can anyone explain shostakovich to me?
mike
a film"?
Kevin Ward
> like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music without
> a film"?
Have you heard the Piano Concerto No. 2, op. 102? I'm just wild about
it. The opening movement takes a very light-hearted (almost cartoonish)
theme and somehow transforms it to a wild raging adventure theme, and then
at the too brief climax a theme of majestic soaring VaughanWilliamsesque
sonorities in full tilt orchestra (tutti, I guess you call it), and back
to a denouement of the playful theme. It comes across as less like
variations on a theme as I have described it here, but more like a journey,
an emotional roller coaster ride that comes full circle.
Well, ok -- I guess film music does that too. Actually I'm
not sure what you mean by "just a film music writer." This is just
like the age old argument in art school that illustrator's are not artists
and illustration is not art. Illustration COULD be art -- and so
could film music IMO.
-- Kevin
My apologies if this is a duplicate post. The first did not seem to send
Ray Hall
news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198...
| like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music without
| a film"?
Because Shostakovich is primarily a classical composer, of 15 symphonies,
string quartets, concertos for piano, violin, cello, piano trios, song
cycles, and important piano works such as the 24 Preludes and Fugues. Many
of his symphonies are staple diet for concerts, and a high percentage of
conductors (great ones too) have all programmed, played and recorded many of
his symphonies. Perhaps one of the most important composers of the 20th
century.
The fact that he wrote some music for film, is neither here nor there
really. To put bread on the table most likely, and he did, very early on,
play the piano in cinemas to accompany many silent films to earn income for
his family.
There are several books in the library on Shostakovich. Best to get a couple
of them. BTW, Shostakovich wasn't the only composer to write for film.
Prokofiev, Alwyn, Arnold, Rawsthorne (just ottomh) all wrote some film
music, although Shostakovich and Prokofiev are the most well known.
Regards,
# RMCR Contributor Links/Main Page :
# http://www.users.bigpond.com/hallraylily/index.html
< NEW Doris Day TV series news >
Ray, Sydney
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.361 / Virus Database: 199 - Release Date: 7/05/02
Nicholas Buenk
> a film"?
He is not, but why does it matter if he was?
Nicholas Buenk
"Kevin Ward" <kwa...@onnashville.infi.net> wrote in message
news:3CDEBDDC...@onnashville.infi.net...
But there is a major difference between film music and illustration too,
illustration can't really have much depth if any, but film music can within
the context of the film.
mike
we'd probably say that 15 of the illustrator's work as illustration could
be an art. we'd look for how the content talked with the frame, and how
the 15 frames talked with each other: "illustrations" are usually
concerned only with the object illustrated, being framed by the object
itself. that's my prob with shos... that the individual exuberances don't
seem to play with each other, as a whole, but don't go beyond the level
of "contrast". that's why i need help understanding him.
my thought is that he was very influenced by the constructivists, whose
main art form was the collage... and that Shos was trying to be modern
*For* his friends.
mike
news:3cdec22a$0$2525$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au:
nah, the illustration can have wonderful range of emotion and expression,
or it can just show where to put the coffee in the machine.
mike
news:HVyD8.8936$b5.3...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com:
> "mike" <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198...
>| like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music
>| without a film"?
>
> Because Shostakovich is primarily a classical composer, of 15
> symphonies, string quartets, concertos for piano, violin, cello, piano
> trios, song cycles, and important piano works such as the 24 Preludes
> and Fugues. Many of his symphonies are staple diet for concerts, and a
> high percentage of conductors (great ones too) have all programmed,
> played and recorded many of his symphonies. Perhaps one of the most
> important composers of the 20th century.
well, that's not really good enough for me.
>
> The fact that he wrote some music for film, is neither here nor there
> really. To put bread on the table most likely, and he did, very early
> on, play the piano in cinemas to accompany many silent films to earn
> income for his family.
>
> There are several books in the library on Shostakovich. Best to get a
> couple of them.
i need to know personally what his music is about, from a musician who
really speaks "shostakovich". that's more about music gesture than
"expression". i need to understand why he breaks off when it seems like he
should be at the point where he could actually start saying something
musically.
> BTW, Shostakovich wasn't the only composer to write for
> film.
nah, it's not a question of his deigning to write for films... any decent
composer ought to be able to write for a film, thought the actual making of
the music fit the film is something else... i like Copland's film work, but
think that Thomson's work is overambitious.
mike
'cause the films that go with the symphonies and stuff must be lost...
shouldn't there be an international search for them? maybe in the Disney
studio? like, is it just "tap your feetsies" to shos? is that all he's
really good for?
but, "He is not" is the sort of knowledge that needs an oracle for
interpretation. i'm not given much to work with... it could be that you
like his "haircut" for instance, and that you think that makes him "more
than a film music writer".
Ray Hall
| "Ray Hall" <hallr...@bigpond.com> wrote in
| news:HVyD8.8936$b5.3...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com:
|
| > "mike" <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
| > news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198...
| >| like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music
| >| without a film"?
| >
| > Because Shostakovich is primarily a classical composer, of 15
| > symphonies, string quartets, concertos for piano, violin, cello, piano
| > trios, song cycles, and important piano works such as the 24 Preludes
| > and Fugues. Many of his symphonies are staple diet for concerts, and a
| > high percentage of conductors (great ones too) have all programmed,
| > played and recorded many of his symphonies. Perhaps one of the most
| > important composers of the 20th century.
|
| well, that's not really good enough for me.
Tough! Find out for your F***ing self then. Like I did.
mike
@newsfeeds.bigpond.com:
> "mike" <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns920C6371B5786...@66.75.162.198...
>| "Ray Hall" <hallr...@bigpond.com> wrote in
>| news:HVyD8.8936$b5.3...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com:
>|
>| > "mike" <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
>| > news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198...
>| >| like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music
>| >| without a film"?
>| >
>| > Because Shostakovich is primarily a classical composer, of 15
>| > symphonies, string quartets, concertos for piano, violin, cello, piano
>| > trios, song cycles, and important piano works such as the 24 Preludes
>| > and Fugues. Many of his symphonies are staple diet for concerts, and a
>| > high percentage of conductors (great ones too) have all programmed,
>| > played and recorded many of his symphonies. Perhaps one of the most
>| > important composers of the 20th century.
>|
>| well, that's not really good enough for me.
>
> Tough! Find out for your F***ing self then. Like I did.
sorry you misunderstood. i meant that your saying that he's well liked
doesn't explain what there is to like about him... even if you got to know
his inner essence by fukking yourself.
shosh was very big here during the war: the gallant fellow fighters. very
political thing to include him on a program. then you get stylists like
Solti, who don't really need a core for the music, since it's they
themselves that the audience comes to see... he can play Shosh all night.
i do like "great ones too", and "perhaps" really shines as well.
but, it's not like you have to defend Picasso here. shosh is just a utility
grade modernist with an east european flavoring -- sort of a Chagall,
really. he didn't invent a music the way Bartok or even Stravinsky (that
old trooper) did.
i've been in the audience for a Petersberg Quartet performance of one of
S's quartets. they played wonderfully -- were very much inspired, it
seemed... though i thought the music itself was disappointing... and i was
looking for an explaination of his stuff with this performance they played
a Prokofiov quartet too, and played it dull... not half as involved as they
were with the shosh. it makes me think that shosh must be some new musical
salvation for them? a representation of all that they had to go through?
Massaean wrote a representation of what he was going through in Quartet for
the End of Time. i really like that piece, and i don't understand why shosh
is so unsatisfying for me.
sounds like you're a fan though, so rock on.
AV
>
> but, it's not like you have to defend Picasso here. shosh is just a utility
> grade modernist with an east european flavoring -- sort of a Chagall,
> really. he didn't invent a music the way Bartok or even Stravinsky (that
> old trooper) did.
>
> is so unsatisfying for me.
>
mike, don't feel alone. i also have much the same question. it seems
that if you question the importance of his music, you are ipso facto put
into the "ignorant fool" department by whomever you are asking..
has always seemed to me that his biography tends to bloat his music. and
if prokofiev had stayed in russia his whole life, and suffered more
under stalin's hand, he would be taken more seriously than he is.
av
Scott GF Bailey
can't imagine the right scenes for the Shostakovich you're listening to?
On the other hand, the music of S that I enjoy most does happen to be his
film music (listen to the music for "King Lear"; it's retro, but well done
and just gorgeous). When I listen to his chamber music (because I just don't
like his symphonies at all, so I stopped with them), I hear bits that I just
really am captivated by, and some of the interplay between instruments is
brilliant. Unfortunately, and I believe you said something like this in this
thread, all his stuff other than the film music seems to be pastiche, where
you have moments of great writing rubbing shoulders with really banal crap.
I listen for those moments of great writing. I think DS just didn't take
much time to go back and edit; I think he wrote very quickly (but maybe, if
you believe the tales, he felt that each work could be his last, so he
didn't spend time on rewrites?) so there are these bits of unedited mess
clogging up what could otherwise be masterpieces. In a way, it's sort of
like taking a tour of a disorganized genius' work environment, and that in
itself can be an enlightening, worthwhile experience. I do think that he
was trying to work out his own personal musical vocabulary, and he had all
the bits gathered together but never quite got the syntax figured out.
Maybe Mike will simply never like Dmitri's music, and that's all fine, isn't
it? But before you give up, I suggest you listen to the piano trios. I find
them to be quite fine.
mike <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198...
BenHeneghan
<orang...@aol.com> writes:
>like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music without
>a film"?
Well, do you like gloom, irony, fire, and waste?
best wishes
Ben Heneghan
See some of my scores at http://www.sibeliusmusic.com/
Remove poser to email
zn...@aracnet.com
> There are several books in the library on Shostakovich. Best to get a couple
> of them. BTW, Shostakovich wasn't the only composer to write for film.
> Prokofiev, Alwyn, Arnold, Rawsthorne (just ottomh) all wrote some film
> music, although Shostakovich and Prokofiev are the most well known.
Copland, Elmer Bernstein, Khachaturian, ...
--
M. Edward Borasky
zn...@borasky-research.net
http://www.borasky-research.net/HarryIannis.htm
Yesterday, I walked by a BMW. I saw scratches on the bumper, and I stooped
down for a closer look. It was engraving: "My Other Car is a '73 Pinto!"
Abelard2
news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198..
.
> like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music without
> a film"?
...to which "Nicholas Buenk" Ni...@NonSPAMtig.com.au replied:
>He is not, but why does it matter if he was?
...and once again, "Mike" pressed the matter:
>i need to understand why he breaks off when it seems like he
>should be at the point where he could actually start saying something
>musically.
I must say, orangiemike, that I may have underestimated you. The weakness that
you detect in Shostakovich has a name: Romanticism. And the symptoms include
the mistaken idea that it is sufficient to merely express "feelings", rather
than to, as you put it, "start saying something musically." Because Romanticism
inevitably boils down to what Brahms (who was not, contrary to all popular
textbooks and PBS commentators, a Romantic) condemned as "mood-painting", one
often looks about for the films that should go with it, except in the case of
Wagner, who thoughtfully supplied them, long before "Terminator II".
Now, in answer to the question of "Nicholas Buenk", i.e., "Why does it
matter?", it is because there are consequences for all humanity. Art that is
devoid of ideas, that merely excites, titillates or entertains, tends to bring
cultural decadence and pessimism in its wake. The collapse of the Classical
tradition in the late 19th Century, followed by the onslaught of Romanticism
and Modernism, produced a deep cultural pessimism in the 20th century, which in
turn made European culture susceptible to fascism and other disastrous isms.
Here's an analogy from a non-musical area: I was present during a discussion of
whether murder-simulator software games like "Doom" or "Counterstrike", and
related forms of violence-porn entertainment, can be said to de-sensitize
people to violence. Someone argued that since there are many people who play
the games, who do not carry out Columbine- or Erfurt-style massacres, it is not
permissible to hold that the games, or related cultural phenomena, are
"de-sensitizing." But then, someone else pointed out that in 1972, campuses all
over the US erupted in protest over the US bombing of Cambodia -- yet today,
when the IDF crushes women and children in the Jenin camp, with machinery
supplied by the US, there is no significant reaction on US campuses. This is
what "de-sensitization" looks like, and it has everything to do with the
degenerate culture.
Conversely, if we were to revive the method of producing Art that inspires and
uplifts, you might see an optimistic turn in the culture, which just might save
us all.
abelard2
the Davidsbündler site
http://members.aol.com/buendler
M. Edward Borasky
> a film"?
As an unabashed fan -- someone who rates Shostakovich right up there
with Beethoven, Mozart and Bach -- let me give you my take on the
music of Shostakovich. First of all, there were three distinct periods
in his life. The first, starting with his graduation piece, Symphony
#1, and ending with the opera "Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk" and his
then-unperformed Symphony #4, was a period when he was intensely
creative, a modern composer with a unique and recognizable voice, who
used jazz, a biting wit, and an unmistakable genius.
Then, Stalin went to see Lady Macbeth. He was disgusted and wrote an
article the next day in Pravda called "Muddle Instead of Music". The
opera was shut down, and Shostakovich fully expected that the secret
police would come and haul him off to prison or even execution. He put
the 4th symphony away.
