Liszt and Rachmaninov

[peterthekeys]

Watching the "Joy of Rachmaninov" programme last night brought back Alfred Brendel's comment that Liszt was a "great man" and Rachmaninov was a "grand seigneur". (Part of one of the essays in which he said it is here -

http://www.oocities.org/vienna/2192/essays4.html

Now, Brendel's never been my favourite pianist, but I've always regarded him as a very wise man, and I'm fully with him when he says that Liszt should get a serious re-evaluation. But his comment about Rachmaninov (apparently dismissing him as not even worthy of serious interest) seems very strange. Personally, my admiration of Rachmaninov increases with every work of his which I hear.

Thoughts?

[Serial_Apologist]

Watching the "Joy of Rachmaninov" programme last night brought back Alfred Brendel's comment that Liszt was a "great man" and Rachmaninov was a "grand seigneur". (Part of one of the essays in which he said it is here -

http://www.oocities.org/vienna/2192/essays4.html

Now, Brendel's never been my favourite pianist, but I've always regarded him as a very wise man, and I'm fully with him when he says that Liszt should get a serious re-evaluation. But his comment about Rachmaninov (apparently dismissing him as not even worthy of serious interest) seems very strange. Personally, my admiration of Rachmaninov increases with every work of his which I hear.

Thoughts?

For me Liszt is one of a small number whose innovations have been picked up and improved upon by others - and I would include Rachmaninov among those clearly influenced harmonically and pianistically by Liszt.

[rauschwerk]

I greatly admire Brendel, but don't really care tuppence what he thinks of Rachmaninov's music. Plenty of great musicians have valued his music highly and that's good enough for me.

[peterthekeys]

I greatly admire Brendel, but don't really care tuppence what he thinks of Rachmaninov's music. Plenty of great musicians have valued his music highly and that's good enough for me.

Why do I think it's important? Well, Brendel's interpretations of some music is rated so highly that it's considered virtually definitive - so his opinions tend to be rated highly also. I don't have a problem with any performer saying that he or she dislikes a composer's music (Harold Truscott pointed out to me on several occasions that it's possible to admire a composer's music without actually liking it (usually in the context of the music of Delius, which he disliked/admired.) But for a great performer to just dismiss a composer's music as unworthy of attention is worrying - to me at least (particularly if it's a composer of whom I'm fond - I tend to dislike so many items in the standard repertoire that, like Ives, I sometimes wonder if my ears are "on wrong")

(I do wonder how much of Rachmaninov's music Brendel actually knows (he's said that he views the second piano concerto as a work for teenagers, so he's obviously heard that (at least once.)) I'd like to know if he's heard the first symphony - and if not, to tie him to a chair and play him the Svetlanov recording a few times.)

[ahinton]

Why do I think it's important? Well, Brendel's interpretations of some music is rated so highly that it's considered virtually definitive - so his opinions tend to be rated highly also. I don't have a problem with any performer saying that he or she dislikes a composer's music (Harold Truscott pointed out to me on several occasions that it's possible to admire a composer's music without actually liking it (usually in the context of the music of Delius, which he disliked/admired.) But for a great performer to just dismiss a composer's music as unworthy of attention is worrying - to me at least (particularly if it's a composer of whom I'm fond - I tend to dislike so many items in the standard repertoire that, like Ives, I sometimes wonder if my ears are "on wrong")

(I do wonder how much of Rachmaninov's music Brendel actually knows (he's said that he views the second piano concerto as a work for teenagers, so he's obviously heard that (at least once.)) I'd like to know if he's heard the first symphony - and if not, to tie him to a chair and play him the Svetlanov recording a few times.)

So would I! - as well as the Francesca da Rimini music, the Fourth Piano Concerto (in either version), The Bells, the Third Symphony, the Symphonic Dances and a decent selection of the songs (though not all in immediate succession, of course!). I likewise take the view that Brendel has never really been the pianist as which he is so widely regarded but that he is indeed a man of great wisdom and high intellect as well as a most articulate and interesting writer; I remember hearing his attempt to rescue Busoni's Fantasia Contrappuntistica from near-oblivion and that making that piece sound uninteresting was quite an achievement in itself, although allowance deserves to be made that he was still in his 'teens at the time of that recording and he must have had considerable courage to apply himself to this challenging work at that stage in his life, so my impression of him is of a very mixed persona. He is quite right about Liszt and really does know Liszt's work well, though he is not a pianist to whom I would go to listen to any of it when there are so many other better Liszt players around. I also suspect that his familiarity with Rachmaninoff's music is a good deal less than it ought to be if hs is going to dismiss it in such a manner; I wonder what his views (if any) might be on Rachmaninoff the pianist or Rachmaninoff the conductor?

