BaL 7.03.15 - Clara Schumann: Piano Trio in G minor Op. 17

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Who decided which composers became great masters and which ones were cast aside?

A good question. Time was, when Spohr was numbered among the greats.

[Alison]

Who decided which composers became great masters and which ones were cast aside?

Robert Layton, Edward Greenfield and Ivan March.

[Alison]

A good question. Time was, when Spohr was numbered among the greats.

How true. I love Spohr as it happens! Must be due a revival ...

[EdgeleyRob]

Robert Layton, Edward Greenfield and Ivan March.

Perhaps for a bit of fun forumites might like to nominate 2 or 3 composers they think deserve to be up there with the greatest composers.
By the greatest I'm obviously talking about the 3 Bs plus Elgar and RVW.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Perhaps for a bit of fun forumites might like to nominate 2 or 3 composers they think deserve to be up there with the greatest composers.
By the greatest I'm obviously talking about the 3 Bs plus Elgar and RVW.

A separate Thread, perhaps? (And with that Examiners' old favourite "give reasons for your response"?)

[EdgeleyRob]

A separate Thread, perhaps? (And with that Examiners' old favourite "give reasons for your response"?)

Yes,sorry for derailing this one.
I'll have a think about whether or not it's a goer.

[Pabmusic]

...That's perhaps what worries me a tad with Clara S. She is of course a central figure in the "Women composers are great too" campaign (the name of Diana Ambache comes immediately to mind). We're immediately into deep water if we start to ask "How great? PROVE that [female composer QQQQ] is as good as [male composers X, Y and Z]", "She really deserves my attention" or whatever. The existence of a 'political' agenda, however well-merited, makes it difficult to listen with the same set of ears as to a 'new oldie' like Biber. IMO of course. And again I tentatively ask, Which is the CS masterwork that books her ticket on the steep Mt Olympus rack-railway? I shall try to listen to the BaL with open ears, hoping to be persuaded, though alas it'll have to be the i-player as I'm St Elsewhere next Saturday

Don't get me wrong, I'm not pushing a 'Male Composers Really Are Better' agenda (AFAIK!),and have my own list of women composers whom I definitely seek out. But the wider feminist campaign does make evaluations difficult I find.

Here's my own take. I agree that it's right to include female composers in all the activities of our concert/radio/recording lives. But not usually because they're female. To choose the composer's sex as a principal reason for playing something must almost aways be mistaken, or at least irrelevant, rather like choosing music because the composers were Sagittarians, or very short, or liked fried onions. Wait, though... A programme of music from - say - the Nordic lands seeems to me to be unobjectionable, and an occasional programme of music by female composers might be similar, if only because female composers are (or were) fewer on the ground for all sorts of social and cultural reasons.

The problem comes when the reason for programming something has more to do with putting the historical record straight than anything about its inherent quality. This is thin ice to tread on. It's acceptable, I think, if the programme is aiming to be 'completist'. I'd like to hear George Butterworth's Suite for String Quartet broadcast, also his In the Highlands, but I'll acknowledge they're probably not lost masterieces, though they are attractive. But I'd never expect the Suite to appear on BAL (even if there were recordings of it).

We now approach a Catch-22. Statistically, there must be works by female composers that are comparable to others by males*, but identifying them may not be easy because of the (truly) male-dominated history that has undoubtedly restricted performances. To identify tem by whatever means requires them to be heard first, but that in itself requires that judgements be made by only a privileged few, because there's no corpus of accepted masterpieces to fall back on. And unless the works are played they'll never be accepted in the same way as acknowledged 'greats'. Such pieces need to be aired, and recording and concert programmes need to include them for that reason.

It seems to me that there are indeed enough recordings of this trio to compare them and perhaps to begin to form a lasting view about the music.

*[If musical composition is largely an autistic trait - and it has been argued that it may well be (see Tony Attwood et al.) - then there should be an imbalance between sexes of between 2:1 and 4:1 in favour of males.]

[Stanfordian]

A good question. Time was, when Spohr was numbered among the greats.

Hiya Eine Alpensinfonie,

I'm glad Spohr isn't regarded as a 'great'. I've spent loads of dosh on Spohr CDs each time freshly buoyed by claims of his unjust neglect. Sadly I always come away disappointed by his lack of memorability.

[Alison]

Hiya Eine Alpensinfonie,

I'm glad Spohr isn't regarded as a 'great'. I've spent loads of dosh on Spohr CDs each time freshly buoyed by claims of his unjust neglect. Sadly I always come away disappointed by his lack of memorability.

Tried the Fourth symphony Stan ?

