Prom 71 - 4.09.13: Górecki, Vaughan Williams & Tchaikovsky

[Sir Velo]

I can honestly say I've never heard anything by Britten that has appealed to me in the least, so no need for that!

Disappointing that one of our leading contemporary composers feels the need to diminish the achievements of a predecessor who did so much for the standing of British music worldwide.

[Serial_Apologist]

Disappointing that one of our leading contemporary composers feels the need to diminish the achievements of a predecessor who did so much for the standing of British music worldwide.

RB is not diminishing Britten, just saying he doesn't appeal to him!

[jean]

I wasn't going to bother listening to this prom, but after reading this thread, I think I'm going to have to.

[jayne lee wilson]

And what "new experience(s)" have you found in the Gorecki? What is "valuable and beautiful" about it? You've mentioned the use of the Aeolian mode and ... erm ... well, "a singing of the survival of their Faith and culture" (not specifically Gorecki, though, this). Is that it? Your response (no matter how impassioned) tends rather to confirm, not contradict, my opinion that the work is vacuous if this is the most you can say about it. The tendency towards using vocabulary that suggests a somewhat Zhdanovian sense of inadequacy doesn't help: "chucked aside", "sneering", "eurocentric" (in what sense is admiring works from the Balkans not another aspect of a Eurocentric mindset?) "serialist-centric", "select canon", "excludes".

And now we see the resurgent Religious Faiths in the former Soviet Union freely expressing its hatred of homosexuality ...

(No; I don't quite see the relevance, either, but such phrases are apparently part of the argument that the Gorecki isn't worth spending time on.)

Up your game, Jayne: what is in the Music of the Gorecki Third Symphony (not its texts, not its attitude towards Soviet oppresssion, not its rejection of serial methodology - what's in the Music [by which I mean such features as the harmony, the thematicism, the orchestration, the texture, the structure, the klang]) that makes it "valuable (and I'm emphasizing this word, because you chose to use it) and beautiful"?

Even if I was capable of such detailed musical analysis, it wouldn't do any good would it, if you describe the piece as "feeble, inadequate whinging"... that seems a very instinctive rejection, not analytical at all.

The new experience I refer to is simply my instinctive response; it moves me, often to tears. Why isn't that valuable and beautiful? The same could be said for many of John Adams' pieces that get short shrift here. The building blocks of the piece are old and familiar - but for me, the experience is new - rewarding and unique.

Back in the day, I taped the complete Ferneyhough Carceri d'Invenzione from Huddersfield; even wrote to R3 to get the leaflet about it. Oh how I tried with that piece, but I could never find a response. Do I think it's "impenetrable, tuneless noise" etc. etc.? Of course not. I just don't "understand" it on any sonic or emotional level really. My loss. I leave it, a little sadly perhaps, and quietly move on.

I can't see how studying musical analysis of a given piece is going to help if that response isn't there; more listening may well do, and often brings surprising results. Hence my dislike of insulting dismissal of any piece or composer, which seems just a cry of pain or disgust in the face of the undesired.

However you place or frame it, that strand of Estonian, Georgian, Russian and North European mystical or contemplative music is a strand of expression which stands apart - perhaps even apart from critical evaluation; that it finds a response in many listeners, religious or not, is undoubted. If I'm unusual in enjoying Caris Mere or Bright Sorrow on the one hand and Schoenberg's Piano Concerto on the other, so be it; this is one reason why I often refer to The Age of Recordings - I think the listening game has changed, rapidly and irrevocably, and (I hope) our ability to respond generously to many musical styles along with it.

[teamsaint]

Yes I am, because I think folkishness and mediaevalism in music are generally used to point implicitly to some kind of golden age when music and life were simpler and happier, as opposed to being characterised by hereditary inequality, illiteracy and gruelling manual labour for the majority, frequent war, plague and so on.

But that doesn't strip them of all value.
They could be, and often are also used to highlight the very abuses that you describe.

All that is required to avoid the perils that you mention, are sensitivity in the writer, and some perception on the part of the listener, surely.

