Music Lane

It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes.

Return to Music Lane

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Boulez calls Shostakovich a "second-rate composer"

73.222.105.47
Posted on January 20, 2016 at 10:44:30
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 He also says Shosty was an "excellent" composer - that's too high a level of praise IMHO! ;-)

Anyway, here's an interesting Boulez obituary from a woman who actually played in one of the orchestras (the BBC Symphony) which Boulez conducted. I'm surprised that she reports that, at one point, he asked for more "magic" from the percussion - a meaningless directive more worthy of the likes of Marin Alsop. But I think you'll agree that the BBC tympanist handled the situation appropriately - LOL! OTOH, I find very it believable that Boulez sometimes rehearsed each desk of string players individually.

In any case, a very interesting article:

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: Boulez calls Shostakovich a "second-rate composer", posted on January 20, 2016 at 10:47:58
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 That makes Boulez what? A tenth rate composer
Alan

 

LOL! Who knows? [nt] ;-), posted on January 20, 2016 at 10:50:00
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012

 

RE: Boulez calls Shostakovich a "second-rate composer", posted on January 20, 2016 at 11:28:37
Utley1
Audiophile

Posts: 1609
Location: NYC
Joined: July 30, 2010
 Could never understand why Boulez was so recorded and admired? Thank God he stayed away from opera? And as composer compared to Nono, Maderna and Carter he's ridiculous, 'serially..'

 

"When he is bad, he is awful., posted on January 20, 2016 at 12:55:20
steve.ott@kctcs.edu
Audiophile

Posts: 795
Joined: January 16, 2009
 But when he is good, he is very good-so good that it is impossible to deny him a place with the greatest composers of our time". From Milton Cross's Encyclopedia of Great Composers (ca. 1953,1969).

C'mon Chris; wouldn't you say that his 5th and 10th symphonies, his piano quintet, his best string quartets and his preludes and fugues would warrant calling him at least second-rate? :-)

 

I agree with Milton Cross, posted on January 20, 2016 at 13:35:26
Jay Buridan
Audiophile

Posts: 10284
Location: Michigan
Joined: January 21, 2004
 When I was a kid, I had a recording of the Preludes and Fugues performed by Emil Gilels (I think) that was wonderful.

"Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. "
― W.C. Fields

 

Milton Cross - one person with an opinion, no more, no less, posted on January 20, 2016 at 15:13:57
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 When I hear the beginning of the Fifth Symphony finale, I can't help but think of a gorilla pounding his chest in rhythm to the timpani! ;-)

One of my favorite Shostakovich symphony movements is the long, slow first movement of the Eleventh, the calm before the storm, so to speak. Actually, I really do like that movement. Still. . .

I'd rather be listening to Glazunov! ;-)

BTW, I've got to get out my Shostakovich Cello Sonata and get it back up to snuff, since I'm playing it again in less than two weeks. If only people would play the Myaskovsky First Sonata instead! ;-)

 

Well ...., posted on January 20, 2016 at 15:33:36
Amphissa
Audiophile

Posts: 2717
Location: Zardoz
Joined: March 9, 2004
 There is no doubt in my mind that Shostakovich's difficult life story has led to his music being overrated as a whole. Yes, there are a few *good* pieces in his body of work. But none that I would consider great or compelling.

Of course, Boulez resides waaaaaay down on my list of composers, much below Shostakovich. His music is deeply dreadful.

But just because Boulez could not *write* music that was as good as other composers, that doesn't necessarily mean he was unable to *discern* good music when he heard it. I mean, after all, most critics can tell a rose from a turd with no training at all, and Boulez had a lot of training and a lifetime of experience. He just couldn't translate that into original music of his own that was listenable.




"Life without music is a mistake" (Nietzsche)

 

A: "opinions are like asses; everybody's got one" , posted on January 20, 2016 at 17:35:20
steve.ott@kctcs.edu
Audiophile

Posts: 795
Joined: January 16, 2009
 B: Yes, but like asses, some opinions are better formed than others."

 

RE: Did not know he recorded them. , posted on January 20, 2016 at 17:37:20
steve.ott@kctcs.edu
Audiophile

Posts: 795
Joined: January 16, 2009
 Hope I can find the recording if it's out of print. Thanks.

 

RE: Boulez calls Shostakovich a "second-rate composer", posted on January 20, 2016 at 17:53:53
rbolaw
 Funny, Boulez calls Shostakovich excellent but second rate because he deemed Shosty too conservative, and not a revolutionary game changer like Berg or Schoenberg -- or, in his implied opinion, like himself. Not quite how you see it, Chris!
This is a good example of how it usually isn't too enlightening to read composers' opinions of other composers. they have too much skin in the game. So it seems non-musician critics do have a place, at least the better ones.