The second period of his career began with Symphony #5, subtitled "A
Soviet Composer's Response to Justified Criticism". This work
rehabilitated him, and is thought by many to be his greatest work.
This second period includes Symphonies 5 - 8, known as "The War
Symphonies", much of the film music, and some outstanding chamber
works like the Piano Quintet. Because of the alliance between Britain,
the USA and the Soviet Union, his music was widely played in all of
these countries and he was a "war hero".
This period ended in 1948, when again the authorities, at the behest
of Stalin, criticized Soviet composers. In the case of Shostakovich,
the trigger was his 9th symphony. Again Shostakovich was forced to lay
low and did not emerge until after Stalin (and Prokofiev) died in
March of 1953. And in the US, the Cold War put a damper on enthusiasm
for his music -- after all, he was a "Communist" and they were now the
"enemy".
His third period began with Symphony #10, which is tied with #5 in
popularity. By this time, years of smoking had begun to take a toll on
his health. He would go on to write five more symphonies and many more
chamber works. He died in August of 1975 at the age of 69.
That's the historical Shostakovich. The music: well, I have most of
it, being a fan, but for "beginners" I recommend Symphony #1, the Age
of Gold complete ballet, Symphonies #5 and #10, the Piano Quintet, the
Piano Trio #2 and the Preludes and Fugues for piano, Opus 87. After
that, if you decide you like his music, pick up Symphonies #6, #8,
#11, and #13, "The Execution of Stepan Razin" and some of the string
quartets, especially #3, #8 and #10. There are two cello concerti and
two violin concerti. I would put the first of each in with the
"beginners" if you have the money, and if you like his music you'll
want both of each and the two piano concerti as well.
--
M. Edward Borasky
http://www.borasky-research.net/HarryIannis.htm
zn...@borasky-research.net
Allen & Linda Tyler
Allen Tyler
AV
>
>
> Conversely, if we were to revive the method of producing Art that inspires and
> uplifts, you might see an optimistic turn in the culture, which just might save
> us all.
>
care to explain how this reviving might take place?
care to explain what this "method" is?
av
Laura E. Czeschick
> Perhaps all music is just film music in search of a film? Maybe you
> just can't imagine the right scenes for the Shostakovich you're
> listening to?
>
> On the other hand, the music of S that I enjoy most does happen to be
> his film music (listen to the music for "King Lear"; it's retro, but
> well done and just gorgeous). When I listen to his chamber music
> (because I just don't like his symphonies at all, so I stopped with
> them), I hear bits that I just really am captivated by, and some of
> the interplay between instruments is brilliant. Unfortunately, and I
> believe you said something like this in this thread, all his stuff
> other than the film music seems to be pastiche, where you have
> moments of great writing rubbing shoulders with really banal crap.
I am not going to argue about his film music which I hardly know. But
talking about chamber music: could you give an example for what you mean by
pastiche? I don't share this impression at all, so I'd really like to know.
Also what you mean by banal crap - maybe you are talking about what I
understand as satiric quotations? Uhm - no, satiric doesn't cover exactly
what I want to say - there's at times a strange, even bizarre (and to my
opinion deeply moving) mixture of despair and biting satire (even in most of
his scherzi) in Shostakovitch's music which I never found in any other
composer's work. Even when he is funny he is never serene, there's always a
deeply sinister touch in the brightest moments. (I feel I am expressing
myself badly, but that's what inevitably has to happen in every attempt at
describing music.)
> Maybe Mike will simply never like Dmitri's music, and that's all
> fine, isn't it?
I guess Mike's problem is a matter of being or not being sensitive to the
emotional properties in Shostakovitch's work? I understand, because though I
have no problems with Shostakovitch, I have big problems with Mozart. I
simply don't get him!
> But before you give up, I suggest you listen to the
> piano trios. I find them to be quite fine.
Agreed, only "quite fine" seems an understatement to me. (And I do love very
much his opera "Lady Macbeth of Mzenzk", though I'd hesitate to recommend it
to a Shostakovitch-beginner.)
In addition to what has been said already, I want to recommend a book which
(regardless of the controversies it once aroused) is very enlightening as
regards not only Shostakovitch's biography, but the life of musicians and
composers in general in the Soviet era under Stalin, and I believe that
knowing the political circumstances of his time can give a clue to
understanding Shostakovitch's music . I apologize for knowing the German
title only:
"Zeugenaussage. Die Memoiren des Dmitrij Schostakowitsch. Aufgezeichnet und
herausgegeben von Solomon Volkow", Hamburg 1979. It's based on interviews
with and papers by Shostakovitch himself and did not appear in Russia
(though there's a Russian original title "Svidetelstvo" given). I don't
know exactly, but the first edition may have been in English and before
1979, as Solomon Volkow emigrated to the U.S. in 1976 and worked with the
Russian Institute of the Columbia University.
Kind regards,
Laura
Laura E. Czeschick
Did you never come across a real good comic-book? They do exist, but to my
rough estimation they don't amount to more than 5% of the existing masses of
comics. An illustration is more or less a transformation of a given text
into a visual media; that's why, rather than to illustration, I'd prefer to
compare film music to comics; IMO they have in common that one criterion for
their quality is the degree of integration, of coherence, of enmeshment, of
two independent means of expression, without one repeating the other (a
property they share with opera, I think). (Well, sorry, this is just an
unduly reduced way of expressing a very complicated matter.)
Kind regards
Laura
mike
news:abmpjf$j4ddk$1...@ID-125766.news.dfncis.de:
> Perhaps all music is just film music in search of a film? Maybe you
> just can't imagine the right scenes for the Shostakovich you're
> listening to?
well, this is a start! =) but, does that mean that every film is waiting
for a symphony? not to mention a broadway treatment.
>
> On the other hand, the music of S that I enjoy most does happen to be
> his film music (listen to the music for "King Lear"; it's retro, but
> well done and just gorgeous).
i agree. he's really better than Prok. at film music. i think it might be
because he doesn't have to invent the plot!
> When I listen to his chamber music
> (because I just don't like his symphonies at all, so I stopped with
> them), I hear bits that I just really am captivated by, and some of the
> interplay between instruments is brilliant.
yah, it's right there as music, and then it's like some aged wunderkind
getting self-conscious about his weirdness/genius and redirecting the focus
with a joke.
> Unfortunately, and I
> believe you said something like this in this thread, all his stuff
> other than the film music seems to be pastiche, where you have moments
> of great writing rubbing shoulders with really banal crap. I listen for
> those moments of great writing. I think DS just didn't take much time
> to go back and edit; I think he wrote very quickly (but maybe, if you
> believe the tales, he felt that each work could be his last, so he
> didn't spend time on rewrites?)
how do you say "an abomination unto god" in composese? i can't believe that
any serious writer would work that way unless he were afraid of the sources
of his talent.
> so there are these bits of unedited
> mess clogging up what could otherwise be masterpieces. In a way, it's
> sort of like taking a tour of a disorganized genius' work environment,
> and that in itself can be an enlightening, worthwhile experience.
theoretically... but, when he throws some russianisms at you and then flips
to mozart... gnash, gnash.
> I do
> think that he was trying to work out his own personal musical
> vocabulary, and he had all the bits gathered together but never quite
> got the syntax figured out.
that's like maybe all of us? but the avocation is about figuring out how
we're supposed to say it.
>
> Maybe Mike will simply never like Dmitri's music, and that's all fine,
> isn't it?
mike's an officious prik. don't pay any attention to him.
> But before you give up, I suggest you listen to the piano
> trios. I find them to be quite fine.
hey!! alright... i love to discover new music, and i really need my
confidence in some friends of mine restored. thanx!
mike
news:abn5j6$l4j$02$2...@news.t-online.com:
that's ok too. m. is really strange... i don't think it's about getting the
emotional properties... they all seem to be talk-show specific. he doesn't
seem that complicated... in fact, his simplistic writing whacks my brain.
>
>> But before you give up, I suggest you listen to the piano trios. I
>> find them to be quite fine.
>
> Agreed, only "quite fine" seems an understatement to me. (And I do love
> very much his opera "Lady Macbeth of Mzenzk",
though I'd hesitate to
> recommend it to a Shostakovitch-beginner.)
i'm not a beginner, per se. in fact, i'm a composer, if you haven't already
figured that out. i listen to the music as a conversation with the
composer... quid pro, "probably it's something you wouldn't unnerstan.." +)
>
> In addition to what has been said already, I want to recommend a book
> which (regardless of the controversies it once aroused) is very
> enlightening as regards not only Shostakovitch's biography, but the
> life of musicians and composers in general in the Soviet era under
> Stalin,
vee haf red of this, and vee find it most enlightening, but really not so
pertinent to the composer at hand. behind the social is the personality.
this guy had stagefright before he had stalin. besides, why wouldn't this
just accord with the impression i have that S. is a regional and genric
composer of socialist modernism (whatever that means... though, reading of
stalin cultural intervention, you get the idea)?
> and I believe that knowing the political circumstances of his
> time can give a clue to understanding Shostakovitch's music .
we know this from New York in the 1940's. =)... in fact, did Bartok not get
played so much because he was from fascist Hungary? i don't think so, but i
do think that S. was made a big deal of in lefty circles. i'm liberal, but
only because the lefties are so fukking tone deaf and blind.
> I
> apologize for knowing the German title only:
> "Zeugenaussage. Die Memoiren des Dmitrij Schostakowitsch. Aufgezeichnet
> und herausgegeben von Solomon Volkow", Hamburg 1979. It's based on
> interviews with and papers by Shostakovitch himself and did not appear
> in Russia (though there's a Russian original title "Svidetelstvo"
> given). I don't know exactly, but the first edition may have been in
> English and before 1979, as Solomon Volkow emigrated to the U.S. in
> 1976 and worked with the Russian Institute of the Columbia University.
i'll look through this, but most composer writing is pretty self-serving...
a stumbling over audience and critic. better to have a fine little old lady
who misses no concerts tell us about what is good or bad in Shostakovich.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Laura
>
>
>
>
>
mike
news:20020512190410...@mb-ml.aol.com:
> In article <Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198>, mike
><orang...@aol.com> writes:
>
>>like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music
>>without a film"?
>
> Well, do you like gloom, irony, fire, and waste?
no ben, i like music, as you know. i have burnt several of my compositions
though when i've felt they were very bad... and i've remembered them later
and wish i'd kept them. yes, what a waste: so you are correct that i am
"involved". =)
mike
news:f23e4313.02051...@posting.google.com:
> mike <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198>...
>> like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music
>> without a film"?
>
> As an unabashed fan -- someone who rates Shostakovich right up there
> with Beethoven, Mozart and Bach -- let me give you my take on the
> music of Shostakovich. First of all, there were three distinct periods
> in his life. The first, starting with his graduation piece, Symphony
> #1, and ending with the opera "Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk" and his
> then-unperformed Symphony #4, was a period when he was intensely
> creative, a modern composer with a unique and recognizable voice, who
> used jazz, a biting wit, and an unmistakable genius.
i've mistaken it!
>
> Then, Stalin went to see Lady Macbeth. He was disgusted and wrote an
> article the next day in Pravda called "Muddle Instead of Music". The
> opera was shut down, and Shostakovich fully expected that the secret
> police would come and haul him off to prison or even execution. He put
> the 4th symphony away.
>
> The second period of his career began with Symphony #5, subtitled "A
> Soviet Composer's Response to Justified Criticism". This work
> rehabilitated him, and is thought by many to be his greatest work.
that's too bad. i don't care for it. probably i'm insensitive to the
political aspects.
> This second period includes Symphonies 5 - 8, known as "The War
> Symphonies", much of the film music, and some outstanding chamber
> works like the Piano Quintet. Because of the alliance between Britain,
> the USA and the Soviet Union, his music was widely played in all of
> these countries and he was a "war hero".
well worn, even.
>
> This period ended in 1948, when again the authorities, at the behest
> of Stalin, criticized Soviet composers. In the case of Shostakovich,
> the trigger was his 9th symphony. Again Shostakovich was forced to lay
> low and did not emerge until after Stalin (and Prokofiev) died in
> March of 1953. And in the US, the Cold War put a damper on enthusiasm
> for his music -- after all, he was a "Communist" and they were now the
> "enemy".
>
> His third period began with Symphony #10, which is tied with #5 in
> popularity. By this time, years of smoking had begun to take a toll on
> his health. He would go on to write five more symphonies and many more
> chamber works. He died in August of 1975 at the age of 69.
>
> That's the historical Shostakovich. The music: well, I have most of
> it, being a fan, but for "beginners" I recommend Symphony #1, the Age
> of Gold complete ballet, Symphonies #5 and #10, the Piano Quintet, the
> Piano Trio #2 and the Preludes and Fugues for piano, Opus 87. After
> that, if you decide you like his music, pick up Symphonies #6, #8,
> #11, and #13, "The Execution of Stepan Razin" and some of the string
> quartets, especially #3, #8 and #10. There are two cello concerti and
> two violin concerti. I would put the first of each in with the
> "beginners" if you have the money, and if you like his music you'll
> want both of each and the two piano concerti as well.
well, i don't know what to say. i understand that you say he was
innovative. but, i haven't been able to figure out what his medium was. +)
probably i'm too stupid to hear this music. it's truly possible. really
intelligent people like yourself can either see the patterns in the
wallpaper or hear the patterns in the music of the spheres. i'm just not
convinced that it's not wallpaper your hearing.
thanks very much though.
mike
Peter T. Daniels
Allen & Linda Tyler wrote:
>
> Honegger, Revueltas.....
