Overrated

[opu...@aol.com]

This is being done on a dare from Earl.

The most overrated composer for me is Brahms. He doesn't belong with
the other two great B's Bach and Beethoven. He only wrote his first
symphony at the age of 43. Shostakovich was 18. Brahms is played too
much in the concert hall and too much on the radio. I do admit his work
is of high caliber, but there is no reason why we couldn't tone down a
little bit on the Brahms, and turn up a little more on the Shostakovich.
After all there is only so many concerts in a season and only so much time
on the radio to be programmed. I'm not saying we should ban Brahms, just
put him in his place.

Peace... Fred

[Michael Kerpan]

Nope, Brahms is under-rated -- even if some of his works are over-played.
Classical forms became moribund after Schubert died. Brahms, single-handedly,
gave new life to these forms. Setting the stage, of course, for Mahler and
DSCH, among others.

Michael Kerpan
Stone Mountain

[Caius Marcius]

In <19961124154...@ladder01.news.aol.com> ega...@aol.com
writes:
>
>In article <19961124050...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
opu...@aol.com
>writes:

>
>>
>>This is being done on a dare from Earl.
>

>Well this is true. I put him up to it.
>>
>
>The most overrated composer is Elgar, with Elgar coming in second,
close
>to Elgar, third.
>

Elgar is a genius. In his 2nd Symphony, listem to the fortissimo
reprise in the 3rd movement of a quiet theme intially presented in the
opening movement - one of the Supreme Moments of Music....

Most overrated composer - well, I'll say it's Webern - granted Webern
himself was admirably terse, but the Enraged Gnat (as Lawrence Gilamn
described him) was certainly the most unfortunate role model in Western
musical history - Webern's example encouraged the natural tendency of
academicians toward obscurantism and rigid orthodoxy to reach
unprecedented levels, and helped to enshrine an increasingly toxic
atmosphere between composers and audiences that is only now beginning
to dissipate.

- CMC

[opu...@aol.com]

Earl,

You should talk to your wife once in a while. She e-mailed me and
agrees that Brahms is the most overrated. Sorry Marisa.

I'm not trying to break up your marriage but you asked for it...
Fred

[cmc...@aol.com]

I hardly think it's necessary to bash Elgar - he's a fine composer, and a
much better orchestrator than...I won't dare to say it!
CMC...@aol.com

[opu...@aol.com]

Dear CMC,

Webern? Brahms has Webern out-numbered 14 to 1 in the Schwann
catalog for number of pages used for recordings! Now that's overrated.

Fred

[opu...@aol.com]

O.K.

Single handed Brahms... Maybe DSCH is the Brahms of the 20th
century.
After all Shostakovich preserved the symphony, concerto, and string
quartet while others were doing weird stuff and calling them symphonies
etc... I think that Shostakovich wrote the 14th symphony just to prove
how much the name "symphony" had been distorted followed by an "orthodox"
15th symphony to show what the symphony should be.

Someone told me, correct me if I'm wrong and I know you will, that
Brahms most important works were his chamber works. Then why is it that
every season there is a sprinkling of Brahms symphonies or concerti or
serenades at the symphony concert when his best work was chamber?

What about that Tchaikovsky guy? Did he fiddle with a couple of
symphonies and concerti. Brahms was the only one? C'mon.

And I knew that it would turn to mud slinging. Someone attacks "X"
composer and someone else defends "X" composer. Isn't this fun? O.K.
X=Elgar.

I think those British people will be really offended at you Earl. I
mean I can say a few bad things about Brahms, but the German-Austrians
still got Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Schumann, Mendelssohn, Schubert,
Mahler, Wagner, Richard Strauss.... Well you get the picture. Where as
the British have only a few composers outside G & S like Vaughan Williams,
Britten, and oh my god Elgar. I don't dig Elgar much myself, but is he
really being over played?

Trying to stay in touch with reality.... Fred

[Ian O. Morrison]

In article <19961125044...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
opu...@aol.com writes:

> I don't dig Elgar much myself, but is he really being over played?

He is in Britain, but then so is Brahms.

--
Ian O. Morrison (i...@nmsdoc.demon.co.uk)
A Wyld Wykkyd Helandman fae Linlithgowshire

[ega...@aol.com]

In article <19961125044...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, opu...@aol.com
writes:

>Where as
>the British have only a few composers outside G & S like Vaughan
Williams,

>Britten, and oh my god Elgar. I don't dig Elgar much myself, but is he
>really being over played?

Vaughan Williams and Britten are geniuses compared to Elgar, and likely
geniuses without being compared with Elgar. Should Elgar get extra credit
because he is English? Would even Fred purchase a cd on the basis that
the composer was the "third greatest modern Belorussian composer?"

Go home, match VW's song Linden Lea or the 2nd Symphony or Britten's Sea
Pictures with anything written by Elgar. Earl.

[opu...@aol.com]

You may ask, what does "Overrated" have to do with Shostakovich?
Simply I would say that there is some fat in classical music that needs to
be trimmed and in it's place we need to put some meat like Shostakovich.
That is the purpose of "Overrated" in a nutshell.
Now to my memory we have slammed Brahms (my choice), Elgar (Earl's
choice), and Webern (CMC's choice). Any other takers? Have we offended
you by mentioning a favorite of yours yet?

FrankenFred... maker of monster e-mail

[Greg Whitman]

"" <opu...@aol.com> wrote:

....

> Someone told me, correct me if I'm wrong and I know you will, that
>Brahms most important works were his chamber works. Then why is it that
>every season there is a sprinkling of Brahms symphonies or concerti or
>serenades at the symphony concert when his best work was chamber?

....

Who knows what "someone" meant by "most important" -- most influential,
most performed, most plunges from tentative hope to abysmal despair?

Regardless of that, I'd have to guess that the reason why his chamber
works aren't performed at symphony concerts is that chamber music is
not written for orchestras.

It appears to me that Brahms isn't one of your favorites, and there's
really nothing wrong with that, so long as you are prepared to follow
up your attacks with substantial arguments. If you intend only to argue
over matters of taste, well, non dispuntandum and all.

--
__ __ __ __ __
__ / __ / __ / __ / __ /
/ /_ / /_ / /_ / /_ / /_
/_ /_ /_ /_ /_

[Paul Murphy]

Earl writes:

> The most overrated composer is Elgar, with Elgar coming in second, close
> to Elgar, third.

Brahms? Elgar? Webern? I like them all. Rachmaninov! I heard a concert
last year with Yo-Yo Ma performing DSCH's 1st Cello Concerto (much more
vibrant and muscular than his recording with Ormandy), and the wiseguys
at the Toronto Symphony elected to follow it with Rachmaninov's 2nd
Symphony. What a tedious windbag.

