Havergal Brian.

[relm1]

But here's a question I've been mulling over: are there any composers who show the influence of Brian? As far as I know he didn't teach (?), but surely someone must have found some aspects of his style sympatico enough to have absorbed them. Perhaps a fellow Brit?

I think he was influential to Robert Simpson.  Sometimes a composer influences others in ways that are beyond how closely they sound to each other.  Like you take a piece or two of what they do and incorporate it into your vernacular. 

[krummholz]

I think he was influential to Robert Simpson.  Sometimes a composer influences others in ways that are beyond how closely they sound to each other.  Like you take a piece or two of what they do and incorporate it into your vernacular.

Yes, I think you're right about Simpson and should have mentioned him as a singular possibility, but I was thinking mainly of later 20th century composers who weren't personally acquainted with Brian, but who fell under his influence through listening and study.

Re: Simpson, as a specific example I've often wondered if the course of events in the first movement of Simpson's 8th Symphony wasn't to some extent influenced by the first movement of Brian's 28th. Both start out with a rather perky theme in the winds, and both become increasingly invaded by sinister, disruptive ideas and a sense of impending chaos. Simpson goes into rather different territory from Brian toward the end of the movement, and of course the idea for the symphony was famously suggested by a friend, but I wonder if there wasn't an influence in the way the music evolves.

[Leggiero]

But here's a question I've been mulling over: are there any composers who show the influence of Brian? As far as I know he didn't teach (?), but surely someone must have found some aspects of his style sympatico enough to have absorbed them. Perhaps a fellow Brit?

There are clear echoes of Brian (particularly the Gothic and the 8th Symphony) in Steve Elcock's 3rd Symphony (Toccata Classics); no obvious influence in other Elcock pieces I've heard, mind.

[krummholz]

There are clear echoes of Brian (particularly the Gothic and the 8th Symphony) in Steve Elcock's 3rd Symphony (Toccata Classics); no obvious influence in other Elcock pieces I've heard, mind.

Thanks -- that's exactly the sort of thing I was looking for. I have never heard anything by Elcock, but will look up his 3rd Symphony and see if anyone has uploaded a recording to YouTube or similar.

[Leggiero]

Thanks -- that's exactly the sort of thing I was looking for. I have never heard anything by Elcock, but will look up his 3rd Symphony and see if anyone has uploaded a recording to YouTube or similar.

No worries . It looks like someone has, along with various other pieces (both volumes of his orchestral music released to date appear to be on YouTube, essentially). Elcock is well worth checking out in his own right, regardless of any Brian connection, as are his labelmates Rodney Newton and David Hackbridge Johnson, the latter seemingly a bona fide polymath genius whom music and poetry pour out of (excitingly, he's written well into the teens of symphonies before the age of 60). All three (to name just three) are doing a fine job of keeping symphonism in the UK alive.

[relm1]

No worries . It looks like someone has, along with various other pieces (both volumes of his orchestral music released to date appear to be on YouTube, essentially). Elcock is well worth checking out in his own right, regardless of any Brian connection, as are his labelmates Rodney Newton and David Hackbridge Johnson, the latter seemingly a bona fide polymath genius whom music and poetry pour out of (excitingly, he's written well into the teens of symphonies before the age of 60). All three (to name just three) are doing a fine job of keeping symphonism in the UK alive.

+1

[relm1]

Something I just thought about...HB doesn't really do long form.  I can't really think of anything I've heard from him that can be considered long form taught structured music.  For example, the Gothic, even though there are several long movements the last lasting nearly 40 minutes, these are a series of vignettes rather than a single idea developed throughout.  The same with his single movement symphonies.  It is very hard to tell the movement that starts has any relation to the half way point to the end.  This is a characteristic quality of his music but sometimes one longs for a theme that develops throughout the work so you understand how we got to where we are by the time of the end.  In contrast to the symphonies of Mahler, Shostakovich, Rachmaninoff, Sibelius, Vaughan Williams, Prokofiev all follow structure.  Not necessarily strictly (Shostakovich 4) but each minute develops from what came before.  Most especially in the war symphonies of Shostakakovich where there is a general transformation of the opening material through struggle into triumph or transcendence.  With Sibelius the same is done though more cerebrally.  With Mahler the same is done but with more grandiosity.  Yes, I am generalizing here and there are exceptions but this is generally.

