Vaughan Williams: The symphonies

[Pabmusic]

To summarize some of the ideas in this thread, when one considers the stylistic evolution from the "Sea" and the "London" Symphonies to the world of the last two symphonies, it is a very interesting road that RVW traveled. Without ever adopting some of the trends of the time, such as polytonality and serialism, there is still quite an evolution in the language and chromaticism of this fascinating composer.
I love the 3rd Symphony, and it is amusing in retrospect to read all of the criticisms of RVW that appeared after this work ("English Cowpat"). He wrote the work on the battlefields of Flanders, and to me the music has always seemed like a lament for a world that must of have seemed so benevolent compared to the incredible carnage that he was enmeshed in. Then the fury of the $th, the indescribeble beauty of the 5th and the horrifying visions ofthe 6th are ultimately replaced by the more impersonal, but no less vivid, music of the last 3 Symphonies. Mahler's compositional voice undergoes a similar evolution between his 4th and 5th Symphonies.
I wonder what RVW's Uncle, Charles Darwin, would have had to say about his Nephew's musical evolution?

Good post. Your last sentence has an error, though. Charles Darwin was RVW's great-uncle, being the brother of Caroline Darwin, who was RVW's grandmother. Charles and Caroline (and four more siblings) were grandchildren of both Erasmus Darwin and Josiah Wedgwood, and both Charles and Caroline married Wedgwood cousins - the siblings Emma and Josiah III. RVW's mother, Margaret Wedgwood, was the product of the Caroline-Josiah III union. RVW was thus descended through three different Wedgwood-Darwin marriages - (1) maternal grandparents, (2) one set of maternal great-grandparents, and (3) one set of maternal great-great-grandparents. It is made even more complicated because (1) - Caroline and Josiah III) - were cousins anyway, and the mother of Caroline (and of Charles Darwin) - Susannah - was the sister of Josiah II (father of Josiah III). Fun eh?

I expect you know this, but it bears repetition. RVW recalled how he, as a child, asked his mother about Darwin, and what all the fuss was about. His mother replied that "the Bible says that God made the world in six days. Great-uncle Charles thinks it took longer: but we need not worry about it, for it is equally wonderful either way". He met Darwin as a boy, and Darwin wrote to RVW's mother how he had given the boy some money, telling him not to mention it to anyone. Later, RVW told his great-uncle "'I suppose I ought to give it back to you for I have told Aunt Sophy' - a proof of pleasure which he could not forbear to show, and of honesty which he could not resist."

[Lateralthinking1]

To summarize some of the ideas in this thread, when one considers the stylistic evolution from the "Sea" and the "London" Symphonies to the world of the last two symphonies, it is a very interesting road that RVW traveled. Without ever adopting some of the trends of the time, such as polytonality and serialism, there is still quite an evolution in the language and chromaticism of this fascinating composer.
I love the 3rd Symphony, and it is amusing in retrospect to read all of the criticisms of RVW that appeared after this work ("English Cowpat"). He wrote the work on the battlefields of Flanders, and to me the music has always seemed like a lament for a world that must of have seemed so benevolent compared to the incredible carnage that he was enmeshed in. Then the fury of the $th, the indescribeble beauty of the 5th and the horrifying visions ofthe 6th are ultimately replaced by the more impersonal, but no less vivid, music of the last 3 Symphonies. Mahler's compositional voice undergoes a similar evolution between his 4th and 5th Symphonies.
I wonder what RVW's Uncle, Charles Darwin, would have had to say about his Nephew's musical evolution?

And it all comes together on Leith Hill in Dorking where RVW lived, CD studied earthworms and CW planted all those wonderful rhododendrons which I make a point of visiting every May. At some point in the not too distant future, I would love to see a thread about the Cowpat Brigade. We should really identify the key people and try to separate the ones who were constructive in their thinking and the more malevolent. In the longer term, RVW's work was strong enough to weather the criticisms but a large number of British composers were lost to time because of it. It would also be interesting to have an assessment on who suffered the most.

[rauschwerk]

Being equally frank, I think I do "grasp it": it's just that I don't think it's particularly good! And, I add again; YET!

In judging a piece of music I'm with Antony Hopkins, who has said that we should always ask ourselves whether a composer has achieved what he/she set out to achieve, insofar as we can assess that. It seems to me that in the 8th symphony RVW turned his back on the 'grand' type of piece and set out to write a kind of entertainment without descending to the trivial. If I'm not mistaken, none of the four movements is in sonata form, which says a good deal. (RVW made up for this in a way by writing a double sonata in No. 9.) But the first movement ("Variations in search of a theme") is highly organised.

One might also criticise a piece for (a) weak musical materials, (b) poor use of those materials. I don't think RVW 8 is open to criticism on either ground, and consider that the composer did achieve what he set out to achieve. He didn't try and fail to write a 'grand' symphony of the Sibelian or Mahlerian type.

