Prom 54 (23.8.12): Davies, Delius & Shostakovich

[Roehre]

Is my memory deceiving me? At the time of the Antarctic Symphony, I'm pretty sure we heard Max declaring with full certainty that he would not be writing any more symphonies, and that, if one listened to the conclusion of No 8, one could go from there right back to the start of No 1, with which it is structurally connected, and re-commence the whole cycle.

That's what he said (and do I recall correctly that it was the Antarctica which didn't have a number at all??).
In the short intro on R3 he was remembered having said this, and he did admit he had done so.
Therefore he changed his mind and is honestly wllling to admit it too.

[Dave2002]

I was at an early performance of one of Max's symphonies in Liverpool, and indeed he signed my programme. Worth a fortune? Probably not - I think it was lost in a clear out, though not by me. Must have been Symphony 1, looking at the dates in the 1970s. Hey ho!

[Petrushka]

I was at an early performance of one of Max's symphonies in Liverpool, and indeed he signed my programme. Worth a fortune? Probably not - I think it was lost in a clear out, though not by me. Must have been Symphony 1, looking at the dates in the 1970s. Hey ho!

I was at the first UK performance of the Symphony No 2 in 1981 (BBCSO/Rozhdestvensky) and Max signed my programme at the pre-Prom talk that evening. Still have it somewhere...

Thanks JLW and edashtav for your fascinating and illuminating comments on the 9th. I shall listen again with renewed pleasure.

[heliocentric]

A time there was when penning just one was taken as a symptom that Max’s arteries were furring and that middle age complacency was sapping his radicalism & creativity. And, oh dear, Max invoked Sibelius as a guide & helpmate, long before Sibelius software converted cutting-edge thoughts into beautiful scores. “Max is maxing out on tonality,” thought the avant-garde as they interred his remains without erecting a headstone.

I don't think that's quite fair though - sure there was plenty of comment on his having decided to write a symphony back then, but, as I remember, it was considered as a step forward by at least as many as thought it a step backward. In particular his claim that there was "no orchestration" in the piece, that everything that happened and the way that it happened was integrated into the work's materials and processes, was highly suggestive. It was more of an upscaling of the form and expression of works like Ave maris stella (his best work of all IMO, if I had to choose one) than a continuation of his or anyone else's previous orchestral work. Also the 1st symphony is hardly "tonal"...

[edashtav]

I don't think that's quite fair though - sure there was plenty of comment on his having decided to write a symphony back then, but, as I remember, it was considered as a step forward by at least as many as thought it a step backward. In particular his claim that there was "no orchestration" in the piece, that everything that happened and the way that it happened was integrated into the work's materials and processes, was highly suggestive. It was more of an upscaling of the form and expression of works like Ave maris stella (his best work of all IMO, if I had to choose one) than a continuation of his or anyone else's previous orchestral work. Also the 1st symphony is hardly "tonal"...

Hi helio,

I never claimed that everyone thought it was a backwards step, I was talking about those people with 1970s superheliocentricity.

Hardly tonal,eh? What did Max say in 1978?
" The overall tonal centre is F, with a "modal dominant" of D♭".
Goodenough for me!

But, let's be fair to you, helio, because you do think before you type. Your passage re "upscaling of form" hits an important nail on the head. The manner in which its slow movement dissolves into a scherzo, the relationship of the whole to the final hammered(!) chords shows that Max had learned from Sibelius (the 5th?), had come to appreciate that master of construction, Beethoven, and as he has admitted, he even knew his Schumann symphonies! (Oh dear, I've done a whoopsie. )

What's the biggest problem with PMD? He's just too prolific - we don't get enough chances to revisit his earlier works in NEW performances. Let's put the Collins Classics CDs on the shelf.

I want live, old Max!

Do you, or are you, too, ready to bury the old boy?

[Boilk]

Now Max has reached No.9, it's worth recalling his characteristic comment about why he called No.1 a symphony at all - 'because it marked the beginning of the possibility of an orchestra competence'.

That remark does a bit of a disservice to Worldes Blis and Second Fantasia on John Taverner's In Nomine

[heliocentric]

Hardly tonal,eh? What did Max say in 1978?
" The overall tonal centre is F, with a "modal dominant" of D♭".
Goodenough for me!

I can't argue with that I suppose, although I really can't hear it in that way. On the other hand, in a recent interview he said "Even that first symphony (...) I think of as being in D", which suggests that he might have the same problem!

[3rd Viennese School]

Hello fans. Have been busy lately so only just getting round to getting thoughts together.

The only work I heard was Maxy Davy 9- then had to dash into the lounge to watch Messian symphony on BBC4! Why do they clashed everything? Missed DSCH 10- so have to wait for the repeat.

