Elgar (1857-1934)

[Serial_Apologist]

I was very disappointed in this. The elaboration/completion/tinkering by Robert Walker does Elgar a disservice, with unElgarian orchestration and a lack of real imagination. And perhaps the sketches didn't match those of the 3rd Symphony.

A very laboured and over-long work. I have the 2005 documentary on the reconstruction and performance on VHS.

[BBMmk2]

A very laboured and over-long work. I have the 2005 documentary on the reconstruction and performance on VHS.

Really? I am surprised you saying this, SA! I think the general ebb and flow of the work is not too bad, after AP's edition of it. After all it was commissioned from the Elgar Estate, wasn't it?

[ahinton]

Really? I am surprised you saying this, SA! I think the general ebb and flow of the work is not too bad, after AP's edition of it. After all it was commissioned from the Elgar Estate, wasn't it?

Some confusion seems to have arisen here over which work is being discussed, i.e. the Piano Concerto realised by Robert Walker or the Third Sympohony dittoed by Anthony Payne! The realisation of the Piano Concerto seems to me to be a very poor achievement compared to that of the Third Symphony.

[ahinton]

We have the sketches that Payne worked on. Some were even published in the 1930s in The Listener and in Willy Reed's Elgar as I Knew Him. Radio 3 broadcast the useable skeches on orchestra and piano(and that was reissued with the BBCMM). Payne recorded a disc explaining what he did, and he also wrote a detailed book about it. I am fortunate in having the complete sketches as well (copied from the BBC Archives) and I can vouch for what a true pig's ear they constitute. So we have a very good idea of what was done. Elgar left almost nothing usable, nor much idea of where anything would go. What Payne did is worthy of great praise, but it can hardly represent Elgar. Many sections are by Payne himself, and The entire 'patrol' ending is pure speculation, with not even a sketch to go on. But the incidental music to King Arthur was useful since Elgar was obviously intending to use much of it.

You're right about the state of those sketches in that only Elgar himself could possibly have been expected to know what to make of them and do with them, but one of the truly great aspects of Anthony Payne's work on them is his success in getting inside Elgar's mind, not merely in terms of the kind of music that Elgar would have wanted to make in this symphony but also in the procedures that he was wont to adopt when writing a large scale work. As he said to me (Payne, that is!), it felt as though he had somehow to "be" Elgar in order to do this, however far-fetched that might seem. What Elgar left was indeed usable but only by Elgar himself, unless someone could get inside his 1933/34 head and figure out the kind of things that he might have done with those sketches had he survived even to the end of the year of his death.

Also, according to Payne, not "many sections" are by him alone and some that are happen to be quite short.

Yes, the "patrol" ending is pure speculation, but then so is anyone's version of the coda to the finale of Bruckner's Ninth Symphony because, unlike the remainder of that movement (of which more and more in the composer's hand has been discovered over the years), there's not a scrap of evidence that he wrote down a note of it, even in skectch form.

As Elgar 3 closes and sinks into an uncertan but resigned C minor I'm almost reminded of the close of the Fourth Symphony on which Shostakovich was working at the time! I even asked AP (in jest, of couse) whether he'd considered extending that final section and incorporating into it a kind of celestial doorbell motif; you might well imagine the short shrift that I received for that!

I would not say that the Third Symphony "can hardly represent Elgar"; au contraire, I might suggest that a good deal of it might well represent him but (of course) without actually being note for note what he'd have written himself.

I think that one of the particular problems with making a performable piece out of those sketches wa the fact that, since the Cello Concerto some 15 years earlier, Elgar had written little of significance and devoted more of his time to conducting; this, I think, was not just down to the impact on him of WWI and the death of his wife but also to a fear that trends in new music were passing him by and that there might be less demand for the kind of music that he'd written (an irrational, if partly understandable, response, given that the music that he'd already composed continued to be performed quite frequently during his latter years).

You're right about the King Arthur music, but then this was hardly atypical of Elgar's own methodology that had long included the practice of jotting down ideas in his sketch books as and when they occurred to him in the guise of possible aides-memoire (aide-memoires?) but without any idea of what he might do with them or when he might do it.

[ahinton]

Really? I am surprised you saying this, SA! I think the general ebb and flow of the work is not too bad, after AP's edition of it. After all it was commissioned from the Elgar Estate, wasn't it?

