Walking with Elgar

[karlhenning]

I don't know if I agree, as I know at a guess about 90% of each of those composers works, and what paerticularly impresses me with them are their uniform high quality.

Oh, I certainly agree (at least, on the basis of the smaller percentage than yours, with which I have had occasion to familiarize myself) as to the uniformly high quality, and that this distinguishes them from lesser composers of various levels and hues.  Personally, the high quality of Bach's, Haydn's, Mozart's, Beethoven's and Brahms's work notwithstanding, I should find the stylistic 'monotony' heavy going if I were to undertake such an encompassing survey with any of their work.  Thus, I am making my way through a 40-disc Bach "premium edition" (and, for that matter, the complete Haydn symphonies) at a gradual pace, well interspersed with other listening.

[DavidRoss]

Oh, I certainly agree (at least, on the basis of the smaller percentage than yours, with which I have had occasion to familiarize myself) as to the uniformly high quality, and that this distinguishes them from lesser composers of various levels and hues.  Personally, the high quality of Bach's, Haydn's, Mozart's, Beethoven's and Brahms's work notwithstanding, I should find the stylistic 'monotony' heavy going if I were to undertake such an encompassing survey with any of their work.  Thus, I am making my way through a 40-disc Bach "premium edition" (and, for that matter, the complete Haydn symphonies) at a gradual pace, well interspersed with other listening.

Agreed, in spades.  It is the consistently extraordinary quality of a substantial body of work in a variety of genres that distinguishes--for me--the dozen or so masters of the first rank from all the others.  But all Sibelius and no Debussy would make Dave a dull boy.  Even no Telemann, no Zelenka, no Gershwin, no...Elgar.  Elgar is one of my favorite composers, in that I love some of his music as much as I love any and have returned to it again and again for spiritual nourishment since I was but a young lad coping with managing a gas station in Southern California during the 1973 Arab oil embargo.  (I practically wore out that original Angel pressing of Tortelier's Elgar VCC!)

My love for some of Elgar's music--like my love for music by Barber and Copland and Gershwin and Grieg--does not require that I rank him with those supreme masters mentioned above, or than I demand others recognize him as such, or run around alienating those who might share my affections by browbeating them as morons if they don't agree that Elgar was the greatest composer who ever lived and that compared with him Beethoven was a pathetic hack! 

But that's just me.  Others' MMV. 

[karlhenning]

BTW, Dave, that Hahn disc of the Vn Cto (plus) is terrific!

[The new erato]

Agreed, in spades.  It is the consistently extraordinary quality of a substantial body of work in a variety of genres that distinguishes--for me--the dozen or so masters of the first rank from all the others.  But all Sibelius and no Debussy would make Dave a dull boy.  Even no Telemann, no Zelenka, no Gershwin, no...Elgar.  Elgar is one of my favorite composers, in that I love some of his music as much as I love any and have returned to it again and again for spiritual nourishment since I was but a young lad coping with managing a gas station in Southern California during the 1973 Arab oil embargo.  (I practically wore out that original Angel pressing of Tortelier's Elgar VCC!)

My love for some of Elgar's music--like my love for music by Barber and Copland and Gershwin and Grieg--does not require that I rank him with those supreme masters mentioned above, or than I demand others recognize him as such, or run around alienating those who might share my affections by browbeating them as morons if they don't agree that Elgar was the greatest composer who ever lived and that compared with him Beethoven was a pathetic hack! 

But that's just me.  Others' MMV. 

Well, I certainly agree. Hindemith, Gershwin (and a slew of other Tin Pan alley greats), Reger, Prokofiev et al in infinitum provides the variety necessary to avoid wearing out this passion.

[Elgarian]

I've been dipping into a collection of essays: Oh, My Horses: Elgar and the Great War, published by the Elgar Society and edited by Lewis Foreman.



It's a well-researched, scholarly volume, and the first essay ('Elgar's War' by Andrew Neill) is interesting both for the perspectives it gives, and for some of the information that emerges, about Elgar's attitude to the First World War and its effect on his composing. For instance he writes about what confronted Elgar, at the age of 57, when the war began:

"Elgar faced a challenge which, if not dangerous, was nonetheless a demanding one. He had to provide what was required and expected of a major artistic figure during a catastrophe unprecedented in his lifetime and that of his fellow countrymen."

