International Women's Day

[smittims]

I'm always disappointed by the quality of the music played each year on this day. I wonder how many agree.

In my opinion the best women composers were Grace Williams, Priaulx Rainier, Elisabeth Lutyens, Doreen Carwithen and Peggy Glanville-Hicks. Apart from one short voluntary by Rainier (the first broadcast of any of her music in 11 years, I think) I find nothing in today's schedule by these composers. Yet here are Judith Weir, Judith Bingham, Hildegard of Bingen, Cecilia MacDowall and Thea Musgrave yet again in all their dreary, bland dulness, as almost every other week. Why does Radio3 think they're so marvellous and the others so worthy of total neglect? At any rate it's a poor case for the argument that women's music is unfairly overlooked.

[french frank]

I can't speak to the quality/interest of what is played, but looking at the regular playlists the choices do seem to focus on a relatively few names, contemporary and older. If anything it gives the opposite impression to that intended: not much to see/hear here.

[Ein Heldenleben]

I'm always disappointed by the quality of the music played each year on this day. I wonder how many agree.

In my opinion the best women composers were Grace Williams, Priaulx Rainier, Elisabeth Lutyens, Doreen Carwithen and Peggy Glanville-Hicks. Apart from one short voluntary by Rainier (the first broadcast of any of her music in 11 years, I think) I find nothing in today's schedule by these composers. Yet here are Judith Weir, Judith Bingham, Hildegard of Bingen, Cecilia MacDowall and Thea Musgrave yet again in all their dreary, bland dulness, as almost every other week. Why does Radio3 think they're so marvellous and the others so worthy of total neglect? At any rate it's a poor case for the argument that women's music is unfairly overlooked.

I’d give Composer Of The Week a miss if I were you. All BBC music channels are full of ok but not outstanding stuff including large swathes of Radio 3. Every time I think of writing anything (other than paid work) I look at all the unrecognisable names on Gutenberg or IMSLP and do something else.

[kuligin]

I'm always disappointed by the quality of the music played each year on this day. I wonder how many agree.

In my opinion the best women composers were Grace Williams, Priaulx Rainier, Elisabeth Lutyens, Doreen Carwithen and Peggy Glanville-Hicks. Apart from one short voluntary by Rainier (the first broadcast of any of her music in 11 years, I think) I find nothing in today's schedule by these composers. Yet here are Judith Weir, Judith Bingham, Hildegard of Bingen, Cecilia MacDowall and Thea Musgrave yet again in all their dreary, bland dulness, as almost every other week. Why does Radio3 think they're so marvellous and the others so worthy of total neglect? At any rate it's a poor case for the argument that women's music is unfairly overlooked.

I agree, although I would not put Weir or Hildegard in the very dreary category. The problem is that pieces are being chosen because they are by women rather on the grounds of quality. The Halle is the same this year. Lots of pieces by women but apart from some Gubalaidunina they have turned out to sub minimalist pieces of no interest at least to me. of course there are hundreds of dreary pieces by men too, but these generally don’t get played more than once.

[Ein Heldenleben]

I agree, although I would not put Weir or Hildegard in the very dreary category. The problem is that pieces are being chosen because they are by women rather on the grounds of quality. The Halle is the same this year. Lots of pieces by women but apart from some Gubalaidunina they have turned out to sub minimalist pieces of no interest at least to me. of course there are hundreds of dreary pieces by men too, but these generally don’t get played more than once.

I think a more fundamental question is how do you assess a piece of music for inclusion on Radio 3? Is it the Arnoldian notion of the “consent of the learned “ or is it the whim of the producer or presenter ? A massive generalisation but I can’t remember a time when so much low quality stuff has been played on Radio 3 - by both men and women. But that’s just my judgement. We can’t fill the schedules with masterpieces so how do we select from the also-rans ?

Oh they’ve just played a rather good Carwithen piece….

[smittims]

Hmm, maybe that was unscheduled. I did look earlier.

I don't see why we can't fill the schedules with masterpieces. There are plenty, after all. Its' better than whatI've heard recently (trying to give them a fair hearing):

'Red', by Ana Milosavljevic, played on 'TTN' this morning: yet another poor imitation of Barber's Adagio; and
Karamanov's Third Piano Concerto: mind-numbingly repetitious. I kept waiting for the musical argument to start, and then (mercifully) the audience were applauding and the presenter was assuring me I couldnt have heard that anywhere else. Just as well, I thought.