 

Don't hold back, how do you really feel about Boulez as a composer? nt, posted on January 20, 2016 at 17:55:22
rbolaw

 

Milton Cross, posted on January 20, 2016 at 18:08:26
rbolaw
 A classic, old-school non-musician (at least, non-professional musician) critic and author. He was really just a radio man from the earliest days of radio. But I sure miss his sort. Harold Schonberg too, he was another amateur musician. Sometimes I think professional musicians should be banned from writing music criticism or reviews, despite their superior knowledge in many contexts. Too many axes to grind, too much skin in the game.

 

I couldn't agree more [nt] ;-), posted on January 20, 2016 at 18:37:50
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012

 

Not to mention that Boulez was a VERY respected (possibly even great) conductor [nt], posted on January 20, 2016 at 18:41:39
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012

 

If someone really loves a composer's music..., posted on January 20, 2016 at 18:42:47
MWE
Audiophile

Posts: 2202
Location: Burlington, NC
Joined: June 8, 2000
 then to that person, the composer is worthy. And that's all that matters, in my opinion. If this sounds simplistic, so be it.

Mark in NC
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon

 

Well, not all composers feel as Boulez did about musical "progress", posted on January 20, 2016 at 18:53:24
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 As you no doubt know, some composers were extremely insightful about other composers' music.

As for non-musician critics, I'd be interested in which ones you think are worthy of attention. Please don't tell me Claudia Cassidy - LOL!

As for Milton Cross, I really don't have an opinion, since I haven't read any of his writings - all I remember is his portentous announcements on the old Met broadcasts, and thinking to myself, geez, this type of presentation is sure going to win over a lot of converts to opera - NOT! ;-)

 

RE: Boulez calls Shostakovich a "second-rate composer", posted on January 20, 2016 at 18:59:11
pbarach
Audiophile

Posts: 3307
Location: Ohio
Joined: June 22, 2008
 He didn't stay away from opera entirely, at least not on record. There are good performances of Pelleas and Melisande, Wozzek, Lulu, and of course the Ring cycle.

 

You are absolutely right, posted on January 20, 2016 at 19:01:35
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 I have a bit of fun poking the hornets' nests of the DSCH lovers here, but, as I mentioned already, there are a couple of works by Shostakovich that even I actually like (not very many though!). ;-)

 

RE: Boulez calls Shostakovich a "second-rate composer", posted on January 20, 2016 at 19:42:38
Utley1
Audiophile

Posts: 1609
Location: NYC
Joined: July 30, 2010
 His Lulu 1966 is fabulous. Sorry I was careless. Never thought he has a feel for voice. By the way Shostakovich wrote magnificent 'leider' ..Must admit I never knew of the Ring. Wow!

 

RE: "Shostakovich's difficult life story has led to his music being overrated as a whole.", posted on January 20, 2016 at 19:43:15
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001

Perhaps, but if he had not endure said 'difficult life story' would his music have been as interesting?

Had he fled to The West with others of his generation, would he be a footnote mentioned offhandedly when Russian Composers of the time are discussed, if mentioned at all? And what would he have written, had he left Russia when any sensible creative artist would have?

Who knows? Not me.

I see Dmitri Dmitriyevich and his music as a product of his time and of his life. That those circumstances were, to some degree, self imposed makes it all the more fascinating.

And who doesn't find his 4th Symphony interesting?

WHO?







First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

RE: Boulez calls Shostakovich a "second-rate composer", posted on January 20, 2016 at 22:26:11
PAR
 The Boulez/Chereau Ring cycle was one of the greatest and was my own introduction to Wagner when BBC TV transmitted the entire cycle from Bayreuth. They only operated 2 channels in those days so this was a major commitment for a broadcaster.

I guess that what the BBC did would probably be regarded by their current management as too elitist so I wouldn't expect something similar again.