My question: are there any examples of long structure (think sonata form or equivalent but at its most basic explanation, think a connected traceable flow of the musical material from start to finish) in any works of HB?  Put another way, which of his symphonies is the best example of how HB would do long structure?

[springrite]

Something I just thought about...HB doesn't really do long form.  I can't really think of anything I've heard from him that can be considered long form taught structured music.  For example, the Gothic, even though there are several long movements the last lasting nearly 40 minutes, these are a series of vignettes rather than a single idea developed throughout.  The same with his single movement symphonies.  It is very hard to tell the movement that starts has any relation to the half way point to the end.  This is a characteristic quality of his music but sometimes one longs for a theme that develops throughout the work so you understand how we got to where we are by the time of the end.  In contrast to the symphonies of Mahler, Shostakovich, Rachmaninoff, Sibelius, Vaughan Williams, Prokofiev all follow structure.  Not necessarily strictly (Shostakovich 4) but each minute develops from what came before.  Most especially in the war symphonies of Shostakakovich where there is a general transformation of the opening material through struggle into triumph or transcendence.  With Sibelius the same is done though more cerebrally.  With Mahler the same is done but with more grandiosity.  Yes, I am generalizing here and there are exceptions but this is generally.

My question: are there any examples of long structure (think sonata form or equivalent but at its most basic explanation, think a connected traceable flow of the musical material from start to finish) in any works of HB?  Put another way, which of his symphonies is the best example of how HB would do long structure?

Off the top of my head I am thinking the 10th, especially the first movement. But (off the top of my head) I can't give you much more specifics. Let's see if someone else can (or if I get a chance to listen to it again soon.)

[krummholz]

Something I just thought about...HB doesn't really do long form.  I can't really think of anything I've heard from him that can be considered long form taught structured music.  For example, the Gothic, even though there are several long movements the last lasting nearly 40 minutes, these are a series of vignettes rather than a single idea developed throughout.  The same with his single movement symphonies.  It is very hard to tell the movement that starts has any relation to the half way point to the end.  This is a characteristic quality of his music but sometimes one longs for a theme that develops throughout the work so you understand how we got to where we are by the time of the end.  In contrast to the symphonies of Mahler, Shostakovich, Rachmaninoff, Sibelius, Vaughan Williams, Prokofiev all follow structure.  Not necessarily strictly (Shostakovich 4) but each minute develops from what came before.  Most especially in the war symphonies of Shostakakovich where there is a general transformation of the opening material through struggle into triumph or transcendence.  With Sibelius the same is done though more cerebrally.  With Mahler the same is done but with more grandiosity.  Yes, I am generalizing here and there are exceptions but this is generally.

My question: are there any examples of long structure (think sonata form or equivalent but at its most basic explanation, think a connected traceable flow of the musical material from start to finish) in any works of HB?  Put another way, which of his symphonies is the best example of how HB would do long structure?

Well, there are basic ideas in the Gothic that are transformed throughout the symphony. If you just focus on the 1st movement it is a pretty standard sonata form movement although some new ideas are introduced in the development. If you want a "long form symphony" then maybe the 3rd, or perhaps the 7th, at least within individual movements. Or the 31st, which though there is certainly a lot of new material that comes in during the course of the work, still keeps finding new contexts for those first descending four notes.

Maybe there are many more examples as well... Brian tends to ALLUDE to earlier ideas rather than develop them in a classical way. If you allow that kind of procedure as a basis for "long form", it might be that MOST of his work exhibits it. But it depends on how you define "long form", and I'm not 100% clear on your definition. "Traceable flow" is a bit hard to pin down (at least for me).