[teamsaint]

In judging a piece of music I'm with Antony Hopkins, who has said that we should always ask ourselves whether a composer has achieved what he/she set out to achieve, insofar as we can assess that. It seems to me that in the 8th symphony RVW turned his back on the 'grand' type of piece and set out to write a kind of entertainment without descending to the trivial. If I'm not mistaken, none of the four movements is in sonata form, which says a good deal. (RVW made up for this in a way by writing a double sonata in No. 9.) But the first movement ("Variations in search of a theme") is highly organised.

One might also criticise a piece for (a) weak musical materials, (b) poor use of those materials. I don't think RVW 8 is open to criticism on either ground, and consider that the composer did achieve what he set out to achieve. He didn't try and fail to write a 'grand' symphony of the Sibelian or Mahlerian type.

That's an interesting post, Rauschy. On the back of this thread, I am revisiting 8 and 9, not that its a problem, and i'll have a listen to 8 with your thoughts in mind.

incidentally, I usually try to do as Hopkins suggests, and try to appreciate what the composers intentions are....they go to a lot of trouble to produce this music!!

[Barbirollians]

I do find the Barbirolli recordings both the live on Legends and the first recording on Dutton much the most persuasive in No 8 . It just seems to sound right throughout .

I assume that nobody has heard this live Barbirolli 4th ?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

In judging a piece of music I'm with Antony Hopkins, who has said that we should always ask ourselves whether a composer has achieved what he/she set out to achieve, insofar as we can assess that.

I'm not sure this is much help in helping to evaluate a piece: what about those compositions which "take over" their composer's initial "settings out" (Meistersinger or the 2nd String Quartet of Schönberg for example)? If we "always" have such criteria in mind, do we dismiss these works because the final piece doesn't "achieve" what their creators "set out to achieve"?

It seems to me that in the 8th symphony RVW turned his back on the 'grand' type of piece and set out to write a kind of entertainment without descending to the trivial.

I agree: a Symphony more in the spirit of Haydn, (the Paris or London Symphonies) perhaps.

If I'm not mistaken, none of the four movements is in sonata form, which says a good deal. (RVW made up for this in a way by writing a double sonata in No. 9.) But the first movement ("Variations in search of a theme") is highly organised.

Agreed. I'd also point to the way the Violas in the Cavatina rerun the melody of the Scherzo.

One might also criticise a piece for (a) weak musical materials, (b) poor use of those materials. I don't think RVW 8 is open to criticism on either ground

Disagreed. I don't think the materials approach the standard RVW set himself in other works. This is the crux of our disagreement - I don't "misunderstand" those materials, I just don't think they're very good!

and consider that the composer did achieve what he set out to achieve. He didn't try and fail to write a 'grand' symphony of the Sibelian or Mahlerian type.

Well, this is true also of all the other Symphonies from 3 - 9, all of which are among the finest creations of our species, IMO. IMO, he tried and failed to write an effervescent, genial, optimistic Symphony in keeping with the joy he felt at his second marriage.

And I fervently hope that I shall have to return to this Thread eating my words and berating myself for an imbecile before too long: I don't at all like not much liking this piece!

[teamsaint]

I'm not sure this is much help in helping to evaluate a piece: what about those compositions which "take over" their composer's initial "settings out" (Meistersinger or the 2nd String Quartet of Schönberg for example)? If we "always" have such criteria in mind, do we dismiss these works because the final piece doesn't "achieve" what their creators "set out to achieve"?


I agree: a Symphony more in the spirit of Haydn, (the Paris or London Symphonies) perhaps.


Agreed. I'd also point to the way the Violas in the Cavatina rerun the melody of the Scherzo.


Disagreed. I don't think the materials approach the standard RVW set himself in other works. This is the crux of our disagreement - I don't "misunderstand" those materials, I just don't think they're very good!


Well, this is true also of all the other Symphonies from 3 - 9, all of which are among the finest creations of our species, IMO. IMO, he tried and failed to write an effervescent, genial, optimistic Symphony in keeping with the joy he felt at his second marriage.

And I fervently hope that I shall have to return to this Thread eating my words and berating myself for an imbecile before too long: I don't at all like not much liking this piece!

Following this with amateur interest. The way you describe it, Ferney,is the way I feel about Brahms 2. I suspect that I just will never really love the material. But luckily i have board members helping me with my problem , which is great.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Following this with amateur interest. The way you describe it, Ferney,is the way I feel about Brahms 2. I suspect that I just will never really love the material. But luckily i have board members helping me with my problem , which is great.

- it is endlessly fascinating, and one of the joys of this Forum, how we all respond so differently to Music. I'm not by any means intending to "brag" about my problems with RVW #8 - I much prefer loving Music to disliking it, and I'm going to listen to it again with rauschy's words in mind and a determination to get more from it than hitherto.

The Brahms #2 has been one of my real joys since I was 16 - probably my favourite work by one of my favourite composers. That opening tune is one that Johann Strauss might have quoted on someone's fan with the signature "Not by me, alas ... " And I think RVW was fond of it, too: pedal note in the 'celli and Basses, melody over the top based on a D major triad played by a pair of Horns - it's also a description of the opening of RVW's Fifth!