[LeMartinPecheur]

Here's my own take. I agree that it's right to include female composers in all the activities of our concert/radio/recording lives. But not usually because they're female. To choose the composer's sex as a principal reason for playing something must almost aways be mistaken, or at least irrelevant, rather like choosing music because the composers were Sagittarians, or very short, or liked fried onions. Wait, though... A programme of music from - say - the Nordic lands seeems to me to be unobjectionable, and an occasional programme of music by female composers might be similar, if only because female composers are (or were) fewer on the ground for all sorts of social and cultural reasons.

The problem comes when the reason for programming something has more to do with putting the historical record straight than anything about its inherent quality. This is thin ice to tread on. It's acceptable, I think, if the programme is aiming to be 'completist'. I'd like to hear George Butterworth's Suite for String Quartet broadcast, also his In the Highlands, but I'll acknowledge they're probably not lost masterieces, though they are attractive. But I'd never expect the Suite to appear on BAL (even if there were recordings of it).

We now approach a Catch-22. Statistically, there must be works by female composers that are comparable to others by males*, but identifying them may not be easy because of the (truly) male-dominated history that has undoubtedly restricted performances. To identify tem by whatever means requires them to be heard first, but that in itself requires that judgements be made by only a privileged few, because there's no corpus of accepted masterpieces to fall back on. And unless the works are played they'll never be accepted in the same way as acknowledged 'greats'. Such pieces need to be aired, and recording and concert programmes need to include them for that reason.

It seems to me that there are indeed enough recordings of this trio to compare them and perhaps to begin to form a lasting view about the music.

*[If musical composition is largely an autistic trait - and it has been argued that it may well be (see Tony Attwood et al.) - then there should be an imbalance between sexes of between 2:1 and 4:1 in favour of males.]

(Except for the bit about autism which is completely new to me and on which I'll need a lot more info for evaluation!)

[Pabmusic]

(Except for the bit about autism which is completely new to me and on which I'll need a lot more info for evaluation!)

I'm certainly over-simplifying this, but it really relates to the apparent over-representation of historical figures who demonstrated cear signs of mild autism (either Asperger's or High-Functioning Autism) among scientists, mathematicians, artists and composers - fields that draw on unconscious mathematical skills. There have been serious 'retro-diagnoses' - a historical figure's life examined by psychologists. I know this has been done for Mozart (no surprise there), Beethoven and Bartok, because I've read them, but there are more; and there's certainly much informed speculation. There doesn't seem to be much challenge to the idea that Newton, Cavendish, Darwin, Einstein, Bohr, Dirac,Turing, or Wittgenstein had either Asperger's or HFA - they're "whacky", "nerdy" or "geekish" scientists. Likewise, figures such as Benjamin Franklin of Thomas Jefferson (subject of retro-studies).

[doversoul1]

(This section probably should be moved to the WWD thread)

Is there any evidence that women composers’ works (from the medieval onward) are proportionally poorly represented (recorded, performed, or broadcast)?

LeMartinPecheur #25

But the wider feminist campaign does make evaluations difficult I find

I find that, too. It will be good to hear the music we rarely hear and find out about the composers’ backgrounds but beyond that, is there anything to discuss about women composers’ music as such?

[tigajen]

Radio 3 on Sunday is devoted (largely) to women composers

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

With all the debate going on elsewhere, let's not forget this programme - one that deals with the nuts and bolts.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

yep nuts and bolts, a delightful but at times wearing focus on the musical details ... comment on harmony teaching and playing the chords wrong was a DON 'smile' eh

i would have enjoyed the odd metaphysical moment but can not argue with his choice

with reference to the current fad for attributing spectral disorders right left and centre i would suggest that a familiarity with the realities of attention deficit disorders and the aetiology in modern times [car fumes eh] and the prevalence of lead in the pipes and containers in the good old days should be borne in mind when considering such personal difficulties .... also the nature of a truly dysfunctional syndrome is being air brushed from existence by discussing the nature of the introvert personality as if it was such a syndrome .... really geeky people are mostly just one end of normal distributions of personality traits .... what box are we trying to put people in ..... is genius too difficult to accept at face value? too intimidating? want to see awkward difficult people with funny ideas - take a stroll down a street near you .... there are many such and not geniuses or very creative .... at least half the population have distinct introvert tendencies ... many extroverts lack social skills and are unhappily withdrawn .... large numbers of us are unduly rude to idiots.... many of us [pace Nelson?] feel undervalued by an indifferent mob or snobbish elite .... clinical diagnosis is useful in so far as it leads to a reliably effective treatment or amelioration of a syndrome .... calling people names does not lead to much understanding of individual persons and their works whether they be astonishing or trivial ...