"Benjamin Britten at 100 - time for a new appraisal?"

[ahinton]

Please take this suggestion seriously.

I do take it seriously, which is why I sought to advocate a return to serious discussion - yes, "DISCUSSION" - of Britten, his music and his reputation as a musician here.

[Nick Armstrong]

serious discussion - yes, "DISCUSSION" - of Britten, his music and his reputation as a musician here.

Why not do that on the dedicated 'Britten's music' thread, and let the wrangling here continue, or not...

[ahinton]

Why not do that on the dedicated 'Britten's music' thread, and let the wrangling here continue, or not...

I have - and I take your point, which is why I asked if there was any particular reason why there were two such threads within the same sector of the forum; that said, I hope that the Britten's Music thread does not become similarly infected, otherwise "discussion" there might likewise become more difficult to continue...

[Mr Pee]

Were the Lat stance is to acquire some kind of benchmark status in terms of how we might all be supposed or expect to address and respond to the Britten centenary, I worry for what might have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the arena about Witold Lutosławski in order somehow to satisfy what appears to be the prurience or something of those who seem for some reason determined to seize upon a composer's centenary as some kind of excuse to focus on something, sometimes purely speculative but always quite other than what he/she actually produced and gave to us all (and both Britten, whom I met but to most of whose music I happen to find it hard to get close and Lutosławski, whom I never met but to much of whose music I have to make little effort to get close, were immensely generous in what they provided to us all as a legacy).

And breathe.

[Beef Oven]

What if anything is that supposed to mean and upon what specific evidence do you base it, either in general terms or (more importantly here) in the particular context of this thread?

Discuss it with your GP.

[Lateralthinking1]

This is my last contribution to this thread. It concerns the place of Britten in Britain's psyche. The arrival of Peter Grimes coincided with a nation that at last was looking forward. Not only was it musically inspiring at a time when the country was more than ready for being uplifted. The composer and his work were fundamental to the expectation that there would be a national rebuilding.

I think necessary questions are felt by some to be a dismantling of that effort and perhaps a further indication, if one were needed, that the regeneration was never undertaken as hoped. The sea had been an important part of the war. It was the last line of defence. In Suffolk with music, it could be painted wonderfully from 1945 as a brand new vista. There was also a gloaming in the productions, a reminder of the murky atmosphere of the Blitz, which would remain vivid in minds at least until the end of rationing. Hence the music and drama were a highly symbolic turning point. The composer's name even sounded like the name of the country.

To depict considered dialogue about his life and its depiction in his work as inapt, or to insist on only one version, is not only to stifle questions about morality and behaviour but to take away important perspectives on the country itself. Even in sensitive matters, critique needs to be subtle. Certainly condemnation alone is futile. There has to be an acknowledgement of tragedy too.

There is tragedy in the vast distance between the post war spirit and what was delivered to British people. The ways of our leaders have been economically indecent. Perhaps there was only so much that could be achieved, given the impact of the war and the system that had been in place before it. Britten's music captures those disappointments and enables contemplation of a boat upon the rocks. That though requires willingness to view him as something other than reliably solid and unequivocally sound.

[visualnickmos]

......That though requires willingness to view him as something other than reliably solid and unequivocally sound.

I read your very analytical post, but you stop at a vital point! What do you suggest is the "something other" he should be viewed as? It is a brilliant opening gambit.

[Thropplenoggin]

I read your very analytical post, but you stop at a vital point! What do you suggest is the "something other" he should be viewed as? It is a brilliant opening gambit.

I think he made his vision of Britten transparently clear here.

[Flosshilde]

This is my last contribution to this thread.

Thank the lord for that (not that I believe in him, her or it).

[Lateralthinking1]

I read your very analytical post, but you stop at a vital point! What do you suggest is the "something other" he should be viewed as? It is a brilliant opening gambit.

I don't know. I think the child in Britten - in his character, the attraction he had to children, the music, the roles of the performers - is the Britain that didn't really want another war so soon after WW1 and yet which had to feel that conflict was a desire because the enemy was Fascism. Damage was the inevitable consequence even with the ultimate victory of ongoing freedom. It meant that development would never be at all easy and so it proved. Additionally, the composer's leanings towards Germany in peacetime were not unique to his position. For all of the fight, the British were contradictory in their sentiments and admired how Germany rebuilt.

I think too of Imogen Holst. She was ultra efficient and businesslike and without her many events would not have functioned. The model of a mature adult, one might think, and the epitome of the spirit during the war. Her achilles heel was her slavish devotion which in a sense was also childlike. Necessary to her, needed and used by the composer, there is so much of an interplay and interchange there politically and it's carried forward onto a broad canvas. All of the 'players' were symptomatic of time and place.

One legacy of those failings is that many adults in positions of responsibility are still like children. They are not able to provide welfare to children or well being to each other. The price children pay is that they are required to be inappropriately adult before their time. Most cope but only just and in their adulthood contribute to a nation that, being reliant on them, can only do the same.

Thank the lord for that (not that I believe in him, her or it).

Thank you for your contribution.

[Flosshilde]

Thank you for your contribution.

You're welcome. But it wasn't, was it?

[Lateralthinking1]

You're welcome. But it wasn't, was it?

Your contribution wasn't welcome? Everyone has a right to express an opinion.

[ahinton]

And breathe.

What? The air of other planets? (pace Schönberg)...

[ahinton]

Discuss it with your GP.

Discuss what with my GP - and why? Once again, despite being asked clearly and unequivocally, you have omitted to identify what it is that you're trying (and so far failing meaningfully) to talk about so, until and unless you do so in a way that's both credible and understandable, both I and my GP (who I'm sure couldn't care less and has no need to in any case - oh and, by the way, are you paying?) have nothing about which to concern ourselves.

Britten, anyone? - or should this thread indeed now be abandoned once and for all in favour of the other one by anyone seeking serious discussion of that composer?

[Sydney Grew]

Mr. Hinton was indeed fortunate in his choice of school. In my day when a boy was caught without his cap, even, outside the Gates that was ground for immediate expulsion.