Britten and Wagner Anniversaries: Nothing to Celebrate?

[kleines c]

c

[gurnemanz]

this aspect was raised by the original poster, and in a rather provocative manner.

Presumably, the agenda was deliberately set in this way because any controversy about whether Wagner's anniversary should be celebrated or not would most likely centre around his life and personality rather than his musical significance, which is surely not in doubt ... even if you don't like the operas.

Wagner was an arrogant, selfish, paradoxical and paranoid man. He was intolerant of much else apart from Jews. He chose a Jew to conduct Parsifal but once said Jews should be burned. The young Mahler was bowled over by Parsifal at Bayreuth. I've tried reading some of his tracts. His thinking is muddled, half-baked, inconsistent and self-contradictory. I love Parsifal but still can't work out exactly what it is about.

I remember glimpsing Bernard Levin at the Boulez Proms Parsifal in the 70s. I think he once wrote: "If I wasn't a Jew, I would probably be anti-semitic".

[verismissimo]

When I read the title, I immediately thought: How interesting. A thread about the artistic influence of Wagner on Britten, conscious and subconscious.

Anyone like to have a shot at that?

Oh, all right. I'll give it a start.

An early experience for Britten of Wagner's work was in 1934 in Vienna: "Meistersinger, Siegfried last week & Gotterdammerung tonight!!!"

On that Meistersinger: "The five hours... didn't seem as many minutes; the incredible vitality, modernity, richness in lovely melody, humour, pathos, in fact every favourable quality." He could be describing Grimes!

The previous year, Britten saw Tristan und Isolde at Covent Garden: "What music... He is the master of us all."

[Mary Chambers]

The previous year, Britten saw Tristan und Isolde at Covent Garden: "What music... He is the master of us all."

These were very early experiences of Wagner. This is probably the performance his sister Beth went to with him. He warned her beforehand that the music was so emotional that it sometimes made people physically ill. She didn't feel ill, rather to his disappointment - just very uncomfortable sitting for so long in the hard gallery seats.

He used the 'Tristan chord' many years later in Albert Herring, when Albert drinks the rum-laced lemonade.

[Lateralthinking1]

I can't say I'm greatly excited at the prospect of these anniversaries.

The Dickens one we've just had seemed to be an almighty damp squib: no concentrated attempt to discuss Dickens, or what he might mean to us now. OK, so his works are always before the public in some form, but an original approach might have been interesting.

Something far more sinister is in store for Britten and Wagner, though, I fear.....

In Britten's case, we can anticipate a lot of unwelcome speculation about his relationships with male children. People like Martin Kettle, for reasons best known to themselves, are very keen on this - and the fact that any solid evidence of impropriety doesn't seem to exist won't deter them.


In the case of Wagner - more predictably - we can expect a lot of opinionated, ignorant nastiness from the usual crew of media yobs, hack journos, pensioned-off leftists and fascistic Israelites, who will try (yet again) to convince us that Wagner's works are indelibly tainted by his - alleged - political/cultural stances. They will be up to their usual dirty tricks trying to reduce complex issues into slogans and soundbites. So, those of a like mind might be advised to avoid the 'Culture' (ha!) section of the Guardian, where most of this rubbish will be given a home.

Personally, I shall be doing my best to ignore all the hoopla and just concentrating on the music (which is, in the end, what it's all about).

I must have blinked because I missed the BBC's celebration of the anniversary of Charles Dickens. Actually I didn't blink. It was here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/features/dickens/ - and it reminded me of Ebenezer. One of its lower points of 2012. By contrast, the BBC seems to be going somewhat over-the-top on opera in 2013. Two of these marathons would have been good. Three seems excessive. Having said as much, the one that I would dropped is not necessarily the one that would have been.

I like to know more about the composers. In many cases, though not all, their music can't be fully appreciated without context. A part of that concerns their identities. As was made clear in "Viva Verdi" last night, there is also the broader historical and political context. Sadly, greater knowledge is sometimes a barrier. There is a wall between Wagner and me. It is mainly political. Being to some degree musical too, that isn't such a problem as when there is conflict between music I appreciate and composers I dislike.

When in yesterday's programme, Verdi was described in older age as exceptionally right wing, things became difficult. That wasn't helped by the appropriation of his music by Lega Nord. I was, though, prepared to take in the other aspects for the sake of the music. Fortunately, there was a lot more. He is not an overtly political composer. There are subtleties in the historical context, not least around 1848 and the need to build a new national identity. And there are cross-political and apolitical currents in the way he is a fundamental part of Italian culture even at street level. Very arguably, the latter are more significant than any other context.