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Interesting question about the presence or absence of a 'long form' in Brian. I am with Krummholz, I think. Brian always spoke about 'balance of form'. This suggests to me he was all about tension, flux, transformation and conflict, and not goal-oriented striving for a resolution. Although many endings of Brian symphonies are unforgettable, they are not a Brucknerian summit or apotheosis. Brian is not that kind of composer. He creates an experience in every symphony, we are on the move with his music, which likes contrasts and opppositions. We open to a world of flux kept in check. My few cents.

[calyptorhynchus]

Interesting question about the presence or absence of a 'long form' in Brian. I am with Krummholz, I think. Brian always spoke about 'balance of form'. This suggests to me he was all about tension, flux, transformation and conflict, and not goal-oriented striving for a resolution. Although many endings of Brian symphonies are unforgettable, they are not a Brucknerian summit or apotheosis. Brian is not that kind of composer. He creates an experience in every symphony, we are on the move with his music, which likes contrasts and opppositions. We open to a world of flux kept in check. My few cents.

I agree, Brian's music to me depicts the flux of experience where nothing recurs as itself, but as memories, allusions and distortions. And rarely is any mood sustained beyond a few minutes before it is contradicted, or swept aside by another thought.

[Maestro267]

The 10th doesn't have a first movement, it has an only movement.

What about the Adagio first movement of No. 11? That feels like a single unbroken thought.

[relm1]

The 10th doesn't have a first movement, it has an only movement.

What about the Adagio first movement of No. 11? That feels like a single unbroken thought.

Will check out the 11th again.  Is that the Agamemnon prelude one...which I do like, just don't remember which that was.

[relm1]

If you allow that kind of procedure as a basis for "long form", it might be that MOST of his work exhibits it. But it depends on how you define "long form", and I'm not 100% clear on your definition. "Traceable flow" is a bit hard to pin down (at least for me).

Let me try to further elaborate on long structure.  In a strict sonata form, there is a main "A theme", usually dramatic and in the home key (the tonic).  It will probably get repeated a few times to set it firmly in memory.  Then there is a contrasting "B" theme that would be in a related but contrasting key such as the relative major/minor or the dominant (the fifth of the tonic).  The dominant key is the place of maximum contrast and is furthest away from the tonic.  This section should be contrasting so if the opening A theme was dramatic, the B theme would be lyrical or even comedic for instance.  It generally has little melodic or dramatic similarities to the A theme.  As the B theme continues, it builds, ebbs and flows and the material goes through a "development" section where elements of the original A theme come back to the fore but are in a very harmonically unstable place.  This section develops and expands on the material and builds and builds until bursting at the seams, we reach the Big RECAPITULATION!...this is the grand statement of the opening theme now with guns ablazing.  The B theme could also b heard as a counterpoint to the A theme - the contrasting sections all make sense and everything has pointed to this moment in the sonata.  We understand what it all was striving for and what it al means.  This is the basis of the Sonata form.  In the romantic era, composers added a prologue and maybe a coda.  For example, rather than starting with the A theme, they might start with a contrasting harmony of tension that gradually builds and builds until finally the tension is resolved and we arrive at the tonic where the A theme is stated forcefully.  This is how Bruckner would have done it.  Similarly a coda could have some moments of thoughtfulness after the recapitulation like how Shostakovich ends the first movement of the 5th symphony quietly after the dramatic recapitulation.  Eventually composers weren't so strict about harmony and harmonic tension, resolution but used the idea of the sonata as dramatic or expressive.  The ideas of principal idea and secondary idea were still there but the relationship might be less formal.  This is definitely present with 20th century symphonic works like Sibelius and Vaughan Williams.  But the general idea of theme 1, contrasting theme 2, development of some kind, climactic return to the opening ideas in a new "revealed" way then an apotheosis - the main character has been transformed through the journey and are no longer the same.  In some of the greatest symphonies, all the ideas are traceable to the opening few notes.  For example Beethoven Symphony No. 5, the "fate" motif is heard in every movement and transformed at the end from C minor to C major.  Some say the whole symphony is in the opening notes.