Cheers,
Paul

[opu...@aol.com]

Dear Greg,

You're right. All I can do is argue the numbers. Like Brahms has
14 pages of space in the Schwann Opus. Is that a lot of space? Elgar has
4 and Webern has 1. I imagine some composers aren't even recorded and
have no space at all.
Some fool named Phil G. Goulding actually attempted to rank all of
the great composers. He has Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven as the top 3. I
don't exactly agree with the order, but I think that he's right about
those being the top 3. He has Brahms as the 6th greatest composer. I
think he ranks Brahms high but that's Goulding's opinion. Why did I buy
this stupid book? He ranks Shostakovich 19th, which is the highest on
any list compared to the one I can generate from the doing an analysis in
the Schwann Opus Catalog . So I like Goulding's ranking of Shostakovich
as relatively high, but then I think Brahms is too high. I could make
other criticisms about his list and his book, but I'll leave it at that.
I am an analytical and go by the numbers, I'm from Missouri "The Show
Me State" kind of person. Brahms does come out of the numbers of
performances each year, raw number of recordings, and this rank in this
"book" as being a greater composer than what my "golden ears" have
determined, as good being a full blown Shostakovich fan. Are you
something other than a Shostakovich fan? Do you disagree with my
numerical analysis? Then prove yourself. But I give you one chance and
one chance only since this is not alt.fan.Brahms. State what you have to
say and I will leave it at that. I will not respond to this response on
alt.fan. shostakovich. Perhaps the best thing would be is to e-mail me
personally and we can take this outside. This is my best argument. I
have nothing left to say.

Fred

[opu...@aol.com]

Earl,

I have a small library of VW. Don't have the 2nd symphony. I prefer
the dissonance of the 4th. Kind of like a Soviet composer that completed
a symphony in 1936 that was his 4th also. What was his name?

Fred

[Caius Marcius]

In <3299CB...@utoronto.ca> Paul Murphy <paul....@utoronto.ca>
writes:
>
>Earl write Rachmaninov! I heard a concert

>last year with Yo-Yo Ma performing DSCH's 1st Cello Concerto (much
more
>vibrant and muscular than his recording with Ormandy), and the
wiseguys
>at the Toronto Symphony elected to follow it with Rachmaninov's 2nd
>Symphony. What a tedious windbag.

In my book, anybody as obsessed with the Dies Irae theme as The Rach
can't be all bad.

- CMC

[opu...@aol.com]

Dear Paul,

Say it ain't so. Not good ole "Rocky." Ya didn't like his 2nd
symphony. My god man that would be the equivalent of his Shostakovich
5th!
Rachmaninov did a fine 1st symphony in my estimation and what
happened?
rejection and a nervous breakdown. His 1st symphony is kinda like his
Shostakovich's 4th.
I just love the Rhapsody on a theme of Paganini even though I am
fundamentally against theme and variations.
No I'm not a real Rachmaninov nut, but I do think he's good.
Remember it's not enough that you don't like the composer, but that he is
actually played or recorded too much.
I don't like Richard Strauss for instance. I don't understand why
there are so many recordings of Strauss. Even though the only works of
his that I like are his First Horn Concerto and the Four Last Songs that
doesn't mean I don't think that he is over played or over recorded. I
can't judge what I don't understand. Although some may have you believe
that I do judge things that I don't understand.

Fred

[feral...@aol.com]

I can't believe these rankings of "best" composer. What kind of creepy
fan-crap is this all about? People who buy into this thing need analysis.

Shosty is #1 for me today. Perhaps #43 tomorrow. Who gives a shit?

Adam Parfrey

[Ian O. Morrison]

In article <19961125152...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
opu...@aol.com writes:

I rather like Webern's music, but I do understand why people might
consider him over-rated. You don't tend to get many *bangs for your
buck* with him.

I think, on balance, I would nominate Mahler as the most over-rated
composer, but it is a close run race.

[opu...@aol.com]

I guess if your a conductor and you want to please the audience and
fill the most seats for the season you should know what composer's are "on
top" and who are the "bottom feeders." It's a musical Darwinian kind of
the thing "survival of the most musical." Of course, you can't have all
the composer's "on top" during the season so you sprinkle a few "bottom
feeders" along with a "new" composition that no one has heard of.
No, it doesn't matter if your a Shostakovich fan to you personally
where a composer would rank. That is a very personal thing indeed. Of
course, Shostakovich is #1 with me. It's just that the Schwann catalog
has 22 other composers taking up more space than Shostakovich. That's a
pretty big difference from my point of view, I say he's #1 and reality
says he's #23. I don't know about you, but that causes me some anxiety
and depression.
The Other 22 Composers are:
J.S. Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, Chopin, Debussy, Dvorak, Handel, Haydn,
Liszt,
Mendelssohn, Mozart, Prokofiev, Rachmaninov, Ravel, Schubert, Schumann,
R.Strauss, Stravinsky, Tchaikovsky, Verdi, Vivaldi, and Wagner.

Fred... You can always count on me.

[Theo Vosse]

In article <19961125042...@ladder01.news.aol.com> opu...@aol.com writes:

Webern? Brahms has Webern out-numbered 14 to 1 in the Schwann
catalog for number of pages used for recordings! Now that's overrated.

Then again, Brahms has written well over 14 times as much music as
Webern has. I suppose all of Webern's music will fit into CD space
that holds Brahms' piano trios.

No, when you're talking about overrated composers, take a look
(listen) at composers of these horrible virtuoso pieces: Paganini,
Liszt or Stockhausen, to name a few...
--
Theo Vosse
----------
Unit for Experimental Psychology
University of Leiden
The Netherlands

[ega...@aol.com]

December Gramaphone has Naxos ad promising complete DSCH piano works.
Goody. A nice Christmas present. Earl.

[opu...@aol.com]

Uh yah Earl,

I guess the Gramophone has an ad for DSCH piano works on Naxos...
that means that in Europe the CD would be good for a Christmas present.
Here in the States you can probably mark your calender for the year 2000
for that release.

Fred

[Ian O. Morrison]

In article <19961126230...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
opu...@aol.com writes:

> No, it doesn't matter if your a Shostakovich fan to you personally
> where a composer would rank. That is a very personal thing indeed. Of
> course, Shostakovich is #1 with me. It's just that the Schwann catalog
> has 22 other composers taking up more space than Shostakovich. That's a
> pretty big difference from my point of view, I say he's #1 and reality
> says he's #23. I don't know about you, but that causes me some anxiety
> and depression.
> The Other 22 Composers are:
> J.S. Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, Chopin, Debussy, Dvorak, Handel, Haydn,
> Liszt,
> Mendelssohn, Mozart, Prokofiev, Rachmaninov, Ravel, Schubert, Schumann,
> R.Strauss, Stravinsky, Tchaikovsky, Verdi, Vivaldi, and Wagner.

The top 23, by this reckoning, includes hardly any 20th century composers.
This is depressing, as it suggests to me that popular opinion can take
about 100 years to establish a composer's *greatness*, at least in Schwann
ranking terms.

For a composer who was working into the 1970s, DSCH doesn't do badly at
all, in terms of recordings and performances. This is a cause for
rejoicing, as far as I am concerned.

--
Ian O. Morrison (i...@nmsdoc.demon.co.uk)

....pondering the possible implications of at least one list.....

[sombody you don't know]

feral...@aol.com wrote:

I agree Adam. I think there are people here who have 8X10 glossies of
Shostakovitch and collect his buble gum packs. I heard that one of the
posters here once promised his high school that he could get
Shostokovitch to appear at his prom. In the end, he learned that it's
more important to be yourself than to impress other people.

To resurrect an old arguement, I don't like the word "fan" in this
context, yet it does seem to describe the attitude of a few (and only
a few) of the posters.

_____
SYDK

[LU...@cunyvm.cuny.edu]

I would like to join the chorus of those who are singing
the uncherished lists of overrated literature in Western
music.