[Serial_Apologist]

Even if I was capable of such detailed musical analysis, it wouldn't do any good would it, if you describe the piece as "feeble, inadequate whinging"... that seems a very instinctive rejection, not analytical at all.

The new experience I refer to is simply my instinctive response; it moves me, often to tears. Why isn't that valuable and beautiful? The same could be said for many of John Adams' pieces that get short shrift here. The building blocks of the piece are old and familiar - but for me, the experience is new - rewarding and unique.

Back in the day, I taped the complete Ferneyhough Carceri d'Invenzione from Huddersfield; even wrote to R3 to get the leaflet about it. Oh how I tried with that piece, but I could never find a response. Do I think it's "impenetrable, tuneless noise" etc. etc.? Of course not. I just don't "understand" it on any sonic or emotional level really. My loss. I leave it, a little sadly perhaps, and quietly move on.

I can't see how studying musical analysis of a given piece is going to help if that response isn't there; more listening may well do, and often brings surprising results. Hence my dislike of insulting dismissal of any piece or composer, which seems just a cry of pain or disgust in the face of the undesired.

However you place or frame it, that strand of Estonian, Georgian, Russian and North European mystical or contemplative music is a strand of expression which stands apart - perhaps even apart from critical evaluation; that it finds a response in many listeners, religious or not, is undoubted. If I'm unusual in enjoying Caris Mere or Bright Sorrow on the one hand and Schoenberg's Piano Concerto on the other, so be it; this is one reason why I often refer to The Age of Recordings - I think the listening game has changed, rapidly and irrevocably, and our ability to respond generously to many musical styles along with it.

Yes indeed - and the problem of difficulty with new or complex idioms isn't helped by one side using Ferneyhough or Carter as their starting point standard bearer and the other John Adams, say. But luckily jayne you have cited the Schoenberg piano concerto among your enjoyments, for there is usually more profitability in middle ground works or trends from which to advance into new territories... or, at least, this has been so in my case, demonstrating to me that there are normally continuities between conservative and innovative, even when this is not apparent on first or even fourth hearing.

[Richard Barrett]

Disappointing that one of our leading contemporary composers feels the need to diminish the achievements of a predecessor who did so much for the standing of British music worldwide.

Thank you for your kind words, Sir Velo, but I really don't feel that need, it's just that Britten's music is a personal blind spot for me and I just can't hear what other people find to like in it (I'm sure the feeling would have been mutual too!).

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Even if I was capable of such detailed musical analysis, it wouldn't do any good would it, if you describe the piece as "feeble, inadequate whinging"... that seems a very instinctive rejection, not analytical at all.

No; as I'd said, my first reaction to hearing it was enthusiastic - that was the "instinct". The barrenness of the piece became clearer with each subsequent hearing - that was the analysis. I can hear nothing in the Music that is particularly worthy of interest: the rhythms, harmonies, melodic lines, orchestration, textures, structure have nothing of interest to offer - the reduction of activity (regular rhythmic motion, sustained chords, divisi strings, homophony) has been done far better by other composers, not least the ones I mentioned (only one of whom used serial techniques in the works I cited) - I could have added Scelsi and Feldman. All that's left are the texts, which reveal and inspire a far greater spectrum of emotional responses away from this Music that enwebs it in a quasi-pornographic wash of modal cluster harmonies.

The new experience I refer to is simply my instinctive response; it moves me, often to tears. Why isn't that valuable and beautiful? The same could be said for many of John Adams' pieces that get short shrift here. The building blocks of the piece are old and familiar - but for me, the experience is new - rewarding and unique.

So; you like it. Good for you and the others who get more from this piece than do I. But if you cannot point out what the Musical features are that make it worthy of your attention, you cannot then have the effrontery to tell others that their "standards" are "wrong" - I have said the Gorecki is "empty" Music: if you are unable to say what the Music contains that "fills" this space, you forfeit the right to pronounce judgement on my "standards".

However you place or frame it, that strand of Estonian, Georgian, Russian and North European mystical or contemplative music is a strand of expression which stands apart - perhaps even apart from critical evaluation; that it finds a response in many listeners, religious or not, is undoubted.

