I hate Stravinsky music
Else Lindh
hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
/Tobias Lindh
Sweden
Matthew H. Fields
David M. Cook
Else Lindh <m-3...@mailbox.swipnet.se> wrote:
>I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
>hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
>Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
What Stravinsky are you listening to? Much of it has charm. Try
Pulcinella, Dumbarton Oaks, Concerto in D, the Ebony Concerto or Violin
Concerto. Give him a second chance.
I do think Stravinsky is overrated, but that's not his fault.
Dave Cook
Margaret Bailey
> I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
> hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
> Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
The Rite of Spring
Sara Freeman
SHAW ROSEMARY JANE
>I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
>hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
>Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
>/Tobias Lindh
>Sweden
My stepbrother has this to say about sushi. "When you're bored with
everything else, you eat sushi. It's like nothing else."
You could say the same for Stravinsky. When you are bored with all the
pretty melodies and harmonies of classical and romantic music, you need
something to force you to look at things with a new perspective. The
musical equivalent of a palate cleanser, so to speak.
Personally, I like the part where the dinosaurs are eating each other.
Leif Nordling
"No, I'm not an idiot."
Roger Lustig
>I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
>hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
>Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
Could you let us know which pieces you've heard? Some of us find great
beauty and charm in much of Stravinsky's music.
Roger
Len Fehskens
>
>Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
>
len.
Matthew H. Fields
Sara Freeman <fre...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>In <4csf5t$i...@jupiter.planet.net> Margaret Bailey <mba...@planet.net>
>writes:
>>> m-3...@mailbox.swipnet.se (Else Lindh) writes:
>>> I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I
>personally almost
>>> hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty
>no nothing!
>>> Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
>>The Rite of Spring
>Symphony of Psalms
For "charm", I'd add the violin concerto.
Rob Holzel
: I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
: Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
What have you listened to?
Try the Firebird ballet and see if you want to stand by your statement.
Rob
Clifton J. Evans
you have to approach the music in a different way than you do things
that have "beauty" and so on.
Stravinsky uses different compositional techniques than great composers
like Beethoven and Brahms. He abandons the traditional idea of tonality
and goes with octatonicism, modality, and sometimes atonality. Some
passages are tonal melodies, but very few, and usually to make a point
or impact the drama (such as in Petrushka). You have to listen to
Stravinsky in the great blocks of sound that he uses. Listen to the
Rite of Spring not once, but about five times one week, and you will
begin to hear the chords come back in different parts of the piece. You
will understand the primal rhythms, etc.
Be sure to read a bit about the piece, too. It will help you understand
what the ballet is about. It is still not my favorite music, but I can
appreciate his brilliance now. Try this, and you will see the workings
of a great mind.
CE
Mario Taboada
music, I remember liking Igor's compositions at first sight. Neither then
nor now did I find them to be difficult to grasp or grating to the ear.
For me , his music has remained an evergreen - and I find charm in it, in
spades.
As to "beauty", I don't think it should be equated with "singable tunes"
(and Igor has *lots* of those, too); there can be great beauty in the
skillful manipulation of musical time, and in the overall architecture of
a work - not to mention in the sounds themselves. Igor was a great master
at all of these things. As the son of a windplayer, I continue to be
astounded at his ability to compose for winds, unrivalled except by
Mozart in my opinion.
His style was so strongly individual that he could take the most trivial
motif and end up with a fully worked out, unmistakeably Stravinskian piece.
He had an extremely sharp intellect, an enormously wide-ranging culture
(musical and otherwise), a tart sense of humor and a sense of musical
time on the level of a Haydn or a Beethoven.
I am sorry that the original poster decided to start this thread with a
tasteless and would-be provocative statement - Igor is the wrong guy to
%^&$ around with!!