The Third Symphony was only commissioned by the Elgar Estate when those in charge of it had been persuaded that the work was soon to enter the public domain whereupon anyone had the right to "tinker" with it to his/her heart's content and, by then, AP had already written most of it because he was determined to try to see the project through with or without the Estate's permission; indeed, the Estate has initially refused to grant that permission but, from 1 January 2005, it would no longer be required and so audiences would have had to wait just another seven years before it could be performed.

[ahinton]

The problem with what the Third Symphony should be called is at least in part down to the cumbersome nature of "Edward Elgar: the sketches for Symphony No 3 elaborated by Anthony Payne" and I think that, provided that the work were to gain public acceptance as a realisation of something as near as possible to what the composer might have intended (as indeed has been the case), it would most likely and most often get to be referred to as "Elgar 3" (as has also been the case).

[Pabmusic]

You're right about the state of those sketches in that only Elgar himself could possibly have been expected to know what to make of them and do with them, but one of the truly great aspects of Anthony Payne's work on them is his success in getting inside Elgar's mind, not merely in terms of the kind of music that Elgar would have wanted to make in this symphony but also in the procedures that he was wont to adopt when writing a large scale work. As he said to me (Payne, that is!), it felt as though he had somehow to "be" Elgar in order to do this, however far-fetched that might seem. What Elgar left was indeed usable but only by Elgar himself, unless someone could get inside his 1933/34 head and figure out the kind of things that he might have done with those sketches had he survived even to the end of the year of his death.

Also, according to Payne, not "many sections" are by him alone and some that are happen to be quite short.

Yes, the "patrol" ending is pure speculation, but then so is anyone's version of the coda to the finale of Bruckner's Ninth Symphony because, unlike the remainder of that movement (of which more and more in the composer's hand has been discovered over the years), there's not a scrap of evidence that he wrote down a note of it, even in skectch form.

As Elgar 3 closes and sinks into an uncertan but resigned C minor I'm almost reminded of the close of the Fourth Symphony on which Shostakovich was working at the time! I even asked AP (in jest, of couse) whether he'd considered extending that final section and incorporating into it a kind of celestial doorbell motif; you might well imagine the short shrift that I received for that!

I would not say that the Third Symphony "can hardly represent Elgar"; au contraire, I might suggest that a good deal of it might well represent him but (of course) without actually being note for note what he'd have written himself.

I think that one of the particular problems with making a performable piece out of those sketches wa the fact that, since the Cello Concerto some 15 years earlier, Elgar had written little of significance and devoted more of his time to conducting; this, I think, was not just down to the impact on him of WWI and the death of his wife but also to a fear that trends in new music were passing him by and that there might be less demand for the kind of music that he'd written (an irrational, if partly understandable, response, given that the music that he'd already composed continued to be performed quite frequently during his latter years).

You're right about the King Arthur music, but then this was hardly atypical of Elgar's own methodology that had long included the practice of jotting down ideas in his sketch books as and when they occurred to him in the guise of possible aides-memoire (aide-memoires?) but without any idea of what he might do with them or when he might do it.

What a truly interesting post, AH. We are perhaps arguing over degrees. Oh to have been among the select group that heard Elgae play it all at the piano in September 1933. Bernard Shaw, Willy Reed, Fred Gaisberg, etc.

[Once Was 4]

What a truly interesting post, AH. We are perhaps arguing over degrees. Oh to have been among the select group that heard Elgae play it all at the piano in September 1933. Bernard Shaw, Willy Reed, Fred Gaisberg, etc.

Personally I have developed a great regard for 'Elgar 3' or whatever we should call it. To me, the 'mastermind' of the Passchendaele campaign - Sir Hubert Gough - strides confidently and impetuously through the last movement but then, as did Sir Hubert himself, dies at a great age, racked with guilt and trying unsuccessfully to justify what he did. Fanciful or what? Certainly I put that idea to Paul Daniel (who recorded the work for Naxos) and he did not treat me as an idiot in response.

I played in its first professional performance in Yorkshire which was a disaster - mainly due to the Viennese conductor (hugely respected by the entire orchestra) having been talked into doing it against his better judgement - he knew no Elgar and had absolutely no sympathy with it. In fact its first ever performance in Yorkshire was by a very good amateur orchestra whose (Northern Irish) conductor judged it perfectly.