Elgar took the role very seriously. The catastrophe was now upon the nation whether he or anyone else liked it or not, and he saw it as his responsibility to respond accordingly. Neill (rightly, I think) thinks of The Spirit of England as Elgar's Requiem, and offers some useful material about the background to its composition. It was based on three poems by Laurence Binyon (The Fourth of August, To Women, and For The Fallen), and initially the future of Elgar's involvement in the project looked uncertain: Cyril Rootham, a pupil of Stanford's, had already begun to set For The Fallen to music and Novello had agreed to publish it. Novello were reluctant to publish two such works, and in any case Elgar was reluctant to tread on Rootham's toes. But Binyon tried to persuade Elgar that he had a higher duty - and this is how he expressed it, in the letter he wrote:

"Think of the thousands who will be craving to have their grief glorified and lifted up and transformed by an art such as yours. ... Surely it would be wrong to let them lose this help and consolation."

It's interesting to see the approach Binyon used here - playing on the idea that Elgar's music would be of help and consolation to people whose lives had been broken by circumstances beyond their control. There's no notion of drum-beating or jingoism - just the concept of attempting to provide the only kind of support he could. At any rate, Elgar was persuaded, and as a result composed what I believe to be one of his greatest and most unforgiveably neglected works. This is how Neill writes of it:

"The Spirit of England, the music of the war that he had been destined to write. The public could hear his reaction to a changed world. His response is both angry and sad for the waste, horror and carnage that would destroy the life he knew. Although for 'England', these pieces are for any country and its dead."

Elgar's response was based on a deeply-felt sympathy for the sorrows and agonies of his fellow man in the face of catastrophe. Put aside 'Land of Hope and Glory', and listen to The Spirit of England. It can break your heart and inspire you, both at once.

Here's my recommended recording: this is by far the best version to buy, and costs less than a fiver on Amazon. Alexander Gibson rises magnificently to the occasion, and Teresa Cahill sings like one inspired.



http://www.amazon.co.uk/Elgar-Coronation-Ode-Spirit-England/dp/B000000A9N/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1247511957&sr=1-2

[karlhenning]

Most interesting, thank you.

[Elgarian]

Neill's essay is leading me to revisit some of Elgar's other war music, in the first instance Une Voix dans le Desert (1915). It's the kind of thing we might tend to walk by, these days - 7 or 8 of its 12-minutes consists of a narration against a background of music - but to walk by it is actually to miss something important.

Emile Cammaerts was a Belgian poet, and wrote the narrated text (translated into English by his wife). In October 1915, Alice Elgar recorded in her diary: 'M. Cammaerts came to talk about "Voix dans le desert" - E. played it to him & wept a little. Cammaerts profoundly moved'. It's not surprising to read of the tears; the piece is heart-breaking. The setting is not far from the battlefront, 'a hundred yards from the trenches'. There's a small cottage that has had its roof damaged by a shell. Everything is silent - nothing but 'the stillness of the great graveyards. Only the crosses, the crooked wooden crosses, on the wide lonely plain'.

So the narrator sets the scene. Then out of the desolation, from the cottage comes a single soprano voice, singing: 'When the spring comes round again', looking ahead to the time when all this will be over. She sings for about five minutes, but those are five of the most moving minutes in all Elgar's music. When she stops, the narrator continues. It isn't over. Now there's only 'the sound of our boots on the muddy road'.

This kind of narration spoken over music is much of its age, and not my kind of thing; but even so, this breaks through all my prejudice. It's hard not to listen without tears.

I have two versions, but by far the best is the one on this disc. Teresa Cahill sings the central soprano section with total conviction, and the CD is worth buying for that alone:

[71 dB]

Here's my recommended recording: this is by far the best version to buy, and costs less than a fiver on Amazon. Alexander Gibson rises magnificently to the occasion, and Teresa Cahill sings like one inspired.

I have been "considering" that CD for ages.

[71 dB]

I have two versions, but by far the best is the one on this disc. Teresa Cahill sings the central soprano section with total conviction, and the CD is worth buying for that alone:

That one I do have. Unknown Elgar that more people should hear. Elgar was so versatile!

[Elgarian]

I have been "considering" that CD for ages.

Speaking purely personally, and realising that it may seem absurd to anyone else, it's the most essential CD that I own, not just by Elgar, but by anyone. If the Coronation Ode were missing, and only the half-hour of The Spirit of England were there, it would still be the most essential CD I own - the one I would keep if I had to give everything else away.

[71 dB]

Speaking purely personally, and realising that it may seem absurd to anyone else, it's the most essential CD that I own, not just by Elgar, but by anyone. If the Coronation Ode were missing, and only the half-hour of The Spirit of England were there, it would still be the most essential CD I own - the one I would keep if I had to give everything else away.