Regards,
--
Mario Taboada \\"The trouble with truth is its many varieties"\\
\\"To a mouse, cheese is cheese: that is why mousetraps work"\\
* Department of Mathematics * University of Southern California * Los Angeles
e-mail: tab...@mtha.usc.edu
Jeff Bernhard
Listening to L'histoire du Soldat on WQXR when I lived in those parts many
years ago. I discovered his early ballets, the Octet, the Symphonies of
Wind Instruments and much more over time, and his output is diverse and
rarely boring. While I've "moved on" and discovered and treasure a wealth
of music from this century, I'll always include Stravinsky's works among
these. They are accessible and the product of a unique, special man.
--
Jeffrey Bernhard Harris Computer Systems Corp.
Jeff.B...@mail.hcsc.com Voice: (954) 973-5496 Fax: (954) 977-5580
*** The opinions expressed herein are mine, not those of my employer! ***
joseph louis rizzo
Else Lindh <m-3...@mailbox.swipnet.se> wrote:
>I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
>hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
>Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
I hate silly closed minded people who post useless rants on newsgroups. I
mean, read the posts! No charm! No grace! No nothing. If you don't like
Stravinsky, fine. "But frankly, dear, I don't give a damn."
>/Tobias Lindh
>Sweden
>
--
J.L.Rizzo II
Between the retina and the higher centers of the cortex the innocence of
vision is irretrievably lost-it has succumbed to the suggestion of a
whole series of hidden persuaders. -Arthur Koestler
Chang Wu Ji
<hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
<Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
</Tobias Lindh
<Sweden
Hmm, not unusual in my opinion. It took me about 6 years to really appreciate
the genius of Stravinsky. In terms of being a revolutionary he was one of the
most radical. I would rank him as one of the 5 most influencial of all
time(together with Beethoven, Wagner, Debussy and Schoenberg). What you should
listen to in his music such as the "Rite of Spring" is his innovative rhythm
inventions. He absolutely breaks all traditional bounds in this area. Also
listen to the primal passion in the "Rite".
Another place to start might be "Firebird" or "Petrouchka", both more
accessible
than the "Rite"
dancertm
>I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
>hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
>Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
>/Tobias Lindh
>Sweden
Ok...I'll take up the challange:
1) History: Go to my homepage and read my short bio about the composer
http://exo.com/~dancertm/music.htm
You will see a link to my Stravinsky page.
2) Listen to these works and see if the composer didn't know how to
compose lyrical works:
Pulcinella Suite
Apollo
The Fairy's Kiss
Concerto in D
After you have done this, you are more than welcome to send me email,
and I can answer any questions or comments you wish to make.
Ryan M. Hare
: For "charm", I'd add the violin concerto.
I also quite like this piece; it is a charming, humorous, and very
engaging concerto. I've no idea why it is so generally neglected. I know
quite a few Stravinsky fans who are not familiar with it, which baffles
me. I always try to correct such an omission! :-)
There are so many pieces by Stravinsky that I love, I would be
hardpressed to produce a short list of "favorites", but here goes:
Firebird
Petrushka
Rite of Spring
Soldier's Tale
Pulcinella
Symphony of Psalms
Symphonies of Wind Instruments
Symphony in C
Symphony in 3 Movements
Scherzo a la Russe
Rake's Progress
Agon
Canticum Sacrum
Variations in Memoriam Aldous Huxley
Requiem Canticles
I knew it wouldn't work! :-) But I tried.
Ryan Hare
rh...@u.washington.edu
Ryan M. Hare
: Funny, but many years ago, when I started getting interested in composed
: music, I remember liking Igor's compositions at first sight. Neither then
: nor now did I find them to be difficult to grasp or grating to the ear.
: For me , his music has remained an evergreen - and I find charm in it, in
: spades.
Stravinsky would approve of this pun! (re: Soldier's Tale, Jeu de Cartes,
Rake's Progress, etc.) :-)
: As to "beauty", I don't think it should be equated with "singable tunes"
: (and Igor has *lots* of those, too); there can be great beauty in the
: skillful manipulation of musical time, and in the overall architecture of
: a work - not to mention in the sounds themselves. Igor was a great master
: at all of these things. As the son of a windplayer, I continue to be
: astounded at his ability to compose for winds, unrivalled except by
: Mozart in my opinion.
