Bruckner: Symphony no. 7 BaL 13/12/14

[Beef Oven!]

Bruckner pressed all the right buttons for the Nazis.

Bruckner pressed no buttons for the Nazis. And in any case, he was pushing up the daisies when Hitler was only 7 years old.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Incredible, being a professional murderer as well as a quite accomplished musician.

Yes. It's not the right place to indulge in dilettante and speculative psychoanalysis of which I have scarce qualification to comment, nevertheless, I think there seems to be an aspect of the human psyche that allows (and, in some cases, even encourages) individuals to commit acts of atrocities if they believe (beyond what appears to be sane to the rest of us) that such acts are "for the greater good" - and, of course, there are those who hide their enjoyment of such acts behind the excuse that they believe that such things" have to be done". That, sadly, is an aspect that of humanity - indeed, exclusively exhibited by humans.

[Beef Oven!]

Yes - the optimistic 18th & 19th Century idea that the Arts have a "civilizing" effect on people was blown out of the water in the 20th. At most, the Arts merely give "moral" (highly inappropriate vocabulary in some contexts) succour for people to do what they believe to be the right thing to do. The thought of these people (for whom no description carries sufficient contempt) coming home after a hard day's work of torture and murder, and finding solace in Bruckner (or Bach or Wagner or Beethoven or Mozart ... ) is one I find inexpressively repugnant.

In the 1960s I watched a war film at the cinema (The Longest Day, perhaps?). And I remember being shocked when the Germans, having suffered a set-back, said something like 'it makes you wonder whose side God is on'. I thought WTF!!? Are you crazy!!? He aint gonna be on your side!!!

But then, I suppose they didn't come home after a long day's 'toil' and say, I really fancy listening to Bruckner 7, but I'd better not because I'm evil!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

But then, I suppose they didn't come home after a long day's 'toil' and say, I really fancy listening to Bruckner 7, but I'd better not because I'm evil!

Exactly! The Nazis believed they were the good guys (the ones who truly "deserved" Art) and everyone else was evil.

[Don Petter]

I have no problem with listening to a lecture - providing the subject matter is well-researched and decently presented.

The big advantage of a single broadcaster talking on the radio is that the speaker appears to be directly addressing you, the listener.

On the other hand, two people talking to each other appear to exclude the listener. That is not to say that other peoples' conversations can't be interesting, but in terms of listener involvement (the current mantra) it would seem to be a backward step.

[Beef Oven!]

Exactly! The Nazis believed they were the good guys (the ones who truly "deserved" Art) and everyone else was evil.

And that's why it's something of a straw-man argument to be indignant at the Nazis' use of music.

Reminds me of a letter to Gramophone in the 90s where the writer was saying that it was incongruous and repugnant that Karl Bohm should be conducting Beethoven 6, because he thought he was a Nazi collaborator!! Sheep, birds, shepherds and all things pastoral are off limits to Nazis!!!

There is definitely something wrong with this whole idea about music and baddies.

[gurnemanz]

I suspect that the audience figures for Bal/CDR have gone down in the last 5-10 years. If that's tue, it's a good enough reason to consider a new format.

Establish a focus group, maybe. Someone telling us about some recordings he or she has listened to and telling us which one he or she likes best more or less dictates its own format. It is surely the determination to invent new formats that has led to recent failed experiments such as the one where Person B, who has not actually listened to all recordings, chips in from the sidelines.

[Beef Oven!]

Establish a focus group, maybe. Someone telling us about some recordings he or she has listened to and telling us which one he or she likes best more or less dictates its own format. It is surely the determination to invent new formats that has led to recent failed experiments such as the one where Person B, who has not actually listened to all recordings, chips in from the sidelines.

If we want to apply the ''if it aint broke, don't try to fix it'' idea, then we need to be sure that Bal is at least maintaining audience numbers by drawing in new listeners to replace the ones that leave. Otherwise, the programme will die with its listeners.

[BBMmk2]

A glorious account by RCO/Haitink. Hearing on Radio3 at this moment.

[Nick Armstrong]

The big advantage of a single broadcaster talking on the radio is that the speaker appears to be directly addressing you, the listener.

On the other hand, two people talking to each other appear to exclude the listener. That is not to say that other peoples' conversations can't be interesting, but in terms of listener involvement (the current mantra) it would seem to be a backward step.

[BBMmk2]

Agreed!

Also sometimes, though, even though it's scripted, iot be good if the presenter could speak with more expression as opposed to a more robotic sounding voice?

[DracoM]

Agreed. Astute comment. Email CD Review and tell them.

[Beef Oven!]

The big advantage of a single broadcaster talking on the radio is that the speaker appears to be directly addressing you, the listener.

On the other hand, two people talking to each other appear to exclude the listener. That is not to say that other peoples' conversations can't be interesting, but in terms of listener involvement (the current mantra) it would seem to be a backward step.

I agree that the single presenter format has the advantage of one feeling directly addressed, and I do like that aspect.

The dog of two head approach is not the same, but it's not inferior, it's just different.

A forward step concerning listener involvement would be to hashtag/twitter the programme.

[Don Petter]

A forward step concerning listener involvement would be to hashtag/twitter the programme.

Verily, you speak of unkown cabbalistic matters.

[Beef Oven!]

Verily, you speak of unkown cabbalistic matters.

I don't follow you, what do you mean?