 

RE: Boulez calls Shostakovich a "second-rate composer", posted on January 21, 2016 at 04:51:14
Utley1
Audiophile

Posts: 1609
Location: NYC
Joined: July 30, 2010
 Thank you! A 'Socialist Ring'. Fabulous. That he upset the orchestra-just as fabulous. I just hope it is still available. I am partial to the Furtwangler RAI performances and Levine when he was well. But I believe Boulez more than capable of taming the monster. Thanks. UT

 

RE: Well, not all composers feel as Boulez did about musical "progress", posted on January 21, 2016 at 05:40:06
rbolaw
 Yes, composers and other professional musicians can be extremely insightful as critics, but also extremely biased and cynical, often for personal and other non-musical reasons. A great example is Virgil Thomson, maybe the most perceptive American music critic writing for the general public ever, but with a greatly inflated opinion of himself as a composer (imo) that colored much of what he wrote.

He could also be very harsh on people he didn't happen to like personally or who wouldn't do favors for him, etc. Many musicians feared and despised him.

OTH, your comment notwithstanding, Milton Cross was hugely successful in expanding the American audience for opera, despite on-air and in-print styles that neither you nor I find compelling. He was able to draw in ordinary people who lacked sophisticated training and education in music by conveying the drama and excitement while keeping it simple. As a hard boiled long time pro musician, I'm not surprised you don't appreciate his homey style, but don't underestimate him. A lack of cynicism and an ample supply of enthusiasm can carry a critic far.

 

Hmm. . . I wonder if Milton Cross just rode the wave. . . , posted on January 21, 2016 at 08:35:56
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 . . . during that mid-twentieth-century era, when the masses eagerly sought high culcha prior to the general decline that led to the more or less complete triumph of its pop equivalent. IOW, was he just lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time? And perhaps it just took time for audiences to turn away from the pretentious delivery and conceits of folks such as MC? Just speculating. . . ;-)

 

Right guy, right place, right time ... that's show biz! ;-) nt, posted on January 21, 2016 at 09:58:31
rbolaw

 

Exactly +++1 [nt], posted on January 21, 2016 at 14:47:57
Mike Porper
Audiophile

Posts: 1414
Location: Chicago
Joined: December 28, 2009
 9

 

RE: Whacking hornets' nests, posted on January 21, 2016 at 16:40:40
MWE
Audiophile

Posts: 2202
Location: Burlington, NC
Joined: June 8, 2000
 Really, as one of the "hornets" (ha ha), I should be less thin-skinned about this sort of thing; the discussion engendered is enjoyable and educational, and the whole point of this forum, is it not? Pummel away!

Mark in NC
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon

 

Shostakovich wrote his worst stuff to placate Stalin and the censors, posted on January 21, 2016 at 17:55:09
Jay Buridan
Audiophile

Posts: 10284
Location: Michigan
Joined: January 21, 2004
 Twentieth Century autocrats had notoriously bad taste in the arts.

"Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. "
― W.C. Fields

 

True., posted on January 21, 2016 at 19:54:47
rbolaw
 Also true, he was very Russian in temperament and outlook. The astringent cynicism, especially when it comes to politics (not appreciated by Stalin); the clever but black humor; the generally gray and gloomy view of life; and yet, at times, the intense and very sincere patriotism, especially cultural patriotism.
To appreciate him fully, you need to be willing to live in that world for a bit. And not worry that he's too tonal for Boulez the revolutionary, and too atonal for Chris the conservative. He finds his own way. So on a frigid night, pick up a Dostoevsky novel, knock down a couple shots of vodka, put on some Shosty, and leave Chris to his California wine cooler and lite entertainment. Za zdorov'ye!

 

I understand what you're trying to say, but. . . , posted on January 21, 2016 at 20:45:34
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 . . . uh-uh - Shostakovich is NOT too atonal for me, not in the least. In fact, I don't know of a single atonal work by Shostakovich - Stalin kept him on the straight and narrow!

Another thing that bothers me with Shostakovich is this whole conceit on the part of some writers and critics with what the music is ABOUT, and how you have to understand the "secret meaning" of the music (which often doesn't have anything to do with the actual music!) in order to appreciate it. ("Oh - Poor Shostakovich! He was under Stalin's thumb, and so he wrote this stupid music to secretly depict a stupid commissar - right under Stalin's nose! He was so clever! And if you know about this, then you're superior to the average listener and you'll appreciate his writing!") That's a big pile of donkey manure, and unfortunately there's a whole academic cottage industry that uses this manure to fertilize its fields.

That reminds me - Richard Taruskin is one of the ring leaders of this kind of "analysis" of Shostakovich's music, and he's just over the hills from me at UC Berkeley. I ought to go over and wring his neck sometime! And don't even get me started about Volkov's "Testimony"! ;-)

If you MUST read about Shostakovich, at least read something factual, such as Laurel Fay's "Shostakovich: A Life".