: His style was so strongly individual that he could take the most trivial
: motif and end up with a fully worked out, unmistakeably Stravinskian piece.
: He had an extremely sharp intellect, an enormously wide-ranging culture
: (musical and otherwise), a tart sense of humor and a sense of musical
: time on the level of a Haydn or a Beethoven.
I fully agree with Mario on all points. Stravinsky is one of the reasons I
got interested in classical music in the first place (the Rite of Spring,
which was the first piece of recorded music I ever purchased for myself,
in middle school). And his music remains some of my favorite; these are
pieces I can likewise turn to again and again.
Just today, for fun, I played a bit of Firebird (guess which bit) for the
Freshman theory dictation section I teach and had them sing some of it
back to me and discuss it. It is amazing to me that I can never get tired of
hearing it. Many other Stravinskian sonorities have really stuck with
me, for example much of the Song of the Nightingale, the opening of
Symphony of Psalms, the Libera Me from the Requiem Canticles, etc., etc.
These sounds have in part *defined* the sound of 20th century music.
: I am sorry that the original poster decided to start this thread with a
: tasteless and would-be provocative statement - Igor is the wrong guy to
: %^&$ around with!!
Stravinsky is indestructible! For me, no question: he was one of the
greatest composers ever (up there with Josquin and Bach, for sure). :-)
Ryan Hare
rh...@u.washington.edu
Pultroon
Why anyone should care is the subject for another essay.
When I hear any of Stravinsky's compositions, what I think I hear is the
inspiration. Brother Igor was an idea man. His skills with development
of a theme and such are certainly not up to a Beethoven or Bach, but then
neither was his interest. Perhaps to clarify, in a theme and variations
piece I think the all star
collaboration would be Stravinsky coming up with the theme and Bach then
doing variations on that theme. I agree that the manner in which
Stravinsky travels between ideas is frequently clumsy, but the pearls such
as the rhythms of Le Sacre and the tone progression of L'Histoire remain,
and these rank with the work of any of the other masters. Stravinsky does
not coddle or patronize, but he does reward.
AS
Gene Frazier
>
> I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
> hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
> Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
>
> /Tobias Lindh
> Sweden
Several reasons pop into mind: The ethereal & timeless beauty of the
"Requiem Canticles" (especially the bells and flutes ending), the
dramatic power of the "Symphony in Three Movements" and "Oedipus Rex,"
the wit and charm of the "Octet" and "Renard," the powerful devotion in
the "Symphony of Psalms" and the wonderful musicality of the "Cantata."
Rick Hayward
Chang Wu Ji <rap...@mit.edu> writes:
> <I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
> <hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty
no nothing!
> <Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
> Hmm, not unusual in my opinion. It took me about 6 years to really appreciate
> the genius of Stravinsky. In terms of being a revolutionary he was one of the
> most radical.
I think, in retrospect, that Stravinsky does not stand out in terms
of his radicalism - perhaps innovative, but hardly revolutionary.
Much of what was felt to be so in 1913 seems, in retrospect a natural
extension of Rimsky Korsakov and Debussy (amongst others).
There again, I would not rate the epithet 'revolutionary' as
particularly significant in the development of music.
RH--
Rick Hayward, Wakefield, West Yorkshire
rick.h...@zetnet.co.uk
CBailis
repeated listening usually points the way to understanding, if nothing
else. Stravinsky may not be as user friendly to some as others, although
IMHO he's extremely easy not only to listen to, but to love & enjoy. Try
Petrouchka, Pulchinella, or The Firebird. This particular thread brings
to mind a recent incident in our family. My brother has always considered
Mahler dissonant, a concept I find very difficult to understand, as I love
Mahler's music. This year for Hanukkah I sent my nephew some CDs, one of
which was Mahler's 4th symphony, with a note to listen particularly to the
last movement and my explanations why, what it was supposed to convey,
etc. The other night I spoke to my sister-in-law, who told me that they
all had listened to it, and that they hadn't be able to make it to the
last movement because the preceding movements were just too heavy!