> Allen Tyler
>
> zn...@aracnet.com wrote:
>
> > according to Ray Hall <hallr...@bigpond.com>,
> > > There are several books in the library on Shostakovich. Best to get a couple
> > > of them. BTW, Shostakovich wasn't the only composer to write for film.
> > > Prokofiev, Alwyn, Arnold, Rawsthorne (just ottomh) all wrote some film
> > > music, although Shostakovich and Prokofiev are the most well known.
> >
> > Copland, Elmer Bernstein, Khachaturian, ...
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net
mike
news:20020512200645...@mb-mj.aol.com:
> "mike" <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198..
> .
>> like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music
>> without a film"?
>
> ...to which "Nicholas Buenk" Ni...@NonSPAMtig.com.au replied:
>
>>He is not, but why does it matter if he was?
>
> ...and once again, "Mike" pressed the matter:
it's more sexy that way. and i can tell if the guy really is aroused.
>
>>i need to understand why he breaks off when it seems like he
>>should be at the point where he could actually start saying something
>>musically.
>
> I must say, orangiemike, that I may have underestimated you. The
> weakness that you detect in Shostakovich has a name: Romanticism.
well, i was thinking that it was a "Constructivism": a juxtaposition of the
seemingly unrelated, within the framwork of "art". i had supposed that this
was a mistake on S's part... thinking that music carried the same content
as the visual, with its nominalality.
> And
> the symptoms include the mistaken idea that it is sufficient to merely
> express "feelings", rather than to, as you put it, "start saying
> something musically."
i don't think that any great composer has ever expressed only "feelings"
without first inventing these feelings into a music language. Chopin might
say, "I loves you, baby", but when he played it to her it must have sounded
much more real. artists invent "love".
> Because Romanticism inevitably boils down to what
> Brahms (who was not, contrary to all popular textbooks and PBS
> commentators, a Romantic) condemned as "mood-painting", one often looks
> about for the films that should go with it, except in the case of
> Wagner, who thoughtfully supplied them, long before "Terminator II".
>
> Now, in answer to the question of "Nicholas Buenk", i.e., "Why does it
> matter?", it is because there are consequences for all humanity. Art
> that is devoid of ideas, that merely excites, titillates or entertains,
those aren't ideas? you're very romantic if you think they aren't. the
point of Mozart was that these sensations could be structured as a mime of
"life" for the audience.
> tends to bring cultural decadence and pessimism in its wake.
pess on it. it bad.
> The
> collapse of the Classical tradition in the late 19th Century,
when was this? Debussy? Schoenberg and Webern and Berg were the last great
romantics. more romantic than Strauss, even.
> followed
> by the onslaught of Romanticism and Modernism, produced a deep cultural
> pessimism in the 20th century, which in turn made European culture
> susceptible to fascism and other disastrous isms.
suscept it. or maybe, think of it as a problem: Heydrich was always playing
the Bach Partitas/Sonatas on his violin.
>
> Here's an analogy from a non-musical area: I was present during a
> discussion of whether murder-simulator software games like "Doom" or
> "Counterstrike", and related forms of violence-porn entertainment, can
> be said to de-sensitize people to violence. Someone argued that since
> there are many people who play the games, who do not carry out
> Columbine- or Erfurt-style massacres, it is not permissible to hold
> that the games, or related cultural phenomena, are "de-sensitizing."
> But then, someone else pointed out that in 1972, campuses all over the
> US erupted in protest over the US bombing of Cambodia -- yet today,
> when the IDF crushes women and children in the Jenin camp, with
> machinery supplied by the US, there is no significant reaction on US
> campuses. This is what "de-sensitization" looks like, and it has
> everything to do with the degenerate culture.
talk radio. not enough data to make a determination.
>
> Conversely, if we were to revive the method of producing Art that
> inspires and uplifts, you might see an optimistic turn in the culture,
> which just might save us all.
i think i'll pass... and i like to write only real, emotion based, music.
Peter T. Daniels
>
> "mike" <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198..
> .
> > like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music without
> > a film"?
>
> ...to which "Nicholas Buenk" Ni...@NonSPAMtig.com.au replied:
>
> >He is not, but why does it matter if he was?
>
> ...and once again, "Mike" pressed the matter:
>
> >i need to understand why he breaks off when it seems like he
> >should be at the point where he could actually start saying something
> >musically.
>
> I must say, orangiemike, that I may have underestimated you. The weakness that
> you detect in Shostakovich has a name: Romanticism. And the symptoms include
> the mistaken idea that it is sufficient to merely express "feelings", rather
> than to, as you put it, "start saying something musically." Because Romanticism
> inevitably boils down to what Brahms (who was not, contrary to all popular
> textbooks and PBS commentators, a Romantic) condemned as "mood-painting", one
> often looks about for the films that should go with it, except in the case of
> Wagner, who thoughtfully supplied them, long before "Terminator II".
The Larouchie who poses as a Schumannite -- condemning Romanticism??
> abelard2
> the Davidsbündler site
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> http://members.aol.com/buendler
^^^^^^^^
Or does this simply allude to the once-notorious German-American Bund?
Peter T. Daniels
> As an unabashed fan -- someone who rates Shostakovich right up there
> with Beethoven, Mozart and Bach -- let me give you my take on the
> music of Shostakovich. First of all, there were three distinct periods
> in his life. The first, starting with his graduation piece, Symphony
> #1, and ending with the opera "Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk" and his
> then-unperformed Symphony #4, was a period when he was intensely
> creative, a modern composer with a unique and recognizable voice, who
> used jazz, a biting wit, and an unmistakable genius.
Do forgive this purely practical interruption ... but is the 1979
Rostropovich recording with Vishnevskaja truly a "Great Recording of the
Century," as EMI packages it (And Tower has it on sale for $17.98)? It
was one of my all-time favorites at Lyric, but that was probably with
Malfitano (in her great years), and I wonder whether Glaya was still up
to it by then ...
mike
get down! but, maybe there's something in shosh that i'm missing? maybe
it's just a personality thing? i'm really into Copland romanticism, for
instance, but the Matthew Passion is probably the piece i'd take to the
hypothetical desert isle.
i think i'm really into "pulse in music". that might be it... it's in
both the Copland and the Bach... and in the last Beethoven Piano Sonatas
and Quartets. -- even Verklaerte Nacht is one of my favorite pieces... a
total pulser. either i'm too emotionally involved with music...
overlooking the limited set of emotions which schlock presents, or i have
a more linear sense of time than these shoshtaphiles and i should work
upon becoming post-einsteinian.
mike.
mike
news:3CDF0F67...@bga.com:
lists! i love Lizst! here's one: "oxygen,hydrogen, iron and tin... helium,
nitrogen... just to begin!" remember that one? it's from some kids thing
called "what are stars?" or something. music is so fun.
Peter T. Daniels
> In addition to what has been said already, I want to recommend a book which
> (regardless of the controversies it once aroused) is very enlightening as
> regards not only Shostakovitch's biography, but the life of musicians and
> composers in general in the Soviet era under Stalin, and I believe that
> knowing the political circumstances of his time can give a clue to
> understanding Shostakovitch's music . I apologize for knowing the German
> title only:
> "Zeugenaussage. Die Memoiren des Dmitrij Schostakowitsch. Aufgezeichnet und
> herausgegeben von Solomon Volkow", Hamburg 1979. It's based on interviews
> with and papers by Shostakovitch himself and did not appear in Russia
> (though there's a Russian original title "Svidetelstvo" given). I don't
> know exactly, but the first edition may have been in English and before
> 1979, as Solomon Volkow emigrated to the U.S. in 1976 and worked with the
> Russian Institute of the Columbia University.
It's called *Testimony*, and over here it seems to be regarded as a
complete fabrication. (Or has it, in true Soviet fashion, been
"rehabilitated"?)
mike
go to a book store and look at Graphis Illustration Annuals. also, think of
Titian as an illustrator... why not?
mike
practical! it was drop down Entrance. i'll take macbeth under advice, but
i'm still knocked out by your dinner jacket!
(are those donut crumbs?)
Ray Hall
| "Ray Hall" <hallr...@bigpond.com> wrote in news:_OzD8.8949$b5.30425
| @newsfeeds.bigpond.com:
|
| > "mike" <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
| > news:Xns920C6371B5786...@66.75.162.198...
| >| "Ray Hall" <hallr...@bigpond.com> wrote in
| >| news:HVyD8.8936$b5.3...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com:
| >|
| >| > "mike" <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
| >| > news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198...
| >| >| like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music
| >| >| without a film"?
| >| >
| >| > Because Shostakovich is primarily a classical composer, of 15
| >| > symphonies, string quartets, concertos for piano, violin, cello,
piano
| >| > trios, song cycles, and important piano works such as the 24 Preludes
| >| > and Fugues. Many of his symphonies are staple diet for concerts, and
a
| >| > high percentage of conductors (great ones too) have all programmed,
| >| > played and recorded many of his symphonies. Perhaps one of the most
| >| > important composers of the 20th century.
| >|
| >| well, that's not really good enough for me.
Ok, I'll admit I probably did misunderstand initially, and I believed you
were really trolling. Evidently you can't grasp Shostakovich, or what he has
to say. So, therefore, another tack :-
In my opinion, his body of works are highly personal, autobiographical in
it's progression, and deeply introspective. There is no Romantic gloss, no
gushing tunes for the sake of crowd pleasing (except a few works such as the
5th, that were written in a false fashion, in order to get back into
official favour), plenty of ironic bite, and sarcasm, but deeply felt music
that comes from the heart. A bitter and depressed heart in DSCH's case.
What we (or rather myself) seek in DSCH's music, is evidence that despair
can be overcome, not lightly, or perhaps not even at all, but musical
evidence of the human capacity and ability to rise above the events
surrounding them. That is DSCH, for me.
In addition, and it might be a minor thing, but he could orchestrate well
too.
BTW, what composers do you like, and how do they differ in important
respects to DSCH?
tlste...@tpgi.com.au
> like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music without
> a film"?
Well, the simple statistical fact is that film music represents only a
small portion of his output. He wrote symphonies, concertos, operas, songs
and a wealth of chamber music, to name just a few areas. So in the sense
of "range" he was obviously more than just a film music writer.
If by the words "more than just a film music writer" you are implying that
film music is in some way a "down-market" activity for a serious composer,
there is not too much to support that view. Naturally, the preclassical,
classical and romantic composeres didn't write for films because they
predated them. But our experience, since the addition of sound to films,
suggests that it is a fine and valuable area for good composers to
exercise themselves.
--
Cheers!
Terry
(remove the numbers if replying direct)
tlste...@tpgi.com.au
<orang...@aol.com> wrote:
> get down! but, maybe there's something in shosh that i'm missing? maybe
> it's just a personality thing? i'm really into Copland romanticism, for
> instance, but the Matthew Passion is probably the piece i'd take to the
> hypothetical desert isle.
>
> i think i'm really into "pulse in music". that might be it... it's in
> both the Copland and the Bach... and in the last Beethoven Piano Sonatas
> and Quartets. -- even Verklaerte Nacht is one of my favorite pieces... a
> total pulser. either i'm too emotionally involved with music...
> overlooking the limited set of emotions which schlock presents, or i have
> a more linear sense of time than these shoshtaphiles and i should work
> upon becoming post-einsteinian.
>
> mike.
I suspect that the answer to your question is going to be "No", because
nobody can explain Shostakovich to you, any more than that they could
explain Beethoven, Schubert or anyone else. By the sound of things, you've
had a good shot at it, and there's nothing there for you. People who like
Shostakovitch can probably try to tell you why *they* like him, but that's
unlikely to help you all that much. Why not leave him alone for a while?
mike
news:tlsterry123-13...@war-56k-118.tpgi.com.au:
> In article <Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198>, mike
><orang...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music
>> without a film"?
>
> Well, the simple statistical fact is that film music represents only a
> small portion of his output. He wrote symphonies, concertos, operas,
> songs and a wealth of chamber music, to name just a few areas. So in
> the sense of "range" he was obviously more than just a film music
> writer.
>
> If by the words "more than just a film music writer" you are implying
> that film music is in some way a "down-market" activity for a serious
i like film composers, and some composers write for both film and concert
hall (little posts of applicable composers are dropping into this tread
like dandriff, in fact). my recognition of Schlockstakovich's film music
was an oblique way of saying that his concert music was a failure. i like
his film music. shall we film my liking his film music? would that make you
feel better about my post? will you write the music?
AV
>
> go to a book store and look at Graphis Illustration Annuals. also, think of
> Titian as an illustrator... why not?
oh, and let's not forget one of the greatest illustrators of all time,
da vinci.
av
mike
so far so good. this is probably the case. in fact, i'm trying to think of
any other composer who doesn't have this possibility of reading depth into
his work. can't think of any.
> There is no Romantic
> gloss, no gushing tunes for the sake of crowd pleasing
you don't think his smoogy twinkles and snappy adagios aren't meant to lead
the crowd into a frenzy?