But I know that the son of an old colleague was actually turned on to Elgar by Elgar 3 which is what I am happy to call it - especially having heard Anthony Payne give a talk on the rationale behind what he did.

[Serial_Apologist]

Some confusion seems to have arisen here over which work is being discussed, i.e. the Piano Concerto realised by Robert Walker or the Third Sympohony dittoed by Anthony Payne! The realisation of the Piano Concerto seems to me to be a very poor achievement compared to that of the Third Symphony.

My apologies! I was referring to the piano concerto.

[Barbirollians]

Personally I have developed a great regard for 'Elgar 3' or whatever we should call it. To me, the 'mastermind' of the Passchendaele campaign - Sir Hubert Gough - strides confidently and impetuously through the last movement but then, as did Sir Hubert himself, dies at a great age, racked with guilt and trying unsuccessfully to justify what he did. Fanciful or what? Certainly I put that idea to Paul Daniel (who recorded the work for Naxos) and he did not treat me as an idiot in response.

I played in its first professional performance in Yorkshire which was a disaster - mainly due to the Viennese conductor (hugely respected by the entire orchestra) having been talked into doing it against his better judgement - he knew no Elgar and had absolutely no sympathy with it. In fact its first ever performance in Yorkshire was by a very good amateur orchestra whose (Northern Irish) conductor judged it perfectly.

But I know that the son of an old colleague was actually turned on to Elgar by Elgar 3 which is what I am happy to call it - especially having heard Anthony Payne give a talk on the rationale behind what he did.

I agree - in many ways it makes a much more satisfying piece than completions of other great works where the person completing the work has to compete with whole complete movements by the original composer.

[teamsaint]

We visited The Firs : Elgar's Birthplace , as it is now called, today. Just wondered if anybody else as been since the NT took over the running on a 5 year deal ?

It was a good visit, with lots of helpful attention from the volunteers and staff. They seem to have plenty of time to chat due to the low visitor numbers. They are working hard to turn it into a more attractive centre. Work in hand includes development of the house , with some interesting changes underway at this very moment in one of the upstairs rooms. They are also trying to develop the music offer there, although widening the music to be heard ( concerts, recorded and other) is taking the NT out of their usual comfort zone. But they seem determined to do all they can to pull in more visitors( down to 8k a year at one point) and to to reflect the cultural significance of the place.

The NT are clearly putting a NT "stamp" on the place, one down- side of which is a rather poor retail offer. I suspect that this is one area unlikely to improve short term, but I'd like to be wrong. The NT likes to " John Lewis-ise" all of its retail, and overcoming this, to cater to the specialist market requires both determination and experience on the part of the site staff, and the people there at the moment probably have bigger fish to fry.

Anyway, it's a lovely place to go if you are in the area, and the museum staff really appreciate visitors with enthusiasm for the subject, which they clearly share. Combining a a visit with a trip to the three choirs seems like a good idea to me.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Referring to Elgar's Birthplace as The Firs is about as sensible as when they renamed the Royal Mail.

[teamsaint]

Referring to Elgar's Birthplace as The Firs is about as sensible as when they renamed the Royal Mail.

Just between you and me EA, the guys at The Firs don’t seem too impressed with this.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-44382472

I think they see The Hive as a better home, rather than the BL, where I suspect they think the archives will be mostly lost to public view..

[gradus]

Just between you and me EA, the guys at The Firs don’t seem to impressed with this.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-44382472

I think they see The Hive as a better home, rather than the BL, where I suspect they think the archives will be mostly lost to public view..

The only time I visited the birthplace was c 1972 when it's simplicity engaged the imagination in ways that no 'visitor centre' could emulate. No surprise then that I dislike the idea of taking the Archive and lodging it in the anonymous vastness of the British Library.
References above to the King Arthur music remind me of the solemn and imv inspired, Passage of Arthur to Avalon, the only part that I have heard. Why so neglected?

[LMcD]

I've recently heard (on Radio 3) and watched (on Youtube - the link doesn't seem to work) impressive performances of the cello concerto by Sol Gabetta. The Youtube performance is with the Danish Radio Symphony Orchestra (and has been seen an impressive 925,000 times!)