Mahan Esfahani's problem with....

[french frank]

I suppose it would be just too cynical to suggest that he was invited to pick a couple of composers who might be 'difficult' for some of the 'potential new audience'?

I could do that

[Petrushka]

Quite a welcome change to hear an adverse opinion of Mahler's music and by no means an unusual one if we go back a generation or two. Toscanini amongst others thought little of GM's work and Barenboim admits to being a late convert having disliked GM's symphonic bombast though admiring his setting of songs. Odd that Esfahani's opponent in the broadcast didn't deploy the songs to counter the allegation of bombast and that Mahler couldn't write memorable tunes.
From memory Mahler certainly didn't figure much if at all in Proms concerts until well into the sixties and several of my musical friends have found and continue to find his scores overlong and boring.

First appearance at the Proms of the Mahler symphonies:

1 1903 (Henry Wood)
2 1963 (Leopold Stokowski)
3 1962 (Norman del Mar)
4 1905 (Henry Wood)
5 1909 (Henry Wood)
6 1963 (Norman del Mar) coupled with Walton's Belzhazzar's Feast!!!
7 1969 (Jascha Horenstein)
8 1964 (Charles Groves)
9 1966 (Jascha Horenstein)
10 1964 (Berthold Goldschmidt)
Das Lied 1945 (Adrian Boult)

[jayne lee wilson]

I wouldn't want to be totally negative about that, but compared with a short series of programmes about what he doesn't (apparently) know about and a 2-hour programmes playing Mahan's Choice, the specialist stuff - even with those three lovely photographs - doesn't amount to a lot. It seems more as if they're exploiting his celebrity status to add 'seriousness', and his reputation for being outspoken.

I'm just saying I think it would be better value to hear him enthusing and providing insights about his own field of expertise. The Sunday feature with the interviews would have made a good introduction to a series in which he talked about the music he performs and the special aspects of playing it.

Forgive me but I think that's a little unfair. My first link is to a fascinating 45-minute piece which includes a very moving interview with the great Zuzana Růžičková, about her battles to find appreciation or even acceptance about being such a soloist. Here, you really can hear him "enthusing and providing insights about his own field of expertise", with some historical depth.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b054glfz

Try it you might like it.... as the joggers' t-shirts used to say...
But he's a very creative musician with a very lively mind; still quite young; a young artist making the most of his opportunities in a media-saturated age.. Why not let him go his own way, shake things up a bit.....
(..and don't put the magazine hype in front of the gifted individual...don't worry, he'll be more aware of the pitfalls than anyone...and he'll know what really matters...)

[french frank]

But he's a very creative musician with a very lively mind; still quite young. Why not let him go his own way, shake things up a bit.....

I should make it clear that I have no criticism of ME, merely of R3 for not using him as I , solipsistically, would prefer to hear him! I did think the one 45-minute programme sounded interesting: my criticism was that it was only one (relatively) short programme, compared with the short series and longer programme which he had also presented.

I can explain my own feelings about the Mahler format as being my antipathy towards having an intermediary between me and the expert. I think of the two-handed Record Review format and Melvyn Bragg on In Our Time ("Just to be clear, could we go over that point again?").

It's for Radio 3 to let him go his own way and shake things up a bit, not me, if that's what suits their current strategy.