Roy Harris (1898-1979)

[cilgwyn]

There's an article on her in The Post today. The Baltimore Symphony is doing a 'feminist' thing... oh, great!!

Maybe Benny Hill should have taken up conducting?

I'm off to burn my underpants!

[snyprrr]

Normally I listen to the DG 3rd, but I pulled out the Sony 3rd, and wow!, what a change. Here Bernstein, or the recording, or whatever, suddenly turned the Symphony into a Civil War piece for me. One really hears the wood in this recording, and it's played, I suppose, just that much more quickly, or more urgently, so that, for me at least, the whole thing just 'sounded' differently. I keenly payed attention to every detail, and felt like I was hearing it for the first time. Perhaps I was hearing certain lines coming through the recording in a different way than in the DG, so that I was actually hearing new detail.

I Amazoned a bunch of Harris samples, and found that the SQ 3, on that Chamber Music disc, is definitely one piece that takes its cue from the 3rd. The first movement (it is a suite of sorts) really has that cool Harris sound. I'm just going to have to learn his secret (moving between modes?). The SQ 2, on that old Emerson/New World disc, is of no import, IMO. I'm ambivalent concerning the Piano Quintet, and haven't heard the Violin Sonata.

I also listened to portions of Symphonies 5-6. I had assumed I would like them (again), but feel like I could live without them for now. And, since I already know that 8-9 aren't 'Harris sounding', I may get the Albany disc again (after years and years) just as Symphonies by someone ELSE!!! I'm still curious about the Symphony for Band, though: hope strings eternal. However, I have concluded that I really ONLY need the 3rd, and with two such different yet valid takes, who could want more? I could sing that melody forever!

The Harris 3rd may be my favorite artistic expression ever; or Sibelius 7, but Harris may have it. Or Finzi. Oh, I'm so sentimental!

[cilgwyn]

Yes,Indeed! I tried to argue in favour of some of the other symphonies a while ago,remember? But have I listened to any since?!!! The best ones really aren't THAT awful,really;it's just all that solemn patriotism & the lack of thematic variety. No 6 is still the best of the rest,as far as I'm concerned & I think it's a pretty impressive symphony. I just wish Bernstein could have recorded it. Still,the Pacific SO is as good as anyone who believes there IS life after Harris's third could hope for. And,I know I'm in danger of being sexist here,suitably macho!
If only I hadn't heard the others (bar No 3)!!!

But as you say,Harris's third is the only one you can hum. That great theme is as indelible as Copland's 'Fanfare for the common man. Argue as hard as you can,it has to be said,there is nothing as memorable or indelible as that theme anywhere else in Harris's output. It's as simple as that! My only suprise is that Emerson.Lake & Palmer.....oh,and Pans People ,didn't get round to doing it! I remember,as a teenager,nearly wearing out my copies of their hilariously unsubtle prog rock take on 'Hoedown' & the eponymous,Fanfare!
Tut! Tut!!!
(Good musicians to be fair,but NOT subtle!!! )

[cilgwyn]

My goodness! Am I really admitting that I listened to ELP!
This is a serious thread!!!

On second thoughts,maybe the sheer unremitting seriousness & patriotism of Roy Harris's muse makes you snatch at frivolous topics,like OTT prog rock interpretations of classical music,as some kind of light relief?
Or what about Harris's Seventh followed by an episode of Red Dwarf?!!
But the fact that I could even suggest such an idea only underlines the quality of Harris's inspiration in his only 'hit'!

On a more positive note,none of Harris's symphonies are so terrible that I will be donating them to a charity shop. At least,not yet! Although the Naxos 3 & 4 WILL be going there. But that's largely down to the performances themselves,fair play!

And a further thought. Is hanging onto you're Roy Harris cd's (if you do!) just wish fulfilment. Harris's third is SO good that you are convinced that somewhere in his output there must be something as good? Surely,SURELY,there MUST be SOMETHING there in all those symphonies that's just,or even,NEARLY as good? And maybe,MAYBE,one fine day you'll find it,like the Lost chord,or,better still,the Roy Harris version of Eldorado (the place,not the ill fated Beeb soap!) nestling there,just waiting for you,somewhere? Although,sadly,now that the remaining Harris symphonies have all been recorded or made available (to all too horrid effect) on 'Youtube',there isn't really even any hope of that! Or maybe,snatching at straws,another Bernstein,who could make the sixth or Seventh sound like the truly shattering masterpiece they probably aren't!

Also,even if Harris's third,Sixth or Seventh do,somehow,against all the odds,work their way back into the concert halls,what about the others?!!! No 8 may be proof that Harris COULD do something a little different,but is it really a symphony or an exercise in sonorities & intriguing ear tickling timbres. It strikes me right now as possibly the closest Harris's ever came to minimalism. Oh,and what about those peculiar titles? I can see allot of head scratching over that. What the heck was Harris thinking of? I've read the booklet notes with the cd,but it's still a bit peculiar!
  The Fifth could sound quite good,possibly,but the sheer perfection of No 3 is,presumably, always going to be used as a comparison. I might enjoy it,so might Joe Bloggs,but the critics don't work that way.
   And then you've got No 9,which is more or less an uneven retread of No 7,and so it goes on. As to No 10 & the ones with the bloke yapping,I think they're just going to have to miss those ones out!