[cloughie]

I think a more fundamental question is how do you assess a piece of music for inclusion on Radio 3? Is it the Arnoldian notion of the “consent of the learned “ or is it the whim of the producer or presenter ? A massive generalisation but I can’t remember a time when so much low quality stuff has been played on Radio 3 - by both men and women. But that’s just my judgement. We can’t fill the schedules with masterpieces so how do we select from the also-rans ?

Oh they’ve just played a rather good Carwithen piece….

Indeed how do you assess pieces - I happened to tune in yesterday to Afternoon on 3 - two works which I would put in the ‘dismal listening - avoid repeated listening’ category - Karamov PC3 and David Matthews Sym 8.

[RichardB]

I don't see why we can't fill the schedules with masterpieces.

Then there would have to be some agreement as to what constitutes a masterpiece, and, as a long time member of this board, you will be aware that there can be no such consensus! I for one am extremely suspicious of the label "masterpiece". For me it evokes a 19th century view of what a musical work consists of, which takes account neither of earlier nor more recent music. What about jazz? Is the song "Body and Soul" a masterpiece? or is Coleman Hawkins' recording of it a masterpiece? What about Monteverdi's Vespers which is a compilation of pieces that the composer probably didn't intend to be performed in its entirety? Does it only become a masterpiece when it's performed complete? We limit our listening imagination and breadth of experience by clinging to a concept of masterpieces and "other stuff".

[JasonPalmer]

Well i think essential classics did a good job of broadcasting pieces i unaware of, i think being a presenter a difficult job, easy to criticise but hard to do.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Then there would have to be some agreement as to what constitutes a masterpiece, and, as a long time member of this board, you will be aware that there can be no such consensus! I for one am extremely suspicious of the label "masterpiece". For me it evokes a 19th century view of what a musical work consists of, which takes account neither of earlier nor more recent music. What about jazz? Is the song "Body and Soul" a masterpiece? or is Coleman Hawkins' recording of it a masterpiece? What about Monteverdi's Vespers which is a compilation of pieces that the composer probably didn't intend to be performed in its entirety? Does it only become a masterpiece when it's performed complete? We limit our listening imagination and breadth of experience by clinging to a concept of masterpieces and "other stuff".

Both Body and Soul and Coleman Hawkins rendition are masterpieces in miniature . But Bruno Walter and Adorno would have disagreed with us. We can’t fill R3 with masterpieces and wouldn’t want too. It’s good to hear the heroic failures , near misses even dare I say the Karamanov Third PC with its curious stuck in a groove tinklings.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Now that Radio 3 is recognising women composers throughout the year, rather than just giving them a token day once a year, IWD on Radio 3 is less important than it was. That said, I’ve always found this to be a most interesting day, as we hear much that few of us know, rather than the daily playlist of stuff we’ve heard countless times before.

[smittims]

Of course I accept that it's difficult if not impossible, and unwise to try, to apply labels like 'masterpiece', as it always raises the question of where one draws the line and what qualifications one has for doing so.

When I questioned the assertion that 'we can't fill the schedules with masterpieces' I took it to mean that it's necessary for Radio 3 to play a range of classical music which includes much music which frankly isn't 'top drawer' but which is interesting in its way, which sheds light on musical life in history or provides light relief between the heavy stuff: otherwise we'd be playing just Bach and Haydn to Schubert all day long and we'd tire of it; so there has to be room for , say, Jack Moeran's 'Overture for a Masque' or Percy Grainger's 'Harvest Hymn' which aren't masterpieces but provide necessary variety. We can't fill the schedules with masterpieces any more than we can eat only fillet steak and fresh strawberries.

But when I asked 'why can't we?' I was thinking it would be a good experiment to have a week or so when only unquestioned masterpieces were broadcast. I think a lot of people would learn something.

[kernelbogey]

I heard about two thirds of last night's TTN and all of that with great enjoyment and some learnings.

Good to hear Danielle J beginning to form her own style and warming to the TTN task.

[vinteuil]

i think being a presenter a difficult job, easy to criticise but hard to do.

"You may abuse a tragedy, though you cannot write one. You may scold a carpenter who has made you a bad table, though you cannot make a table. It is not your trade to make tables." Samuel Johnson LL.D.
.

[french frank]

I was thinking it would be a good experiment to have a week or so when only unquestioned masterpieces were broadcast. I think a lot of people would learn something.

If they were unquestioned masterpieces, wouldn't they tend to be the already very well known (even overplayed) works? I think the well-known, little known, unquestioned masterpieces, unquestionably minor works would be a better mix. Even a few acknowledged 'failures' would add to the variety.