tss@astrovax.UUCP (12/13/83)
Right! Let's get some discussions of classical music going! Anyone who wants
to argue about any of the following is heartily encouraged to do so...
Concerning recordings: A recent addition to my collection that was definitely
worth its price is David Del Tredici's "Final Alice" (Chicago Symph./
Barbara Hendricks/Georg Solti; London LDR 71018). Maintain an open mind
as you listen to this piece for the first time.
Terminology: An oft-discussed question, I'm sure, but-- What word do you use
in place of 'classical' when you're talking about baroque, romantic,
neoclassical, etc., as well? ('Serious' tends to get jazz admirers mad at
you.)
Real Art: Can anybody name a piece that is recognized as a 'masterpiece', and
is consequently performed often, that was written after, say, 1955?
More Real Art (Intentionally inflammatory): I think Schoenberg's "Verklarte
Nacht" stinks. Anybody want to make something of it? Go ahead, make my day.riddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle) (12/14/83)
>> Terminology: An oft-discussed question, I'm sure, but-- What word do you >> use in place of 'classical' when you're talking about baroque, romantic, >> neoclassical, etc., as well? ('Serious' tends to get jazz admirers mad at >> you.) I don't know if it's much help, but one term that's often used is "art music". I believe that ethnomusicologists use it to distinguish the "classical" musics of non-Western traditions from their "folk" and "popular" musics. I may have also heard the phrase used by composers of "new music" (or "avant garde" or whatever they're calling it this week) to refer to their own work. Of course, as far as I'm concerned it's all "art" anyway...
cbf@allegra.UUCP (12/14/83)
O.K. A few personal thoughts. Concerning Recordings and Del Tredici's "Final Alice": Del Tredici is one of the "New Romantics" (it's not yet called neoromanticism), meaning that his music departs from the Eastern Academic Establishment's infatuation with "intellectually correct" dodecacophony [:-)] and other atonal abstractions. Consequently, his style is less forbidding than that of most contemporary composers. His "Alice" works, which have been compared favorably to late Strauss, are actually very appealing and don't require too much effort on the listener's part. The Solti recording of "Final Alice" is definitely worth investigating, if only because it's a rare instance of a major record company (Decca) endorsing a contemporary work immediately after its premiere. However, I've found that the extensive narration and the sustained lack of tonal variety throughout this one-hour (with cuts) work gets in the way of repeated listenings. Still, I cannot praise Barbara Hendricks' contribution to the proceedings highly enough. As usual, she is superb. She's one of the world's great lyric sopranos and one of my two favorite singers. Jessye Norman, my other fav, also sings soprano, but I prefer her awesomely opulent mezzo range. I just found out that the TWO of them will be singing Mahler's "Resurrection" under Leonard Bernstein (one of the great interpreters of that work) and the NYPO in January. I can't wait! Get a ticket if you can. Terminology and what to call "classical" music: I remember when I took my first music course, one of the first things our teacher did was to carefully define that term as "Traditional Western Art Music", and it has stuck with me since. So how about a net.music.twam? Real Art and post-1955 masterpieces: Let's put it this way. Mahler's music was ignored for a good forty years after his death, and now I can't imagine life without it. In good time, the true masterpieces will show themselves as such. Immortality is the name of the game. Off the top of my head, I would propose Benjamin Britten's "War Requiem" as a good candidate, but I'm not sure about the composition date. I also imagine that some of Olivier Messaien's output will survive -- his opera "Saint Francois d'Assises" had a grand premiere in Paris a couple of weeks ago and his "Quartet for the End of Time" is well established, but that was composed during WWII (in a concentration camp). As for which music is performed regularly, smaller-scale works, e.g. chamber works, tend to have more advocates than others. Music students in particular thrive on them. More Real Art and Schoenberg's "Verklaerte Nacht": I once decided to find out what the fuss was all about and invested in the Karajan recording (apparently the finest ever made) of that work. To my own suprise, I found myself responding to it, and I've even grown to, well, sort of like it...!? I won't flame, though. My feelings aren't that strong about it. Come to think of it, my feelings aren't that strong about much that was composed after Mahler. I'll let Jeff Winslow (sp?), our resident Schoenberg expert make a better case for that work. If anyone is interested by the way, the Karajan recording has just been re-released on the cheaper DG Signature label. Another great DG Signature is Abbado's Tchaikovsky's Fourth. The Great Music Quiz: If you haven't sent in your answers, it's probably too late by now. I'm posting the results, then the answers later today... Thanks to astrovax!tss for getting the ball rolling. -- "Yes, but is it art?" Charles B. Francois (decvax!allegra!cbf)
ags@pucc-k (Seaman) (12/15/83)
Benjamin Britten's "War Requiem" was composed in 1962. I was glad to see it mentioned as a "post-1955 masterpiece," since it is one of my personal favorites. Dave Seaman ..!pur-ee!pucc-k:ags
ellis@flairvax.UUCP (12/17/83)
>From tss@astrovax:
<<More Real Art (Intentionally inflammatory): I think Schoenberg's "Verklarte
Nacht" stinks. Anybody want to make something of it? Go ahead, make myday.>>
OK, tss@astrovax. Your mother wears army boots...
