Prom 31 - 9.08/14: Hallé, Coote / Elder

[Hornspieler]

- I had thought that quote was referring to works premiered at the Proms (ie, Proms commissions). The one in that category that I thought of was Birtwistle's Panic. Hasn't reappeared at a Prom, yet, but still programmed quite regularly (especially, IIRC, in Germany for some reason).

Raus! Raus! Schnell!! Schnell!

Das ist verboten!

This thread purports to be about a Promenade concert given by the Hallé Orchestra under Sir Marc Elder.

Aren't we more than a little off post?

An interesting discussion regarding the merits (or waste of money in some views, including mine) of BBC Commisions.

Let's have a thread titled BBC Commisions where those in favour and those against may freely state their views and the reasons for holding them.

Hornspieler

Good morning Fernie!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Mornin' HS - you are absolutely right of course! Another Thread needed for this.

[pureimagination]

The problem here, perhaps, is your use of "you" (and "your") - for the programmers and for many of us in the audience it was an inspired trio of works: far more imaginative and rewarding programming than the majority of concerts of arbitratily cobbled-together pieces from the Nineteenth Century. For us, Xenakis' Pleiades in between Holst & RVW was a perfect "context" - it enhanced, rather than "spoiled", the overall appreciation of the event. We did "want it there" both because it is a superb piece of Music and because it enhanced features in the other works. I know you were giving your opinion, but expressing this in the second person can give the impression that you think that this is an opinion universally held. It isn't.

Okay. I didn't want it there because it spoilt my overall appreciation of the event. Is that better grammatically? I don't have an opinion for it to be held by anyone but me.
To quote Grayson Perry in his Reith Lecture who was quoting Alan Bennett "You don't have to like it all."

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I didn't want it there because it spoilt my overall appreciation of the event. Is that better grammatically?

I don't know about the grammar - your original made perfect grammatical sense - but it is certainly a better communication of what you meant, precisely because ...

I don't have an opinion for it to be held by anyone but me.

Exactly - but by the repeated use of "you" in your original you were ascribing it to the reader. The concert was spoiled for you by the addition of the Xenakis; for many others (and for the performers and programmers) it enhanced it.

To quote Grayson Perry in his Reith Lecture who was quoting Alan Bennett "You don't have to like it all."

I agree entirely, and I don't wish to suggest that everyone must or should like it all. But your use of the second person made it sound as if you were suggesting that we all should dislike the inclusion of the Xenakis. Many of us loved it.

[pureimagination]

Please qualify 'universally held' and your affirmation that 'it is a superb piece of music'.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Please qualify 'universally held'

Read the context more carefully ... I know you were giving your opinion, but expressing this in the second person can give the impression that you think that this is an opinion universally held.

and your affirmation that 'it is a superb piece of music'.

Already qualified in context: For us, Xenakis' Pleiades in between Holst & RVW was a perfect "context" - it enhanced, rather than "spoiled", the overall appreciation of the event. We did "want it there" both because it is a superb piece of Music

[Alison]

Still think this was a performance of the Eroica that failed to thrill with a particularly anticlimactic finale.

[bluestateprommer]

I have rather enjoyed this on BBC4 - the presentation egregious as ever but the orchestra and Elder in good form and a central but enjoyable Eroica and I am not sure what the problem is that others have with Alice Coote - a HIPP interpretation perhaps with a touch of the Clara Butt and far from the seaspray and mezzo singing of Baker/Barbirolli but an interesting alternative approach.

Obviously without the benefit (?) of being able to watch the proceedings on TV, but just hearing iPlayer, I found to be a very solid Prom once again from the Halle and Sir Mark. Whip-smart form for the Berlioz overture, and Helen Grime's work to start the 2nd half. I'm with Barbirollians about AC and Elgar's Sea Pictures, as I didn't really find anything that off-putting about her performance there. No, the Elgar isn't the quality of a Mahler song-cycle, or Berlioz's Les nuits d'ete, nor the best of Elgar's other works, but it's OK on its own. Sir Mark's Eroica interpretation shows the hallmarks of period practices, as others have noted, with vibrato trimmed and other details like the trumpet starting, but not finishing, the main theme just before the close of the 1st movement. However, one perhaps non-HIPP moment was the quick grunt at about 8:16 into the first movement, presumably from Sir Mark on the podium, sort of a Beecham-esque exhortatory moment to the musicians. Interestingly, in the coda of the finale, Sir Mark did not scurry or gabble matters, but rather gave it a spaciousness that reminded me, of all recordings, of Klemperer's 1961 Philharmonia Eroica, in its relative breadth. I liked Sir Mark's choice there, and shows how one can use aspects of period practice, but also be more flexible on matters of tempo where the conductor feels it appropriate (given the discussion on RN and Prom 62).

[amateur51]

I'm quite happy to disagree with you especially re Alice Coote's voice. I love her diction and for me (personally, in my opinion) it has been one of the highlights of this years Proms.

I agree with you pureimagination. Unlike many forumites I'm rather fond of Sea Pictures, known primarily from the Baker/Barbirolli recording and I greatly enjoyed Alice Coote's different ways of singing them. Her diction was superb as you say and I loved also the confidence with which she took those lower notes. Brava!