Karlheinz Stockhausen (1928-2007) 4-9 Jan

[Serial_Apologist]

For me I'm afraid, this COTW has launched with a very inadequate opening programme.

From a snatch of Kontakte by way of three monodic Klavierstucke to the early Chore fur Doris, then onto a full but strangely laid back performance of Gruppen, by way of a student violin and piano Sonatina, neither the jumbled chronology nor Robert Worby's varispeed metrophone [sic] demonstration, managed to illuminate further Mr Worby's observation that Stockhausen, contrary to common opinion, was no revolutionary but a visionary with his roots firmly in the Austro-German music tradition.

The remainder of the week is going to have to make up for this if it is not be have turned out one big disappointment to those of us who usually hold great store by COTW.

[zola]

Over the weekend I was irritated by forum members who were ( I thought ) unreasonably irritated by Tom Service's presentation of the two TV documentaries but I myself was then irritated by the fact that in the first 90 seconds of his introduction to today's Stockhausen COTW, Donald Macleod managed to mention the Beatles and the "wit" of Thomas Beecham. The whole tone of the programme seemed to plead "please don't switch off".

[Serial_Apologist]

Over the weekend I was irritated by forum members who were ( I thought ) unreasonably irritated by Tom Service's presentation of the two TV documentaries but I myself was then irritated by the fact that in the first 90 seconds of his introduction to today's Stockhausen COTW, Donald Macleod managed to mention the Beatles and the "wit" of Thomas Beecham. The whole tone of the programme seemed to plead "please don't switch off".

I couldn't agree more, zola.

[MrGongGong]

Over the weekend I was irritated by forum members who were ( I thought ) unreasonably irritated by Tom Service's presentation of the two TV documentaries but I myself was then irritated by the fact that in the first 90 seconds of his introduction to today's Stockhausen COTW, Donald Macleod managed to mention the Beatles and the "wit" of Thomas Beecham. The whole tone of the programme seemed to plead "please don't switch off".

WHY do we always have to get the sodding Beatles?
or the ignorant f*ckwit comments of Beecham?

[Bax-of-Delights]

The whole tone of the programme seemed to plead "please don't switch off".

This also extends to "Breakfast" in which C B-H introduced Gavin Bryars' Agnus Dei from Charlie Haden Requiem with what sounded like a plea for listeners not to turn off. She even read out an email from a listener who didn't like all this "modern stuff" (one presumes the listener is one of those who has been lured over from CFM by R3's unending 100 Best Tunes) and then proceeded to tell us that the Bryars piece was five minutes long (as in "I'm sure you can bear it that long, can't you?").
There appears to be an overarching desire among the programme makers and presenters not to frighten the horses. One is left with the impression that they are going through the motions...)

[DublinJimbo]

Over the weekend I was irritated by forum members who were ( I thought ) unreasonably irritated by Tom Service's presentation of the two TV documentaries but I myself was then irritated by the fact that in the first 90 seconds of his introduction to today's Stockhausen COTW, Donald Macleod managed to mention the Beatles and the "wit" of Thomas Beecham. The whole tone of the programme seemed to plead "please don't switch off".

The Beatles were also used to introduce the complete performance of Hymnen.

[french frank]

This also extends to "Breakfast" in which C B-H introduced Gavin Bryars' Agnus Dei from Charlie Haden Requiem with what sounded like a plea for listeners not to turn off. She even read out an email from a listener who didn't like all this "modern stuff"

I think this is surely where the Roger Wright 'accessibility' drive was so horribly wrong. It's not that there isn't an audience that welcomes helpful introductions to more or less anything post 1950, but this heavy-handed, contrived style seems (to me) to be addressing just the audience that isn't and won't be interested, however much the Beatles are invoked. Such listeners may already have switched off anyway.

The feedback I've had suggests intelligent curiosity as much as anything - but there are one or two who appear to make no distinction between Everyday Breakfast and having new music 'foisted' on them: both 'unlistenable'

[BBMmk2]

Would this be one to drive listeners away?

[Quarky]

As with others, I have been irritated by presenters' approaches. May I also mention the very possessive attitude of SMP and Tom Service to "their" music.

But when it comes to the Beatles and the Stones, to what extent is it permissible to consider the extra musical Guru status of KHS amongst the pop art fraternity?

[Serial_Apologist]

As with others, I have been irritated by presenters' approaches. May I also mention the very possessive attitude of SMP and Tom Service to "their" music.

But when it comes to the Beatles and the Stones, to what extent is it permissible to consider the extra musical Guru status of KHS amongst the pop art fraternity?

You are referring to the venerable rake, used in the picture?

[french frank]

But when it comes to the Beatles and the Stones, to what extent is it permissible to consider the extra musical Guru status of KHS amongst the pop art fraternity?

It's historically not uninteresting that he held that sort of reputation with the pop bands of the time. The Beatles underwent a number of cultural influences.

But was Stockhausen influenced by the Beatles? Or was it just the other way round? - in which case there doesn't seem to be much reason to emphasise their interest.

[oddoneout]

Having decided to broadcast this repertoire I wish the Beeb would just get on and do it, instead of going all flabby and apologetic about it. There were plenty of folk who objected to Mozartfest and Bachfest. I don't care for Sibelius that much and Nielsen even less - but I don't see that as a reason to grumble when so much of their music has been featured due to their anniversaries. Admittedly some 'new' music may challenge one's definition of what music is, but that's not a reason to avoid playing it - quite the reverse I would suggest, in the same way that viewing 'new' Art gives an opportunity to think about and discuss opinions.
It's not as if R3 is the only source of music broadcasting these days, so employing the off switch doesn't consign one to silence. Even a technodinosaur like me has CDs and LPs as alternative listening.

[Quarky]

It's historically not uninteresting that he held that sort of reputation with the pop bands of the time. The Beatles underwent a number of cultural influences.

But was Stockhausen influenced by the Beatles? Or was it just the other way round? - in which case there doesn't seem to be much reason to emphasise their interest.

This CotW is fascinating. I had heard Stimmung (Thursday episode) before, but appreciating it in an historical context, with KHS spending much time in USA, it seems KHS had fallen in with the World Music Crowd, and this seemed to me New-Age music (as opposed to new music). The name of Holger Czukay (pupil of KHS) may be relevant? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holger_Czukay

[DracoM]

Hymnen and Stimmung I have hugely appreciated - real genius, and I stayed with Hymnen to the end - my first hearing.
BUT
quite a lot of the other stuff I thought mannered, lacking editing, and some frankly silly.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

A polite correction of Donald MacLeod's concluding statement on today's programme: Licht did not "occupy Stockhausen from 1997-2003", but from 1977.