> (except a few
> works such as the 5th, that were written in a false fashion, in order
> to get back into official favour), plenty of ironic bite, and sarcasm,
ah. well, i hate irony... i think it's the nastiness of tiny minds. now
"hubris"... that's a chewy subject. and, obviously, satire is ok... but i
need a sharper wit with satire. like, the Diabelli might be heard as
satire... on one level i hear it that way. but, things like the Polka, from
the Age Of Mold? no thanks... that's slapstick.
> but deeply felt music that comes from the heart. A bitter and depressed
> heart in DSCH's case.
o solo mio. it just seems shallow and whining to me. he goes a little way,
heavies it up, and then quotes mozart to "put his angst into perspective",
i guess.
>
> What we (or rather myself) seek in DSCH's music, is evidence that
> despair can be overcome, not lightly, or perhaps not even at all, but
> musical evidence of the human capacity and ability to rise above the
> events surrounding them. That is DSCH, for me.
you wouldn't like to see my copy of Readers Digest?
>
> In addition, and it might be a minor thing, but he could orchestrate
> well too.
tis true. very rich sounding music.
>
> BTW, what composers do you like, and how do they differ in important
> respects to DSCH?
well, the thing is i can't really put my finger on what i'm hearing in
Shosh! from this period i like Bartok, for instance... the Strings,
Percussion... outdoes any depth dimension in S. for me. i like Copland very
much and Prokofiov... early Stravinsky... Massaean organ music.
i like avant guarde and modern music per se, at least pre-1970 modern music
(though Koyaanisquaatsi i think is fine film music).
i think i like punk rock better than most 1980's "classical composers".
Bach is my most favorite composer, but i have 6 recordings of the Bartok
Violin Concerto and only 5 of the Musical Offering.
i suppose that i'd have to say that i feel the composers and compositions
that work for me have a surpression and consistancy over the entire output
or work. this ought to make me like the "dead" or "beetles" too i guess,
but there's a dependence on "face" and "hipness" with them which makes them
seem shallow and momentary. i guess that's what i hear in Shostakovich too.
mike
> In article <Xns920CB33919244...@66.75.162.196>, mike
thanks for sharing. by the way, i'm 56 and i've been listening to music for
54 years. during some of those years i've heard some shostakovich...but i
just don't think i'm gonna have the time to approach this guy on his own
terms. would you like me to explain Beethoven or Shubert by the way?
AV
> hypothetical desert isle.
>
ugh, that goyische music? on a desert? with no nuns?
or i have
> a more linear sense of time than these shoshtaphiles and i should work
> upon becoming post-einsteinian.
einsteinian??? i wouldn't give shosh THAT much credit. bach is more
einsteinian than shoshtakovich, no? but i do believe that no matter the
schooling in music one has, it does usually boil down to "i know what i
like" for most people.
otoh, a good music professor can make all the difference. i learned a
life-long love of louis armstrong after sitting and watching one
professor turn himself into a human bouncing ball (you know, follow the
bouncing ball, and sing-a-long?)and become the notes. after one song,
one MEASURE even, i was hooked.
my guess is that if he had bounced for shoshtakovich like that for me,
i'd probably be as appreciative. .... well maybe.....
sometimes it does just take someone else to open a door for you.
av
AV
Naturally, the preclassical,
> classical and romantic composeres didn't write for films because they
> predated them.
no, they wrote for the pleasure of the court.
same thing perhaps?
music to accompany dinner
music to accompany an insomniac
music to accompany on the waterfront
but even if so, so what? what we call masterpieces in painting were
often "just" commissioned portraits, or to fancy up some new church.
from limitations doth come great art.
but
limitations dothn't guarantee great art.
av
Francois Desnoyers
AV wrote:
> mike wrote:
>
> > hypothetical desert isle.
> >
>
> ugh, that goyische music? on a desert? with no nuns?
>
> or i have
> > a more linear sense of time than these shoshtaphiles and i should work
> > upon becoming post-einsteinian.
>
> einsteinian??? i wouldn't give shosh THAT much credit. bach is more
> einsteinian than shoshtakovich, no?
No, not really... He was too much of a metronome composer with an
"absolute" concept of time.
> but i do believe that no matter the
> schooling in music one has, it does usually boil down to "i know what i
> like" for most people.
Which is backward thinking...
>
>
> otoh, a good music professor can make all the difference. i learned a
> life-long love of louis armstrong after sitting and watching one
> professor turn himself into a human bouncing ball (you know, follow the
> bouncing ball, and sing-a-long?)and become the notes. after one song,
> one MEASURE even, i was hooked.
>
> my guess is that if he had bounced for shoshtakovich like that for me,
> i'd probably be as appreciative. .... well maybe.....
>
> sometimes it does just take someone else to open a door for you.
And sometimes, when you feel the door too small, you find out after you've
openned it that the room on the other side is just as small.
Shostakovitch did not have enough talent to surmount government pressure
and idealism because he could not express himself totally in this context.
On the other hand, Prokofiev did! and was as comfortable in composing in
either setting.
>
>
> av
Francois Desnoyers
mike wrote:
For me too!
> i like Copland very
> much
Don't know his music. Only heard a few pieces, the most well knowned... and it
did not grab me.
> and Prokofiov... early Stravinsky...
And sometimes the old too! Love his serialist music. He orchestrates
magnificently, very clean. Much better than Shostakovitch.
Also love Webern and Berg's music... and Schoenberg's too.
> Massaean organ music.
>
> i like avant guarde and modern music per se, at least pre-1970 modern music
> (though Koyaanisquaatsi i think is fine film music).
>
> i think i like punk rock better than most 1980's "classical composers".
Which 1980's composer did you give a try?
>
> Bach is my most favorite composer, but i have 6 recordings of the Bartok
> Violin Concerto
Which one do you prefer ? What do you feel about his string quartetts
(Bartok's)?
> and only 5 of the Musical Offering.
> i suppose that i'd have to say that i feel the composers and compositions
> that work for me have a surpression and consistancy over the entire output
> or work. this ought to make me like the "dead" or "beetles" too i guess,
> but there's a dependence on "face" and "hipness" with them which makes them
> seem shallow and momentary.
But that could be superficial, the face value and the hipness.
> i guess that's what i hear in Shostakovich too.
Shostakovitch was tortured by an anachronic idealism with which he could not
reconcile his creativity.
Francois Desnoyers
Abelard2 wrote:
> "mike" <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198..
> .
> > like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music without
> > a film"?
>
> ...to which "Nicholas Buenk" Ni...@NonSPAMtig.com.au replied:
>
> >He is not, but why does it matter if he was?
>
> ...and once again, "Mike" pressed the matter:
>
> >i need to understand why he breaks off when it seems like he
> >should be at the point where he could actually start saying something
> >musically.
>
> I must say, orangiemike, that I may have underestimated you. The weakness that
> you detect in Shostakovich has a name: Romanticism. And the symptoms include
> the mistaken idea that it is sufficient to merely express "feelings", rather
> than to, as you put it, "start saying something musically." Because Romanticism
> inevitably boils down to what Brahms (who was not, contrary to all popular
> textbooks and PBS commentators, a Romantic) condemned as "mood-painting", one
> often looks about for the films that should go with it, except in the case of
> Wagner, who thoughtfully supplied them, long before "Terminator II".
>
> Now, in answer to the question of "Nicholas Buenk", i.e., "Why does it
> matter?", it is because there are consequences for all humanity. Art that is
> devoid of ideas, that merely excites, titillates or entertains, tends to bring
> cultural decadence and pessimism in its wake. The collapse of the Classical
> tradition in the late 19th Century, followed by the onslaught of Romanticism
> and Modernism, produced a deep cultural pessimism in the 20th century, which in
> turn made European culture susceptible to fascism and other disastrous isms.
????
>
>
> Here's an analogy from a non-musical area: I was present during a discussion of
> whether murder-simulator software games like "Doom" or "Counterstrike", and
> related forms of violence-porn entertainment, can be said to de-sensitize
> people to violence. Someone argued that since there are many people who play
> the games, who do not carry out Columbine- or Erfurt-style massacres, it is not
> permissible to hold that the games, or related cultural phenomena, are
> "de-sensitizing." But then, someone else pointed out that in 1972, campuses all
> over the US erupted in protest over the US bombing of Cambodia -- yet today,
> when the IDF crushes women and children in the Jenin camp, with machinery
> supplied by the US, there is no significant reaction on US campuses. This is
> what "de-sensitization" looks like, and it has everything to do with the
> degenerate culture.
>
> Conversely, if we were to revive the method of producing Art that inspires and
> uplifts, you might see an optimistic turn in the culture, which just might save
> us all.
>
Can you tell me what is uplifting about Macbeth? Ah, the nature of art still
mystifies many!
Francois Desnoyers
Francois Desnoyers
Nicholas Buenk wrote:
> "Kevin Ward" <kwa...@onnashville.infi.net> wrote in message
> news:3CDEBDDC...@onnashville.infi.net...
> > mike wrote:
> >
> > > like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music
> without
> > > a film"?
> >
> > Have you heard the Piano Concerto No. 2, op. 102? I'm just wild about
> > it. The opening movement takes a very light-hearted (almost cartoonish)
> > theme and somehow transforms it to a wild raging adventure theme, and then
> > at the too brief climax a theme of majestic soaring VaughanWilliamsesque
> > sonorities in full tilt orchestra (tutti, I guess you call it), and back
> > to a denouement of the playful theme. It comes across as less like
> > variations on a theme as I have described it here, but more like a
> journey,
> > an emotional roller coaster ride that comes full circle.
> >
> > Well, ok -- I guess film music does that too. Actually I'm
> > not sure what you mean by "just a film music writer." This is just
> > like the age old argument in art school that illustrator's are not artists
> > and illustration is not art. Illustration COULD be art -- and so
> > could film music IMO.
> > -- Kevin
>
> But there is a major difference between film music and illustration too,
> illustration can't really have much depth if any, but film music can within
> the context of the film.
And it could also be much more than that :
Prokofiev's Alexander Nevsky cantata...
Francois Desnoyers
Scott GF Bailey wrote:
> Perhaps all music is just film music in search of a film? Maybe you just
> can't imagine the right scenes for the Shostakovich you're listening to?
Not so. The space is definitely not the same.
>
>
> On the other hand, the music of S that I enjoy most does happen to be his
> film music (listen to the music for "King Lear"; it's retro, but well done
> and just gorgeous). When I listen to his chamber music (because I just don't
> like his symphonies at all, so I stopped with them), I hear bits that I just
> really am captivated by, and some of the interplay between instruments is
> brilliant. Unfortunately, and I believe you said something like this in this
> thread, all his stuff other than the film music seems to be pastiche, where
> you have moments of great writing rubbing shoulders with really banal crap.
> I listen for those moments of great writing. I think DS just didn't take
> much time to go back and edit; I think he wrote very quickly (but maybe, if
> you believe the tales, he felt that each work could be his last, so he
> didn't spend time on rewrites?) so there are these bits of unedited mess
> clogging up what could otherwise be masterpieces. In a way, it's sort of
> like taking a tour of a disorganized genius' work environment, and that in
> itself can be an enlightening, worthwhile experience. I do think that he
> was trying to work out his own personal musical vocabulary, and he had all
> the bits gathered together but never quite got the syntax figured out.
>
> Maybe Mike will simply never like Dmitri's music, and that's all fine, isn't
> it? But before you give up, I suggest you listen to the piano trios. I find
> them to be quite fine.
>
> mike <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198...
Francois Desnoyers
mike wrote:
> "Scott GF Bailey" <sg...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:abmpjf$j4ddk$1...@ID-125766.news.dfncis.de:
>
> > Perhaps all music is just film music in search of a film? Maybe you
> > just can't imagine the right scenes for the Shostakovich you're
> > listening to?
>
> well, this is a start! =) but, does that mean that every film is waiting
> for a symphony? not to mention a broadway treatment.
> >
> > On the other hand, the music of S that I enjoy most does happen to be
> > his film music (listen to the music for "King Lear"; it's retro, but
> > well done and just gorgeous).
>
> i agree. he's really better than Prok. at film music. i think it might be
> because he doesn't have to invent the plot!
Hm, between the Shos and the Prok, I strongly prefer the Prok. He can go
anywhere with his music and still be at home.
>
>
> > When I listen to his chamber music
> > (because I just don't like his symphonies at all, so I stopped with
> > them), I hear bits that I just really am captivated by, and some of the
> > interplay between instruments is brilliant.
>
> yah, it's right there as music, and then it's like some aged wunderkind
> getting self-conscious about his weirdness/genius and redirecting the focus
> with a joke.
>
> > Unfortunately, and I
> > believe you said something like this in this thread, all his stuff
> > other than the film music seems to be pastiche, where you have moments
> > of great writing rubbing shoulders with really banal crap. I listen for
> > those moments of great writing. I think DS just didn't take much time
> > to go back and edit; I think he wrote very quickly (but maybe, if you
> > believe the tales, he felt that each work could be his last, so he
> > didn't spend time on rewrites?)
>
> how do you say "an abomination unto god" in composese? i can't believe that
> any serious writer would work that way unless he were afraid of the sources
> of his talent.
Or extremely, extremely confident!
