|
Music Lane It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes. |
|
|
|
Music Lane It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes. |
|
In Reply to: Well, you see, THAT is the problem posted by Chris from Lafayette on March 25, 2017 at 13:44:51:
At the risk of igniting a semantics debate, I'd suggest that in the case of many of Shostakovich's works--aside, for example, from his reliance on Yevtushenko's text in the Thirteenth--it might be more accurate to portray the music as not so much dependent on its non-musical background as reflective or evocative or expositive of it (the Fifth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Fifteenth Symphonies, as well as the Eighth String Quartet, come to mind). You may consider that a distinction without a difference, but to me it sets the tone, if you will, for how I'll listen to the piece and determine whether it "speaks" to me "musically".
I'm no Shostakovich "expert", though I've read what you deem "crap" in addition to any number of other works and commentaries and actually have the protagonist of one of my unpublished novels interview the composer, which in turn leads Shostakovich to provide the solution to one of the protagonist's thorniest problems. But I think context (including what you call "non-musical background") is not necessarily detractive from (nor condemnatory of) a composer's work. I mean, what's Fantastique without Harriet Smithson?
Okay, I got that out of my system. I'll just conclude by saying that Shostakovich gets a lot of playtime here. Mostly because of the music itself.
:-)
Jim
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Well, you see, THAT is the problem - Jim Treanor 15:41:22 03/25/17 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
