The 2016 Proms Season: what are your thoughts?

[french frank]

Was totally speechless when I read the media coverage.
The rock and pop dilution drill is in the lock of the R3 door.
Patronising.
Or are the Proms sufficiently desperate for money to feel TOWIE?

It's fairly predictable that the media will latch on to everything which is atypical of the Proms and say very little about the main concerts - they have their customers too, most of whom would be as bewildered by Mahler as the journos themselves. It's the reality of our society.

What seems to me to be total rubbish is the idea that if you offer/publicise a pop concert, the fans are doing something other than attending a pop concert. Like finding out about the Proms, encouraging them to attend a classical concert, breaking down the barriers. If the original Proms had any purpose at all, it was encouraging a new audience to come and sample classical music. Not an Ibiza club night.

That said, I don't think there's an unreasonable quantity of lighter stuff this year.

The BBC seems to feel that the BBC Proms have to have some sort of tie-in with their other projects: Doctor Who, Sherlock, Ten Pieces, Strictly …

[DracoM]

Like the shameless, troubling and cynical exploitation of The Archers at the moment in trails that ape Hollywood nasties? The core product in itself of a rural soap is, in BBC speak, seemingly ineffective / incomplete / a product manque without sensationalist plugging.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I'm surprised you think that. After all, the RAH is North of the river!

No, it isn't. It's some way to the south of the Humber Bridge.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Will you be adapting yourself to queer London ways and ensuring you're ensconced at 17:45 in the Imperial College Union on Sunday 28 August, and thereafter at the RAH?

Adaptation is rarely a problem from those of us living in the Sticks. It's those in the capital who whinge when they have to wait for longer than 5 minutes for a train, who find it difficult to adapt. Here we relish our railway with a train every 90 minutes.

[Nick Armstrong]

Adaptation is rarely a problem from those of us living in the Sticks. It's those in the capital who whinge when they have to wait for longer than 5 minutes for a train, who find it difficult to adapt. Here we relish our railway with a train every 90 minutes.

It was a genuine enquiry actually (I wasn't 'avin a dig): are you going to be there?

[Beef Oven!]

Adaptation is rarely a problem from those of us living in the Sticks. It's those in the capital who whinge when they have to wait for longer than 5 minutes for a train, who find it difficult to adapt. Here we relish our railway with a train every 90 minutes.

Many of us are far more resilient than those who can't hack it in the metropolis and must live in the sticks.

[ChrisBennell]

More typos spotted on the printable events list:

Prom 3: Haydn's Paukenmesse in 4 minutes (that's going some!)

Also Faure's Requiem appears twice (first is 8 minutes) - should be Pavane (Choral version).

At least the Proms Guide is right!

A fair number of Bruckner Symphonies this year. And Mahler's 3rd and 7th - looking forward to them.

No Vaughan Williams Symphonies at all - Lark Ascending yet again. (I cannot believe it!)

Prokofiev's 3rd Symphony should be interesting. Also Bartok's Bluebeard's Castle. Unmissable.

KatieD in a Strictly Prom - completely missable!

[teamsaint]

Many of us are far more resilient than those who can't hack it in the metropolis and must live in the sticks.

after trying to get on a tube at waterloo at 8.30 yesterday morning, I have to agree with you.

easier and quicker to walk.

[MrGongGong]

Was totally speechless when I read the media coverage.
The rock and pop dilution drill is in the lock of the R3 door.
Patronising.
Or are the Proms sufficiently desperate for money to feel TOWIE?

Sharing the love as expected Drogo

[DracoM]

Indeed - it's a shame that some time, therefore, isn't given over to the sorts of composers (writing 21st Century Music for 21st Century listeners, to nick BeefO's brilliant phrase) who attract the small but enthusiastic audiences (as used to happen regularly in the '60s, '70s and '80s) rather than those whose work arouses enthusiasm in nobody.


And yet they manage to get to Huddersfield every November? (Just to refer to New Music - there's also the Baroque and Earlier Music ensembles, too.)


I didn't - I think the words that came to my mind were "dull, unadventurous, predictable". Now you may well think that these are synonyms for "conservatism", but I couldn't possibly comment. Nonetheless, I would find it very entertaining to watch anyone trying to describe the programme as anything other than "conservative".


