorced in music. But that explanation lacks notability.) Philgoetz (talk) 02:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)