I predict they'll never hear that lovely, lyrical, soprano solo, but
folks, that's what makes horseracing! Hopefully, YOU'LL try again & begin
to see the beauty, and fun, in Stravinsky's music.
Carole Bailis
John Sullivan
>I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
>hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
>Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
>/Tobias Lindh
>Sweden
I'm assuming this is a troll, but if you're serious...no, I can't think of any
reason to listen to someone you hate.
/* John Sullivan */
/* jsul...@fhcrc.org */
T.J. Hull
I sure can.
As a student, I spent at least two hours a day in the listening library
(I studied composition). When I found a composer I couldn't stand, I
made a mental note to listen to the same in a month or two.
Strangely enough, I began to 1) like composers I previously didn't
(Reich, Carter, Babbitt), thus getting a greater enjoyment and
appreciation of the art in general, or 2) trancend my original "No sir,
I don't like it" reaction and learn something about why they did what
they did (Cage, Boulez, Glass). Listening to composers I don't like
also helps me define who I am and what I do in my own music.
*Everything* you listen to inexorably changes you.
T.J.
Stephen Hanson
>
>I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
>hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
>Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
>
>/Tobias Lindh
>Sweden
>
The first time I heard the Rite of Spring, I thought this. Then I heard it
a second time and it made perfect sense. Now I have the score. I assume
that this is the type of Stravinsky that you are disagreeing with.
Music is not only charm and beauty because life is not only charm and beauty.
Believe it or not, there are bad things in the world and unhappy things in
the world and angular raucous things in the world. If you don't like the
music of Stravinsky, you'd probably like Bartok's 4th and 5th string quartets.
With a :) to all who have.
-stephen
dancertm
> I sure can.
> As a student, I spent at least two hours a day in the listening library
>(I studied composition). When I found a composer I couldn't stand, I
>made a mental note to listen to the same in a month or two.
> Strangely enough, I began to 1) like composers I previously didn't
>(Reich, Carter, Babbitt), thus getting a greater enjoyment and
>appreciation of the art in general, or 2) trancend my original "No sir,
>I don't like it" reaction and learn something about why they did what
>they did (Cage, Boulez, Glass). Listening to composers I don't like
>also helps me define who I am and what I do in my own music.
> *Everything* you listen to inexorably changes you.
> T.J.
TJ..that's funny you basically said the same thing I said, but in a
different way! You are quite correct. I've always had a problem with
Mahler..still do, but..working on a Major choral and orchestra work of
mine, I based a movement on few bars fromf Mahler's Reserrection
Symphony. Ten years ago...had anyone mentioned this...I would have
said they were crazy.
Stravisnky, himself, said the relationships we have with music are
always changing. Once again, he is correct.
Bradford Kellogg
>I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally almost
>hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
>Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
>
>/Tobias Lindh
>Sweden
>
Judging by the conclusions you have evidently drawn about Stravinsky's music,
there may in fact be no reason for you to listen to any of it.
---
Bradford Kellogg // There is nothing, absolutely nothing,
kel...@atb.teradyne.com // half so worth doing as simply messing
^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v // about in boats.
David Bluestone
He's the greatest composer of the 20th century.
Have another go.
David
Jose Marques
>Matthew H. Fields (fie...@zip.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:
>: For "charm", I'd add the violin concerto.
>I also quite like this piece; it is a charming, humorous, and very
>engaging concerto. I've no idea why it is so generally neglected. I know
>quite a few Stravinsky fans who are not familiar with it, which baffles
>me. I always try to correct such an omission! :-)
I sure could do with a new recording. Any good recommendation?