What has this to do with the quality of the Music of Gorecki's Third Symphony? Again, unable to discuss the work in anything but homeopathic language, you turn away from the work in question and start generalizing about the whole of "Estonian, Georgian, Russian and North European mystical or contemplative music" , supporting your "argument" by bringing in Serialism and now Ferneyhough as straw men. Nobody on this Thread has made any comment on Gubaidulina, Kancheli, Part or any other piece than the Gorecki Third: you were the one who presumed from this that an entire body of Music was being attacked.

[jayne lee wilson]

Isn't your description "feeble, inadequate whinging" an affront to others' standards? It has little to do with your description of what the piece lacks in musical terms. Or if you say (as I SO often do) that it's "in my view" etc., then why should you insist that I show you some justification for my enjoyment, if your analysis can't persuade me of its shortcomings? It cuts both ways.

I said "maybe it is being held against the wrong standards" i.e those of that central european, sonata-based symphonic repertoire. That's no effrontery to your or anyone else's PERSONAL standards or tastes at all - just a suggestion that this approach to hearing and evaluating music like the Gorecki 3rd is the wrong one - tending away from hearing and responding to what it has to offer. Which is why I said that the strand of music variously called "holy minimalism" "mystical minimalism" etc may not really be open to critical evaluation at all.

But we're too far apart on this to make further repetitions worthwhile, and as for your last paragraph... "homeopathic language"? Using Ferneyhough as a straw man? "An entire body of music was being attacked"?! - well I find it too intemperate, innaccurate and exaggerated a representation of my views to be able to respond further.

[Sir Velo]

Ferns, quick question: why always the capital "M" in "music"?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Ferns, quick question: why always the capital "M" in "music"?

It deserves it.

[Roehre]

It deserves it.

[Nachtigall]

Isn't your description "feeble, inadequate whinging" an affront to others' standards? It has little to do with your description of what the piece lacks in musical terms. Or if you say (as I SO often do) that it's "in my view" etc., then why should you insist that I show you some justification for my enjoyment, if your analysis can't persuade me of its shortcomings? It cuts both ways.

I said "maybe it is being held against the wrong standards" i.e those of that central european, sonata-based symphonic repertoire. That's no effrontery to your or anyone else's PERSONAL standards or tastes at all - just a suggestion that this approach to hearing and evaluating music like the Gorecki 3rd is the wrong one - tending away from hearing and responding to what it has to offer. Which is why I said that the strand of music variously called "holy minimalism" "mystical minimalism" etc may not really be open to critical evaluation at all.

But we're too far apart on this to make further repetitions worthwhile, and as for your last paragraph... "homeopathic language"? Using Ferneyhough as a straw man? "An entire body of music was being attacked"?! - well I find it too intemperate, innaccurate and exaggerated a representation of my views to be able to respond further.

For what it's worth, Jayne, you have my complete support for your point of view. Intellectual arguments such as those mustered by FHG and Richard Barrett simply don't count when we're dealing with instinctive, non-rational responses to music – and surely our first responses are always of this nature. From what I can gather FHG and RB seem unable to countenance multifarious strands of contemporary musical development which include what you term "holy minimalism", for example, insisting on a certain kind of cerebral approach to musical creativity. It is of course nothing new for creative artists to dislike and distance themselves from the work of others as a way of asserting the value of their own practice. Didn't Tchaikovsky refer to Brahms as a "scoundrel" and "talentless bastard"?

As far as serialism is concerned and much as I love the work of the Second Viennese School, the sensible approach is surely to be as inclusive as one's personal tastes allow and to recognise that it was one form of musical development among several in the 20th century, significant but in reality a bit of a dead end, rather like James Joyce's experiments with language in Finnegan's Wake. The late John Drummond was a fierce advocate but we know that that advocacy led to the neglect of many worthy 20th century composers.

[Nick Armstrong]

instinctive, non-rational responses to music

My reaction to music is in the above category, and on that basis I disliked Gorecki 3 immediately and still do.

[Nachtigall]

My reaction to music is in the above category, and on that basis I disliked Gorecki 3 immediately and still do.

No problem.