[muzzer]

I remember an interview with Brendel in which he said, if I remember correctly, that he found R too sentimental as he, AB, got older........ Has he no heart .....?

[Alison]

Its easy to think Brendel hasn't the big technique needed for Liszt but whenever I return to his recordings they strike me as remarkably fresh and probing.

[akiralx]

I recall AB also described Grieg's Lyric Pieces as 'music for chambermaids'.

[P. G. Tipps]

Musicians can indeed be horrid to each other.

Tchaikovsky is reputed to have called Brahms a "talentless bastard". Even I think that is rather too strong. The recently-departed Pierre Boulez is said to have refused to conduct the same Tchaikovsky's music.

Back on topic, I think Rachmaninov's music is sneered at by some in the same way as is Tchaikovsky's. Is it because their music is considered too tuneful and therefore unacceptably pleasant to the ear? I really don't know why.

[Serial_Apologist]

Musicians can indeed be horrid to each other.

Tchaikovsky is reputed to have called Brahms a "talentless bastard". Even I think that is rather too strong. The recently-departed Pierre Boulez is said to have refused to conduct the same Tchaikovsky's music.

Back on topic, I think Rachmaninov's music is sneered at by some in the same way as is Tchaikovsky's. Is it because their music is considered too tuneful and therefore unacceptably pleasant to the ear? I really don't know why.

Following smoking, alchohol and transfats, sugar is the new no-no.

[ahinton]

Musicians can indeed be horrid to each other.

Tchaikovsky is reputed to have called Brahms a "talentless bastard". Even I think that is rather too strong. The recently-departed Pierre Boulez is said to have refused to conduct the same Tchaikovsky's music.

Back on topic, I think Rachmaninov's music is sneered at by some in the same way as is Tchaikovsky's. Is it because their music is considered too tuneful and therefore unacceptably pleasant to the ear? I really don't know why.

Be that as it may or may not, I am inclined to think that such sneering arises largely from snobbery. Boulez could indeed be very dismissive; under that maître's marteau came, de temps en temps, composers as diverse as Shostakovich, Strauss, Brahms, Xenakis, Tchaikovsky - even Beethoven on occasion! - not to mention his compatriots Dutilleux and Ohana and (in a very specific context only) his own teacher Messiaen; however, he respected Messiaen as a teacher and conducted quite a few of his works, he conducted one work only of Dutilleux and more than one by Xenakis and he did perform Beethoven symphonies occasionally, though rarely if ever (as far as I can remember) touched the music of those other composers and I seem to recall that he once refused to conduct Tchaikovsky. Not all of Boulez's negative prejudices lasted throughout his career, however; he effected a rapprochement with Dutilleux, began to conduct Szymanowski raletively late in life and even claimed that he found Vaughan Williams interesting (though given his sense of humour one might wonder quie what he meant by that!).

As to Tchaikovsky on Brahms, perhaps he's had a little too much Russian liquid when he said this, although given that Britten once said that he played some Brahms once a year just to remind himself how bad it was - a remark which surely says much more about Britten than it does about Brahms, as conductor Nicholas Simpson notes, though whether Britten had O/Dd on some of the more disgusting English white wine of the time before saying this I cannot be sure (and it was an odd remark anyway coming from a composer who thought so highly of Brahms' first piano concerto).

I recall once reading a published review of composer's work (no names, no pack-drill) which includes the following two phrases - firstly "its subsequent development is so protracted that one wants to call the police — chase the fugitive fuge-thief! — and so pitch-deaf as to have one hanker for the sheer succulence of the goods stolen earlier" and, secondly, "the same question arises that used to be complainingly asked about radical modernism — 'Is it music?'"; given that the reviewer was himself another composer, you'd think that he might have known the answer to that question, wouldn't you?(!)...

[ahinton]

Following smoking, alchohol and transfats, sugar is the new no-no.

The new Nono, surely? And anyway, is sugar (except Alan, who arguably should be) really so much more recent a no-go area as the other three?

[Serial_Apologist]

The new Nono, surely? And anyway, is sugar (except Alan, who arguably should be) really so much more recent a no-go area as the other three?

Hmm. I should also have included salt!

[Roslynmuse]

I recall an interview in Gramophone when Brendel said that he was interested in the later Rachmaninov and mentioned the Paganini Rhapsody saying that it was Variation 18 that turned him off the piece, representing to him everything that Hollywood came to stand for (I paraphrase). So, yes, the sugar content (so perceived) seems to be the factor. In the same interview he talked about not playing Chopin - he came to realise that the greatest Chopin players were Chopin specialists (his view) and so he stopped playing him. I seem to remember that he recorded some of the polonaises in his youth.

[ahinton]

Hmm. I should also have included salt!

Oh, I don't know; there's arguably already more than enough saltiness here!