Jose Marques
jmar...@originet.com.br
Matthew H. Fields
Andreas LandŽn <andreas@landŽn.pp.se> wrote:
>Well, Strawinsky is not either my favourite, but lately I ve got a bit
>more of understanding.
>
>Rite of spring: Do not compare it with other music. In modern classical
>music there is other laws ruling than in yhe classical or the romantic
>world. How to listen ? Rite of spring is a work there energy is the
>ruling princip.Listen to this and you see that here is something
>special, which perhaps not are beauty but something else which is
>fascinating.
Actually, if you've heard Russian opera and some Russian folk songs,
Stravinsky's ballets speak on a different level (all the tunes are
borrowed folk tunes cf Rimsky's 1001 Russian Folk Songs; conventions
like chromaticism=supernatural run through them...etc.).
Andreas LandŽn
more of understanding.
Rite of spring: Do not compare it with other music. In modern classical
music there is other laws ruling than in yhe classical or the romantic
world. How to listen ? Rite of spring is a work there energy is the
ruling princip.Listen to this and you see that here is something
special, which perhaps not are beauty but something else which is
fascinating.
Anderas Landén, Sweden
Richard Wang
Cho-Liang Lin plays the Stranvinsky Violin Concerto and both of
Prokofiev's on a recent Sony release. I believe the orchestra is the Los
Angeles Philharmonic, Esa-Pekka Salonnen conducting.
--
Richard Wang rw...@fas.harvard.edu
"In all my experience, I have never been wrong."--Ted Floyd
james cesarini
TandCMCGEE
almost
<hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no
nothing!
Try his 1948 ballet "Orpheus," particularly the first and last segments.
Very beautiful, very charming (in a tragic way)
--Tom McGee
Tom McGee
TandC...@aol.com
james cesarini
on Phillips is a very sweet reading. I heard it on the radio one day
and was really taken with it, but I couldn't find a recording. I
think its out of print in the US, but I was lucky enough to have
found it in Toronto last fall.
Second choice: Anne Sophie Mutter
Robert Raschhofer
> The Rite of Spring
And Petrouchka
Robert
Christopher van de Sande
> In article <4d3qsq$i...@texas.nwlink.com> "T.J. Hull" <t...@nwlink.com> writes:
>>JSUL...@fhcrc.org (John Sullivan) wrote:
>>>In article <4crroh$i...@mn5.swip.net> m-3...@mailbox.swipnet.se (Else Lindh) writes:
>>>
>>>>hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
>>>>Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
>>>
>>>of any reason to listen to someone you hate.
>>
>> I sure can.
>
>
>> As a student, I spent at least two hours a day in the listening library
>>(I studied composition). When I found a composer I couldn't stand, I
>>made a mental note to listen to the same in a month or two.
>
> - at some point - to a work I don't like. First impressions can be
> misleading; in any case, they are unreliable.
>
> -Margaret
>
How can anyone hate Stravinsky...
I have only heard on piece of music by him but I love it..
It is the right of spring..
And the awsome thing is, is that it was this piece that extended my rang
on the bassoon...
Before I had that music to practice I had nothing to play that high...
So I practiced to intro to the right of spring and now I am a better
bassoonist!!!
So there is some good in Stravinsky...
Jennifer Macaulay...
Jean-Pierre Beugoms
: <I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally
: almost
: <hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no
: nothing!
: <Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
Funny, isn't it. I thought the same thing when I first started
listening to classical music back in junior high school.
The first Stravinsky piece I ever listened to was the "Circus
Polka". I thought it was a very ugly piece and wondered why
anyone would compose such a thing. The same was true for
"The Rite of Spring". Then, lo and behold, for some strange
reason a few years later I decided to give it another try and
the piece just blew me away. I couldn't get enough of it.
In my freshman year of college I played "The Rite" to my
roommate who was especially appalled by the "dance of the young
girls". "Get that music off the radio", he would say.
Then, during the summer I get a call from him telling
me that in his "Intro. to Music" class they were listening to
the piece and that he loved it! Even more, he loved Schoenberg's
"Pierrot Lunaire"!