Why do you think it's THAT good?

[Elgarian]

Why do you think it's THAT good?

The best I can do to explain it is to quote from a post I made elsewhere. But I'm aware that it isn't an 'explanation'; it's just a record of my own Elgarian journey, really.

I was sixteen when I first heard the Introduction and Allegro for Strings, which music seemed to emanate from a place that was at once deeply rooted within me, yet also seemed to imply that there was some place 'out there' that I needed to find. So I was bound to make my way to the Malvern Hills eventually (though I grew to know a lot more of Elgar's music before that), and at first when I arrived there I thought 'this is the place'. And in a strictly biographical sense, of course, the Malvern Hills and countryside are, indeed, 'the place'. But over time I realised that 'the place' was really all of England, and Malvern was a kind of symbolic focus for that. And then again, later, I realised that this 'England' was really only a kind of focus for something still deeper and more profound. (I think it's Gimli, isn't it, at Helms Deep, who stamps on the ground and says something like 'this place has strong bones'? Well, this idea of 'England' seemed to be like that.) So this 'England' itself was not so much a place as an idea - like Blake's 'Albion'. It has nothing to do with nationalism; it's partly to do with patriotism, but less so than you might think; it has something to do with landscape, but also more than just landscape - something to do with roots, and belonging, and certain kinds of ideals (noble and heroic ideals, some of them), mingled with a kind of indefinable sadness.

And the point about Elgar is that his music is like an admission ticket into this place/idea. So which of his works, I might ask, is the best ticket? The symphonies are wonderful - I've loved them for decades. The chamber works, so very very different, yet so recognisably Elgar, mark another high point. The cello concerto, the violin concerto - sheer magic, and on and on I could go. But the work by Elgar that I would choose above all others is The Spirit of England (most perfectly and powerfully represented by the Alexander Gibson/Scottish National Orchestra recording, mentioned above, with Teresa Cahill as soloist).

It lasts about half an hour. It's hardly ever performed, I think. I suspect the three currently available recordings sell poorly (though I don't know). But here's Elgar at his most profound. It may not be his greatest music in a technical sense - I'm not competent to judge that. But I believe it's his greatest work of art, in the broadest, most humanistic sense. It's based on three poems by Laurence Binyon, but the literal meaning of the words is really only a kind of rough guide to the meaning of the whole work, which expresses Elgar's deepest feelings about the anguish of war; the nobility of sacrifice; the despair created by the loss of thousands upon thousands of brave young men, and the sheer determination and need to come to terms with that and above all, to remember them appropriately; and the frightening mixture of beauty and pain that inhabits the making of music that deals with such profound thoughts and feelings. I find it impossible still, to listen to it without tears, and without feeling that this may be the most profound work of art I know.

If someone told me I could only listen to one more piece of music, (with silence to follow forever after), I'd choose The Spirit of England to be that final piece.

[DavidRoss]

Well done, Alan...persuasive enough for me to add it to my shopping cart.  I especially liked this passage:

...this 'England' itself was not so much a place as an idea - like Blake's 'Albion'. It has nothing to do with nationalism; it's partly to do with patriotism, but less so than you might think; it has something to do with landscape, but also more than just landscape - something to do with roots, and belonging, and certain kinds of ideals (noble and heroic ideals, some of them), mingled with a kind of indefinable sadness.

And the point about Elgar is that his music is like an admission ticket into this place/idea.

That "indefinable sadness" seems to me about the passing of an age...the death knell sounded by the blast of factory whistles and the shuttle of massed looms; the Great War nailing not only the coffins of the lost generation, but also of the lost age. 

What truth lay between Rosetti's dreams and Mr. Dickens's nightmares?  At what price England's best...and the world's? 

Forester's (and Merchant/Ivory/Jhabvala/Sands's) George Emerson, proclaiming his creed:  "Joy!  Beauty!  Love!"

[Elgarian]

That "indefinable sadness" seems to me about the passing of an age...the death knell sounded by the blast of factory whistles and the shuttle of massed looms; the Great War nailing not only the coffins of the lost generation, but also of the lost age.