 

RE: I understand what you're trying to say, but. . . , posted on January 21, 2016 at 22:24:35
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 There is a biography of Richter (tital escapes me) where he talks a lot about living under Stalin. It is a wonder that Shosti and prokoviev were able to write anything under Stalin and Richter, Gilels and many other artists survived. Actually most Russian artists of the time except Richter left Russia for good. And Richter was a homosexual which was punishable by death in Russia
Alan

 

His quartets were not atonal only because..., posted on January 22, 2016 at 03:40:37
Jay Buridan
Audiophile

Posts: 10284
Location: Michigan
Joined: January 21, 2004
 The Lindsays never recorded them :)



"Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. "
― W.C. Fields

 

RE: Boulez calls Shostakovich a "second-rate composer", posted on January 22, 2016 at 06:12:35
afro18
Audiophile

Posts: 630
Location: NorthEast Ohio
Joined: December 1, 2003
 I find Shostakovitch one of my favorite symphonic composers! I have the Concertbow (sp?) Amsterdam with Hatnik (sp?) box set of all the symphonies...and love them !!

On the other hand, I heard Boulez conduct Bartok's Bluebeard Castle live at Severance Hall (Cleveland Orchestra) and EVERYTHING WAS PERFECT !!

So, while I am not a big fan of his compositions and am a big fan of Shostakovitch; when doing Bartok Boulez is some of the best overall !!


Marty N.

 

Oh, relax and have some vodka! ;-) nt, posted on January 22, 2016 at 06:27:01
rbolaw

 

Are there any 20th century composers who are not "second rate"..., posted on January 22, 2016 at 08:20:46
genungo
 ... "classicists"? When compared to the Giants of the 19th, at least?

It might be kinder to ask: Out of all composers born during the 20th century (or just before) is Shosty "top of the heap"?

 

The first mov't of Shostakovich's 4th should guarantee the guy respect, IMHO. nt, posted on January 22, 2016 at 08:33:01
jdaniel@jps.net
 .

 

LOL! Now THAT is funny! [nt] ;-), posted on January 22, 2016 at 09:01:54
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012

 

RE: Oh, relax and have some vodka! ;-) nt, posted on January 22, 2016 at 09:07:15
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 Sure. . . but I can never decide which brand!

 

Yeah - Putin has changed all that - you still don't want to get on the wrong side of him though!, posted on January 22, 2016 at 09:31:52
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 When I win the PowerBall jackpot, I'm going to move to Russia and become an oligarch! ;-)

Natasha (who cuts my hair, provides me with financial advice, and updates me with the latest news about Russia) has a mother who lives in the Crimea - in an apartment that was once a fortress of one of the Russian Mafia members (three-foot-thick walls, etc.). The government prosecutors were actually able to convict this guy and send him to prison. They then took over this place and subdivided it into apartments - "for the benefit of The People". Perhaps the prosecutor in this case was Putin's gal, Natalia Poklonskaya:


(The current Prosecutor General of the Crimea - who has stated that she is grateful to be living in a country where "the rule of law is respected"!)

 

Shosty "top of the heap"? Come, come, surely you jest!, posted on January 22, 2016 at 09:45:46
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 Bartok, Stravinsky, Prokofiev - heck, I'll even take Basil Poledouris over Shostakovich!

 

I brought about 8 different brands home from Russia, posted on January 22, 2016 at 09:55:49
rbolaw
 They cost next to nothing in the duty free shops, so no worries about reaching any duty free limits. Stoli was the cheapest, I didn't even bother buying that. Some of those you will never see here. But the truth is, imho, good ol' Smirnoff does the trick. ;-)

 

Did you ever try a brand called "Kremlin Award"? [nt], posted on January 22, 2016 at 10:16:07
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012

 

I did say "born during the 20th century"..., posted on January 22, 2016 at 11:20:28
genungo
 Igor = 1882, Bartok = 1881, Prokofiev = 1891 (well, I did say "or just before" so Prokofiev might barely qualify).

Ok, so how many composer(s) *born during the 20th century* actually beat out Shostakovich for "greatness"? Not too many I'd say (I don't really care much for Prokofiev, personally).

Then, how many of those on your list might truly be considered "first rate" within the context of classical music from 18th century to... whenever?

 

RE: Did you ever try a brand called "Kremlin Award"? [nt], posted on January 22, 2016 at 11:25:13
rbolaw
 In Russia I only bought bottles where everything on the label was in Russian, the more obscure the better. The only one that's readily available here is Russian Standard. At home, I don't do "premium" vodka.
BTW, in the Soviet era, there was only one brand in Russia. Ah, the hardships of Communism!