How does one explain it--I don't know.
-------
Jean-Pierre Beugoms
Margaret Mikulska
>JSUL...@fhcrc.org (John Sullivan) wrote:
>>In article <4crroh$i...@mn5.swip.net> m-3...@mailbox.swipnet.se (Else Lindh) writes:
>>
>>>hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no nothing!
>>>Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
>>
Charles Eggen
>TandCMCGEE (tandc...@aol.com) wrote:
>: <I can not understand why there are any Stravinsky fans, I personally
>: almost
>: <hate this silly composer, I mean listen to it! No charm, no beuty no
>: nothing!
>: <Can anyone please tell me a reason to listen to Stravinsky?
>Funny, isn't it. I thought the same thing when I first started
>listening to classical music back in junior high school.
>The first Stravinsky piece I ever listened to was the "Circus
>Polka". I thought it was a very ugly piece and wondered why
>anyone would compose such a thing. The same was true for
>"The Rite of Spring". Then, lo and behold, for some strange
>reason a few years later I decided to give it another try and
>the piece just blew me away. I couldn't get enough of it.
>In my freshman year of college I played "The Rite" to my
>roommate who was especially appalled by the "dance of the young
>girls". "Get that music off the radio", he would say.
>Then, during the summer I get a call from him telling
>me that in his "Intro. to Music" class they were listening to
>the piece and that he loved it! Even more, he loved Schoenberg's
>"Pierrot Lunaire"!
>How does one explain it--I don't know.
>-------
>Jean-Pierre Beugoms
I'm reminded of that old joke that went something like:
When I was 16, I thought my father was a complete idiot.
By the time I was 21, I was surprised how much my father had
learned in just 5 years.
Teen-agers are the most hard-nosed, conservative, inflexible group in
our societies. Such has always been(my memory of my teen years is
quite clear in this area). We just must acknowledge this and be
patient. Time and further education will correct this flaw in most of
us.
Chuck
DAN TALBOT
H. Fields) writes:
>
>In article <4dbgl7$g...@stella.tip.net>,
>Andreas LandŽn <andreas@landŽn.pp.se> wrote:
>Stravinsky's ballets speak on a different level (all the tunes are
>borrowed folk tunes cf Rimsky's 1001 Russian Folk Songs; conventions
>like chromaticism=supernatural run through them...etc.).
I disagree that "perhaps it is not beauty". I believe the ending of
Rite of Spring is highly beautiful. I cannot see the peculiarity in
Stravinsky which some of you can. He is just another giant in a world
of geniuses of classical music. It is as much nonsense as saying "I
love my body, but I hate my face" to say that you love the classics and
hate Stravinsky. Just my opinion.
Dan Talbot
ttk...@ix.netcom.com
Bradford Kellogg
Stravinsky, unlike most composers, has no signature style. He was perhaps
the most 20th century of the 20th century: musical development has been very
rapid this century, and he was the very antithesis of static. Listen to
the Firebird, L'Histoire du Soldat, Le Sacre du Printemps, the Ebony Concerto, Petrouska, whatever else, in any order. His inventiveness was seemingly
endless. Yes, some of his music is warmer, richer, more sensual; some of it
is colder, leaner, more platonic. His music sometimes laughs, sometimes
dances, sometimes is stone-faced and dry, sometimes is frightening.
I don't like all of it equally, but all of it is intriguing to a greater or
lesser degree. His versatility and ability to follow a winding road make
Stravinsky, for me, one of the greatest geniuses of this century.
John
: My stepbrother has this to say about sushi. "When you're bored with
: everything else, you eat sushi. It's like nothing else."
: You could say the same for Stravinsky. When you are bored with all the
: pretty melodies and harmonies of classical and romantic music, you need
: something to force you to look at things with a new perspective. The
: musical equivalent of a palate cleanser, so to speak.
: Personally, I like the part where the dinosaurs are eating each other.
