Should Schubert have been paired with another, and if so, who?

[kernelbogey]

[...] I would have preferred something like a "Schubert and Shostakovich" week.

Which composer would you have liked to have been paired with Schubert?

I'd have gone the other way with Schubert - pairing him with say Domenico Scarlatti or Monteverdi.

[cloughie]

Richard Strauss

[Flay]

John Cage and Jean Barraque

For a whole week?

[Flay]

Richard Strauss

Yes, I could live with that.

How about Bruckner, a great fan of Schubert? At least the "bleeding chunks" would be longer!

[cloughie]

Yes, I could live with that.

How about Bruckner, a great fan of Schubert? At least the "bleeding chunks" would be longer!

...and the option of twinning unfinished symphonies and silly numbering!

[jean]

I think one could defend the use of 'who' here if one took this as an aposiopesis - ie, not a question of "with whom" but rather a broken-off clause implying "who [is it that Board Members might wish to suggest]"...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aposiopesis

Quite - though I would prefer to regard it as an example of ellipsis, since the failure to complete the grammatical unit of which who is a part is done for the sake of conciseness, and is not meant to suggest any hesitation or unwillingness to continue, as aposiopesis does.

We can imagine the missing completion as either if so, with whom should he be compared? or if so, who should that other composer be?

[MrGongGong]

...and the option of twinning unfinished symphonies and silly numbering!

In that case it has to be La Monte


"The Symmetries in Prime Time from 288 to 224 with 279, 261 and 2 X 119 with One of The Inclusory Optional Bases: 7; 8; 14:8; 18:14:8; 18:16:14; 18:16:14:8; 9:7:4; or The Empty Base (1991–present), including The Symmetries in Prime Time When Centered above and below The Lowest Term Primes in The Range 288 to 224 with The Addition of 279 and 261 in Which The Half of The Symmetric Division Mapped above and Including 288 Consists of The Powers of 2 Multiplied by The Primes within The Ranges of 144 to 128, 72 to 64 and 36 to 32 Which Are Symmetrical to Those Primes in Lowest Terms in The Half of The Symmetric Division Mapped below and Including 224 within The Ranges 126 to 112, 63 to 56 and 31.5 to 28 with The Addition of 119 and with One of The Inclusory Optional Bases: 7; 8; 14:8; 18:14:8; 18:16:14; 18:16:14:8; 9:7:4; or The Empty Base (1991), "

Now that's what I call a title

[Pabmusic]

Quite - though I would prefer to regard it as an example of ellipsis, since the failure to complete the grammatical unit of which who is a part is done for the sake of conciseness, and is not meant to suggest any hesitation or unwillingness to continue, as aposiopesis does.

We can imagine the missing completion as either if so, with whom should he be compared? or if so, who should that other composer be?

A lovely post, but I would not agree. The question is, "Should Schubert have been paired with another [composer], and if so, ..." the missing pronoun being - surely - which?

[Flay]

I love this message board. Keep it up!

[Pabmusic]

Perhaps I should answer the question. A composer who was very much influenced by Schubert, and who did his bit to promote him, was Dvorak.

[makropulos]

I think I can appreciate their intentions in what they are doing. I have heard much new music, and re-discovered other pieces.
But it is all too much.
Remember the Tchaikovsky week - he was paired with Stravinsky.
I would have preferred something like a "Schubert and Shostakovich" week.

Which composer would you have liked to have been paired with Schubert?

And if it were to be done again , which other composers would you like pairing?

I feel like a slightly lonely voice here - but I hope I'm not the only person who actually likes these wall-to-wall experiences from time to time. I though it worked a treat with Bach and Mozart, and I'm discovering all sorts of bits and pieces of Schubert as a result of the present marathon. So I'm quite happy to have the focus on a single composer.

In other words, I'm not sure I'd want a pairing at all unless it was necessary and helpful (at it obviously was with Tchaikovsky/Stravinsky). But if there is going to be one, the composers need to be connected in some way or other - so I can't think of anything much less appropriate than pairing Schubert with Shostakovich...except that they both begin with "S". As other posters have already suggested, Dvorak or Brahms might have worked well, but since there's more than enough Schubert, I (personally) enjoy the experience of hearing so much of the work of one (great) composer.

[eucalyptus44]

I largely agree with Makropulos - in common with heaps of others, it's the endless trailers and the rather silly interactive element with all those tweets and emails.

However, at risk of being hoisted on a trailer petard, another mega fest is on its way...

http://www.for3.org/forums/showthread.php?4892-After-Schubert-Dickens-24-7

[Flay]

I feel like a slightly lonely voice here - but I hope I'm not the only person who actually likes these wall-to-wall experiences from time to time. I though it worked a treat with Bach and Mozart, and I'm discovering all sorts of bits and pieces of Schubert as a result of the present marathon. So I'm quite happy to have the focus on a single composer.

In other words, I'm not sure I'd want a pairing at all unless it was necessary and helpful (at it obviously was with Tchaikovsky/Stravinsky). But if there is going to be one, the composers need to be connected in some way or other - so I can't think of anything much less appropriate than pairing Schubert with Shostakovich...except that they both begin with "S". As other posters have already suggested, Dvorak or Brahms might have worked well, but since there's more than enough Schubert, I (personally) enjoy the experience of hearing so much of the work of one (great) composer.

Nice to hear a positive response, Makro. I find myself in two minds about this - I understand why they are doing it, and when I can I have been listening. But for those of us who cannot spend a lot of time with the radio on, we miss a lot of good stuff. Much of prime listening time is taken over with more trivial programming. I was suggesting that monotony could be avoided by having another's music too.

[Quarky]

I was suggesting that monotony could be avoided by having another's music too.

There was a Chopin weekend a little while ago, which had an entertaining programme, courtesy of World Routes I believe, which went into the origins of the Mazurka.

May be there might have been some programmes on the Volkslied that Schubert might have been exposed to - to break the monotony.

[Roehre]

I feel like a slightly lonely voice here - but I hope I'm not the only person who actually likes these wall-to-wall experiences from time to time. ... I'm discovering all sorts of bits and pieces of Schubert as a result of the present marathon. So I'm quite happy to have the focus on a single composer. ... there's more than enough Schubert, I (personally) enjoy the experience of hearing so much of the work of one (great) composer.

Though I don't think wall-to-wall presentation of a composer's (or for that matter: any artist's) work in a short period of time is a good thing, I find myself now listening more to R3 than normally as the many bits and bobs, and large works as the operas (or the Symphony D.708a in Newbould's completion), are enticing and otherwise never broadcast.

I am certainly not a Lieder-fan (in general), so I hardly listen to any of these, but there is so much "new" and otherwise "unknown" music offered, that any real music lover would find something to enjoy; obviously using the play lists, to avoid the inane nonsense, trailers, news items, tweets of long dead composers and other rubbish with which the Beeb seems to prefer to present Schubert's works.

Short: I don't like wall-to-wall, but I do take the opportunity to listen to an otherwise unavailable selection of works.