 

I'd say Copland. In my mind he's fist rate.(nt), posted on January 22, 2016 at 11:37:52
kuma
Audiophile

Posts: 10274
Location: IN
Joined: July 8, 2001
 .

 

Yes, you said, "born during the 20th century (or just before)", posted on January 22, 2016 at 15:28:36
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 IMHO Shostakovich is a nothing, compared to a master like Prokofiev. DSCH's fame is all based on extra-musical clap-trap that has nothing to do with the actual quality of his music. I admit that there will always be listeners who are fascinated by this kind of external "meaning", so I don't see this kind of "popularity" dying out anytime soon. Shostakovich's music is for listeners who have a literary bent to their mentality. The trouble with this predisposition is that as soon as certain new facts come to light, their evaluation of the music can change 180 degrees. How else can you explain all the critics and listeners who couldn't praise the performances of Joyce Hatto highly enough, but who now don't care so much for those same performances since the truth came out that they were actually performances by other pianists without the same sob story attached to their recordings. The same with the Halina Czerny-Stefanska recording of the Chopin E-minor Concerto - it was "to die for" as long as people thought that the performer was Dinu Lippatti, but now, not so much. The same principle is operating with the music of Shostakovich - how he heroically stood up to Stalin by writing trivial music for important occasions. (Wow - if that isn't thumbing your nose at the authorities, I don't know what is!) I contend that what people love about the music of Shostakovich is the "back-story", not the music itself. (Well, maybe not in all cases, but that's a good chunk of the appreciation anyway.)

But, now that you've moved the goal posts a bit, I'm still happy to answer your question (about other 20th-centuy composers who are superior to Shostakovich) on your new terms! ;-)

So, among those composers BORN in the twentieth century whom I consider superior to Shostakovich, I'd certainly include Joaquin Rodrigo, although his output was comparatively limited.

And, just as certainly, I'd include Aram Khatchaturian - who worked under the same general conditions as Shostakovich, but who achieved incomparably finer results.

To a lesser extent, I would also include Dmitry Kabelevsky too, for similar reasons.

Oh, and let's not forget Richard Addinsell! (He wrote "Warsaw Concerto"!) I'm tempted to include Leroy Anderson too, but perhaps he didn't compose in a wide enough emotional range. ;-)

Miklos Rozsa wrote some fine concert music in addition to his celebrated movie scores. (BTW, one of Shostakovich's best scores IMHO is his incidental music for a Russian movie production of "Hamlet".)

Of course there's Julian Scriabin, who composed in the same scented, creepy style of his father (I love it!), before his life was cruelly snuffed out (drowning accident) at the age of 11. (Now THERE's a back-story!)

As for Olivier Messiaen, I'm kind of on the fence. All those bird (-brained) pieces haven't worn well for me over the years. Same with Samuel Barber - the first couple of movements of that Violin Concerto are awfully gooey!.

Then there's Bernard Herrmann, the Wagner of the 20th century and an absolute master of motivic manipulation!

Although probably too prolific for his own good, Alan Hovhaness sometimes achieved a level of spirituality in his music that Shostakovich could only dream of!

Based on what little I know of the music of the Dutch composer, Jan Koetsier, his total output might be better than that of Shostakovich too. It's difficult to say at this point, since I don't enough of Koetsier's total output. The same goes for the Hungarian composer, Gyula David, and the Russian composer, Georgy Sviridov. But they're all POSSIBLY better than Shostakovich IMHO.

The music of Igor Makevitch (now far better known as a conductor) seems to be becoming better known - no less a composer than Igor Stravinsky once considered Markevitch's music a threat to his own credentials as the most interesting avant garde modernist. In any case, I prefer what I've heard of Markevitch's music to Shostakovich's.

Morton Gould, Kent Kennan - POSSIBLY more interesting than Shostakovich. I don't have enough exposure to their music.

Argentinean composer Alberto Ginastera wrote compelling music for piano, orchestra and voice (I'm thinking of his operas) - he certainly should be able to keep his place in the repertoire.

Shostakovich's own student, Galina Ustvolskaya, wrote far more compelling music than he did - again, just based on the small amount of her music I've heard so far. In fact, Shostakovich wrote to her "It is not you who are influenced by me; rather, it is I who am influenced by you." In fact, she could be the stronger and superior musical figure - we're only now unraveling all this.

