What do Gustav Mahler and Johannes Brahms have in common?

Question

And how are they different? Thanks a BUNCH for the help!

Answer 1

There are many more differences.  OK, their similarities first:

Both were German speaking; though, Mahler (1860-1911) was Austrian and Brahms (1833-1897) German.  Both are associated with the period identified as the Romantic Period of Western European (i.e., classical) music which is approximately 1820-1900.  

[A side note: The problem here is that the majority of Mahler's output was after 1900.  So while some make the mistake of calling him a 20th century composer, most people wisely consider him part of the Romantic tradition and ignore the assumed January 1, 1900 cut off point.  The same issue comes up with Richard Strauss (1864-1949).  But, back to Brahms and Mahler...]

Both are associated with Vienna Austria (Brahms spent the later part of his life there, and Mahler studied there and later became director of the Vienna Opera).  Both are considered to be benefactors of the symphonic tradition established by Beethoven.  You see, they are both in the sacred lineage of German-Austrian composers of the symphony, i.e., Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven (who ushers in the Romantic tradition), Schubert, Mendelssohn, Schumann, Brahms, Mahler, and sometimes Richard Strauss [excluding Berlioz, Tchaikovsky, and Dvorak as they're not German/Austrian].  Some people consider Mahler to be the conclusion of the lineage as Richard Strauss is bored with the symphony and develops it into the symphonic poem instead (sometimes called the Tone Poem).  Also note that I omitted other names from the list such as Lizst, Schoenberg, etc.  They were both a bit on the moody and temperamental side.  Both were perfectionist and had a tendency to continually revise compositions before publishing, which contrasts other composers like Mozart who often lacked the patience to write in the instrumentation of a work before a performance or sending it off to the publisher.

The differences:

Although Brahms probably never really heard the name Gustav Mahler, Mahler on the other hand hated Brahms (or at least his music).  He called Brahms "a tiny little dwarf with a narrow chest" and says something the effect of Wagner (Richard Wagner (1813-1883) German composer of mainly opera...great big huge one's at that) would blow him away.  You see there was a feud during Wagner's and Brahms' lifetime.  I forget who started it, but the notoriously anti-Semitic Wagner didn't care for Brahms.  Now that I think about it, a lot of people had a dislike for Brahms, including Tchaikovsky (Russian composer 1840-1893) who met him on several occasions.  You see, Brahms had a tendency to be grumpy and sarcastic.  He actually unintentionally insulted Lizst by falling asleep during a private performance...a Private Performance!  Huge insult.  But anyway, Mahler's gripes had to do with Brahms' music, in particular it's development.  Mahler claimed that Brahms didn't know what to do with the beautiful thematic material that he'd "sometimes" come up with.  In other words he felt that Brahms' beautiful expository melodies were not developed as intensely as they could've been before the conclusion of the piece.  And If you compare their symphonies Mahler's are much longer and more developed [11 symphonies in all, with 1 being incomplete or more specifically he died before he could orchestrate it].  Mahler is going to twist, turn, and completely exploit and develop a melody before he lets it go.  

Brahms on the other hand (and in his defense) develops in a more formal manner.  He is less concerned with breaking or stretching the rules than he is with acknowledging, respecting, and even paying homage to them in a way and out of sheer reverence for the tradition/practices of those great composers who came before him, namely Beethoven, Mozart, even Bach, etc.  Brahms studied composers who came before him with an alarming frequency.  He inherited Schumann's library from Clara after his death and constantly studyied other earlier composers and even quoted them (in his music) from time to time.  To Brahms form is sacred and is most important...not development.  The finale of his Third Symphony is in sonatina form, meaning it doesn't even have a development.  Though, one should note that Brahms is not above shaking things up a bit as can be seen in the last movement in his Fourth (and last) symphony, Op. 98.  The last movement is not in Sonata form as would be expected but instead in the form of a Passacaglia (an imitative form most popular in the Baroque period 1600-1750).  So even in his attempt to be innovative Brahms is still old fashioned and looking backwards for inspiration.  But that's what I love about him and why his name is on my license plate.