My first choice is Mozart, for his easy-tuned, often
predictable simplicity which has too often been hailed
as exquisitely wrought fluency. Granted, there are works
of extrordinary genius that stand out in the Mozart oeuvre,
but Mozart has been elevated to the degree where many
second rate pieces keep getting recycled in the repertoire.
Mozart has become and remains the darling of the concert
hall, the hero of the listener who never wants his/her
ears unruffled by challenges to the Almighty, and who is
content with the easy flowing and soothing sounds of
predictability.

My second choice in the overrated category is Dvorak's
Cello Concerto. Now, Dvorak is a composer for whom I have
a lot of respect. I feel that the first six symphonies
should be played much more than they are. Yet the Cello
Cto suffers from weak melodic material and overall weak
construction. What is this Gestalt that has convinced
the masses of its supposed greatness?

Regarding Elgar, I feel that his Sym #1 is actually UNDERrated
as are his large oratorios such as Light if Life, Dream of
Gerontius, Apostles, etc. I suppose if you are British, you
may find Elgar excessively trumped up in the Grammophone
reviews (jingoistic lot, aren't they?). Elgar isn't even
performed that often to even rank in the overrated category,
is he?

Best Wishes,


Louis Blois, New York

[Patrick TJ McPhee]

Just to move a little further off topic...

In article <4pw112...@ruls41.fsw.LeidenUniv.nl>,
Theo Vosse <vo...@ruls41.fsw.LeidenUniv.nl> wrote:
% No, when you're talking about overrated composers, take a look
% (listen) at [...] Liszt

Actually, I would say Liszt is under-rated, at least among musicians.
He wrote a lot of good music, but people (at least, the people I know)
seem to just sneer at him these days.
--

Patrick TJ McPhee
Toronto Canada
pt...@io.org

[begley@mojo]

opu...@aol.com wrote:

: The Other 22 Composers are:

: J.S. Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, Chopin, Debussy, Dvorak, Handel, Haydn,
: Liszt,
: Mendelssohn, Mozart, Prokofiev, Rachmaninov, Ravel, Schubert, Schumann,
: R.Strauss, Stravinsky, Tchaikovsky, Verdi, Vivaldi, and Wagner.

Actually, I'm surprised he did that good. He beat out Bruckner, Mahler
Rimsky Korsakoff (sp?), Mousorsky (sp?), and Bartok!

Bob.

[Patrick TJ McPhee]

In article <57g7b2$h...@sjx-ixn9.ix.netcom.com>,
Caius Marcius <cori...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
% many of the aforementioned composers - Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Vivaldi,
% etc - were more prolific than DSCH (who wrote, I guess, roughly 200
% pieces)

I dunno about that. Shostakovich wrote a lot of music. The Oxford
Dictionary of Music lists more than three columns of compositions, which
is a bunch, and many of those are very long compared to a typical work by
one of the aforementioned. This isn't to say that, say, Bach and Vivaldi
didn't out score him, but I think he probably wrote more pieces of longer
duration than Beethoven, say. Anyway, if you went a little deeper into
Fred's catalogue, I guess you'd find half the Bach recordings are Brandenburg
concertos, and 2/3 the Beethovens are symphonies 3,5,6, and 9. The Debussy
is mostly la mer, pr\'elude \`a l'apr\`es-midis d'un faun, and selected
works for solo piano, with a few copies of the string quarted for good
measure. I imagine the bulk of the Shostakovich catalogue is just a few
pieces -- the 5th and 1st symponies, 1st violin concerto, and maybe
the 10th symphony.

This doesn't depress me: it's just market forces at work and we all know
how that makes it a better world.

[Diane Wilson]

I don't know how this fits into the ranking scheme, but I walked into
the local CD Superstore today only to encounter a rack full of audio-
plus-multimedia classical CDs entitled "_________ for Dummies" (fill
in any of quite a few composers). Yes, the screaming yellow cover
and everything.

I did not see "Shostakovich for Dummies" but the series does include
Stravinsky and Prokofiev, as well as others who edged into this century
including Debussy, Ravel, and Mahler.

I'm not sure whether to feel relieved or insulted that Shostakovich
was not in the series.
--
Diane Wilson, gender renegade |
dewi...@pobox.com | What we need is an optimistic
http://www.lava.net/~dewilson/ | Shostakovich.
http://www.lava.net/~dewilson/asd/ | --Shostakovich, quoting
http://www.lava.net/~dewilson/menace/ | official sources

[Caius Marcius]

In <19961126230...@ladder01.news.aol.com> opu...@aol.com
writes:

>
>
> I guess if your a conductor and you want to please the audience
and
>fill the most seats for the season you should know what composer's are
"on
>top" and who are the "bottom feeders." It's a musical Darwinian kind
of
>the thing "survival of the most musical." Of course, you can't have
all
>the composer's "on top" during the season so you sprinkle a few
"bottom
>feeders" along with a "new" composition that no one has heard of.

> No, it doesn't matter if your a Shostakovich fan to you personally
>where a composer would rank. That is a very personal thing indeed.
Of
>course, Shostakovich is #1 with me. It's just that the Schwann
catalog
>has 22 other composers taking up more space than Shostakovich.
That's a
>pretty big difference from my point of view, I say he's #1 and reality
>says he's #23. I don't know about you, but that causes me some
anxiety
>and depression.

> The Other 22 Composers are:
>J.S. Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, Chopin, Debussy, Dvorak, Handel, Haydn,
>Liszt,
>Mendelssohn, Mozart, Prokofiev, Rachmaninov, Ravel, Schubert,
Schumann,
>R.Strauss, Stravinsky, Tchaikovsky, Verdi, Vivaldi, and Wagner.
>

> Fred... You can always count on me.

Yeah, but how many of the top 22 have their own NG? (Answer - only
three - Bach, Beethoven & Wagner. The rest have to settle for an
occasional plug at rec.music.classical or rec.music.opera).

Like everyone else at AFS, Fred, I appreciate your industry - however I
think there are a few other variables we have to consider. Among them:

many of the aforementioned composers - Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Vivaldi,

etc - were more prolific than DSCH (who wrote, I guess, roughly 200

pieces), so of course that will generate more recordings on their
behalf. Verdi and Wagner were primarily opera composers (duh!), so
their listings take up more space in the Schwann catalog becuase they
have to list all the major soloists. And of course 20th-Century music
has yet to attain the same level of popularity as 18th and
19th-Century. So DSCH's placing 23rd is really a triumph - he's the
highest ranking composer born in this century!

Question - who in this Century rates second - I would guess Copland,
followed by Britten.

- CMC

[zn...@teleport.com]

Caius Marcius (cori...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: have to list all the major soloists. And of course 20th-Century music

: has yet to attain the same level of popularity as 18th and
: 19th-Century. So DSCH's placing 23rd is really a triumph - he's the
: highest ranking composer born in this century!

: Question - who in this Century rates second - I would guess Copland,
: followed by Britten.

1. Was Copland born in the 20th century?
2. If you pick from works composed in the 20th century, Gershwin is
pretty high on the list. Villa Lobos and Bartok are two other heavy
hitters.

--
zn...@teleport.com (M. Edward Borasky) http://www.teleport.com/~znmeb

I support the right to keep and arm bears.

[sombody you don't know]

begley@mojo () wrote:

>Actually, I'm surprised he did that good. He beat out Bruckner, Mahler
>Rimsky Korsakoff (sp?), Mousorsky (sp?), and Bartok!