Of course,there is always the outside chance that we've all got Harris wrong & maybe he WAS just interested in exploring sonorities,or something & the fact that they aren't all strikingly different is our problem NOT his? Maybe,he's like an American Rubbra (over to you Dundonnell! ?). But having ventured that,how does that explain the crassness of the one on Youtube? Unless I'm the aural equivalent of Mr Magoo,I really can't see how there could possibly be any musical value in that,with the best will in the world. A Paul Robeson in his prime might make it sound a bit better than it is,but that's about all! And,what about Walter Piston,who is,very possibly,my favourite American symphonist? Superficially,Piston's symphonies may appear to lack variety,but listen through the set a little more closely & there's a range of mood and expression,which you just don't find in you're average Roy Harris symphony. My goodness,there are even barn dances & humour!!! Indeed,the First edition recordings of No's 5,7 & 8, are real eye openers;particulaly No 8. I find it quite shocking that these are the only available recordings!

[Dundonnell]

"(Harris is) like an American Rubbra.....?"

I actually find it hard to imagine two 'relatively conservative' symphonists more dissimilar.

Harris is an American nationalist, a patriotic upholder of the American Dream, of heritage and of tradition, bold, sometimes brash, sometimes strident, a composer very much of external impression and force whose appeal is essentially visceral.

Rubbra was once referred to by the eminent musicologist Wilfred Mellers as a composer of dual nature, in the world but not of it. His music looks inward, it has a seriousness of purpose which is as far removed from the 'nationalist English pastoralists' as it is from that of a composer like Harris. There is, to me of course (I can only speak personally), a profound spirituality in Rubbra's music which does not reveal itself easily and will never appeal to those who seek instant gratification through surface glitter or glamour.

We think of Vaughan Williams as an almost quintessentially 'English composer' and there is, superficially, a considerable degree of difference between his music and that of Rubbra. Yet RVW held Rubbra in enormous esteem and considered him as his natural successor as a British symphonist. Both composer's music, and certainly RVW's best, was infused with a similar spirituality.

....and if by your remark you are implying that all Rubbra sounds the same then all I can do is to urge you to listen more often and with greater attention than you may have had the opportunity to do in the past.

There is never going a Rubbra bandwagon. We are never likely to be cracking jokes about him- although the reality was that alongside his profound religious beliefs Rubbra was a man of great passions, a man whose private life was as colourful as many other composers. But I can immerse myself in Rubbra's music in a way I can with few other composers.

(and...did you know-just a throw-away parting thought- that Rubbra's Second Symphony, no less, was the one which Sir Adrian Boult would have taken as one of his eight Desert Island Discs ).

[snyprrr]

Now you've done it, and woken up Dun!

[cilgwyn]

Roy Harris,an American Rubbra! No,no Dundonell,I was not suggesting that,at all,I was just making a point,rest assured. I was merely casting out for some kind of comparison & not being that well versed in Rubbra's output,unlike yourself ,that is why I included the,bracketed,"Over to you!" They are obviously very different composers as you so eloquently explain. I think I was referring to the fact that they both composed (except in two instances) purely orchestral symphonies & the fact that Rubbra tends to stick to what he's good at. He's not exactly wildly adventurous,is he? I know that allot of unkind critics would point to allot of 'grey' 'unremitting counterpoint' & 'seriousness'. When you put on another Rubbra symphony you 'kind of' know what to expect!
Harris's meandering eighth sounds wildly experimental in comparision to some of the Rubbra I have encountered.

No offence implied,please note. I know he's you're favourite composer! Enlighten me!

[Dundonnell]

"..........Enlighten me "

If you will forgive me?.......not at 2.23am I shan't

[cilgwyn]

And this from a relative of Count Dracula?!!! (You're 'joke'*,not mine!) Shocking!!!

*At least,I HOPE it was!

Actually,I think you did (enlighten me)!
Now,I think I'll have a look at the appropriate Rubbra thread!

[snyprrr]

How would Sym 3 work as a 2 Piano transcription? Sounds pretty awesome, no?

[drogulus]

     I said before that Harris is a composer with a strong style, which is not entirely a compliment. This is also related to the nationalist/patriotic aura that so much of his music emanates. He can't get away from his methods and signature sound. Composers go to great lengths to craft a sound like that, and the next thing they must learn is how to submerge it. They have to make good music rather than "their" music. Harris never entirely escaped the undertow of his greatest work, and everything after that, including some very good music, has been dragged down by it. If Harris had escaped his strong style, the 6th symphony would have a better shot as an American masterpiece. By the time you go from the 3rd to the 6th, you're tired of Harris.