>
> > so there are these bits of unedited
> > mess clogging up what could otherwise be masterpieces. In a way, it's
> > sort of like taking a tour of a disorganized genius' work environment,
> > and that in itself can be an enlightening, worthwhile experience.
>
> theoretically... but, when he throws some russianisms at you and then flips
> to mozart... gnash, gnash.
>
> > I do
> > think that he was trying to work out his own personal musical
> > vocabulary, and he had all the bits gathered together but never quite
> > got the syntax figured out.
>
> that's like maybe all of us? but the avocation is about figuring out how
> we're supposed to say it.
> >
> > Maybe Mike will simply never like Dmitri's music, and that's all fine,
> > isn't it?
>
> mike's an officious prik. don't pay any attention to him.
>
> > But before you give up, I suggest you listen to the piano
> > trios. I find them to be quite fine.
>
> hey!! alright... i love to discover new music, and i really need my
> confidence in some friends of mine restored. thanx!
Francois Desnoyers
tlste...@tpgi.com.au wrote:
> In article <Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198>, mike
> <orang...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music without
> > a film"?
>
> Well, the simple statistical fact is that film music represents only a
> small portion of his output. He wrote symphonies, concertos, operas, songs
> and a wealth of chamber music, to name just a few areas. So in the sense
> of "range" he was obviously more than just a film music writer.
>
> If by the words "more than just a film music writer" you are implying that
> film music is in some way a "down-market" activity for a serious composer,
> there is not too much to support that view.
The entire output of music for films... and the army of producers and
directors...
Francois Desnoyers
AV wrote:
> tlste...@tpgi.com.au wrote:
> Naturally, the preclassical,
> > classical and romantic composeres didn't write for films because they
> > predated them.
>
> no, they wrote for the pleasure of the court.
> same thing perhaps?
>
> music to accompany dinner
> music to accompany an insomniac
> music to accompany on the waterfront
Not the same thing. This music (as above) is supposed to free the mind.
Not much of a contraint for the composer, if you compare with music for
movies.
Movies have a story-line, many psychological and structural demands. And
music is rarely "starring" in a movie, as it does in "Once upon a time in
the west" :-)
>
>
> but even if so, so what? what we call masterpieces in painting were
> often "just" commissioned portraits, or to fancy up some new church.
True!
Nicholas Buenk
"AV" <a...@sover.net> wrote in message news:3CDF55...@sover.net...
Well, yes, but film music is more like ballet, play music or perhaps even
opera.
Peter T. Daniels
>
> tlste...@tpgi.com.au wrote:
> Naturally, the preclassical,
> > classical and romantic composeres didn't write for films because they
> > predated them.
>
> no, they wrote for the pleasure of the court.
> same thing perhaps?
>
> music to accompany dinner
> music to accompany an insomniac
> music to accompany on the waterfront
That one's L. Bernstein ... presumably in his pre-radical chic days ...
Nicholas Buenk
"Francois Desnoyers" <fdesn...@micro-intel.com> wrote in message
news:3CDF7986...@micro-intel.com...
>
>
> tlste...@tpgi.com.au wrote:
>
> > In article <Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198>, mike
> > <orang...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music
without
> > > a film"?
> >
> > Well, the simple statistical fact is that film music represents only a
> > small portion of his output. He wrote symphonies, concertos, operas,
songs
> > and a wealth of chamber music, to name just a few areas. So in the sense
> > of "range" he was obviously more than just a film music writer.
> >
> > If by the words "more than just a film music writer" you are implying
that
> > film music is in some way a "down-market" activity for a serious
composer,
> > there is not too much to support that view.
>
> The entire output of music for films... and the army of producers and
> directors...
You prove his point.
Nicholas Buenk
<zn...@aracnet.com> wrote in message news:abmuv...@enews2.newsguy.com...
> according to Ray Hall <hallr...@bigpond.com>,
> > There are several books in the library on Shostakovich. Best to get a
couple
> > of them. BTW, Shostakovich wasn't the only composer to write for film.
> > Prokofiev, Alwyn, Arnold, Rawsthorne (just ottomh) all wrote some film
> > music, although Shostakovich and Prokofiev are the most well known.
>
> Copland, Elmer Bernstein, Khachaturian, ...
Stravinsky even gave it a try, but gave up when his score was rejected
because the director said it didn't fit the film.
Sonarrat Citalis
news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198...
> like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music without
> a film"?
Find Vladimir Viardo's recording of the Op. 34 Preludes and the Second Sonata,
Op. 61.
--
-Sonarrat Citalis.
Medtner, Mompou, and originals at http://www.mp3.com/Sonarrat/
Signature at http://sonarrat.stormloader.com/sonarratsig.html
Abelard2
> Conversely, if we were to revive the method of producing Art that inspires
and
> uplifts, you might see an optimistic turn in the culture, which just might
save
> us all.
...AV a...@sover.net asks the musical question:
>care to explain how this reviving might take place?
>care to explain what this "method" is?
Well, I suggest a few historical examples that might be a paradigm for the
future: during the "Befreiungskriege" or "Liberation Wars", when the the
Prussians drove out the occupation army of Napoleon, the Prussians, organized
into citizen militias, went into battle with copies of Schiller's poems in
their jacket pockets, inspired by his artistic call for freedom and human
dignity. And in the 1989-1991 period, as the various dictatorships were
non-violently toppled in Lithuania, East Germany, Czechoslovakia and others,
Beethoven's 9th Symphony was performed in massive outdoor concerts (as well as
Ma Vlast in Prague, with three combined orchestras conducted by Rafael
Kubelik), as the highest expression of the aspirations of the formerly subject
peoples.
The "method" is commonly referred to as "Classical Composition", the putative
topic of this newsgroup. It begins with Plato's dramatic re-telling of the work
of Socrates (if Jarl Sigurd were still haunting this newsgroup, he'd be going
off like a Roman Candle right now) and came into its own, with respect to
music, with the revolutionary discoveries of J.S. Bach and his successors.
Take a look at this:
http://www.schillerinstitute.org/fid_97-01/972_lar_behind.html
mike
>
>
> mike wrote:
>
>> "Scott GF Bailey" <sg...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> news:abmpjf$j4ddk$1...@ID-125766.news.dfncis.de:
>>
>> > Perhaps all music is just film music in search of a film? Maybe you
>> > just can't imagine the right scenes for the Shostakovich you're
>> > listening to?
>>
>> well, this is a start! =) but, does that mean that every film is
>> waiting for a symphony? not to mention a broadway treatment.
>> >
>> > On the other hand, the music of S that I enjoy most does happen to
>> > be his film music (listen to the music for "King Lear"; it's retro,
>> > but well done and just gorgeous).
>>
>> i agree. he's really better than Prok. at film music. i think it might
>> be because he doesn't have to invent the plot!
>
> Hm, between the Shos and the Prok, I strongly prefer the Prok. He can
> go anywhere with his music and still be at home.
>
[cut!]
you don't feel that shosh fits the sound to the image? almost in a way that
suggests he's really losing himself in his work, which i don't hear in his
concert music?
>>
>> how do you say "an abomination unto god" in composese? i can't believe
>> that any serious writer would work that way unless he were afraid of
>> the sources of his talent.
>
> Or extremely, extremely confident!
even thinking of this possibility -- i emote it to myself and my working --
makes me ill. i can't picture anyone who might have worked this way...
unless it's imagining mozart writing a wonderful quick waltz for a child...
>
>>
...
Scott GF Bailey
> >> how do you say "an abomination unto god" in composese? i can't
believe
> >> that any serious writer would work that way unless he were afraid
of
> >> the sources of his talent.
> >
> > Or extremely, extremely confident!
>
> even thinking of this possibility -- i emote it to myself and my
working --
> makes me ill. i can't picture anyone who might have worked this
way...
> unless it's imagining mozart writing a wonderful quick waltz for a
child...
>
Supposedly, DS would make changes (in ink, no less) to scores on the
night of the performances. So I think it is a matter of his being
awfully confident. Of course, I pity the performers who have no time
to practice these changes...
> >
> >>
> ...
Scott GF Bailey
> "Scott GF Bailey" <sg...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:abmpjf$j4ddk$1...@ID-125766.news.dfncis.de:
>
> > Perhaps all music is just film music in search of a film? Maybe
you
> > just can't imagine the right scenes for the Shostakovich you're
> > listening to?
>
> well, this is a start! =) but, does that mean that every film is
waiting
> for a symphony? not to mention a broadway treatment.
> >
> > On the other hand, the music of S that I enjoy most does happen to
be
> > his film music (listen to the music for "King Lear"; it's retro,
but
> > well done and just gorgeous).
>
> i agree. he's really better than Prok. at film music. i think it
might be
> because he doesn't have to invent the plot!
>
> > (because I just don't like his symphonies at all, so I stopped
with
> > them), I hear bits that I just really am captivated by, and some
of the
> > interplay between instruments is brilliant.
>
> yah, it's right there as music, and then it's like some aged
wunderkind
> getting self-conscious about his weirdness/genius and redirecting
the focus
> with a joke.
>
Right. Just like Papa Haydn, who was a genius but people don't listen
to his music as much as they do Mozart or Beethoven, because Haydn was
too quirky. You never really know what's coming in a Haydn piece...I
think there's a similar thing going on with DS.
> > Unfortunately, and I
> > believe you said something like this in this thread, all his stuff
> > other than the film music seems to be pastiche, where you have
moments
> > of great writing rubbing shoulders with really banal crap. I
listen for
> > those moments of great writing. I think DS just didn't take much
time
> > to go back and edit; I think he wrote very quickly (but maybe, if
you
> > believe the tales, he felt that each work could be his last, so he
> > didn't spend time on rewrites?)
>
> how do you say "an abomination unto god" in composese? i can't
believe that
> any serious writer would work that way unless he were afraid of the
sources
> of his talent.
And maybe he was afraid of his own talent, so we get something raw.
What's the problem with that?
>
> > so there are these bits of unedited
> > mess clogging up what could otherwise be masterpieces. In a way,
it's
> > sort of like taking a tour of a disorganized genius' work
environment,
> > and that in itself can be an enlightening, worthwhile experience.
>
> theoretically... but, when he throws some russianisms at you and
then flips
> to mozart... gnash, gnash.
>
But Beethoven does the same thing in the Razumovsky quartets. I don't
hear you complaining about that. Maybe the seams are too visible in
Shosti?
> > I do
> > think that he was trying to work out his own personal musical
> > vocabulary, and he had all the bits gathered together but never
quite
> > got the syntax figured out.
>
> that's like maybe all of us? but the avocation is about figuring out
how
> we're supposed to say it.
> >
> > Maybe Mike will simply never like Dmitri's music, and that's all
fine,
> > isn't it?
>
> mike's an officious prik. don't pay any attention to him.
>
> > But before you give up, I suggest you listen to the piano
> > trios. I find them to be quite fine.
>
> hey!! alright... i love to discover new music, and i really need my
> confidence in some friends of mine restored. thanx!
> >
> > mike <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
mike
> mike wrote:
>
>> hypothetical desert isle.
>>
>
> ugh, that goyische music? on a desert? with no nuns?
dude! i'm a pagan huminist! Bach's got all the moves in the Matthew
Passion.
>
> or i have
>> a more linear sense of time than these shoshtaphiles and i should work
>> upon becoming post-einsteinian.
> einsteinian??? i wouldn't give shosh THAT much credit. bach is more
> einsteinian than shoshtakovich, no? but i do believe that no matter the
> schooling in music one has, it does usually boil down to "i know what i
> like" for most people.
well, it's like this. composers invented time relativity long before
maths people even got around to noticing the problem. and, it is really
the smart shoshtophiles who are understanding the multi-leveled
hilbertian spaces which this russian inventor of atomic bomb music is
writing! ma foi, i've only gotten as far as the cannons in the 1812!
projectile "a" follows the path "x" to point "c"... "boom". see? very
linear. =)
>
> otoh, a good music professor can make all the difference. i learned a
> life-long love of louis armstrong after sitting and watching one
> professor turn himself into a human bouncing ball (you know, follow the
> bouncing ball, and sing-a-long?)and become the notes. after one song,
> one MEASURE even, i was hooked.
i was always showing my professors what was in the music... but, you
know...
>
> my guess is that if he had bounced for shoshtakovich like that for me,
> i'd probably be as appreciative. .... well maybe.....
>
> sometimes it does just take someone else to open a door for you.
yes... but, most of these guys are selling tickets to the music
instruments show instead of to the glass bead game. i don't wanna new
trumpet!!
>
> av
>
>
tlste...@tpgi.com.au
<orang...@aol.com> wrote:
Thanks, but no thanks. They've already explained themselves perfectly.
mike
>
>
> mike wrote:
cut...
>> > What we (or rather myself) seek in DSCH's music, is evidence that
>> > despair can be overcome, not lightly, or perhaps not even at all,
>> > but musical evidence of the human capacity and ability to rise above
>> > the events surrounding them. That is DSCH, for me.
>>
>> you wouldn't like to see my copy of Readers Digest?
>>
>> >
>> > In addition, and it might be a minor thing, but he could orchestrate
>> > well too.
>>
>> tis true. very rich sounding music.
>>
>> >
>> > BTW, what composers do you like, and how do they differ in important
>> > respects to DSCH?