Yes, but in the case of Mahler (whom I love)...Mahler's cannon
consists of very few peices: nine or ten symphonies a few song cycles
and a few songs. I'd be willing to bet that Mahler out-SELLS
Shostakovich however--for better or worse.

[minhquan@labyrinth.net.au Q]

opu...@aol.com wrote:

> You may ask, what does "Overrated" have to do with Shostakovich?
> Simply I would say that there is some fat in classical music that needs to
> be trimmed and in it's place we need to put some meat like Shostakovich.
> That is the purpose of "Overrated" in a nutshell.
> Now to my memory we have slammed Brahms (my choice), Elgar (Earl's
> choice), and Webern (CMC's choice). Any other takers? Have we offended
> you by mentioning a favorite of yours yet?

No, not really...but I like all of the music that's been mentioned on this
thread.

Sorry, guys.

- Q.

[minhquan@labyrinth.net.au Q]

opu...@aol.com wrote:

> The most overrated composer for me is Brahms. He doesn't belong with
> the other two great B's Bach and Beethoven. He only wrote his first
> symphony at the age of 43. Shostakovich was 18. Brahms is played too
> much in the concert hall and too much on the radio. I do admit his work
> is of high caliber, but there is no reason why we couldn't tone down a
> little bit on the Brahms, and turn up a little more on the Shostakovich.
> After all there is only so many concerts in a season and only so much time
> on the radio to be programmed. I'm not saying we should ban Brahms, just
> put him in his place.
>
> Peace... Fred

You never cease to amaze me with your inane and ludicrous justifications for
your opinions, Fred.

I mean; you wouldn't be biased, would you?

Regards,

- Q.

[Richard A. Muirden]

Gee, Earl's wife never emailed *me*

But then if she's so big on Brahms maybe that's why :-)

*waves a wombat's tail in Earl's direction* :)

-richard

--
Richard A. Muirden, RMIT ITS Unix Snr Systems Admin: Web+News+Post -Master
mailto: ric...@rmit.EDU.AU phone: 9660 3814, Fax: 9662 5652
Likes: Shostakovich (131 CD's), 'planes, sci-fi, cats, romance, cuddles and...
http://www.rmit.edu.au/richard

[opu...@aol.com]

Perhaps I have bubble gum on the brain. My ears hear Shostakovich and
that gooey sticky stuff in my head grabs hold of it and it won't let go.

I do love the music of Shostakovich, but I wouldn't say that I'm anal
enough to have an autograph picture of him. It wasn't how he looked that
attracts me to him. I'm sorry I'm just not that kind of guy.

I probably wouldn't like Shostakovich if I met him. I think that he was
too open-minded to believe that someone would be as obsessed about his
music as I am. He would probably tell me to listen to Stravinsky's
Symphony of Psalms or a Haydn string quartet. He would easily tire of
answering questions about his life and he would probably give vague
answers that would make me think.

So my manic mind will not stop with the endless combinations and
recombinations of Shostakovich music. If you haven't guessed already
A.F.S. is bubble gum for the mind. How profound can you get with an
e-mail message. Read a book for real nourishment for the brain. There's
nothing intelligent here I'm living proof of that.

Fred

[opu...@aol.com]

Dear Q,

Let's see you invent some e-mail that gets some discussion going.
My initial attack on Brahms was weak, but my follow up by sighting that
there were 14 pages of Brahms in Schwann Catalog was unsurpassed by any
other mention of any other composer. O.K. with the exception of Mozart I
think.

This is a pretty stupid discussion. I wonder if there is any end in
sight.

Regards...FrankenFred maker of monster e-mail

[Caius Marcius]

In <329c63e6...@news.netnitco.net> m...@fake.address.com (sombody

you don't know) writes:
>
>
>I agree Adam. I think there are people here who have 8X10 glossies of
>Shostakovitch and collect his buble gum packs.

Dear Mr. Fake -

If you know where I can obtain a pack of DSCH bubble gum cards, please
e-mail me with the info ASAP!

I used to collect Second Viennese School trading cards, which were
included, of course, on Serial boxes

And I also used to get the Johnan Sebastian & Sons series, which were
found on Bach's Tops

- CMC

[Richard A. Muirden]

Paul Murphy <paul....@utoronto.ca> writes:
>Brahms? Elgar? Webern? I like them all. Rachmaninov! I heard a concert

>last year with Yo-Yo Ma performing DSCH's 1st Cello Concerto (much more
>vibrant and muscular than his recording with Ormandy), and the wiseguys
>at the Toronto Symphony elected to follow it with Rachmaninov's 2nd
>Symphony. What a tedious windbag.

Hey, Rach2 is wonderful. I guess maybe that's why I'm a romantic and prefer
this stuff to Webern (yuck!). But I do like Brahms. I like Elgar's 2nd
symphony and the P&C marches but that's about it. His cello concerto drives
me nuts - can't stand it - even if DuPre is playing (gee she was a cutie
that one :) ). Anyway where was I? ah, Rach2 - WONDERFUL WORK! :)

(all IMHO)

>Cheers,
>Paul

[J Marsden]

<LU...@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU> wrote:

I suppose if you are British, you
>may find Elgar excessively trumped up in the Grammophone
>reviews (jingoistic lot, aren't they?). Elgar isn't even
>performed that often to even rank in the overrated category,
>is he?

Jingoistic????

Good humoured, even temperered, sensitive, cultured, modest:
we're all of these. But jingoistic, never!

Of course we know all about you foreign types, so what may
appear to others as aloof arrogance is purely self defence. Anyway,
why don't you yankee b*stards get your own language instead of
stealing one from a poor defencless third world country.....We've seen
your sort before (ie foreigners). In fact years of experience in the
global empire business has taught us that they can be found in all
parts of the world. Strange I know but true!

What is even more remarkable is that we have sustained the
above mentioned characteristics, even after the loss of the greatest
musical genius of the 20th century. It is, of course, our modesty
which has prevented us from proclaiming this loss beyond the shores of
these fair isles (no 3 part mini-series for us). But as the century
closes it is fitting that the truth should be known throughout the
world (even in those countries where foreigners live).

Cecil Sidebottom was born and lived in Poulton-le-Flyde,
Lancashire. At an early age his musical talents were recognised by
his parents . They decided to keep quiet about this in case he became
famous and rise above his station in life, thus rendering him
susceptable to poshness and a loss of forelock tugging ability, or as
they say in that part of the world: "turn into a big girls blouse".
However, this talent was spotted by George Formby (the nations leading
exponent of string orchestration) who one day saw him playing the
spoons with some of his street urchin chums (they were playing
Vivaldi's "Four Seasons" re-written by Cecil for percussion). George
took him under his wing and taught him everything that he knew. When
Cecil came of age he decided that he must defy his families wishes and
devote himself to his art. Upon his announcement of inherent musical
genius he was courted by the musical world and soon obtained his first
commmission. "By Jove" he thought, "Uncle Joes Mintballs Co. are the
finest confectioners in the North West of England....My fortune is
made". Tragically for hm it was the wrong Uncle Joe. He was kidnapped
and taken to Russia by foreigners (them again), placed under dacha
arrest and told to write his music. At first he refused but then the
torture started. They forced him to eat soup made from beetroots
(thereby making him think he was hallucinating each time he took a
pee), they called him grotesque names (the worst of which
"Shostacoughitch" stayed with him for the rest of his life) and they
forced him to wear the most hideous spectacles the world has ever
seen. Every man has his breaking point and Cecil had his. He started
writing and never stopped. He never escaped the grasp of those
malignant foreign type people and never did return to his green and
pleasant land, warm beer, cricket, rain and crumpets.....So sad!

