stravinksy is a good example. the rite in particular solidified him as sort of an enfant terrible, then he sort of minded some of that territory, goes to his neoclassical period (my fave in a lot of ways) and then ends up doing a lot of different things (experimenting with serialism, etc.) that were really well done, but not really as exciting and groundbreaking as the rite felt. (all imo, of course)
Ironically and coincidentally, I was going to cite Stravinsky as one of the few musicians who
was able to remain fresh, inspired and inspiring, as his career matured. His serial writing wasn't just him going "huh, that Schoenberg fellow hit upon a cool idea, Imma try it" he completely understood the potential of the method and then took it in a new direction that not only demonstrated his comprehensive grasp of the method and its potential, but also allowed it to
not subsume his musical personality. Just the very notion of
rotating ordered interval sets is brilliant, something I would expect from a more austere composer like Milton Babbitt than the impish and mercurial Stravinsky... but works like "Agon" are the proof in the pudding.
Yeah, I'll concede that "The Owl And The Pussy Cat" isn't particularly groundbreaking. But then again, I think it's difficult for most musicians and historians to divorce the groundbreakingness of "Le Sacre"
musically from its groundbreakingness
theatrically. iow, there's so much baggage surrounding how anyone born in the latter half of the 20th Century learns about that production that it's hard to imagine what its impact may have been if it had only [sic] been a concert piece.
Derp, I'm blathering now. Yeah, late-period Joe Zawinul is
lame.