>>
>> well, the thing is i can't really put my finger on what i'm hearing in
>> Shosh! from this period i like Bartok, for instance... the Strings,
>> Percussion... outdoes any depth dimension in S. for me.
>
> For me too!
>
>> i like Copland very much
>
> Don't know his music. Only heard a few pieces, the most well knowned...
> and it did not grab me.
i think he's a regional and specific to americans composer, maybe in the
way shostakovich is for russians? Copland is very lyrical... almost Grieg
lyrical, though maybe without Grieg's intellect.
>
>> and Prokofiov... early Stravinsky...
>
> And sometimes the old too! Love his serialist music. He orchestrates
> magnificently, very clean. Much better than Shostakovitch.
>
> Also love Webern and Berg's music... and Schoenberg's too.
>
>> Massaean organ music.
>>
>> i like avant guarde and modern music per se, at least pre-1970 modern
>> music (though Koyaanisquaatsi i think is fine film music).
>>
>> i think i like punk rock better than most 1980's "classical
>> composers".
>
> Which 1980's composer did you give a try?
i really do like punk... that wasn't just being snide... i remember what i
heard as being comfortable in the genre, but not as a new music.
>>
>> Bach is my most favorite composer, but i have 6 recordings of the
>> Bartok Violin Concerto
>
> Which one do you prefer ? What do you feel about his string quartetts
> (Bartok's)?
i like the Bartok quartets, in a way, but i don't hear them as being as
interesting as Schoenberg's. it's like getting into the harmonic structure
of Bartok, but, since he's modalist (i think, anyway) the harmony can't do
much but sound contrastive. i think B. needs melody as an organizer for his
music in order for his thoughts to extend further than the sound cluster...
does that make any sense to you?
for the concerto, it's down and dirty Menuhin and Dorati... probably the
Minneapolis Symphony... i hear the concerto as a savage piece which ought
to be first frightening and then comforting to the fear that it's created.
>
>> and only 5 of the Musical Offering.
>
>> i suppose that i'd have to say that i feel the composers and
>> compositions that work for me have a surpression and consistancy over
>> the entire output or work. this ought to make me like the "dead" or
>> "beetles" too i guess, but there's a dependence on "face" and
>> "hipness" with them which makes them seem shallow and momentary.
>
> But that could be superficial, the face value and the hipness.
i don't know where else it could appear! poster children!
>
>> i guess that's what i hear in Shostakovich too.
>
> Shostakovitch was tortured by an anachronic idealism with which he
> could not reconcile his creativity.
but, so was Beethoven tortured by an idealism. but, maybe you're saying
that shostakovich went "red guard" and thought that concert music was
"decadent"? ... felt that stalin was revisionist? -- wanting him to write
crypto-czarist music in his praise (but, that's what happened to both Shos
and Prokofiov, yes? when they failed to specifically praise "stalin's war
victory"?
>
>>
>
Fred Bloggs
> like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music without
> a film"?
Well, you`re the one suggesting he`s more than a film music
writer...so come on, tell us why hes more than just a film music
writer!
mike
news:20020513111352...@mb-cd.aol.com:
well, the hitler-youth had their leftover wandervogel songs and Hesse
poems, so i guess you have a point. can we get the suburbanite commuters to
all sing the IBM commercial together?? this would be uplifting.
Francois Desnoyers
mike wrote:
Yes it does. But he needs rythm and texture too to put dynamic strength into
the sound masses.
For me, the mystical Webern, the passionate Berg and the profoundly human
Bartok come before Schoenberg the teacher.
>
>
> for the concerto, it's down and dirty Menuhin and Dorati...
Ah yes, Menuhin. What a charming character and limpid soul!
> probably the
> Minneapolis Symphony... i hear the concerto as a savage piece which ought
> to be first frightening and then comforting to the fear that it's created.
All his concertos had a major effect on me. He had such visions and almost a
physical strength in his music...!
>
> >
> >> and only 5 of the Musical Offering.
> >
> >> i suppose that i'd have to say that i feel the composers and
> >> compositions that work for me have a surpression and consistancy over
> >> the entire output or work. this ought to make me like the "dead" or
> >> "beetles" too i guess, but there's a dependence on "face" and
> >> "hipness" with them which makes them seem shallow and momentary.
> >
> > But that could be superficial, the face value and the hipness.
>
> i don't know where else it could appear! poster children!
> >
> >> i guess that's what i hear in Shostakovich too.
> >
> > Shostakovitch was tortured by an anachronic idealism with which he
> > could not reconcile his creativity.
>
> but, so was Beethoven tortured by an idealism.
But he did not have any problem exulting his creativity. He was certainly
tortured, but all his pains only served to propulse him to greater heights.
> but, maybe you're saying
> that shostakovich went "red guard" and thought that concert music was
> "decadent"? ... felt that stalin was revisionist? -- wanting him to write
> crypto-czarist music in his praise (but, that's what happened to both Shos
> and Prokofiov, yes? when they failed to specifically praise "stalin's war
> victory"?
> >
>
I have a stong feeling that where prokofiev was volontarily composing for the
masses (and was comfortable and happy doing so), Shostakovitch was tortured
into it as it did not satisfy his temperament nor his needs as a composer.
Francois Desnoyers
Scott GF Bailey wrote:
Making changes does not show confidence as much as never making changes.
Don't you think?
mike
125766.news.dfncis.de:
but, this is common, yes? the composer has fully worked out his idea and
is able to make plastic surgery changes for the face of the orchestra?
no? all the tin pan alley guys could do this. but, shosh, that's
something else, since i don't believe he had such confidence in what he
wrote, based only on how i read it, so i think maybe it was only a
question of fitting the soundz together?
>
>> >
>> >>
>> ...
>
>
>
Scott GF Bailey
Francois Desnoyers <fdesn...@micro-intel.com> wrote in message
news:3CDFF790...@micro-intel.com...
>
>
> Making changes does not show confidence as much as never making
changes.
> Don't you think?
>
Depends upon one's point of view. If you think you have a bright new
idea and write it directly into the score and parts on opening night
(especially for, say, an orchestral piece), then you're either
confident or foolhardy. Anybody can "finish" a piece and never look
back, can't they? I did it all the time when I was learning how to
compose. Was that a display of my compositional competence/confidence?
I think maybe DS was more in the "this is as close to what I have in
mind as I have time for" mindset. Then again, maybe he felt that his
works were completely polished and it's just my own prejudices telling
me they sound unfinished and a little ragged around the edges. I'll be
honest and say that I've not put as much work into listening to Shosti
as I have certain other composers, so for many of DS's works, I'm
still in the "hearing the surface of the music" stage.
This thread is much more interesting than I thought it was going to
be; it's turning into a discussion of how we listen to music and how
music might be made, instead of just a list of DS pieces that mike has
to listen to before he makes up his mind.
mike
125766.news.dfncis.de:
well, i never feel that Haydn is just joking around... actually, oscar
levant was the model i had in mind here.
>
>> > Unfortunately, and I
>> > believe you said something like this in this thread, all his stuff
>> > other than the film music seems to be pastiche, where you have
>> > moments of great writing rubbing shoulders with really banal crap. I
>> > listen for those moments of great writing. I think DS just didn't
>> > take much time to go back and edit; I think he wrote very quickly
>> > (but maybe, if you believe the tales, he felt that each work could
>> > be his last, so he didn't spend time on rewrites?)
>>
>> how do you say "an abomination unto god" in composese? i can't believe
>> that any serious writer would work that way unless he were afraid of
>> the sources of his talent.
>
> And maybe he was afraid of his own talent, so we get something raw.
> What's the problem with that?
i think it's more like he was afraid to reveal that he was "crazy" or
something... Beethoven never was.
>
>>
>> > so there are these bits of unedited mess clogging up what could
>> > otherwise be masterpieces. In a way, it's sort of like taking a tour
>> > of a disorganized genius' work environment, and that in itself can
>> > be an enlightening, worthwhile experience.
>>
>> theoretically... but, when he throws some russianisms at you and then
>> flips to mozart... gnash, gnash.
>>
>
> But Beethoven does the same thing in the Razumovsky quartets. I don't
> hear you complaining about that. Maybe the seams are too visible in
> Shosti?
no, this isn't the encorporation of a genre and its transformation into a
theme... this is simply throwing sand in your ears so that you don't get
too involved, too "personal"... which, since S. is such a whiny guy, i must
think that this comes from his fear of being called "selfish" or something.
mike
news:tlsterry123-14...@war-56k-073.tpgi.com.au:
well, there you have it!
Scott GF Bailey
Well, I've personally never made changes on opening night; the idea
terrifies me. But then, I'm a wuss.
> all the tin pan alley guys could do this. but, shosh, that's
> something else, since i don't believe he had such confidence in what
he
> wrote, based only on how i read it, so i think maybe it was only a
> question of fitting the soundz together?
I'm not sure what you mean here. What part of composition isn't
"fitting the soundz together"? Or are you talking larger-scale,
sectional fittings? Or do you mean maybe all through rehearsals the
brass section had their pages in the wrong order, and it was only
figured out five minutes before the curtain went up?
>
> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> ...
> >
> >
> >
>
mike
ohhhh, yes. i'm not ignorant of that! but, maybe they are just too
texturally dense for me. i'm going to listen to them again... it's been a
year and my ear might have changed.
>
> For me, the mystical Webern, the passionate Berg and the profoundly
> human Bartok come before Schoenberg the teacher.
i think he secretly thought so too! but, i like the 2nd string quartet very
much.
>
>>
>>
>> for the concerto, it's down and dirty Menuhin and Dorati...
>
> Ah yes, Menuhin. What a charming character and limpid soul!
>
>> probably the
>> Minneapolis Symphony... i hear the concerto as a savage piece which
>> ought to be first frightening and then comforting to the fear that
>> it's created.
>
> All his concertos had a major effect on me. He had such visions and
> almost a physical strength in his music...!
well, except for the "orchestra concerto" which, though fun as hell to
play, hasn't the scope of the piano or violin concerti.
maybe he was just "neurotic", as they used to say?
>
>
>
mike
news:fa2f473d.0205...@posting.google.com:
sorry. you must have gotten the last of a clip of a post of mine. i was
asking the same thing!
mike
125766.news.dfncis.de:
>
> mike <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns920D4DC7024CC...@66.75.162.196...
>> "Scott GF Bailey" <scottg...@msn.com> wrote in
>> news:abop2q$k0fsr$1@ID- 125766.news.dfncis.de:
>>
>> >
>> > mike <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
>> > news:Xns920D3F8BED09E...@66.75.162.196...
>> >> >> how do you say "an abomination unto god" in composese? i can't
>> >> >> believe that any serious writer would work that way unless he
>> >> >> were afraid of the sources of his talent.
>> >> >
>> >> > Or extremely, extremely confident!
>> >>
>> >> even thinking of this possibility -- i emote it to myself and my
>> >> working -- makes me ill. i can't picture anyone who might have
>> >> worked this way... unless it's imagining mozart writing a wonderful
>> >> quick waltz for a child...
>> >>
>> >
>> > Supposedly, DS would make changes (in ink, no less) to scores on the
>> > night of the performances. So I think it is a matter of his being
>> > awfully confident. Of course, I pity the performers who have no time
>> > to practice these changes...
>>
>> but, this is common, yes? the composer has fully worked out his idea
>> and is able to make plastic surgery changes for the face of the
>> orchestra? no?
>
> Well, I've personally never made changes on opening night; the idea
> terrifies me. But then, I'm a wuss.
well, i have, and it's just something you've got to do. in my cases it's
been that i left out 3 notes in manuscript and that i'd not allowed the
violin enough time to make the fingerings! that just meant combining by
lengthening some notes and dropping others. i feel that if the basic
concept is complete then the leaves on the tree fall into place on their
own (with a little prodding).
>
>> all the tin pan alley guys could do this. but, shosh, that's something
>> else, since i don't believe he had such confidence in what he wrote,
>> based only on how i read it, so i think maybe it was only a question
>> of fitting the soundz together?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean here.
the sort of stuff i was relating about how i made my own piece work at the
last minute.
> What part of composition isn't
> "fitting the soundz together"? Or are you talking larger-scale,
> sectional fittings? Or do you mean maybe all through rehearsals the
> brass section had their pages in the wrong order, and it was only
> figured out five minutes before the curtain went up?
wahh!! yah, that too!
>
>>
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> ...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
John Harrington
characterisation of Classicism as music of ideas and Romanticism as
music that merely entertains/titilates is wrong. On the contrary, one
of the problems of Romanticism is that it attempted to artificially
graft ideas onto music, an abstract art form. Classical music is
about musical ideas, in general, whereas Romantic music often also
attempts to be about literary, political, philosophical (etc.) ideas,
all of which are irrelevant to music.
John
abel...@aol.comspamless (Abelard2) wrote in message news:<20020512200645...@mb-mj.aol.com>...
> "mike" <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns920C4A396433A...@66.75.162.198..
> .
> > like, why he's more than just a film music writer who wrote "music without
> > a film"?
>
> ...to which "Nicholas Buenk" Ni...@NonSPAMtig.com.au replied:
>
> >He is not, but why does it matter if he was?
>
> ...and once again, "Mike" pressed the matter:
>
> >i need to understand why he breaks off when it seems like he
> >should be at the point where he could actually start saying something
> >musically.