Thus ends the tale of how Engand lost a national treasure:
Cecil Sidebottom. Regretfully the nation has had to make do with a
national travesty instead: Andrew L Webber (Weber...hmmmmmm)

Yours, John Marsden.
(hoping that the rumour that a irony by-pass is a
pre-requisite to becoming an American is untrue)
PS
Hey! Have a nice day. :)

[ega...@aol.com]

In article <57j3nq$j...@zap.io.org>, pt...@zap.io.org (Patrick TJ McPhee)
writes:

>This doesn't depress me: it's just market forces at work and we all know
>how that makes it a better world.

If this is true how come we have lots of

a. Three tenors.
b. Elgar.
c. Smoking.

Earl.

[ega...@aol.com]

In article <19961129101...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, opu...@aol.com
writes:

> What is Shostakovich's rank with Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia?
>MUD is his rank. MUDDDD.
>
> Fred

I quit doing my serious research in Compton's. Richard Miurdan isn't even
listed.
earl.

[Caius Marcius]

In <19961129101...@ladder01.news.aol.com> opu...@aol.com
writes:
>
>Dear Patrick and everybody,
>
> When I first got this computer I got a CD-ROM called "Compton's
>Interactive Encyclopedia." The first thing I looked up was
Shostakovich.
Surely DSCH has been dragged through the mud by this
>"encyclopedia."

> What is Shostakovich's rank with Compton's Interactive
Encyclopedia?
>MUD is his rank. MUDDDD.

I believe it was Bugs Bunny (in his pre-Michale Jordan days) who
pointed out that MUD spelled backwards is DUM......perhaps this has
some sinister tie-in with the putative "Shostakovich for Dummies" CD
that someone (Diane Wilson?) recently envisioned slouching towards
Tower Records.

- CMC

[Patrick TJ McPhee]

In article <19961129170...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
<ega...@aol.com> wrote:
% In article <57j3nq$j...@zap.io.org>, pt...@zap.io.org (Patrick TJ McPhee)
% writes:
%
% >This doesn't depress me: it's just market forces at work and we all know
% >how that makes it a better world.
%
% If this is true how come we have lots of
%
% a. Three tenors.
I play with an orchestra which either went bankrupt or went into an
8 month hiatus as of tonight, and we were bitching about the three
tenors as we consoled ourselves. The three tenors don't really bother
me. What bothered me was the big Aida production that went through
a lot of stadiums a few years ago. You had this second-rate production
with no singers and no musicians, but thousands of people went to each
performance.

% b. Elgar.
This is an enigma.

% c. Smoking.
This provides a spur for cancer research.

[I was kidding about market forces, of course]

[Q.]

opu...@aol.com wrote:

Why do I get a sense of deja vu every time I post a follow-up to you,
Fred?

> Dear Q,
>
> Let's see you invent some e-mail that gets some discussion going.

What type of discussion would you like me to ignite? I'm quite happy to
talk about DSCH's works for as long as anyone will listen, especially
the chamber and string works - but it seems that what I want to talk
about is not what you want to talk about. I guess I just don't like
talking about the 'best' DSCH symphonies/concertos/quartets etc, or any
threads of that sort. Those things don't really matter to me.

> My initial attack on Brahms was weak, but my follow up by sighting that
> there were 14 pages of Brahms in Schwann Catalog was unsurpassed by any
> other mention of any other composer. O.K. with the exception of Mozart I
> think.

What exactly *is* your problem with Brahms? I think our basic conflict
of interests can be summed up in your dismissal of Brahms as having not
written his first symphony until the age of 43 - - true, but what the
hell does age have to do with it?

> This is a pretty stupid discussion. I wonder if there is any end in
> sight.

There isn't while you keep adding to it, Fred.

> Regards...FrankenFred maker of monster e-mail

- Q...the harmless music-lover

[opu...@aol.com]

Dear Q,

What is my problem with Brahms? Let me tell you a story.

I don't usually listen to public radio because they don't play
classics I like usually. So I tuned in to the classical station while
driving my car and some non-desript music was playing. What could it be
I asked? I like guessing the composer. Is it the middle of the Beethoven
Pastorale? No. Is it Schumann maybe the 2nd or 4th symphony, could be or
maybe Brahms? I stopped and got out of my car and conducted my business.
I got back in my car and some theme and variations were playing and then
it is announced Brahms 4th symphony. How dreary I thought. Next
Mozart's 29th symphony which was crisp and buoyant. I don't exactly dig
the genius Mozart, but who could blame him if he wrote music the way
people breathe. Some music inspired and some not, but what else could he
do he was a genius. I made another stop. Got back in the car and
Tchaikovsky's 1st piano concerto is in the first movement playing.
Tchaikovsky with his great tunes making me feel alive. It's really not
fair to compare Brahms 4th with Mozart's 29th with Tchaikovsky's 1st piano
concerto.
But as I remember these are all suppose to be exceptional works by these
composers. Brahms just doesn't float my boat. He doesn't float my boat
compared to Shostakovich or Mozart or Tchaikovsky.
Brahms seems too timid for me. It must be my inner insecurity of my
masculinity that is at the core of this. Shostakovich seems to be just
the opposite. Shostakovich is strong, brave, and bold. Perhaps
Shostakovich was a timid man, but his music is nothing of the sort. To me
Brahms is the opposite of Shostakovich which as you will probably say is
ludicrous and inane.
I don't totally dislike Brahms. I think that his First Piano
Concerto is good.
Er I forgot how the Violin Concerto goes so I couldn't say. Some of those
Hungarian Dances are mighty snappy.
I should qualify Shostakovich and say when he wasn't bold he was
funny. I just listened to Alledgedly Murdered today.
Am I biased towards Shostakovich. Sure the hell am and proud of it
too. All music deserves understanding. I didn't totally understand
Shostakovich right away and had to give a little. Now I can't count the
times that I've cried because the music has empathized so closely to my
emotions. I am totally obsessed because I feel that there is no one else
who has the deep feelings that I do when they hear the music.
What I hear a lot of and I am disappointed by is almost an
intellectual love for Shostakovich's music. I do agree you have to have a
minimal intellect (aren't you surprised I have one) to understand the
music and I would agree that it is almost intellectually emotional or is
it the contrary.
Oh well, I've stated my reasoning. This is why I strongly like
Shostakovich and dislike Brahms. In short I feel Brahms is the opposite
along my emotional scale. Yes I am saying my feelings according to me not
written in any book.
But to see all recordings of Brahms and to have him performed in greater
frequency all the more adds insult to injury in my mind. I admit my view
is extreme and I am an extremist but that is how I honestly feel.

Still crazy after all these years...Fred

[ega...@aol.com]

Well I have thought about opening my mouth once again and have had fears
that I might receive bombs in the mail, but I venture to say that an
overrated composer is: Khachaturian.

[zn...@teleport.com]

ega...@aol.com wrote:
: Well I have thought about opening my mouth once again and have had fears

: that I might receive bombs in the mail, but I venture to say that an
: overrated composer is: Khachaturian.