EXACTLY - and it was the adventurous programming of Glock and others who created the concerts that brought unfamiliar repertoire to the forefront of their programme-planning (just as did Wood from the earliest days). The mixture that made the Proms such a special series is what's so desperately missing from this and recent series: what's the justification of the Proms if they neglect all Music before 1600 and so much from today, time and time again? If it's just going to be what the South Bank offers as part of its usual offerings (just bunched together in a night-after-night sequence) then what's the point of the BBC using Licence Fee funds? Why not hand over to someone else and just broadcast what they come up with?

Thanks ferney........

[Zucchini]

bluestateprommer She [Mirga Gražinytė-Tyla] even managed to slot in an appearance in the Proms launch video. Given the time scale on which classical music planning works, she's doing a good job of hitting the ground running, in terms of her profile in the UK and the CBSO's.

But nothing coming yet in Brum... or have I not noticed?

Her Symphony Hall debut as Miusic Director will be the day before - Fri 26 August (programme per Proms). The CBSO 16/17 programme will be launched 12 May

[Demetrius]

Indeed - it's a shame that some time, therefore, isn't given over to the sorts of composers (writing 21st Century Music for 21st Century listeners, to nick BeefO's brilliant phrase) who attract the small but enthusiastic audiences (as used to happen regularly in the '60s, '70s and '80s) rather than those whose work arouses enthusiasm in nobody.

So which ones are the certain underwhelming ones? The main conductor (Kristjan Järvi) of my local orchestra (beside the Gewandhaus) has a love-affair with new works that are for the most part tonal (personally, I like what he likes). I have heard him dismissed from 2 sides: those who want a more main-stream repertoire (meaning they think they could beat the Gewandhaus on their turf ) and those who think he should boldly go for "difficult" or "avantgarde", meaning mostly that he should include more atonal music. The audience on the whole, however, is rather enthusiastic about his approach (and on average, they are about 10-15 years younger than the Gewandhaus audience); I don't think they would react to atonal works the same way. In fact, the one new atonal work I have encountered this year was liked by - including me and the composer - perhaps 5 people in the audience (the rest was polite about it, though). The same event featured an arrangement of the Mendelssohn octet that exchanged some of the strings for a horn and some woodwinds. The audience loved it, I thought it both a boring idea and frankly the horn just didn't fit anything.

So what do you expect from the new and newish works at the Proms? That they are uninspired / badly constructed atonal works? or that they are unoriginal / boring tonal ones? My problem in gathering information about new music is that the expectations as to what constitutes "good" are so vastly different.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

So which ones are the certain underwhelming ones? The main conductor (Kristjan Järvi) of my local orchestra (beside the Gewandhaus) has a love-affair with new works that are for the most part tonal (personally, I like what he likes). I have heard him dismissed from 2 sides: those who want a more main-stream repertoire (meaning they think they could beat the Gewandhaus on their turf ) and those who think he should boldly go for "difficult" or "avantgarde", meaning mostly that he should include more atonal music. The audience on the whole, however, is rather enthusiastic about his approach (and on average, they are about 10-15 years younger than the Gewandhaus audience); I don't think they would react to atonal works the same way. In fact, the one new atonal work I have encountered this year was liked by - including me and the composer - perhaps 5 people in the audience (the rest was polite about it, though). The same event featured an arrangement of the Mendelssohn octet that exchanged some of the strings for a horn and some woodwinds. The audience loved it, I thought it both a boring idea and frankly the horn just didn't fit anything.

So what do you expect from the new and newish works at the Proms? That they are uninspired / badly constructed atonal works? or that they are unoriginal / boring tonal ones? My problem in gathering information about new music is that the expectations as to what constitutes "good" are so vastly different.

I think the fact that you are using terms like "tonal" and "atonal" suggests the fundamental difference in my expectations and enthusiasms, Demetrius - and I think that the BBC share your outdated (I mean this literally, without wishing to be aggressive or offensive) bifurcation. I remember a few years ago, when Roger Redgate asked Roger Wright on an open Forum about that year's Proms where all the "cutting edge" Music was, Wright responded with "I don't understand - we've got Music by Harrison Birtwistle!" That's the problem - the Proms bods don't know any Music beyond New Music Manchester, and seek - thinking that they're being "ever-so daring" by commissioning a few works that sound like watered-down Birtwistle. Or half-digested John Adams.