I am less easy about Britten. One of the significant composers in our own country, and from the period of classical music I tend to appreciate most, his alleged proclivities are not at all helpful to appreciation of his music. That is particularly true in the light of recent revelations about the BBC. I understand that David Hemmings was always adamant that there had never been impropriety. It will though be a difficult subject for broadcasters as they attempt to provide an accurate appraisal while striving to keep audiences. It might be that I am put off listening because of the questions around him but that will depend on the answers given.

[Mary Chambers]

I am less easy about Britten. One of the significant composers in our own country, and from the period of classical music I tend to appreciate most, his alleged proclivities are not at all helpful to appreciation of his music. That is particularly true in the light of recent revelations about the BBC. I understand that David Hemmings was always adamant that there had never been impropriety. It will though be a difficult subject for broadcasters as they attempt to provide an accurate appraisal while striving to keep audiences. It might be that I am put off listening because of the questions around him but that will depend on the answers given.

Oh, for heaven's sake....!

[kernelbogey]

Oh, for heaven's sake....!

And then there's Gesualdo....

[Flosshilde]

Couldn't have put it better myself, Mary.

[Mandryka]

I am less easy about Britten. One of the significant composers in our own country, and from the period of classical music I tend to appreciate most, his alleged proclivities are not at all helpful to appreciation of his music. That is particularly true in the light of recent revelations about the BBC. I understand that David Hemmings was always adamant that there had never been impropriety. It will though be a difficult subject for broadcasters as they attempt to provide an accurate appraisal while striving to keep audiences. It might be that I am put off listening because of the questions around him but that will depend on the answers given.

There are no answers.....because there are no questions, unless you count the hypothetical ones that Martin Kettle is just dying to ask.

[Mr Pee]

Oh, for heaven's sake....!

[Lateralthinking1]

Any response that I make to the recent posts is not going to be well-received by many. However, one forum member has kindly referred me to a thread where Britten's sexuality, and the media coverage of it, have been discussed at length. I hadn't intended to wade into a topic that has clearly generated some heat. My apologies. One thing it indicates is that the job of BBC programme makers isn't always easy. Another is that there are pitfalls in making programmes about the lives of composers rather than simply permitting their music to speak. A third is that even people with apparently similar views - shall we say those who have read what has been said and are cautious about dismissing it entirely - are themselves a broad church, from the balanced to the hysterical.

From what I have read of the previous thread, I rule out completely the suggestion that most of any questioning is opposition to his homosexuality. I am not saying that there might not be elements of such prejudice in and around the Daily Mail. However, I have probably read more than a hundred biographies of classical composers on the internet in the past couple of months. My impression is that about 30% of them were gay. Nowhere should that ever be an issue and it doesn't appear to have been even in the newspapers. I am also of the view that there is a kind of witch hunt going on at present. It is not particularly wholesome or indeed wise in a society that is supposed to be advanced. That is particularly concerning where considerable subtlety is needed in managing the current crisis and doing what is right. I am not sure that modern managers are able to meet the required standard.

I do think that more leeway is afforded, one, where figures are cherished and, two, in serious art. On the second, it would not be right for shoulders to be shrugged because Britten is Britten whereas Michael Jackson was only Michael Jackson. Actually, I have always felt that the accusations levelled at Jackson were misplaced. He was clearly not in the same category as the now notorious Savile and, given his upbringing, I have some sympathy for his lifelong problems with mental health. I think too that the comments about Britten having been dubious for writing music for young choirs are completely ridiculous. Many composers have done and it isn't as if that was all he did. Statistically it just doesn't add up either. It is a non-argument based on prejudice and/or ignorance.

To conclude, it was not my intention to rally against Britten, to start a topic that has already been discussed at length or to upset people who have known and loved his music for many decades. Ultimately, as with everything, it is for individuals to decide how they feel about what has been said, the extent of substance to it, if any, and whether any of it matters to them substantially.

[MrGongGong]

There are no answers.....because there are no questions, unless you count the hypothetical ones that Martin Kettle is just dying to ask.

There IS a lot of nonsense surrounding Britten mainly because many people (including some of the good folk of Aldeburgh) have a problem with people being gay
BUT at the same time
no art exists in a contextless vacuum , ones personality and sexuality does affect the art that one might create

[Mr Pee]

BUT at the same time
no art exists in a contextless vacuum , ones personality and sexuality does affect the art that one might create

You make these theoretical statements as though they were hard fact. Which they're not.

[MrGongGong]

You make these theoretical statements as though they were hard fact. Which they're not.

That's NOT a "theoretical" statement at all ........... but I doubt you understand anyway

[Flosshilde]

no art exists in a contextless vacuum , ones personality and sexuality does affect the art that one might create

Well, possibly, but that's such a generalised statement that it's almost meaningless. Can you say how Wagner's views about Jews affected his music? Or, to put it another way, in what way is Wagner's music anti-semitic?