Khachaturian was immensely popular during his lifetime. I for one enjoy
his music, especially the piano, violin and cello concerti. His
symphonies are not really significant alongside of DSCH. His ballet
music is very popular; at one time "Sabre Dance" was actually on pop
music top ten lists! No, he is not as great as Shostakovich, Mahler or
even Prokofiev. But I wouldn't call him overrated.

--
zn...@teleport.com (M. Edward Borasky) http://www.teleport.com/~znmeb

Actually, for their size, elephants don't smell all that bad.

"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself -- and, of course, the
boogeyman." Pat Paulsen

[Caius Marcius]

In <57hppp$s...@nadine.teleport.com> zn...@teleport.com () writes:
>
>Caius Marcius (cori...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>: Question - who in this Century rates second after DSCH - I would

guess Copland,
>: followed by Britten.
>1. Was Copland born in the 20th century?

Copland was born on November 14, 1900 - so in order to answer your
question, just let me ask you this - you plan on celebrating the
Millenium on 01/01/2000 or on 01/01/2001?

(If only those damn Romans had invented a "zero" integer!)

- CMC

[Richard A. Muirden]

m...@fake.address.com (sombody you don't know) writes:
>I agree Adam. I think there are people here who have 8X10 glossies of

>Shostakovitch and collect his buble gum packs. I heard that one of the
>posters here once promised his high school that he could get
>Shostokovitch to appear at his prom. In the end, he learned that it's
>more important to be yourself than to impress other people.

WHAT!?!?! He had bubble gum and I DIDN'T KNOW?! THIS IS A CONSPIRACY!!! :-)

>To resurrect an old arguement, I don't like the word "fan" in this
>context, yet it does seem to describe the attitude of a few (and only
>a few) of the posters.

(seriously) that's a fair point. Way back when I created the group, as I
am sure many are bored to tears with hearing, it was done as a joke and
as such the name wasn't too important, but I guess I intend the fan to
imply those who have a special interest/fondness in the music of DSCH rather
than a teenage rabble (besides I don't think we even have any teenagers
here. I'm prob. the youngest!)

[Caius Marcius]

>m...@fake.address.com (sombody you don't know) writes:

I heard that one of the
>>posters here once promised his high school that he could get
>>Shostokovitch to appear at his prom.

OK, OK, I confess - that was me - back in 1971, my senior year in high
school, I e-mailed DSCH and asked him to appear at the Everett High
prom. He e-mailed me back, saying that he would be there with bells
on. For a brief time, I was the BMOC. All the cheerleaders were
desperate to date the guy who would singlehandedly deliver DSCH to our
prom, and put our school on the musical map. We didn't even hire a
band, figuring DSCH would play his complete Op. 87 cycle for us. Come
prom night, major print and electronic media had our school
surrounded. The air was crackling with anticipation. I had just
finished hanging a "Welcome Dmitri Dmitrievich" banner over the
first-floor drinking fountain when my beeper rang. It was DSCH's
secretary - imagine my chagrin when he cancelled out at the last minute
- his secretary claimed he had some emergency Party conference to
attend in Vladivostok (Title "If Lenin is the Greatest Man of Our Very
Complicated Times, Then Who Are Numbers Two & Three?"). In his place,
he sent Dmitri Kabalevsky, who arrived roaring drunk. Kabalevsky bored
everyone to tears by insisting on playing his Op. 5 Preludes over and
over, and drank so heavily through the evening that most of the
students were forced to go home sober. I never really got over the
shame and ignominy, and had to attend graduation with a paper bag over
my head.

In the end, he learned that it's
>>more important to be yourself than to impress other people.
>

Very true, although I think that this statement would have a lot more
resonance if it came from someone who didn't call himself "Me at Fake
Address"

- CMC (somebody you *do* know)

[Q.]

opu...@aol.com wrote:
>
> Dear Q,
>
> What is my problem with Brahms? Let me tell you a story.
>
> I don't usually listen to public radio because they don't play
> classics I like usually. So I tuned in to the classical station while
> driving my car and some non-desript music was playing. What could it be
> I asked? I like guessing the composer. Is it the middle of the Beethoven
> Pastorale? No. Is it Schumann maybe the 2nd or 4th symphony, could be or
> maybe Brahms? I stopped and got out of my car and conducted my business.
> I got back in my car and some theme and variations were playing and then
> it is announced Brahms 4th symphony. How dreary I thought. Next
> Mozart's 29th symphony which was crisp and buoyant. I don't exactly dig
> the genius Mozart, but who could blame him if he wrote music the way
> people breathe. Some music inspired and some not, but what else could he
> do he was a genius. I made another stop. Got back in the car and
> Tchaikovsky's 1st piano concerto is in the first movement playing.
> Tchaikovsky with his great tunes making me feel alive. It's really not
> fair to compare Brahms 4th with Mozart's 29th with Tchaikovsky's 1st piano
> concerto.

Yeah, yeah, great story, Fred - - but it really doesn't serve much of a
purpose, does it?

> But as I remember these are all suppose to be exceptional works by these
> composers. Brahms just doesn't float my boat. He doesn't float my boat
> compared to Shostakovich or Mozart or Tchaikovsky.

Fair enough, I have no bones with that. My problem is the way that you
are quite happy to denounce any composer you yourself do not like,
dismissing them as over-rated and their music as 'nondescript'.

> Brahms seems too timid for me. It must be my inner insecurity of my
> masculinity that is at the core of this. Shostakovich seems to be just
> the opposite. Shostakovich is strong, brave, and bold. Perhaps
> Shostakovich was a timid man, but his music is nothing of the sort. To me
> Brahms is the opposite of Shostakovich which as you will probably say is
> ludicrous and inane.

Hey - I won't argue, I'm not in a position to do so, being a girl.

> I don't totally dislike Brahms. I think that his First Piano
> Concerto is good.
> Er I forgot how the Violin Concerto goes so I couldn't say. Some of those
> Hungarian Dances are mighty snappy.

True understanding of music goes hand in hand with knowledge. It is
silly to dismiss Brahms' music if you don't know some of his most major
works (personally I wouldn't include the Hungarian Dances among them,
but anyway). I don't have a problem with anyone's dislike of any
music/composer/performer, but I do have a problem with it when a person
will make an uninformed decision.

> Am I biased towards Shostakovich. Sure the hell am and proud of it
> too. All music deserves understanding. I didn't totally understand
> Shostakovich right away and had to give a little. Now I can't count the
> times that I've cried because the music has empathized so closely to my
> emotions. I am totally obsessed because I feel that there is no one else
> who has the deep feelings that I do when they hear the music.

I too am biased towards Shostakovich, as are all the a.f.s. people; but
that really doesn't qualify an unconditional bias *against* anyone else.
Indeed, DSCH is the composer whose music I felt the greatest immediate
affinity with, right from the word go. I too have cried, felt empty and
torn with the music. It does not surprise me, somehow, that you feel
that nobody else has the same reaction to Shostakovich's music. I think
if you asked around you would find that responses would allude to the
contrary.

> What I hear a lot of and I am disappointed by is almost an
> intellectual love for Shostakovich's music. I do agree you have to have a
> minimal intellect (aren't you surprised I have one) to understand the
> music and I would agree that it is almost intellectually emotional or is
> it the contrary.

What, so everyone else's approach is purely cerebral? Intellect does not
drive passion, so nobody would bother if they didn't feel the immense
emotional pull of Shostakovich's music.

> Oh well, I've stated my reasoning. This is why I strongly like
> Shostakovich and dislike Brahms. In short I feel Brahms is the opposite
> along my emotional scale. Yes I am saying my feelings according to me not
> written in any book.