There are dozens of composers throughout Europe and the Americas who are producing work that can neither adequately be described as "Tonal" nor "Atonal". Is Jurg Frey, Victor Ulmann or any of the Wandelweiser collective "Atonal"? Or in what way "Tonal"? Aaron Cassidy? Salvatore Sciarrino? Alexander Schubert? Bernard Lang? How would you describe the pitch language of Finnissy's Above Earth's Shadow, which I've posted on the "Hear & Now" Thread? In what way is that "atonal"? In what way "tonal"? Is this piece by Richard |Glover "Tonal"? Why/not?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KQygxhjWME

Things have moved on - the Proms haven't. Instead of the times when New Music excited heated arguments, we're now in a situation closer to that of the '40s and '50s, where the newest ideas were desperately ignored in favour of the safe, the predictable, the familiar.

Where is the danger? Where is the optimism - the sense that Music can inspire new, provocative ways of thinking; the belief that Music from the Western Classical traditions are as valid and vivid and alive as those of the most provocative visual and literary Artists? If we aren't given some indication - just some - that there are Musicians who are still re-thinking sound from the roots (a genuinely "radical" movement) up, then it can only confirm the wide-spread erroneous belief that "Classical Music" is museum stuff.

Fortunately for the future of the Art, the internet and a few industrious and precariously-financed record companies are doing the job that the BBC should be doing. But it does mean that developments in Music are kept from general awareness, and this is something that I think the Corporation should find a matter of some concern. Because if it's not there to inform interested viewers and listeners about what's going on in the Arts, what's the point of it?

[Serial_Apologist]

I think the fact that you are using terms like "tonal" and "atonal" suggests the fundamental difference in my expectations and enthusiasms, Demetrius - and I think that the BBC share your outdated (I mean this literally, without wishing to be aggressive or offensive) bifurcation. I remember a few years ago, when Roger Redgate asked Roger Wright on an open Forum about that year's Proms where all the "cutting edge" Music was, Wright responded with "I don't understand - we've got Music by Harrison Birtwistle!" That's the problem - the Proms bods don't know any Music beyond New Music Manchester, and seek - thinking that they're being "ever-so daring" by commissioning a few works that sound like watered-down Birtwistle. Or half-digested John Adams.

There are dozens of composers throughout Europe and the Americas who are producing work that can neither adequately be described as "Tonal" nor "Atonal". Is Jurg Frey, Victor Ulmann or any of the Wandelweiser collective "Atonal"? Or in what way "Tonal"? Aaron Cassidy? Salvatore Sciarrino? Alexander Schubert? Bernard Lang? How would you describe the pitch language of Finnissy's Above Earth's Shadow, which I've posted on the "Hear & Now" Thread? In what way is that "atonal"? In what way "tonal"? Is this piece by Richard |Glover "Tonal"? Why/not?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KQygxhjWME

Things have moved on - the Proms haven't. Instead of the times when New Music excited heated arguments, we're now in a situation closer to that of the '40s and '50s, where the newest ideas were desperately ignored in favour of the safe, the predictable, the familiar.

Where is the danger? Where is the optimism - the sense that Music can inspire new, provocative ways of thinking; the belief that Music from the Western Classical traditions are as valid and vivid and alive as those of the most provocative visual and literary Artists? If we aren't given some indication - just some - that there are Musicians who are still re-thinking sound from the roots (a genuinely "radical" movement) up, then it can only confirm the wide-spread erroneous belief that "Classical Music" is museum stuff.

Fortunately for the future of the Art, the internet and a few industrious and precariously-financed record companies are doing the job that the BBC should be doing. But it does mean that developments in Music are kept from general awareness, and this is something that I think the Corporation should find a matter of some concern. Because if it's not there to inform interested viewers and listeners about what's going on in the Arts, what's the point of it?

Well said, ferney!

Come to think of it, the Proms could well be re-enlivened by some of those nevermore performed shortish pieces from the 1960s that would shake up a few sensibilities in the best of all possible ways: Serocki's "Symphonic Frescoes" and Malec's "Sigma" just to offer two suggestions.

(Inadequate or not, I'd still describe that lovely Finnissy piece you linked to on another thread as atonal - but hey - what difference a few microtones between friends? )

[Richard Barrett]

"Atonal" and "tonal" are often bandied around without a clear idea of what they mean. As fg implies, if you do have a clear idea of what they mean you tend not to use them as defining characteristics of one music or another.

Roger Redgate asked Roger Wright on an open Forum about that year's Proms where all the "cutting edge" Music was, Wright responded with "I don't understand - we've got Music by Harrison Birtwistle!"

The thing is that RW does know better than that, and RR knows he knows, and RW knows that RR knows he knows, and this was the kind of answer he'd be expected to give on a public forum where many or most of those listening would thereby be convinced that RW was doing his job and RR represents a fringe opinion.