Elgar

[ahinton]

Well! I haven't appeared in this forum for a long time, but as soon as I take a look it's as if we're back in the 1940s or 50s.

Initial thoughts:

(1) You are factually wrong about the frequency of Elgar performances in the USA and elsewhere - as has been pointed out.

(2) You appear to speak for everyone outside the UK, and you talk of music that "most non Brits avoid". How do you know this? Would you please share your research with us.

(3) When it is pointed out to you that the Enigma and the Cello Concerto are regularly played, your reaction is that they "don't count". Well - so "most non Brits" are not avoiding them, at least.

(4) You easily fall back on adjectives like "pompous", as if the music is turgid. Yet it belongs comfortably within the same sound-world as Suk, Szymanowski, and Schmidt (to name a few). This is demonstrable - though, alas, not on such a forum as this.

Part of "the problem of Elgar" is with the history of his reputation in Britain, particularly from WW1 until the 1960s. This was not the fault (entirely) of the Cambridge anti-Elgar movement but they must shoulder some of the responsibility.

Beginning with Stanford (never really anti-Elgar, but certainly ambivalent) there was a definite move to belittle Elgar's standing, driven by the likes of Edward Dent, Cyril Rootham and Patrick Hadley. This was very influential in academic circles and lasted till the early 1960s. It was noticed worldwide - Dent published scathing attacks in German magazines, and this academic backlash was quoted in reviews of Barbirolli's attempts to introduce Elgar to New York audiences in the 1930s.

When that sort of thing happens there's a received impression that there must be something suspect about Elgar.

Add to that the fact that his music is not understated - it's "in your face" to some extent and cannot be ignored - it is hardly surprising that concert planners became cautious.

No-one can make you enjoy something you don't like (a problem I have with any Bruckner - entirely my own fault, of course) but claiming to speak for other people demands source material.

Anyway, what another person thought of Elgar is no evidence on its own of the music's worth, but here's Stravinsky in an impromptu speech in Liverpool on the day Elgar died "our paths diverged, but Elgar was a supremely great composer, of who the British people should be proud".

Excellent post!

I didn't know about the Stravinsky quote.

Dent did indeed do his unfair sahre of Elgar bashing; indeed, on one occasion in the 1920s a group of people including Sorabji rushed to Elgar's defence following one such outburst. Curiously, Dent, an early biographer of Busoni, seemed unaware (or perhaps chose conveniently to ignore) that Busoni had conducted some Elgar (the Enigma at least) in Germany in the early years of the past century...

[Pabmusic]

Excellent post!

I didn't know about the Stravinsky quote.

Dent did indeed do his unfair sahre of Elgar bashing; indeed, on one occasion in the 1920s a group of people including Sorabji rushed to Elgar's defence following one such outburst. Curiously, Dent, an early biographer of Busoni, seemed unaware (or perhaps chose conveniently to ignore) that Busoni had conducted some Elgar (the Enigma at least) in Germany in the early years of the past century...

Apparently Vaughan Williams found it difficult to break the ice with Elgar (1920s) because EE didn't trust any 'Cambridge man'.

[cloughie]

Apparently Vaughan Williams found it difficult to break the ice with Elgar (1920s) because EE didn't trust any 'Cambridge man'.

I often think that we are very fortunate to have had two great British composers whose music was so good but so very different.

[Pabmusic]

I often think that we are very fortunate to have had two great British composers whose music was so good but so very different.

How true.

[DracoM]

I often think that we are very fortunate to have had two great British composers whose music was so good but so very different.

[ahinton]

Apparently Vaughan Williams found it difficult to break the ice with Elgar (1920s) because EE didn't trust any 'Cambridge man'.

Shame on Elgar in that particular - and, of course, RVW - that most "English" of composers - was a pupil of Ravel (who was younger than him!)...

[cloughie]

Shame on Elgar in that particular - and, of course, RVW - that most "English" of composers - was a pupil of Ravel (who was younger than him!)...

I think Ravel helped him to hone his orchestral writing skills.

[gradus]

By all accounts Elgar could be a moody creature.

[LMcD]

By all accounts Elgar could be a moody creature.

Michael Kennedy's 'The Life of Elgar' is very much a warts-and-all account of his life, mentioning EE's frequent bouts of self-pity and depression.

[Pabmusic]

Shame on Elgar in that particular - and, of course, RVW - that most "English" of composers - was a pupil of Ravel (who was younger than him!)...

Well, RVW took lessons with Ravel for three months. He'd also been a pupil of Max Bruch in a similar way.

But Elgar was hardly a stable character.

[Pabmusic]

By all accounts Elgar could be a moody creature.

[Pabmusic]

I think Ravel helped him to hone his orchestral writing skills.

Yes he did.

[gradus]

Yes he did.

To great effect, the fingerprints are there (ditto Sibelius).

[Serial_Apologist]

To great effect, the fingerprints are there (ditto Sibelius).

Well Sibelius' influence would have come later, one assumes - though I am often struck by the coincidental number of early "Sibelian" characteristics that pop up in some of the English music of that turn of the century period: the high strings at the opening of VW's Norfolk Rhapsody No. 1, as a prime example.