>
> I must say, orangiemike, that I may have underestimated you. The weakness that
> you detect in Shostakovich has a name: Romanticism. And the symptoms include
> the mistaken idea that it is sufficient to merely express "feelings", rather
> than to, as you put it, "start saying something musically." Because Romanticism
> inevitably boils down to what Brahms (who was not, contrary to all popular
> textbooks and PBS commentators, a Romantic) condemned as "mood-painting", one
> often looks about for the films that should go with it, except in the case of
> Wagner, who thoughtfully supplied them, long before "Terminator II".
>
> Now, in answer to the question of "Nicholas Buenk", i.e., "Why does it
> matter?", it is because there are consequences for all humanity. Art that is
> devoid of ideas, that merely excites, titillates or entertains, tends to bring
> cultural decadence and pessimism in its wake. The collapse of the Classical
> tradition in the late 19th Century, followed by the onslaught of Romanticism
> and Modernism, produced a deep cultural pessimism in the 20th century, which in
> turn made European culture susceptible to fascism and other disastrous isms.
>
> Here's an analogy from a non-musical area: I was present during a discussion of
> whether murder-simulator software games like "Doom" or "Counterstrike", and
> related forms of violence-porn entertainment, can be said to de-sensitize
> people to violence. Someone argued that since there are many people who play
> the games, who do not carry out Columbine- or Erfurt-style massacres, it is not
> permissible to hold that the games, or related cultural phenomena, are
> "de-sensitizing." But then, someone else pointed out that in 1972, campuses all
> over the US erupted in protest over the US bombing of Cambodia -- yet today,
> when the IDF crushes women and children in the Jenin camp, with machinery
> supplied by the US, there is no significant reaction on US campuses. This is
> what "de-sensitization" looks like, and it has everything to do with the
> degenerate culture.
>
> Conversely, if we were to revive the method of producing Art that inspires and
> uplifts, you might see an optimistic turn in the culture, which just might save
> us all.
>
>
Scott GF Bailey
idea
> > terrifies me. But then, I'm a wuss.
>
> well, i have, and it's just something you've got to do. in my cases
it's
> been that i left out 3 notes in manuscript and that i'd not allowed
the
> violin enough time to make the fingerings! that just meant combining
by
> lengthening some notes and dropping others. i feel that if the basic
> concept is complete then the leaves on the tree fall into place on
their
> own (with a little prodding).
What? No rehearsals? Oh sure, a note or two here and there is no big
thing; I was thinking of more sweeping changes. But let's just stop
here and I'll say that I really don't know the extent to which S was
rewriting his music on the performance scores. The way it was
presented to me made it seem fairly sweeping, and I was visibly
impressed. But fixing a notation mistake, sure.
Back in the 80's I made some changes to a score for a small group
(music for a children's theater thing) the day before a performance,
handing out new parts just before the show. Only problem was that I
forgot while I was writing that the horns were transposing
instruments. Moments of bitonality that the singers didn't enjoy...
> >
> >> all the tin pan alley guys could do this. but, shosh, that's
something
> >> else, since i don't believe he had such confidence in what he
wrote,
> >> based only on how i read it, so i think maybe it was only a
question
> >> of fitting the soundz together?
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean here.
>
> the sort of stuff i was relating about how i made my own piece work
at the
> last minute.
>
> > What part of composition isn't
> > "fitting the soundz together"? Or are you talking larger-scale,
> > sectional fittings? Or do you mean maybe all through rehearsals
the
> > brass section had their pages in the wrong order, and it was only
> > figured out five minutes before the curtain went up?
>
> wahh!! yah, that too!
Of course, it's worse when you figure it out five minutes *after* the
curtain rises.
John Harrington
You're probably referring to the music that became the 4 Norwegian
Moods. Stravinsky made more than one abortive attempt at film
composition (the Ode contains salvaged material for Welles' Jayne Eyre
and Scherzo a la Russe material for a Russian war film), and he even
successfully scored (with the help of Robert Craft) a United Airlines
training film(!) using previously composed music. He also
contemplated a seconds long work to underscore the CBS "eye" logo.
Anything for a buck, I guess. The Flood was specifically composed as
a TV special, too.
John
mike
news:b97c7d0a.02051...@posting.google.com:
> Excellent comments, except I would register one big objection: the
> characterisation of Classicism as music of ideas and Romanticism as
> music that merely entertains/titilates is wrong. On the contrary, one
> of the problems of Romanticism is that it attempted to artificially
> graft ideas onto music, an abstract art form. Classical music is
> about musical ideas, in general, whereas Romantic music often also
> attempts to be about literary, political, philosophical (etc.) ideas,
> all of which are irrelevant to music.
>
>
> John
anyone want to set this critter staight? like, talk to him about what Lully
was doing with music for instance? and Bach, when he wrote out the "dripping
of the blood from the wound" bass line?
mike
125766.news.dfncis.de:
>
> mike <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns920D560A0141A...@66.75.162.198...
>> "Scott GF Bailey" <scottg...@msn.com> wrote in
>> news:aboucl$jt86m$1@ID- 125766.news.dfncis.de:
>> >
>> > Well, I've personally never made changes on opening night; the idea
>> > terrifies me. But then, I'm a wuss.
>>
>> well, i have, and it's just something you've got to do. in my cases
>> it's been that i left out 3 notes in manuscript and that i'd not
>> allowed the violin enough time to make the fingerings! that just meant
>> combining by lengthening some notes and dropping others. i feel that
>> if the basic concept is complete then the leaves on the tree fall into
>> place on their own (with a little prodding).
>
> What? No rehearsals? Oh sure, a note or two here and there is no big
> thing; I was thinking of more sweeping changes.
if i felt this i would put the thought into the next work that i wrote... i
would think that the present piece was a failure as composition, though i'd
let the performance go as performance. but, this happens all the time to me
with my music... where i'm able to stop and rethink when i realize that
there is something new happening and that it should be allowed its own
space.
> But let's just stop
> here and I'll say that I really don't know the extent to which S was
> rewriting his music on the performance scores. The way it was
> presented to me made it seem fairly sweeping, and I was visibly
> impressed. But fixing a notation mistake, sure.
>
> Back in the 80's I made some changes to a score for a small group
> (music for a children's theater thing) the day before a performance,
> handing out new parts just before the show. Only problem was that I
> forgot while I was writing that the horns were transposing
> instruments. Moments of bitonality that the singers didn't enjoy...
habbb!! that must have been wonderful to hear!
Francois Desnoyers
mike wrote:
:-) most probably it did!
>
>
> >
> > For me, the mystical Webern, the passionate Berg and the profoundly
> > human Bartok come before Schoenberg the teacher.
> i think he secretly thought so too! but, i like the 2nd string quartet very
> much.
>
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> for the concerto, it's down and dirty Menuhin and Dorati...
> >
> > Ah yes, Menuhin. What a charming character and limpid soul!
> >
> >> probably the
> >> Minneapolis Symphony... i hear the concerto as a savage piece which
> >> ought to be first frightening and then comforting to the fear that
> >> it's created.
> >
> > All his concertos had a major effect on me. He had such visions and
> > almost a physical strength in his music...!
>
> well, except for the "orchestra concerto" which, though fun as hell to
> play, hasn't the scope of the piano or violin concerti.
The orchestra concerto seems to be Bartok's attempt at domesticating people
(or a new country). A charming piece though but too compromising.
Yep. And they still do!
I am surprised to read Shostakovith's name mentionned so often in this NG.
It's kind of disapointing. There are so many great composers...
What about Schnittke? a very interresting composer who seems to have grappled
with the same phantoms as Shostakovitch but with more grace and freedom of
thought.
Scott GF Bailey
listen
> > to his music as much as they do Mozart or Beethoven, because Haydn
was
> > too quirky. You never really know what's coming in a Haydn
piece...I
> > think there's a similar thing going on with DS.
>
> well, i never feel that Haydn is just joking around... actually,
oscar
> levant was the model i had in mind here.
>
You mean Levant's character in "American in Paris", or Levant as
composer (I've never heard any of his own work. Is it as buffoonish as
he pretends that he himself is?), or Levant as musical gadfly?
I do think Haydn was just amusing himself in some places. Of course,
he had a great command of his musical language so the jokes were
better structured, fit better with the overall music, except for some
of his early and middle periods, where local events had nothing to do
with large-scale form. That's the Haydn I think of when I compare him
to Shosti. I kind of feel like Shosti was stuck in a long "middle
period" where he didn't know how to fit sectional ideas together in a
way that satisfied even him. I do think he was more successful in his
chamber works, which is why I recommend them. You'll still find
moments of crudeness, but I think they're more deliberate in the
chamber music. Sometimes I get the feeling that he's being very
cruelly self-deprecating, like the jokes are all on him. Most
commentators call this DS's "irony". I don't know about that.
> i think it's more like he was afraid to reveal that he was "crazy"
or
> something... Beethoven never was.
>
Yeah, maybe he was just afraid to reveal anything at all. I don't know
how much I buy into the political ramifications of/to his music, but
it had to be scary to be a composer of classical music (and really,
we're not exactly a threatening bunch politically) and have a
murderous dictator condemn you publicly.
Still and all, that has to be beside the point when you're just trying
to listen to some music, right? My thoughts are that Shostakovich
wrote a sort of messy, disorganized music. You either like the mess or
you don't. You seem mad because he's not "revealing" himself in the
music. I think you might be projecting. Maybe all music, or art, is a
form of self portraiture? Maybe he is baring himself to us, but his
view of himself is not similar enough to your view of yourself and it
just seems like so much noise? Maybe you're put off by the cult of
"DSCH the Genius" and you're expecting too much from the poor guy's
music? What do I know? I'm going to go listen to some Velvet
Underground instead.
zn...@aracnet.com
> Do forgive this purely practical interruption ... but is the 1979
> Rostropovich recording with Vishnevskaja truly a "Great Recording of the
> Century," as EMI packages it (And Tower has it on sale for $17.98)? It
> was one of my all-time favorites at Lyric, but that was probably with
> Malfitano (in her great years), and I wonder whether Glaya was still up
> to it by then ...
> --
> Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net
Are there other recordings available? :-)
--
M. Edward Borasky
zn...@borasky-research.net
http://www.borasky-research.net/HarryIannis.htm
Never play leapfrog with a unicorn.
mike
125766.news.dfncis.de:
>
> mike <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns920D4E82411FE...@66.75.162.196...
>> "Scott GF Bailey" <scottg...@msn.com> wrote in
>> news:abopcf$k3a9e$1@ID- 125766.news.dfncis.de:
>> >
>> > Right. Just like Papa Haydn, who was a genius but people don't
>> > listen to his music as much as they do Mozart or Beethoven, because
>> > Haydn was too quirky. You never really know what's coming in a Haydn
>> > piece...I think there's a similar thing going on with DS.
>>
>> well, i never feel that Haydn is just joking around... actually, oscar
>> levant was the model i had in mind here.
>>
>
> You mean Levant's character in "American in Paris",
i don't like this film so much, so i can't visualize him... his thing is to
act neurotic and as though he were always on the verge of starting his
first failure.
> or Levant as
> composer (I've never heard any of his own work. Is it as buffoonish as
> he pretends that he himself is?), or Levant as musical gadfly?
i don't think gadfly is the word i'd use (carl haas is "gadfly" to me)...
he was a total friend of Gershwin... idolized him... and that played into
his own insecurities i think... never feeling good enough as a writer.
>
> I do think Haydn was just amusing himself in some places. Of course,
> he had a great command of his musical language so the jokes were
> better structured, fit better with the overall music, except for some
> of his early and middle periods, where local events had nothing to do
> with large-scale form. That's the Haydn I think of when I compare him
> to Shosti. I kind of feel like Shosti was stuck in a long "middle
> period" where he didn't know how to fit sectional ideas together in a
> way that satisfied even him.
auk. you think?
> I do think he was more successful in his
> chamber works, which is why I recommend them. You'll still find
> moments of crudeness, but I think they're more deliberate in the
> chamber music. Sometimes I get the feeling that he's being very
> cruelly self-deprecating, like the jokes are all on him. Most
> commentators call this DS's "irony". I don't know about that.
the work i heard performe by the Petersberg wasn't very satisfying
musically, even though they played the heck out of it. but they could play
the phonebook and make it sound...
>
>> i think it's more like he was afraid to reveal that he was "crazy" or
>> something... Beethoven never was.
>>
>
> Yeah, maybe he was just afraid to reveal anything at all. I don't know
> how much I buy into the political ramifications of/to his music, but
> it had to be scary to be a composer of classical music (and really,
> we're not exactly a threatening bunch politically) and have a
> murderous dictator condemn you publicly.
>
> Still and all, that has to be beside the point when you're just trying
> to listen to some music, right? My thoughts are that Shostakovich
> wrote a sort of messy, disorganized music.
ok. yah, and he didn't have Stravinsky's sense of theatre in order to
modulate in at the performing level? that would make sense to me.
> You either like the mess or
> you don't. You seem mad because he's not "revealing" himself in the
> music. I think you might be projecting.
no, my sense of revelation is about music as a sonic language, an
organization of sounds using the same organization principles that we use
on physics or baking cakes, but the "emotion" and "personal experience" are
translated out of the consiousness as music, rather than as formula or
torte.