Fair enough. I too have made my case and I'll leave it at that.

> But to see all recordings of Brahms and to have him performed in greater
> frequency all the more adds insult to injury in my mind. I admit my view
> is extreme and I am an extremist but that is how I honestly feel.

You forget that Brahms has been around for a much longer time than
Shostakovich, and that he is much more 'accessible' to the average
non-classical buff off the street, Fred.

- Q.

[Dirk Kussin]

In article <3299CB...@utoronto.ca> Paul Murphy
<paul....@utoronto.ca> writes:

Paul> Brahms? Elgar? Webern? I like them all. Rachmaninov! I heard a
Paul> concert last year with Yo-Yo Ma performing DSCH's 1st Cello
Paul> Concerto (much more vibrant and muscular than his recording with
Paul> Ormandy), and the wiseguys at the Toronto Symphony elected to
Paul> follow it with Rachmaninov's 2nd Symphony. What a tedious
Paul> windbag.

Apart from the fact that I like Rachmaninov's 2nd symph. I recently
was in a concert with

1st part: Schumann, piano concerto

2nd part: Shostakovich, 11th symph.

Does this fit together? Schumann's piano concerto is a fine work, but
I find it really boring this evening, compared with the brutal and
loud #11.
--

Dirk

[Jonathan Addleman]

On 3 Dec 1996 00:09:25 GMT, ric...@bofh.its.rmit.EDU.AU (Richard A.
Muirden) wrote:

>m...@fake.address.com (sombody you don't know) writes:

>>I agree Adam. I think there are people here who have 8X10 glossies of

>>Shostakovitch and collect his buble gum packs. I heard that one of the

>>posters here once promised his high school that he could get

>>Shostokovitch to appear at his prom. In the end, he learned that it's

>>more important to be yourself than to impress other people.
>

>WHAT!?!?! He had bubble gum and I DIDN'T KNOW?! THIS IS A CONSPIRACY!!! :-)
>
>
>>To resurrect an old arguement, I don't like the word "fan" in this
>>context, yet it does seem to describe the attitude of a few (and only
>>a few) of the posters.
>
>(seriously) that's a fair point. Way back when I created the group, as I
>am sure many are bored to tears with hearing, it was done as a joke and
>as such the name wasn't too important, but I guess I intend the fan to
>imply those who have a special interest/fondness in the music of DSCH rather
>than a teenage rabble (besides I don't think we even have any teenagers
>here. I'm prob. the youngest!)

I'm 18! (not factorial, just exclamatory) Do you find that teenagers
rarely like Shostakovitch? Or you just haven't seen many in the NG. I
know at least a few people my age who like him.

[Richard A. Muirden]

Ah aol, how I have not missed you!

:)

--
Richard A. Muirden, RMIT ITS Snr Unix Systems Admin: Web+News+Post -Master

mailto: ric...@rmit.EDU.AU phone: 9660 3814, Fax: 9662 5652
Likes: Shostakovich (131 CD's), 'planes, sci-fi, cats, romance, cuddles and...

"Resistance is Futile" "Borg? Sounds Sweedish"
http://www.rmit.edu.au/richard

[mpa...@aol.com]

Fred bravely writes:

> I don't totally dislike Brahms. I think that his First Piano
> Concerto is good.

I'd take the 2nd over the 1st anyday.

> Er I forgot how the Violin Concerto goes so I couldn't say.

It's one of the greatest violin concertos in the literature. And I
suggest listening to his trio and violin sonatas. The Hungarian Dances
are snappy, and pretty friggin' cool. But...you won't catch me weeping
for more than a bar or two over much of Brahams (although I suspect some
have, i.e. Clara Schumann).

No composer compares with Shosty - it's just a fact.

--M. Panes

[redrick]

di...@navier.uni-paderborn.de (Dirk Kussin) wrote:

>I recently
>was in a concert with
>
> 1st part: Schumann, piano concerto
>
> 2nd part: Shostakovich, 11th symph.
>
>Does this fit together? Schumann's piano concerto is a fine work, but
>I find it really boring this evening, compared with the brutal and
>loud #11.

Fits together to me, though I wouldn't call the 11th brutal and
loud. I'd say it depicts brutality with loudness in some parts.

I love the Schumann piano concerto, but I think for an orchestra
and conductor it is asking inhuman concentration to expect them
to pay it much attention knowing that they have the 11th to deal
with after the interval.

Regards, -Rick

--
red...@az.com
/ // /// ///// /////// /////////// ///////////// / // ///

[9606...@music.gla.ac.uk]

In article <19961202120...@ladder01.news.aol.com> ega...@aol.com
writes:

> Well I have thought about opening my mouth once again and have had fears
> that I might receive bombs in the mail, but I venture to say that an
> overrated composer is: Khachaturian.

Bombs in the mail it is then!!!!
I really like Khachaturian.

Maniacal Maestro

[9606...@music.gla.ac.uk]

In article <57lm2o$r...@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com>
cori...@ix.netcom.com(Caius Marcius) writes:
> In <329c63e6...@news.netnitco.net> m...@fake.address.com (sombody

> you don't know) writes:
> >
> >
> >I agree Adam. I think there are people here who have 8X10 glossies of
> >Shostakovitch and collect his buble gum packs.
>

> Dear Mr. Fake -
>
> If you know where I can obtain a pack of DSCH bubble gum cards, please
> e-mail me with the info ASAP!

> - CMC

Me too, me too!!!!!
I want Shostakovich Bubblegum wrappers, cards, posters, you name it.
Now, now, now!!!!!!!
Oh, and incedentally, if anyone knows where I could get a copy of "The New
Shostakovich" (Ian MacDonald), then please mail me with that information
too.
Ta very much

Maniacal Maestro

Sorry, but this machine is buggering around: I don't know if I'll end up
posting multiple times. Sorry if that happens.

[9606...@music.gla.ac.uk]

[9606...@music.gla.ac.uk]

[Richard A. Muirden]

jad...@po-box.mcgill.ca (Jonathan Addleman) writes:
>I'm 18! (not factorial, just exclamatory) Do you find that teenagers
>rarely like Shostakovitch? Or you just haven't seen many in the NG. I
>know at least a few people my age who like him.

Well! Welcome. It's unusual for any young people to apprieciate classical
music let alone Shostakovich. Yes, a generalisation but I'm sure many of
you would agree with me. Not that I think that's wrong or bad or anything,
just an observation.

to CMC: Re DSCH Cancelling your prom. I think it prob. had more to do with
not wanting to possibly meet "The Man from Boeing" than upsetting those
cheerleaders. As we know, DSCH was quite fond of the "trombone act" :)

-richard

--
Richard A. Muirden, RMIT ITS Snr Unix Systems Admin: Web+News+Post -Master
mailto: ric...@rmit.EDU.AU phone: 9660 3814, Fax: 9662 5652
Likes: Shostakovich (131 CD's), 'planes, sci-fi, cats, romance, cuddles and...