This is the basis of the idea of long form that I was alluding to.  So in the context of HB, this would at the very least mean there is a unifying thread or idea that evolves and develops throughout but is always related to the opening material.  This also makes a symphony feel like a whole world to itself rather than just a lot of music that has nothing to do with what came before.  For example,  the sound world of Shostakovich No. 12 is very different from No. 13 from No. 14 from No. 15.  They are whole symphonies and you can not take a minute from one and switch it with a minute from another symphony.  It just would no longer fit.  I would say the same is not the case with HB.  You actually can't really tell, aside from the Gothic or ones that have unique instrumentation like the vocal symphonies, what symphony that minute came from because it would blend right in to any other.

[krummholz]

Will check out the 11th again.  Is that the Agamemnon prelude one...which I do like, just don't remember which that was.

I think the 12th is the one that is associated with Agamemnon. The 11th is a relaxed 3 movement work that begins with a glowing Adagio. The 2nd movement quotes the sleigh bells from Mahler's 4th. Does that help jog your memory?

[krummholz]

Let me try to further elaborate on long structure.  In a strict sonata form, there is a main "A theme", usually dramatic and in the home key (the tonic).  It will probably get repeated a few times to set it firmly in memory.  Then there is a contrasting "B" theme that would be in a related but contrasting key such as the relative major/minor or the dominant (the fifth of the tonic).  The dominant key is the place of maximum contrast and is furthest away from the tonic.  This section should be contrasting so if the opening A theme was dramatic, the B theme would be lyrical or even comedic for instance.  It generally has little melodic or dramatic similarities to the A theme.  As the B theme continues, it builds, ebbs and flows and the material goes through a "development" section where elements of the original A theme come back to the fore but are in a very harmonically unstable place.  This section develops and expands on the material and builds and builds until bursting at the seams, we reach the Big RECAPITULATION!...this is the grand statement of the opening theme now with guns ablazing.  The B theme could also b heard as a counterpoint to the A theme - the contrasting sections all make sense and everything has pointed to this moment in the sonata.  We understand what it all was striving for and what it al means.  This is the basis of the Sonata form.  In the romantic era, composers added a prologue and maybe a coda.  For example, rather than starting with the A theme, they might start with a contrasting harmony of tension that gradually builds and builds until finally the tension is resolved and we arrive at the tonic where the A theme is stated forcefully.  This is how Bruckner would have done it.  Similarly a coda could have some moments of thoughtfulness after the recapitulation like how Shostakovich ends the first movement of the 5th symphony quietly after the dramatic recapitulation.  Eventually composers weren't so strict about harmony and harmonic tension, resolution but used the idea of the sonata as dramatic or expressive.  The ideas of principal idea and secondary idea were still there but the relationship might be less formal.  This is definitely present with 20th century symphonic works like Sibelius and Vaughan Williams.  But the general idea of theme 1, contrasting theme 2, development of some kind, climactic return to the opening ideas in a new "revealed" way then an apotheosis - the main character has been transformed through the journey and are no longer the same.  In some of the greatest symphonies, all the ideas are traceable to the opening few notes.  For example Beethoven Symphony No. 5, the "fate" motif is heard in every movement and transformed at the end from C minor to C major.  Some say the whole symphony is in the opening notes.

This is the basis of the idea of long form that I was alluding to.  So in the context of HB, this would at the very least mean there is a unifying thread or idea that evolves and develops throughout but is always related to the opening material.  This also makes a symphony feel like a whole world to itself rather than just a lot of music that has nothing to do with what came before.  For example,  the sound world of Shostakovich No. 12 is very different from No. 13 from No. 14 from No. 15.  They are whole symphonies and you can not take a minute from one and switch it with a minute from another symphony.  It just would no longer fit.  I would say the same is not the case with HB.  You actually can't really tell, aside from the Gothic or ones that have unique instrumentation like the vocal symphonies, what symphony that minute came from because it would blend right in to any other.