> Maybe all music, or art, is a
> form of self portraiture? Maybe he is baring himself to us,
well, he is, but so what? it's in the artful striptease that we recognize
talent and consciousness as similar to our own talent and consciousness.
> but his
> view of himself is not similar enough to your view of yourself and it
> just seems like so much noise? Maybe you're put off by the cult of
> "DSCH the Genius"
again, no... i'd really like to discover another music, another genius...
it's like discovering america.
> and you're expecting too much from the poor guy's
> music? What do I know? I'm going to go listen to some Velvet
> Underground instead.
woof.
>
>
>
>
mike
>
>
> mike wrote:
>
>> Francois Desnoyers <fdesn...@micro-intel.com> wrote in
>> news:3CDFF428...@micro-intel.com:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > mike wrote:
>> >
>> >> Francois Desnoyers <fdesn...@micro-intel.com> wrote in
>> >> news:3CDF674B...@micro-intel.com:
...
>> >
>> > Yes it does. But he needs rythm and texture too to put dynamic
>> > strength into the sound masses.
>>
>> ohhhh, yes. i'm not ignorant of that! but, maybe they are just too
>> texturally dense for me. i'm going to listen to them again... it's
>> been a year and my ear might have changed.
>
>:-) most probably it did!
plastic surgery. had them stretched to catch more sound.
>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > For me, the mystical Webern, the passionate Berg and the profoundly
>> > human Bartok come before Schoenberg the teacher.
>> i think he secretly thought so too! but, i like the 2nd string quartet
>> very much.
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> for the concerto, it's down and dirty Menuhin and Dorati...
>> >
>> > Ah yes, Menuhin. What a charming character and limpid soul!
>> >
>> >> probably the
>> >> Minneapolis Symphony... i hear the concerto as a savage piece which
>> >> ought to be first frightening and then comforting to the fear that
>> >> it's created.
>> >
>> > All his concertos had a major effect on me. He had such visions and
>> > almost a physical strength in his music...!
>>
>> well, except for the "orchestra concerto" which, though fun as hell to
>> play, hasn't the scope of the piano or violin concerti.
>
> The orchestra concerto seems to be Bartok's attempt at domesticating
> people (or a new country). A charming piece though but too
> compromising.
yes, didn't he write it for Koussivitsky?
>
>>
>> maybe he was just "neurotic", as they used to say?
>> >
>> >
>
> Yep. And they still do!
>
> I am surprised to read Shostakovith's name mentionned so often in this
> NG. It's kind of disapointing. There are so many great composers...
>
> What about Schnittke? a very interresting composer who seems to have
> grappled with the same phantoms as Shostakovitch but with more grace
> and freedom of thought.
i don't know his music at all... what does "interesting" mean with him in
mind?
AV
>
> > einsteinian??? i wouldn't give shosh THAT much credit. bach is more
> > einsteinian than shoshtakovich, no?
>
> "absolute" concept of time.
>
true. i was just thinking of at least his attempt to make a distinctly
freer music than had come to that time, and attempt to free left hand's
slavery to the right hand (in piano music).
and
he might be "metronomic" but he did have a hand on the pulse of the
cosmos, ifn' you ask me.
> And sometimes, when you feel the door too small, you find out after you've
> openned it that the room on the other side is just as small.
>
> Shostakovitch did not have enough talent to surmount government pressure
> and idealism because he could not express himself totally in this context.
> On the other hand, Prokofiev did! and was as comfortable in composing in
> either setting.
>
no arguement there. Prokofiev is my man! rock and roll begins and ends
with him!
av
AV
>
> yes... but, most of these guys are selling tickets to the music
> instruments show instead of to the glass bead game. i don't wanna new
> trumpet!!
>
ahh, i can see you didn't know john ronsheim. :o)
av
AV
>
> AV wrote:
>
> > tlste...@tpgi.com.au wrote:
> > Naturally, the preclassical,
> > > classical and romantic composeres didn't write for films because they
> > > predated them.
> >
> > no, they wrote for the pleasure of the court.
> > same thing perhaps?
> >
> > music to accompany dinner
> > music to accompany an insomniac
> > music to accompany on the waterfront
>
> Not the same thing. This music (as above) is supposed to free the mind.
> Not much of a contraint for the composer, if you compare with music for
> movies.
>
> Movies have a story-line, many psychological and structural demands. And
> music is rarely "starring" in a movie, as it does in "Once upon a time in
> the west" :-)
>
i should be better at citing than i am (film major, but too much
immersion in the avant garde); i can't think of any starring roles
outright. but i agree music rarely has a such a role, and to the
detriment of film, imho.
i think kubrick had it almost right, albeit his weakness was in simply
picking from a buffet, rather than working with a living composer. it
has always struck me how odd that was. one of the mose obsessive,
hardest working filmmakers we've had, yet he was happy enough to pick
from already composed music. imagine what he could have done had he
worked as closely with, say, ligeti on 2001 as he did with clarke.
av
AV
>
> > Conversely, if we were to revive the method of producing Art that inspires and
> > uplifts, you might see an optimistic turn in the culture, which just might save
> > us all.
> >
>
> mystifies many!
>
i've decided he must be a closet socialist realist. that had "method"
and "uplifted" the proles. pessimism, bad. optimism to the glorious
socialist utopia, good.
av
AV
> And it could also be much more than that :
>
> Prokofiev's Alexander Nevsky cantata...
ahhhhh... THAT'S the example I want. Music as a starring role.
Perfect.
av
Douglas Clark
Before this thread ends I should say that Shostakovich's genius
lies for me in the Violin and Cello Concertos No. 1, 8/9/10th
String Quartets and the 10th Symphony. And I must admit to a
sneaking liking for the 5th Symphony. But I am not really a great
fan of the symphonies.
--
Douglas Clark, Bath, England mailto: d.g.d...@bath.ac.uk
Lynx: Poetry from Bath .......... http://www.bath.ac.uk/~exxdgdc/lynx.html
mike
thou sees't. i didn't. but, i was referring to the posters in the group
defending composing for film by reporting (gossiping about) who had
composed film music.
kripes, i've composed film music! my point was that you can do that well
and/or write concert music! i like shosha's film stuff, i don't like his
concert stuff (...yet. i'm going to get a cd of the trios tomorrow).
so, tell me about john ronsheim. he's a composer, right?
mike
> Francois Desnoyers wrote:
>>
>> AV wrote:
>>
>> > tlste...@tpgi.com.au wrote:
>> > Naturally, the preclassical,
>> > > classical and romantic composeres didn't write for films because
>> > > they predated them.
>> >
>> > no, they wrote for the pleasure of the court.
>> > same thing perhaps?
>> >
>> > music to accompany dinner
>> > music to accompany an insomniac music to accompany on the waterfront
>>
>> Not the same thing. This music (as above) is supposed to free the
>> mind. Not much of a contraint for the composer, if you compare with
>> music for movies.
>>
>> Movies have a story-line, many psychological and structural demands.
>> And music is rarely "starring" in a movie, as it does in "Once upon a
>> time in the west" :-)
>>
>
>
> i should be better at citing than i am (film major, but too much
> immersion in the avant garde); i can't think of any starring roles
> outright. but i agree music rarely has a such a role, and to the
> detriment of film, imho.
>
> i think kubrick had it almost right, albeit his weakness was in simply
> picking from a buffet, rather than working with a living composer.
Barry Lyndon works exceptionally well for me. kubrick must have really
loved music. i like the classic film scores... Warner's and Fox, for
instance... but i really think that Glass and Reggio were allowed to make a
fine music/film experience with koyaanisquatsi: neither the one or the
other of the elements works without the other (yes, i watch films with the
sound off all the time).
> it
> has always struck me how odd that was. one of the mose obsessive,
> hardest working filmmakers we've had, yet he was happy enough to pick
> from already composed music. imagine what he could have done had he
> worked as closely with, say, ligeti on 2001 as he did with clarke.
no thanks. it's not that kind of film... nor is clarke's work a great
literature which would allow more than an episodic film. it may be that K.
was embarrassed by this film's "ironic" music overlays? maybe Lolita is as
close as one can get towards your concept. it's not "great music", but it
"aids" the film, the way an actor's camera presence can aid the film.
>
> av
>
>
mike
but, the film is so much better with the sound off. i think that shosh's
cubism would have fit Eisenstein's montage in a very tight way. we don't
really need the teutonic knights having their own "fight song" do we? i
mean, Eisenstein kind of showed us what they were like... and, the
portative organ is a very graphic little image for decadence in the film...
any music filling its sound-space would be a disappointment... a Cecil B.
Mistake.
Peter T. Daniels
>
> according to Peter T. Daniels <gram...@att.net>,
> > Do forgive this purely practical interruption ... but is the 1979
> > Rostropovich recording with Vishnevskaja truly a "Great Recording of the
> > Century," as EMI packages it (And Tower has it on sale for $17.98)? It
> > was one of my all-time favorites at Lyric, but that was probably with
> > Malfitano (in her great years), and I wonder whether Glaya was still up
> > to it by then ...
> Are there other recordings available? :-)
Two others on the shelf just at the used CD store this afternoon. Plenty
at Tower. What's your point?
AV
>
> AV <a...@sover.net> wrote in news:3CE02A...@sover.net:
>
> > mike wrote:
> >>
> >> yes... but, most of these guys are selling tickets to the music
> >> instruments show instead of to the glass bead game. i don't wanna new
> >> trumpet!!
>
no. was a jack of a lot of trades....music teacher, choir director
(Ockeghem mainly), film afficianado, gourmand etcetera etcetera... near
master of all. he seemed oddly capable of teaching the heart of the
matter in most things he touched.
i thought you're above reference to "these guys" was about music
teachers in general.
this thread has gotten too complex!!!
i'm getting lost.
av
Ray Hall
news:Gw2K7B....@bath.ac.uk...
|
| Before this thread ends I should say that Shostakovich's genius
| lies for me in the Violin and Cello Concertos No. 1, 8/9/10th
| String Quartets and the 10th Symphony. And I must admit to a
| sneaking liking for the 5th Symphony. But I am not really a great
| fan of the symphonies.
DSCH's genius is evident is most (not all) the music he wrote. How many 19
year olds could produce a work such as his 1st symphony? How many could
evoke the terror of the piano trio No.2, or the sheer symphonic achievement
of the 10th symphony, or the atmospheric quality of the 12th symphony's
first movement, or the ambiguities and challenges presented by the 15th? How
many can chart a course of musical history, that partly reflects the terror
of the regime under which he lived.
You have to get under the "skin" of DSCH, and if it isn't your bag, then
sobeit. Maybe Prokofiev was greater composer (I'll not deny that), whereas
on the other hand, DSCH was the greater human being. My last thoughts.
Regards,
# RMCR Contributor Links/Main Page :
# http://www.users.bigpond.com/hallraylily/index.html
< NEW Doris Day TV series news >
Ray, Sydney
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.361 / Virus Database: 199 - Release Date: 7/05/02
AV
> loved music. i like the classic film scores... Warner's and Fox, for
> instance... but i really think that Glass and Reggio were allowed to make a
> fine music/film experience with koyaanisquatsi: neither the one or the
> other of the elements works without the other (yes, i watch films with the
> sound off all the time).
>
barry lyndon: his most despised film; my most favorite. i've always
wanted that film mounted permanently on my wall, like the moving
painting that it is.
yes, he chose the music well for the film. it would be hard to
out-compose period masters for a period film.
yes... koyannis.... is a good example (even tho' i've never seen it!)
> > it
> > has always struck me how odd that was. one of the mose obsessive,
> > hardest working filmmakers we've had, yet he was happy enough to pick
> > from already composed music. imagine what he could have done had he
> > worked as closely with, say, ligeti on 2001 as he did with clarke.
>
> no thanks. it's not that kind of film...
what u mean? 2001 is probably his most musical film. and its
open-endedness practically begs for originally composed music.
sure, the cute cut to the space ship floating in the 20th century blue
danube is brilliant, but it's always felt too mannered because of the
reliance on the pre-conceived music.
clockwork orange managed to cleverly skirt the issue altogether because
the gang loved the music of ludwig b. he couldn't choose any other
music, but!
nor is clarke's work a great
> literature which would allow more than an episodic film. it may be that K.
> was embarrassed by this film's "ironic" music overlays?
hard to say. i don't second guess a man like him.
and my referring to his work with clarke was meant to suggest that out
of the sow's ear (clarke's sentinnel short story), he managed to make
something of a silk purse... and with clarke's help. don't see why he
didn't do that with ....your choice of living composer placed here... as
well.
maybe Lolita is as
> close as one can get towards your concept. it's not "great music", but it
> "aids" the film, the way an actor's camera presence can aid the film.
>
can't remember music in this one. seen too long ago. and only once.
av
AV
>
> AV <a...@sover.net> wrote in news:3CE02C...@sover.net:
>
> > Francois Desnoyers wrote:
> >
> >> And it could also be much more than that :
> >>
> >> Prokofiev's Alexander Nevsky cantata...
> >
> >
> > ahhhhh... THAT'S the example I want. Music as a starring role.
> > Perfect.
> >
> > av
> >
> >
>
> but, the film is so much better with the sound off.
well there IS something to be said for silent film. :o)
but i disagree.
av