Well, I'm stopping here with the composers who were born 1900 - 1920. It's quite a diverse group, and, overall, I think this group compares well with the composers of the 18th and 19th centuries, and, yes, I think some of them are first-rate.

 

This is simple. Prokofiev bores me, Shostakovich doesn't. nt., posted on January 22, 2016 at 16:17:01
MWE
Audiophile

Posts: 2202
Location: Burlington, NC
Joined: June 8, 2000
 nt.

Mark in NC
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon

 

Great, but all of the composers you've just mentioned..., posted on January 22, 2016 at 16:52:47
genungo
 ... might be considered "second rate", don't you think? At least when compared to certain others who appear to be considered as the true Giants of classical music composition.

You know, those striding Giants. Bloody born and bred in the 18th and 19th. To whom we refer to on an almost daily basis, and who I suppose will always be thought of as the true "first rate" composers of legend and lore. It would seem that there are precious few of those guys around but we gotta draw the line somewhere, don't we?

Or, could I be wrong? Maybe I don't need no stinkin' lines? I honestly can't decide what to do.

With such a shortage of "first rate" composers in this world, one might think that a fleaweight like Boulez would have dodged the issue.

So, I thought I'd ask you about this. Thanks for replying.

 

I suppose one needs a certain critical mass among audiences, academicians and performers to be considered great, posted on January 22, 2016 at 19:29:08
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 And perhaps composers such as Ustvolskaya will never get this kind of critical mass (at least among listeners). Who knows? A lot of 20th-century music is not the kind of stuff that someone off the street can just pick up without too much concentration and effort (as opposed to some late 18th-century "great" composers who never seem to get too far from straightforward triadic harmony with an occasional seventh chord or augmented sixth chord - I won't mention any names!). OTOH, many of the 20th century composers require considerable work on the listener's part to get to a level where the enjoyment and gratification kick in. The "Giants" in classical music already have their favorable inertia going - it's much harder for lesser known composers to "break in" to Olympus, even though they might actually be as good as (or, in some ways, even better than) the composers who are already there! And in fact, I see music (and audiences) fragmenting into ever narrower fields of interest in the future, a trend that, over time, could even start to affect perception of "The Giants". As I say, who knows?

It used to bother me that, in the various music courses I took, "greatness" in music never seemed to be defined satisfactorily (to me, anyway). I was very disappointed that musical greatness was not something which could be "proven" (like in a geometry course!). Now, in my old age, I don't worry about it so much! ;-)

 

RE: Yes, you said, "born during the 20th century (or just before)", posted on January 22, 2016 at 19:40:48
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001

'Gooey'? Did you say 'Gooey', Chris?





First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

LOL. I knew my mentality was bent, but was unaware the bend is *literary*. nt, posted on January 23, 2016 at 09:26:56
Rick W
 nt

 

Interesting. I've never tired of Prokofiev, hope I never do. , posted on January 23, 2016 at 09:35:39
jdaniel@jps.net
 With some exception, Shostakovich yields his secrets pretty quickly.

 

Go against the grain..., posted on January 23, 2016 at 10:27:34
genungo
 Corn and Potato - it's the American way.

 

Amen, Brother..., posted on January 23, 2016 at 12:21:38
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001
 Especially if, as legend has it, the original score was burned for heat during the Nazi siege of Leningrad.


First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

Good one! (nt), posted on January 23, 2016 at 12:52:34
krisjan
Reviewer

Posts: 929
Joined: May 6, 2001
 .

 

RE: I understand what you're trying to say, but. . . , posted on January 23, 2016 at 13:02:17
krisjan
Reviewer

Posts: 929
Joined: May 6, 2001
 I have both Volkov's Testimony and Fay's biography and enjoyed both. String Quartets 13 and 14 both employ tone rows (they are my least favorite) though I suppose one wouldn't say they are atonal per se. Highly chromatic - yes.

My appreciation of Prokofiev continues to grow - at one point some years ago I would have placed DSCH above Proko as a composer but no longer. However, in my book, both are truly unique composers with their own voices that are readily apparent in their works.

 

That skittering fugue in the middle is amazing. Jarvi's is my fav on Chandos. nt, posted on January 23, 2016 at 19:38:53
jdaniel@jps.net
 .

 

I'm sure that with greater experience, careful listening, and. . . , posted on January 23, 2016 at 21:14:05
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 . . . sober reflection, you'll have your preferences turned around 180 degrees in NO time! ;-)

 

Thanks for the info - I of course have not heard everything by Shostakovich, posted on January 23, 2016 at 21:48:33
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 And I was thinking that he might have employed tone rows (after Stalin was safely out of the way!), but I'd never heard an actual row used in one of Shostakovich's compositions. (So you can infer correctly that I've never heard either the 13th or 14th quartets!) The 13th must be an interesting piece, since, as you say, it uses a tone row (perhaps as a kind of isolated element) and yet is said to be in the key of B-flat minor.

