Havergal Brian.

[Klaatu]

It's not what he said about the Gothic I object too (you're right, it's great description); it's the cursory nature of his review. He has an online review site which doesn't limit him in any way and yet all he can contribute to the discussion are two short paragraphs for a work as immense and rare as the Gothic? He's either lazy or has nothing really to say.

Sarge

Perhaps Hurwitz' attitude to the Gothic is understandable in the light of one of his other reviews, in which he states that:

"Havergal Brian is a much better composer than passing acquaintance with the "Gothic" Symphony suggests. In fact, it's very ironic that Marco Polo's recording of that fascinating but intermittently successful behemoth should be far and away the most successful in the series in terms of popularity; the fact is, virtually all of Brian's subsequent music is better."

In general, Hurwitz seems very pro-Brian; take this review of Symphonies 11 and 15:

"By now you should have a sense of Brian's characteristic sound world. There's the martial music for brass and percussion, his uniquely personal melodic use of xylophone and glockenspiel, those passages of seeming emptiness punctuated by flecks of harp and flute, as well as his love of "low" sounds--tubas, bassoons, double basses, and timpani. The present symphony culminates in a finale of rambunctious abandon; a drum-led dance alternates with slightly parodied waltz music. Really, there's nothing at all difficult about any of this. It just doesn't sound like anyone else. The important thing is that when Brian is really "on", and he seems to be "on" more often than not, he's one of the most interesting and gripping symphonists of the 20th century."

Or this about the Lyrita 6 and 16:

"Both are superb works, and these are fabulous performances. Indeed, this is the finest disc of Brian symphonies ever made, and since it has never appeared on CD before, it's a mandatory acquisition for fans of 20th century British music."

I think he has a valid point - the Gothic has almost been Brian's undoing, its media-worthy excesses have overshadowed most of his later music which is arguably better. (Malcolm Macdonald thought along similar lines; he said something about the Gothic being HB's most crucial and personal work but not necessarily his best.)

IMHO, delighted as I was to hear Brabbins' splendid Gothic, I would not now object if we had to wait another 20 years for a performance, as long as we could get plenty of live performances of Symphonies 6, 8, 10 and 16! (And maybe 3......oh, not forgetting 32 and, yes, 7's pretty good as well....)

[Dundonnell]

Well put

(I would add Nos. 2 and 9 to your list )

[cilgwyn]

Definately,No3!

[cilgwyn]

And No 5!
(That's enough Havergal Brian symphonies for now,ed.!)

[Sergeant Rock]

Perhaps Hurwitz' attitude to the Gothic is understandable....I would not now object if we had to wait another 20 years for a performance, as long as we could get plenty of live performances of....

Well put

Indeed, well put, Klaatu. But I disagree completely. The Gothic is, to me, the most astonishing musical creation I've ever heard, and something I cannot now live without. I love many (most?) of his later creations, too, but if he'd only composed the Gothic, Havergal would still be a god at whose altar I'd worship.

Sarge, Gothic Fan Boy 

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

                                                                   

[Sergeant Rock]

  ...not quite what I meant though 

Sarge

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

  ...not quite what I meant though 

Sarge

I know... If you rate the Gothic that highly, how does Bruckner at his best compare, and Wagner? I have been immersing myself in their music for the past few weeks, and I am, as always, bowled over by these two gentlemen. I agree, though, that there is a power in Brian's best music I can find nowhere else in that peculiarly concentrated form, something raw and primeval.

[cilgwyn]

When Andrew Clements,the Guardian critic,who recently treated the the Hyperion Gothic such a deep,incisive  review ,refers to  Hanson's 4th & 5th symphonies (Naxos reissue) as "imposing,economical works that emphasises their debt to Sibelius" there is some ground for hope. When I spotted this review I thought,'Oh no,here we go again!" But was pleasantly suprised by Clements enthusiasm. Not that,I cared about his opinion THAT much,but allot of people read these reviews & Hanson,while not a major composer,was,imho a very skilful one & unfashionably tonal;the kind of composers that newspaper critics seem to dismiss. I personally think that Hanson's musical assimilation of his American and Scandinavian roots was very individual & the Delos Hanson cycle was actually the first complete symphonic cycle I ever bought on cd.
Anyway,back to Brian!
I mean,Brian,Bruckner,Wagner & Gothic rock!!!

