If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
The combination of his humble beginnings and his contribution to English music is surely unparalleled.
He's not underrated by me!
I think that perhaps he 'suffered' (if that's the right word) from being associated with the 'bargain' label Classics for Pleasure rather than having full-price EMI issues.
Hard to think of a dud among all the RVW, Delius, Elgar, and others, on CfP or Eminence.
Then of course there's the Chandos Bax symphony cycle (decided upon when one of the symphonies was recorded with the prospect of being a BBC MM cover disc, iirc).
I think that could be true but quite a few Forum Members would say that they hold him in high esteem(see above), including myself. it could be because of his humble beginnings and also he was quite a modest man. Even refusing a knighthood from the Queen!
Don’t cry for me
I go where music was born
J S Bach 1685-1750
I am wondering why posters feel obligated to mention a 'humble' beginning, as if possession of such a start in life would disqualify one from being considered great. Perhaps it's a British thing. In the States the chances for upward mobility are a given, and we are less likely to esteem someone who was born in the upper strata of society and who therefore had less obstacles to overcome
I'm sure I read an article years ago, possibly in Gramophone, where the writer felt that his 'problem' was that, unlike Richard Hickox, Handley didn't stick to one one record label but recorded for anyone who was prepared to allow him to record repertoire he believed in. For me, one of the great losses of the Gramophone is that he didn't get the opportunity to re-record the Elgar Symphonies with modern sound.
Oddly enough, I found the set of the Bax Symphonies last night. £1 in a charity shop!
I'm sure I read an article years ago, possibly in Gramophone, where the writer felt that his 'problem' was that, unlike Richard Hickox, Handley didn't stick to one one record label but recorded for anyone who was prepared to allow him to record repertoire he believed in. For me, one of the great losses of the Gramophone is that he didn't get the opportunity to re-record the Elgar Symphonies with modern sound.
Oddly enough, I found the set of the Bax Symphonies last night. £1 in a charity shop!
That's quite a find: I hope you bought them, or did you leave them for some other lucky person to snap up?
I remember him taking the trouble to attend and present a prize-giving ceremony at Enfield Grammar School in north London where both he and I had been Old Boys. There was a fairly excruciating performance of a Strauss waltz given by the young school orchestra, but he listened and complimented them all with such good grace. He was already a great conductor in my eyes, but went up even more in my estimation after that.
He made around 150 of recordings, most of them still available in the catalogue. He had a lifelong conducting career and was never short of work. He is remembered with respect and admiration nine years after his death. And he featured on the cover of at least one edition of Gramophone.
In what sense "neglected"?
[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
He made around 150 of recordings, most of them still available in the catalogue. He had a lifelong conducting career and was never short of work. He is remembered with respect and admiration nine years after his death. And he featured on the cover of at least one edition of Gramophone.
This was very much my impression. Having said which, I had to read his delightful obit in the Guardian to remind myself why I know so little about him. It explained a lot
When he met William Glock for the first time, the BBC head of music and boss of the Proms spoke deprecatingly of Tod's predilection for the music of Vaughan Williams, Delius and Bax....His repertoire was vast, although it was not based on Mozart and Haydn; Beethoven he disliked, and he was not fond of Mahler or Bruckner. His Brahms was fine and deep, and in 1984 he made a wonderful recording of the Elgar Violin Concerto with Nigel Kennedy and the London Philharmonic Orchestra....His forte was that span of English music from Stanford through to Walton and beyond.
The Venn diagram circles of what he conducted and what I listen to do not seem to intersect much, my loss I'm sure
Comment