Of course, the first use of a tone row in music (at least that I'm aware of) is the very opening of Liszt's Faust Symphony, even though, like the Shostakovich Quartet, it's written in a definite key (C-minor in this case). So Liszt's use of a 12-tone row precedes Schoenberg's use of it by more than 50 years, but of course, Liszt's developmental procedures really have nothing to do with the way Schoenberg used the row for for his own theories of development and structure. It's also probable IMHO that the row that Liszt came up with would be disallowed by Schoenberg, since Liszt's row is too suggestive of particular keys - something Schoenberg was definitely trying to avoid (even though the row in the Berg Violin Concerto also suggests a key - G minor - too).

 

Interesting - I didn't realize Idaho had so many excellent vodkas [nt], posted on January 23, 2016 at 21:54:38
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26483
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012

 

Correction: I have Elizabeth Wilson's biography about DSCH not Fey's, posted on January 24, 2016 at 05:32:55
krisjan
Reviewer

Posts: 929
Joined: May 6, 2001
 Shostakovich: A Life Remembered by Elizabeth Wilson was published by Princeton University Press in 1994 and THAT's the other DSCH bio that I have along with Testimony. Don't have the Fey. Been a while since I read it so when your post mentioned Shostakovich: A Life I immediately made the association with Wilson's tome.

Perhaps the insider's rule for composing in the 12-tone method is "if it sounds good, you ain't doin' it right". Take THAT, second Vienna...

 

RE: Are there any 20th century composers who are not "second rate"..., posted on January 24, 2016 at 10:19:44
learsfool
Audiophile

Posts: 1001
Joined: August 4, 2008
 One thing that should be clarified here - when Boulez calls Shostakovitch both excellent and second rate, he is being very serious. Shostakovich is an excellent composer, and I like him very much. But he IS in the second rank when we compare him to the other truly great composers. He is not in the ranks with Bartok, Stravinsky, Mozart, Wagner, Beethoven, etc.(and that's not a ranking order, LOL!) This does not mean that he was not an excellent composer - he was. I would place him above most of Chris' list below, for instance, though not Prokofiev, who I would also consider in the second rank. But we already had that discussion.....my point is you can indeed be both second rate and excellent - second rate NOT being a derogatory term in this case.

 

RE: Are there any 20th century composers who are not "second rate"..., posted on January 24, 2016 at 13:55:57
faskenite
Audiophile

Posts: 72
Location: Canada
Joined: June 23, 2009
 The 2nd Piano Trio. The 4th, 5th, 8th and 10th Symphonies. The Preludes and Fugues. After the passing of Mahler, Strauss, Berg and Schoenberg, who was a greater 20th Century composer? And remember that Boulez called Gorecki's 3rd Symphony "merde". I can't imagine any reasonable listener sharing that opinion.

 

But Boulez is right, posted on January 25, 2016 at 19:51:30
gd
Audiophile

Posts: 3257
Location: New York City
Joined: June 16, 2000
 By Boulez's definition. Shostakovich did not change music, It's a bit of myopia on Boulez's art. Cuz Shostakovich is a giant for precisely the reason that Boulez is not, one might argue that Boulez did change music, but only to make sure no one liked it any more.

I wish we could point to more second rate composers who wrote at such a high level under adverse conditions. Do Prokofiev, Mendelssohn, Liszt, Franck, Strauss, Elgar fit the category of Boulez second rate squad? Or is there a third?


Gregg

 

ROTFLMAO WTOLRDMCheeks, posted on January 27, 2016 at 03:11:30
Timbo in Oz
Audiophile

Posts: 23221
Location: Canberra - in the ACT - SE Australia
Joined: January 30, 2002
 exactly.


Warmest

Tim Bailey

Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger


 

RE: Are there any 20th century composers who are not "second rate"..., posted on January 27, 2016 at 22:38:46
learsfool
Audiophile

Posts: 1001
Joined: August 4, 2008
 Uh, Bartok, Stravinsky, Prokofiev, Hindemith, to name just four off the top of my head.