Very nice description of sonata form! I agree that after the first three symphonies, HB doesn't really write sonata form movements (with a couple of possible exceptions -- the first movement of the 18th comes to mind, though it's not strict sonata form by any means). As to whether passages in Brian are interchangeable between symphonies, I can see where one might get that impression, and maybe my perspective is skewed by having listened to them so many times, but I don't think it's true. Most of the symphonies have their own sound world, and I couldn't imagine plopping a passage from, say, the 30th into the 31st and having it not sound very much out of place. As another example, I can't imagine taking *anything* from the 15th and splicing it into any other Brian symphony. The 15th might also be a good example of a work that has an easily discerned "long form" (or at least a "long line" of musical thought), where ideas are consistently worked with and transformed over long spans of time... although the train of thought moves in anything but a straight line, and there are many deviations, backtracks, and an unexpected arrival or two. The 27th, also, with its flute protagonist and brass/percussion eruptions (possibly the most Ives-like writing anywhere in Brian, IMO), seems to be a world unto its own... and it all coheres quite well, even though formally, there doesn't seem to be so much as a trace of sonata form anywhere in the work.

In any case, thanks for the clarification and the stimulating discussion. There is always so much in Brian's work that challenges, sometimes even perplexes... which is what, to me anyway, makes him such a fascinating composer.

[relm1]

I think the 12th is the one that is associated with Agamemnon. The 11th is a relaxed 3 movement work that begins with a glowing Adagio. The 2nd movement quotes the sleigh bells from Mahler's 4th. Does that help jog your memory?

Thanks, will investigate.  I hope all understand I'm a tremendous HB fan but also somewhat of a musicologist so analyze not just listen.

[relm1]

Very nice description of sonata form! I agree that after the first three symphonies, HB doesn't really write sonata form movements (with a couple of possible exceptions -- the first movement of the 18th comes to mind, though it's not strict sonata form by any means). As to whether passages in Brian are interchangeable between symphonies, I can see where one might get that impression, and maybe my perspective is skewed by having listened to them so many times, but I don't think it's true. Most of the symphonies have their own sound world, and I couldn't imagine plopping a passage from, say, the 30th into the 31st and having it not sound very much out of place. As another example, I can't imagine taking *anything* from the 15th and splicing it into any other Brian symphony. The 15th might also be a good example of a work that has an easily discerned "long form" (or at least a "long line" of musical thought), where ideas are consistently worked with and transformed over long spans of time... although the train of thought moves in anything but a straight line, and there are many deviations, backtracks, and an unexpected arrival or two. The 27th, also, with its flute protagonist and brass/percussion eruptions (possibly the most Ives-like writing anywhere in Brian, IMO), seems to be a world unto its own... and it all coheres quite well, even though formally, there doesn't seem to be so much as a trace of sonata form anywhere in the work.

In any case, thanks for the clarification and the stimulating discussion. There is always so much in Brian's work that challenges, sometimes even perplexes... which is what, to me anyway, makes him such a fascinating composer.

Thanks for the excellent response.  I will investigate those works!

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I cannot recommend Malcolm MacDonald's three-volume study of Brian's symphonies enough. They basically answer all the questions you may have about his kind of symphonism. MM has been so thorough and illuminating, it's almost impossible to really add to his insights, let alone refute them. I sometimes disagree with his assesment of certain symphonies (13, 14 spring to mind). But that's the size of it.

[Roasted Swan]

I cannot recommend Malcolm MacDonald's three-volume study of Brian's symphonies enough. They basically answer all the questions you may have about his kind of symphonism. MM has been so thorough and illuminating, it's almost impossible to really add to his insights, let alone refute them. I sometimes disagree with his assesment of certain symphonies (13, 14 spring to mind). But that's the size of it.

+1 in all you say - but all the more impressive given that at the time of writing few had been commercially recorded or even professionally played so these insights are based on looking at the actual written page...