[Mirror Image]

     I said before that Harris is a composer with a strong style, which is not entirely a compliment. This is also related to the nationalist/patriotic aura that so much of his music emanates. He can't get away from his methods and signature sound. Composers go to great lengths to craft a sound like that, and the next thing they must learn is how to submerge it. They have to make good music rather than "their" music. Harris never entirely escaped the undertow of his greatest work, and everything after that, including some very good music, has been dragged down by it. If Harris had escaped his strong style, the 6th symphony would have a better shot as an American masterpiece. By the time you go from the 3rd to the 6th, you're tired of Harris.

I was tired of Harris after the 3rd.

[cilgwyn]

I was tired of Harris after the 3rd.

Very droll MI! But you've probably saved yourself allot of time!

I find the Sixth quite impressive,in the Pacific SO performance,but having said that,I can't say I'm desperate to put it back on again!
I have argued valiantly in favour of the Seventh,but I can't say I'm desperate to put it back on again!
It's that staunch,tub thumping patriotism that is the main problem for me,really,not the level of inspiration. It reminds me of a story about Thomas Beecham (another one! ).The one where he was conducting Richard Strauss & he said something along the lines of (if ONLY I could find the exact b**** quote!!!) Mozart being like a cool draught of spring water in comparison. It was all that dense,chromatic orchestration,he felt like he was being stifled. Not being a Strauss fan & liking Mozart I can see,or rather,hear what he meant.
  It's the same with Harris. I can find some of his music very powerful when I am actually in the process of listening to it (& in the right mood) but then I'll go and listen to Copland's third (for example) and the leanness and clarity of his orchestration is so refreshing. It's like,"Do I REALLY want to go back?!!!"

[cilgwyn]

Here's to Roy Harris page Seven!

Interesting (well maybe,not that interesting?!) that the only thing really keeping this thread going is :

1) Whether Roy Harris wrote anything as good as No 3?
2) Or basically,"everything else I've heard by Roy Harris (other than No 3) is crap!"

On a more positive note,this does keep the thread going. I can think of some composers who were far more successful than Roy Harris who have punier threads.
Anyone seen the Benjamin Britten thread lately?!!!
(Actually he's two 'pages' longer....but,still.......)

Of course,I have had something to do with it!
I mean,hey? Haven't I got anything better to do?
(Okay,let's just leave that one out! )

It is also interesting how people who don't like Roy Harris feel compelled to contribute!
Put it this way. I won't be contributing to a Debussy* or Wagner thread any time soon!


Maybe,Roy Harris has got something going for him after all?

Right! Now for some more Gladys Knight & the Pips!

[Dundonnell]

It is just maybe worth pointing out in reference to your story about Beecham and his opinion of Richard Strauss that Beetham did record one of the finest ever interpretations of
Ein Heldenleben.

[cilgwyn]

Did he? I seem to remember he wasn't too keen on Strauss,or at least he preferred Mozart. I did emphasise the dodginess of my quote to be fair to me! Beecham was very choosy about what he conducted though,wasn't he? I gather he disliked Britten ('Twilight of the sods",or something,wasn't it? Very un pc,as they say!),Vaughan Williams (London Symphony: "A country life for me") & allot of British composers. But he did like Holbrooke & Bantock. Well,Fifine at the Fair',at any rate!
  Anyway,I'm no good at quotes & I should be researching all this BEFORE I post.........in the erm,Roy Harris thread!

Just googled Beecham & Richard Strauss. Apparently,he ONLY championed his opera's!

[Dundonnell]

Beecham's performance of Ein Heldenleben:

http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=146437

http://www.gramophone.net/Issue/Page/April%201990/66/734193/R.+STRAUSS.+Ein+Heldenleben,+Op.+40.

....and it was ".........a city life for me...."

[cilgwyn]

AND "reinstated Richard Strauss's career in the UK"! Must have been hell,reinstating a composer you hate!!
This can only get worse!
But I can see what my 'quote' meant!

He WAS something to do with Beecham's Powders though,wasn't he?
I mean,he really WAS,wasn't he!?

Erm,back to Gladys Knight & the Pips...........I mean,Roy Harris!

[Dundonnell]

Beecham's performance of Ein Heldenleben:

http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=146437

http://www.gramophone.net/Issue/Page/April%201990/66/734193/R.+STRAUSS.+Ein+Heldenleben,+Op.+40.

....and it was ".........a city life for me...."

.....in relation to the Pastoral Symphony, of course

Yes..his grandfather founded the firm

[cilgwyn]

.....in relation to the Pastoral Symphony, of course

Yes..his grandfather founded the firm

I'm loving this,aren't I?!!! Yes, "a city life for me..! Very funny,that one!

I was quite.............................................close!