Gee, I must have missed that part of the ballet. ;-)
John
Jeff Bernhard
: SHAW ROSEMARY JANE (sh...@ucsub.colorado.edu) wrote:
: : Personally, I like the part where the dinosaurs are eating each other.
:
Well, food choice is a personal thing.
:
: Gee, I must have missed that part of the ballet. ;-)
:
Actually, in regard to the comment that Stravinsky is like Sushi, to be
consumed when you're bored with everything else, I find that bordom was
the impetus to listen to new things, or to revisit some things that I
initially didn't like or wasn't ready for. Now, when I need a hit of
color outside of traditional harmory, some Webern or Schoenberg are
utterly delicious, or perhaps some Ligeti or Stravinsky (the Septet
or Movements for Piano and Orchestra, say). BTW, anyone familiar
with Harold Shapiro? I have a string quartet that is wonderful, and
wonder how prolific he was and how much of his music was recorded and
might still be available. Oops, I'm changing the thread ...
--
Jeffrey Bernhard Harris Computer Systems Corp.
Jeff.B...@mail.hcsc.com Voice: (954) 973-5496 Fax: (954) 977-5580
*** The opinions expressed herein are mine, not those of my employer! ***
Pultroon
parsimony.
AS
Matthew H. Fields
pianistic, percussive consistency.
Diane Wilson
In article <4dllug$g...@news.eecs.umich.edu>, fie...@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Matthew H. Fields) writes:
|> Funny, across all Stravinsky's many "styles" I alawys experience a
|> pianistic, percussive consistency.
|>
athleticism. It's so easy to visualize much of his non-ballet music as
ballet. I know I'm not the only one to feel this way; I was taken completely
by surprise one night on PBS when I saw a ballet production based on the
Concerto in D for strings. It was a perfect fit! Considering his early
employment, it seems like a natural influence, too.
--
Diane Wilson | dia...@ix.netcom.com | http://www.lava.net/~dewilson
"Everyone always tries to figure out Why she does what she does; which
as any good person can tell you if he bothered is the wrong approach.
Girls like her, they're not so much Why girls as Because girls." --k.tatroe
Mario Taboada
>Funny, across all Stravinsky's many "styles" I alawys experience a
>pianistic, percussive consistency.
I'm with Matthew on this one. If I'm allowed a metaphor, the piano
(physically present on so many of Igor's compositions, and implicit
in the sound in others) sounds almost as if the composer wanted to
"witness" or "be inside" the composition. Bohuslav Martinu does something
similar in many of his works, and the effect is again that of a
"presence". It's a nice touch.
Regards,
--
Mario Taboada \\"The trouble with truth is its many varieties"\\
\\"To a mouse, cheese is cheese: that is why mousetraps work"\\
* Department of Mathematics * University of Southern California * Los Angeles
e-mail: tab...@mtha.usc.edu
Greg Weeks
: pianistic, percussive consistency.
Well, I certainly don't want to argue with Stravinsky fans. Still, I have
a different view, perhaps the result of excessive reverence.
Rhythmically inventive, vigorous, athletic, angular -- these words seem to
pop up to describe a lot of Stravinsky's music. And they do. To me, they
all add up to "rhymically interesting", which is itself simply a component
of "good". (Isn't an interesting piece, rhythmically and otherwise, better
than an uninteresting piece?) But to say the Stravinsky is uniformly good
should not be taken to imply a uniformity of style.
In other words, interesting rhythms are generally desirable. On the other
hand, there are exceptions, where rhythmic interest interferes with some
other desired effect (eg, the last few minutes of "Symphony of Psalms".)
Greg
PS: Of course, Stravinsky isn't uniformly good. But to mention that above
would have interfered with the rhetoric.
Chang Wu Ji
<first, but subsequent hearings failed to evoke a positive reaction in me.
<---
Yeah, like pretty much anything by Tchaikovsky and definitely everthing by
Chopin. And how about that Pachelbel Canon ? It sucks !