"Resistance is Futile" "Borg? Sounds Swedish"
http://www.rmit.edu.au/richard

[Caius Marcius]

>opu...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> What is my problem with Brahms? Let me tell you a story.
>>
>> I don't usually listen to public radio because they don't play
>> classics I like usually. So I tuned in to the classical station
while
>> driving my car and some non-desript music was playing. What could
it be
>> I asked? I like guessing the composer. Is it the middle of the
Beethoven
>> Pastorale? No. Is it Schumann maybe the 2nd or 4th symphony, could
be or
>> maybe Brahms? I stopped and got out of my car and conducted my
business.
>> I got back in my car and some theme and variations were playing and
then
>> it is announced Brahms 4th symphony. How dreary I thought. Next
>> Mozart's 29th symphony which was crisp and buoyant.

<large snip>

I respect Fred's right not to like Brahms - I rate him rather more
highly, though - one interesting thing about Brahms' 4th, however,
quite pertinent to "fans" of 20th-Century composers, is his revival of
the passacaglia in that symphony's finale - a form which had been
moribund since JSB laid down his pen. In our own Century, of course,
the passacaglia is once again in common use - DSCH used the form in the
4th movement of his Symphony No. 8, the 4th movement of his 3rd SQ, the
3rd movement of his SQ 10, etc.

Of course, his use of such devices helped to justify the charges of
"formalism" levied against him by Just Critics.

- CMC

[mvarfolo]

Wholeheartedly agree!
Pop Quiz: does anyone know how he met Salvador Dali?

ega...@aol.com wrote:
: Well I have thought about opening my mouth once again and have had fears

[Richard A. Muirden]

mpa...@aol.com writes:
>No composer compares with Shosty - it's just a fact.

I don't know why I just have this image springing into my head of DSCH
sitting up out of his grave, reading this and laughing hysterically at
us all.

I think someone spiked this can of Coke. oh well.

[Richard A. Muirden]

"Q." <minh...@labyrinth.net.au> writes:
>At risk of having others completely discount any views I may have (I
>have one a.f.s.-er in mind in particular) (but I would expect that that
>person would discount my views anyway, so what gives?), I am 16, and an
>ardent DSCH devotee :) (I should add that my other half is also) Believe
>me, there are *plenty* of people around my age who love Shostakovich (I
>think I'm probably talking about the dedicated musos, though - ie.
>people studying or planning to study music full-time). :)

Q - definaly fantastic to know. And I only just noticed the .net.au address!
:) I had wondered that DSCH might be dying out in the eyes of the young, but
with an 18 y.o, and you, and your other half, and me (well OK, I'm 10 years
older than you, but redrick still classes me as a young whippersnapper right
winger conspiracy leader and general devotee of the twisted and warped right
wing pundit half baked journalist Ian MacDonald..... oh, where was I?! Ah
yes, that's right...... I'm very pleased to hear that you're a youngster
too! :)

I was also most pleased to turn on 3MBS FM last night at around 2am and hear
the final 2 movements of DSCH's 8th symphony. It's so annoying that they don't
on the overnight shifts, say who the performers were - because it wasn't Jarvi
or Ashkenazy so I was curious. Perhaps Haitink.

-richard

>- Q.

[ega...@aol.com]

In article <587r0f$p...@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com>,
cori...@ix.netcom.com(Caius Marcius) writes:

>
>Of course, his use of such devices helped to justify the charges of
>"formalism" levied against him by Just Critics.

An interesting observation, because I believe that these classical forms
were advanced in DSCH's style as his reaction to the criticism of the
30's. Sad that his reaction to the earlier criticism would lead to his
further denunciation in the forties.

No good deed goes unpunished. You can't please all the people at no time.
Sigh.
Earl.

[Caius Marcius]

In <58dj6u$ih4$1...@aggedor.rmit.edu.au> ric...@bofh.its.rmit.EDU.AU

(Richard A. Muirden) writes:
>
>"Q." <minh...@labyrinth.net.au> writes:
>>At risk of having others completely discount any views I may have (I
>>have one a.f.s.-er in mind in particular) (but I would expect that
that
>>person would discount my views anyway, so what gives?), I am 16, and
an
>>ardent DSCH devotee :) (I should add that my other half is also)
Believe
>>me, there are *plenty* of people around my age who love Shostakovich
(I
>>think I'm probably talking about the dedicated musos, though - ie.
>>people studying or planning to study music full-time). :)
>
>Q - definaly fantastic to know. And I only just noticed the .net.au
address!
>:) I had wondered that DSCH might be dying out in the eyes of the

young, but Ah

>yes, that's right...... I'm very pleased to hear that you're a
youngster
>too! :)

There's a thread currently weaving its way in rec.music.opera about a
Time Magazine article describing an increased interest in opera in the
18-24-year-old group. So there's hope for the world after all.

- CMC

[redrick]

ric...@bofh.its.rmit.EDU.AU (Richard A. Muirden) wrote:

>but redrick still classes me as a young whippersnapper right
>winger conspiracy leader and general devotee of the twisted and warped right
>wing pundit half baked journalist Ian MacDonald.....

That's *would-be* pundit! I *wish* Muirden'd get it right!

Regards, -Rick
--
red...@az.com, in a.f.s.,

"...with teacup-storm philosophers, exploded
revisionist historians, stubbornly Steady State
cosmologists, or pallid poets..."
-Martin Amis, "The Information"

[wsc...@default.ibm.net]

cori...@ix.netcom.com(Caius Marcius) writes:
>Path: news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!newsfeed.uk.ibm.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!worldnet.att.net!ix.netcom.com!news
>From: cori...@ix.netcom.com(Caius Marcius)
>Newsgroups: alt.fan.shostakovich
>Subject: The Young Guard (was: Shostakovitch & bubble gum)
>Date: 9 Dec 1996 02:00:47 GMT
>Organization: Netcom
>Lines: 31
>Message-ID: <58frsf$7...@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>
>References: <19961126005...@ladder01.news.aol.com> <19961126062...@ladder01.news.aol.com> <329c63e6...@news.netnitco.net> <57vr3l$f5f$1...@aggedor.rmit.edu.au> <32a4df5a....@news.mcgill.ca> <32A637...@labyrinth.net.au> <58dj6u$ih4$1...@aggedor.rmit.edu.au>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: col-md1-21.ix.netcom.com
>X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Dec 08 8:00:47 PM CST 1996
>Xref: news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net alt.fan.shostakovich:6284

[9606...@music.gla.ac.uk]

>Caius Marcius (cori...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>: Question - who in this Century rates second after DSCH - I would
> guess Copland,
>: followed by Britten.

Hey, what about Hans Werner Henze? I don't know, there are a lot of
contemporary composers that I have a lot of respect for that it's still
hard to judge, as they haven't been around for long enough, for instance,
James Macmillan. Incedentally, a composer that I would rate extremely
highly, who is totally underrated is the Scottish composer Thomas Wilson.
Brilliand man. To be quite honest, I think it's meaningless to try to
comprise a list, or "top ten" at all, so lets simply not bother. Most of
us are fanatical about DSCH, but we like other composers as well, and to
be quite honest, because of different styles, etc., it's simply not
possible to rate them more than simply saying: "I like this", or "I don't
like this", or "I like this a lot". Cya

Maniacal Maestro

[Richard A. Muirden]

red...@az.com (redrick) writes:

>ric...@bofh.its.rmit.EDU.AU (Richard A. Muirden) wrote:

>>but redrick still classes me as a young whippersnapper right
>>winger conspiracy leader and general devotee of the twisted and warped right
>>wing pundit half baked journalist Ian MacDonald.....

>That's *would-be* pundit! I *wish* Muirden'd get it right!

I stand corrected :)

-richard