 

RE: Are there any 20th century composers - Add Britten (n), posted on January 31, 2016 at 18:53:09
goldenthal
Audiophile

Posts: 1001
Location: Ontario
Joined: March 28, 2003
 n

 

RE: But Boulez is right, posted on February 1, 2016 at 04:01:46
ivan_terrible
Industry Professional

Posts: 207
Location: Ivangorod
Joined: April 26, 2015



Here's Joly JOE back in stunning health as of last year.

Shostakovich second rate?
A knock on your door in the night concentrates the mind admirably.

I don't recall Boulez ever having to worry about anything apart from maybe over eating, although he did state people that didn't agree with his views of 12 tone music were morons.

There surely couldn't be a better person to comment on him than another moron.
"Le président François Hollande a honoré la mémoire du chef-d'orchestre par un tweet. "Pierre BOULEZ a fait briller la musique française dans le monde"

Richard Strauss I suppose was another "2nd rater" too according to PB.

 

RE: Are there any 20th century composers who are not "second rate"..., posted on February 1, 2016 at 04:33:00
ivan_terrible
Industry Professional

Posts: 207
Location: Ivangorod
Joined: April 26, 2015
 "I sent out a slew of emails to cronies of mine asking their opinions on the matter and they pretty much confirmed my suspicions.

My colleague over at the Village Voice, Kyle Gann, said "Appointing Pierre Boulez at Carnegie Hall seems like an incredible anachronism, a self-defeating attempt to cling to the 20th century.

Everyone knows what his musical priorities are, and everyone knows that the musical idiom Boulez feels is the only possible one - 12-tone music - has now been abandoned as one of history's great mistakes by all but a few diehard composers.

If he had truly spent a lifetime creating great musical works - instead of a mere handful, and most of those incomplete - he might be a heartwarming figure to have around." The American Music Center's Frank Oteri seems less interested: "I have been a new music junkie all life and have worked to push a new music agenda in the classical music community for over a decade, yet I have felt no aesthetic urge or even a professional obligation to attend any of the Boulez events at Carnegie Hall this past season."

And downtown composer Phil Kline, who does wonderful things with racks of boomboxes, simply couldn't be bothered: "I haven't thought about his music for years."

***

Back in the 70s when Boulez was in town conducting the NY Philharmonic, he went out of his way to be as un-Lenny Bernstein-ish as possible; with his icy temperament and chilly conducting style, he alienated just about everyone."

"Boulez's music is a development out of Debussy, Webern, and Messiaen with a bit of Varese and Schoenberg thrown in. It's considered great because it has both surface beauty and underlying deeper structure, just like the great music of the past.

I think this captures Boulez and his music perfectly without saying his inevitable place in history will be the opposite of Mahler: pretty good conductor, forgettable composer.

What you say here about Boulez is what they said this about Ries in his day, that he was Beethoven with a touch of Schubert and Haydn thrown in. When I hear Boulez I hear all the composers you cite.

There's a word for that kind of music: derivative. Such composers may be perceived as masters in their time, but that time fades.

Today, Ries is a minor footnote in music while his sound-alikes maintain their positions of greatness. A half-century after Boulez is dead, it will be the same with him ....."

 

But Boulez is still right, posted on February 1, 2016 at 06:30:34
gd
Audiophile

Posts: 3257
Location: New York City
Joined: June 16, 2000
 By his own logic. By his logic Strauss and Boulez are also second rate. It's way to gage artistic achievement that I would choose, but it is not surprising coming from a formalist.

OH, when I was a painter, with a studio at home, my young daughter would all too often knock on my door. Of course she wanted to play in the studio, but I can attest that it is actually very disruptive.


Gregg

 

RE: But Boulez is still right, posted on February 1, 2016 at 07:19:25
ivan_terrible
Industry Professional

Posts: 207
Location: Ivangorod
Joined: April 26, 2015
 "Thinking of Boulez's scandalous article "Schoenberg est Mort," I asked him if someone would someday have to write an article titled "Boulez est Mort." He laughed generously, and replied, "Maybe I should write it myself."

http://www.kylegann.com/BoulezThirdSonata.mp3

 

Boulez is dead, posted on February 1, 2016 at 10:32:12
gd
Audiophile

Posts: 3257
Location: New York City
Joined: June 16, 2000
 But some of his works are becoming mainstream, piano sonata #2 is becoming a modernist recital standard. Oh well.....

 

RE: Are there any 20th century composers - Add Britten (n), posted on February 2, 2016 at 17:41:38
learsfool
Audiophile

Posts: 1001
Joined: August 4, 2008
 Yes, definitely add Britten for sure!!

 

Page processed in 0.058 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]