Home Music Lane

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

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Music Lane ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

Just to be clear. . .

. . . that was my paraphrase of what Bernstein was saying - not what he actually said. ;-) (I still highly recommend that DG set.)

I must say, I read your post with astonishment, because your descriptions surely do not correspond to what I hear. ;-) I wonder if it's worthwhile continuing the discussion when we're so much at odds over just what it is we're hearing. But then, who knows, maybe it's still worth a try.

You seem to be highly focused on the unity of a work of art - hence, your analogy with the structure of a tree. But I think in doing so, you've made Tchaikovsky's point: yes the structure of a tree may be consistent within particular elements - but, as you yourself point out, the components themselves, such as branches, flowers, and fruit, are NOT the same as each other. You prefer non-flowering trees with no fruit? Seriously though, it seems that what you're arguing in favor of is the old Baroque Doctrine of the Affections, whereby (per Wikipedia) "one unified and 'rationalized' Affekt should be aimed at by any single piece or movement of music, and that to attempt more was to risk confusion and disorder". I think that might be appealing to you? Even in the later eighteenth century, the rift was beginning to show, as this doctrine lost ground. Think of the very opening of Mozart's Jupiter Symphony - Mozart is very martial in the first two measures, but then strikes out in another direction in the third and fourth measures with his yielding reply within the same theme. Do you worry about Mozart's lack of unity just within just the first four measures?

I hope you're just being rhetorically over the top when you say Tchaikovsky has struck out in every possible direction by the time we're 2/3 the way through the first movement of the Pathétique. You don't really believe that, do you? I mean, c'mon, EVERY possible direction?

I have to say that I just don't understand someone who considers Tchaikovsky's developments perfunctory. There are few other composers who write such heartfelt music as Tchaikovsky does - and his developments are very much a part of this overall effect. If that's perfunctory, I just have to shrug my shoulders and shake my head. And your comparison with Wagner is especially surprising - Wagner, whose music for so many listeners consists of small oases amid long arid stretches of musical filling (yeah, continuous development!). Certainly, Wagner at his best is exalted indeed, but, in general, you have to suffer through a lot to get to those best parts. Give me Tchaikovsky's development sections any day!

As for the last movement of Brahms's Fourth, the point I was trying to make was not that Brahms was trying to imitate the style of Bach, but rather that Brahms's added note sticks out like a sore thumb. Generally, I don't have any problem adapting older material to the contemporary vernacular. But if the last movement of the Fourth Symphony represents one of these kinds of updates, I must say that it's at best only semi-successful.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  VH Audio  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]