-michaelbch@unc.UUCP (12/19/83)
Terminology: I tend to use the term "classical" to refer to all music within the genre. I use "period" to modified by the adjectives "classic," "romantic," "modern," etc. Real Art: Good question! While I have particular pieces I listen to regularly that have been composed after 1955, I doubt that they would qualify as masterpieces. Then, again, the economics of the time mitigate against great works of art. Serious composers these days tend to work in films or television where quantity is respected over quality and brings in dollars that would have amazed composers of the 19th century. Either that, or they are in academia "composing" serial music. Real art revisited: I have no love for any form of serial music. Not being a computer, I am not quick enough on my feet (or ears, as the case may be) to appreciate that formal truth and beauty of these works on the fly. :-) "Transfigured Night" eats it, but there are whole bunches of other compositions that are worse. -- Byron Howes UNC - Chapel Hill (decvax!duke!unc!bch)
berry@zehntel.UUCP (12/20/83)
#R:astrovax:-18800:zinfandel:8500019:000:280 zinfandel!berry Dec 19 10:54:00 1983 I second the praise for Britten's War Requiem. Last time I sang in it I had a heck of a time making it through. I kept wanting to cry. (It's THAT moving, especially from the inside as a performer.) Berry Kercheval Zehntel Inc. (ihnp4!zehntel!zinfandel!berry) (415)932-6900
tss@astrovax.UUCP (Thomas S. Statler) (01/05/84)
Hi, kids! Now that the topics I suggested for discussion have been once around the net, I feel justified in adding my own blurt. Terminology: As a subsitute for 'classical' as a generic term, 'traditional Western art music' is probably the most accurate, but just a bit clumsy. 'Art music' is a bit cleaner, but tends to offend jazz musicians. My own preference is 'concert music', that is, what one would expect to find or intend to be played in a concert hall. Of course, there is already a similar German word that means something else. (To obtain the German, apply the usual rule: change the c's to k's or z's and remove all spaces.) Recent Masterpieces: An impressive list of suggestions has appeared here over the last few weeks, but I think most of you missed the point. Do any of these works get performed as often as, say, a random Haydn symphony? The only one that would even come close to qualifying is, I think, Britten's War Requiem. The trouble is not that good works don't exist, but that orchestras, in their quest for subscribers, are scared to perform them. Almost invariably, if a modern piece is performed at all, it comes sandwiched between Mozart and Brahms, some- what like a bowl of spinach that the audience has to finish off before they are allowed to have dessert. This is not exactly a brand-new phenomenon; Aaron Copland some time ago took the programs for 4 seasons of NY Philharmonic concerts between 1950 and 1955 and added up the total number of works performed and the number by living American composers for each year. I don't have the exact numbers handy, but they were typically something like 4 out of 150. This, I think, is very sad. Why in the world should anyone want to be a serious composer these days, if orchestras continually reject new works in favor of the old warhorses? Are audiences really so pedestrian that they would all stop buying tickets if one new work were performed, say, every two concerts? Verklaerte Nacht: Well. I'm a bit surprised that so many people seem to like this piece. I'll admit that I haven't heard it in a few years, but that's only because I can't bring myself to shell out the bucks for a recording of a piece I really detest. You all recall, I'm sure, that Schoenberg began his experiments in atonality (or 'pantonality', if you prefer) after he decided that nothing more could be done with traditional techniques. Listening to V.N., it seems to me that the real problem was that HE couldn't do anything with them. The whole work sounds like a compilation of the worst of late romanticism-- every cliche, every over-sentimental progression-- and it goes on forever! End of blurt. OK, Schoenberg fans, what have you got to say?