It is, yes, and yet it's an age that never was. It's a dream that we seek to discover in the past and hope to create in the future, but which we never manage to achieve here in the present. It's a common mistake to see the Preraphaelites, Morris, Ruskin, Elgar as backward-looking. They do look back, but only in order to look forward, inspired. The Preraphs were an avant-garde movement; Morris was a Socialist; Ruskin wanted to rebuild society anew; and Elgar, even in the despair of The Spirit of England, still looks to the chivalric ideal as an inspiration and a way forward, however desperate the situation may seem. Blake had it aright (well, Blake always gets it right): 'Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand/Till we have built Jerusalem/In England's green and pleasant land'. Not 'we once built and let's weep plaintively about its passing', but 'we will build or die in the trying'. In the hands of these great men, the nostalgia is not passive, but purposeful.

[imperfection]

Am I the only one that can't seem to comprehend either of his symphonies, no matter how hard I try?

[71 dB]

The best I can do to explain it is to quote from a post I made elsewhere. But I'm aware that it isn't an 'explanation'; it's just a record of my own Elgarian journey, really.

I was sixteen...

Elgarian, that was a long post and I don't know if I can say anything that matches the spiritual aspects of it. For me Elgar's music feels timeless and "everywhere". It's as if the speakers where sonic light sources illuminating everything around them like X-ray.

I think I heard Introduction and Allegro for the first time in winter 1997. I was already 26 at that time. I didn't even listen to music actively when I was sixteen. I started at age 17. I kind of skipped the naive teenage music phase.  

[71 dB]

Am I the only one that can't seem to comprehend either of his symphonies, no matter how hard I try?

They are complex works but not incomprehensible. Once you get Elgar's musical language and art, they make wonderful sense to you so keep trying! The performances on Naxos label are very clear so maybe you should try them?

[Elgarian]

For me Elgar's music feels timeless and "everywhere". It's as if the speakers where sonic light sources illuminating everything around them like X-ray.

Well, he did say the music was in the air all around, and he just took what he wanted. You're describing something rather similar.

I think I heard Introduction and Allegro for the first time in winter 1997.

For me, it would have been about 1963/4. Elgar and the Beatles hit me both at the same time. So Elgar's been a companion for over 40 years. It's a very personal thing - I'm as fascinated by the man almost as much as by the music, and the strange thing is that it was more than 30 years before I encountered The Spirit of England. I'd assumed it was a minor work, and not much worth bothering with, because no one mentioned it, and it was never performed. So when I finally heard it, I was completely unprepared for its impact, which somehow focused all those years of listening to his music into this heart-rending half-hour, and left me in a state of complete disarray!

But I should explain that I've steeped myself for much of my life in the British-mystical-pastoral-tradition. Blake, Samuel Palmer, Constable, Turner, Cotman, the PreRaphaelites, Ruskin, Morris - these are where my deepest art-roots are; and my love of Elgar is an integral part of all that.

I kind of skipped the naive teenage music phase.

I don't think I ever left it.

[Elgarian]

Am I the only one that can't seem to comprehend either of his symphonies, no matter how hard I try?

I don't know what would make them incomprehensible, particularly. (The first symphony is very tuneful, I think, but one man's good tune is another's random sequence of notes.) Sounds as though you might have more success trying a completely different aspect of his music - the late chamber music, for example: string quartet, piano quintet, violin sonata. They are still very 'English', but don't have that 'Great British nobilmente' flavour.

[71 dB]

Well, he did say the music was in the air all around, and he just took what he wanted. You're describing something rather similar.

What's strange to me is this concept being alien to many. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why some people struggle with Elgar's music?

For me, it would have been about 1963/4. Elgar and the Beatles hit me both at the same time. So Elgar's been a companion for over 40 years. It's a very personal thing - I'm as fascinated by the man almost as much as by the music, and the strange thing is that it was more than 30 years before I encountered The Spirit of England. I'd assumed it was a minor work, and not much worth bothering with, because no one mentioned it, and it was never performed. So when I finally heard it, I was completely unprepared for its impact, which somehow focused all those years of listening to his music into this heart-rending half-hour, and left me in a state of complete disarray!

I haven't listened to The Spirit of England in many years. I will purchase the recommended version soon. It is time. 

I have been so intensively into Tangerine Dream and King Crimson these days that I hardly ever listen to classical music!

But I should explain that I've steeped myself for much of my life in the British-mystical-pastoral-tradition. Blake, Samuel Palmer, Constable, Turner, Cotman, the PreRaphaelites, Ruskin, Morris - these are where my deepest art-roots are; and my love of Elgar is an integral part of all that.

I don't think I ever left it.

Well, I am a Finn and to be honest, Elgar is the only part of this British-mystical-pastoral-tradition I am interested of/familiar with.