Only heard 9 once so far- it may seem different next time round. But got some scrambled thoughts.

Good to hear the old fashioned Max in there – angry brass , screamy strings etc. but it did seem to me more obvious than his other symphonies. Maybe because the other symphonies are more abstract? (even the Antarctic one). Maybe it was more sectionable?

It did seem like the marrying up of both worlds- the serious symphonies and the “light” music.

Anyway. I live at the seaside so I went to my window and watched the funfair going round during the dancing brass sections.

I was wondering if this is Max’s “DSCH 9 !”(someone said that on the message board years ago)


Anyway. Now bought Maxy Davy symphony in 3. In D. Only ever heard it once a few years back so now I’ve got the chance to explore 2 symphonies!

As you readers know, Maxwell Davies symphonies no. 1, 2 and 3 have now been issued on Naxos.

3VS

[jayne lee wilson]

Yes, and 4 & 5 due for release on Naxos in a few days! (5 is the only other Max symphony (apart from No.9) under 30 minutes; 4 has some lovely sea-eagle evocations).

And I think No.9 is terrific.

[Roehre]

And I think No.9 is terrific.

As I do

[3rd Viennese School]

Brilliant news about no.4 being released! I would have all of them then!

No.9 is currently on a cassette tape on the 3VS label.

3VS

[Serial_Apologist]

I can't argue with that I suppose, although I really can't hear it in that way. On the other hand, in a recent interview he said "Even that first symphony (...) I think of as being in D", which suggests that he might have the same problem!

One might be led to question the significance of tonal centres in PMD's work, symphonic or otherwise. Critics discussing Henze's 7th at the time of its UK debut during the interval break raised similar issues about the importance or otherwise of key in its unfolding. What, it might be asked, is the relevance of key schemes that are undetectable, or effectively rendered irrelevant by an atonal musical language, let alone a serial one (which Schoenberg evolved as a substitute for key ordering)?

To the extent to which I have been able to follow him, PMD seems full of ambiguities as regards what is straightforwardly understandable about his music and his attitudes to it. In his 1963 interview in Murray Schaeffer's "British Composers in Interview", Shafer at one point asks, "Some of the listeners to the 'St. Michael Sonata' found it hard to believe that the Dies Irae was present as a cantus firmus in one of the movements. What is the point of a cantus firmus that can't be heard?" To which Max replied, "They obviously weren't listening. I can hear it without any trouble". OK, a 29-year old composer speaking. In the '87 (?) R3 discussion "A New Harmony?" Max concentrated in his discussion on audibility to himself as the composer and trying to get this across to the listener by providing audible continuities and a detectable through logic or narrative in his music; but while speaking of being finished with what he called "childish games with myself in the corner, so to speak!" he also opined that there was no place in contemporary music for a return to tonality "as she once was". How for one thing is one to weigh the works in which tonality has made an unequivocal comeback?

[3rd Viennese School]

Has anyone else had the Maxwell Davies dream?

They were playing one of his works (but sounded nothing like one of his pieces!). This middle aged woman was dancing through the orchestra singing it. The orchestra sitting at the front started ripping up pieces of paper and throwing them and lauging. The rest of the orchestra were laughing.

Then Maxwell Davies appeared in his Mayor outfit, angry, and shouted “Shut the xxxx up!!”

3VS

[Serial_Apologist]

Has anyone else had the Maxwell Davies dream?

They were playing one of his works (but sounded nothing like one of his pieces!). This middle aged woman was dancing through the orchestra singing it. The orchestra sitting at the front started ripping up pieces of paper and throwing them and lauging. The rest of the orchestra were laughing.

Then Maxwell Davies appeared in his Major outfit, angry, and shouted “Shut the xxxx up!!”

3VS

There's nothing new of course about ones inner insecurities being expressed in dreams. I hadn't heard that one, however.

[heliocentric]

One might be led to question the significance of tonal centres in PMD's work, symphonic or otherwise

Quite. He never seems to have quite made his mind up about what he thinks a listener is or should be able to hear in his music, whether it's plainsong melodies "filtered" through magic squares (which as I understand it alter the order of their notes so that the melody's original shape is annihiliated at the start), or on the other hand some kind of "tonality" which is so diluted that not even he can be consistent about where its centre is. Of course it's quite possible to compose music which has clearly-audible pitch-centres without being tonal (Berio for example), but that doesn't appear to be what PMD thinks he's up to. Which may of course not matter at all, but in a lot of his music (his Second Taverner Fantasia for example) I have the feeling that the centre of what's "going on" is so far below the audible surface that the music comes across as arbitrary.