[BBMmk2]

For me. as far as the later RVW symphonioes are concernerd, i find that Ferney's post about the later ones being rather not derived but probab;y inspired from Haydn is perfectly plausioble way of lookjing at these. Would RVW have listened to Haydn's work at this time?

[EdgeleyRob]

RVW 7,8 & 9.

I hate trying to put into words what this music means to me because I find it so difficult,goosebumps already.

Sinfonia Antarctica (I love Michael Kennedy's English Eroica description) does what it says on the tin,man against the elements,ice,penguins.....Haitink in this is superb,makes me shiver (in a good way).

No 8,bursting with melody,makes me think of Beethoven 8,not sure why.

No 9,so different from the first eight,forward looking,not an old man's music,makes me think of the beginning of time,those climaxes in the last movement wow.

Rambling now.

Slatkin in 8 & 9 is superb IMO.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I do find the Barbirolli recordings both the live on Legends and the first recording on Dutton much the most persuasive in No 8 . It just seems to sound right throughout .

I assume that nobody has heard this live Barbirolli 4th ?

Not the Live one, no. But I've played the studio recording (on its EMI "Phoenixa" release) tonight: do you happen to know if it's the composer Arthur Butterworth playing the opening trumpet solo? (The similarity with the opening of his Dales Suite struck me for the first time tonight.)

No change of opinion yet: lovely Cavatina ...

I'll try Boult tomorrow.

[richardfinegold]

Good post. Your last sentence has an error, though. Charles Darwin was RVW's great-uncle, being the brother of Caroline Darwin, who was RVW's grandmother. Charles and Caroline (and four more siblings) were grandchildren of both Erasmus Darwin and Josiah Wedgwood, and both Charles and Caroline married Wedgwood cousins - the siblings Emma and Josiah III. RVW's mother, Margaret Wedgwood, was the product of the Caroline-Josiah III union. RVW was thus descended through three different Wedgwood-Darwin marriages - (1) maternal grandparents, (2) one set of maternal great-grandparents, and (3) one set of maternal great-great-grandparents. It is made even more complicated because (1) - Caroline and Josiah III) - were cousins anyway, and the mother of Caroline (and of Charles Darwin) - Susannah - was the sister of Josiah II (father of Josiah III). Fun eh?

I expect you know this, but it bears repetition. RVW recalled how he, as a child, asked his mother about Darwin, and what all the fuss was about. His mother replied that "the Bible says that God made the world in six days. Great-uncle Charles thinks it took longer: but we need not worry about it, for it is equally wonderful either way". He met Darwin as a boy, and Darwin wrote to RVW's mother how he had given the boy some money, telling him not to mention it to anyone. Later, RVW told his great-uncle "'I suppose I ought to give it back to you for I have told Aunt Sophy' - a proof of pleasure which he could not forbear to show, and of honesty which he could not resist."

Thanks for the correction and the interesting anecdote. You are probably aware that RVW's father was a clergyman. In a family of Atheists, he was considered the Black Sheep.

[richardfinegold]

And it all comes together on Leith Hill in Dorking where RVW lived, CD studied earthworms and CW planted all those wonderful rhododendrons which I make a point of visiting every May. At some point in the not too distant future, I would love to see a thread about the Cowpat Brigade. We should really identify the key people and try to separate the ones who were constructive in their thinking and the more malevolent. In the longer term, RVW's work was strong enough to weather the criticisms but a large number of British composers were lost to time because of it. It would also be interesting to have an assessment on who suffered the most.

Perhaps you should start it now. My knowledge of English composers is more limited. Would Butterworth qualify? I don't think that Elgar, Holst , Bliss, Walton, Alwyn, Rawsthorne, Brian, or Finzi would have been labeled a cowpat. Howells, perhaps.

[Pabmusic]

Thanks for the correction and the interesting anecdote. You are probably aware that RVW's father was a clergyman. In a family of Atheists, he was considered the Black Sheep.

I think 'free thinkers' rather than necessarily atheists in any modern sense (they were probably all baptised into the Church of England). Erasmus Darwin was of the same mould as Thomas Jefferson - a central figure of the Age of Reason - and he and Jefferson certainly weren't believers in any recognisable sense. But Charles's wife, Emma, was certainly a devout Anglican (one reason why Darwin was hestitant to publish On the Origin of Species). As for RVW, he is usually described as an agnostic - but Ursula insisted he was more like the 'passionate atheist' he had been called at Oxford - an interesting thing for a composer so much associated with church music.

[Andrew Slater]

I see there is a Barbirolli live 4th just issued by the barbirolli society from 1950 . Anyone heard it ?

I downloaded the 'mplive' version of the 1950 recording some time ago - if you navigate to the link you can listen to the first minute of each movement. It's certainly a 'different' performance; the first movement starts very slowly, but eventually picks up momentum. All movements are quite slow and lack the bite of RVW's own performance. Nevertheless, worth a listen.