[Sergeant Rock]

I know... If you rate the Gothic that highly, how does Bruckner at his best compare, and Wagner? I have been immersing myself in their music for the past few weeks, and I am, as always, bowled over by these two gentlemen. I agree, though, that there is a power in Brian's best music I can find nowhere else in that peculiarly concentrated form, something raw and primeval.

You know Wagner and Bruckner are two-thirds of my musical trinity. That I place the Gothic so highly tells you something. Maybe I'm just enamored with musical giganticism 


Sarge

[Dundonnell]

                                                                   

Oh My Goodness Gracious Me

Nothing like Havergal Brian

[Brian]

I agree. His review of the Lenárd Gothic was equally poor. He spent half his words dissing Brian fans. His review of the Boult Gothic was a single short parargraph. Yeah, why bother?

Sarge

But then, the only Hurwitz reviews I've ever seen, ever, that went over four paragraphs, involve either Simon Rattle or a Mahler 10/10.

[Dundonnell]

Indeed, well put, Klaatu. But I disagree completely. The Gothic is, to me, the most astonishing musical creation I've ever heard, and something I cannot now live without. I love many (most?) of his later creations, too, but if he'd only composed the Gothic, Havergal would still be a god at whose altar I'd worship.

Sarge, Gothic Fan Boy 

If the stark and unpleasant choice as presented by Klaatu was to forgo the Gothic for another twenty years in return for the regular exposure of the symphonies he mentioned then..yes..I would opt for the latter. Havergal Brian's reputation, his chances of reaching a wider audience and being fully and properly appreciated as a great composer would be better served by the performance of these other works.

[hbswebmaster]

Klaatu's and Dundonnell's points are well-made; regular performances of the other symphonies would be very welcome indeed. Even with all the exposure following the two Gothics (Brisbane and Proms) though, there hasn't yet been a flood of conductors and orchestras wanting to programme Brian symphonies. Maybe if Gergiev would programme one in the same way that he recently performed a Karetnikov symphony at the Barbican ...

Then of course there's always Brabbins' stated intent to be the first conductor to perform the Gothic twice!

I agree with JZH and Sgt Rock about Bruckner (haven't really clicked with Wagner yet; maybe it's all those voices!) but I don't think it's down to gigantism. After all, up to the fifth symphony, his orchestra was that of Brahms and it was only at the fifth that he introduced the bass tuba. It sounds gigantic, but to me, (and love the music or hate it) that's technique. It might be of the monolithic and granitic variety, like a certain other composer to whom this thread is mostly dedicated - but hey, there's nothing wrong with that. Tchaikovsky was often criticised for the inability to develop symphonically and he knew it at the time, so he did it by dint of melodic invention and it works. Bruckner's compositional technique involves an almost geological slowness in the later music that's integral to its long-range planning, but it also works, and more than that it emerged as one of the most radical changes over a symphonic career of the 19th century: from almost Mendelssohn in the F minor study symphony to almost Schoenberg in the ninth.

So HB's time will come, I'm sure. Discussions like those to be found here can do nothing but good  - keep it up!

[Klaatu]

Like the Sarge, I love musical gigantism and I'm a big fan of the Gothic.

But I find the Gothic similar to Mahler's 8th - fully of staggeringly inventive and visionary music but also subject to longeurs and the occasional humdrum passage. His shorter symphonies - 6, 10, 16 especially - seem to be more perfectly realised.

The great thing about Brabbins' Gothic is that it's resulted in a fine recording which will at last allow newcomers to judge the work properly, on its own merits, over the course of repeated listenings. (The latter being essential for a proper appreciation of the work.)

In the concert-hall, the sheer expense of performing the Gothic will always be a problem (although who knows, it might result in an overnight ticket sell-out every time!)

One of his shorter works, performed with passion and understanding, might change this awful "received opinion" of HB as a composer of gargantuan, loopy, unperformable works. If I had to pick one I'd plump for either the 6th (for its lyrical beauty combined with martial excitement) or the 10th (for that haunting "still point", the remarkable storm-episode, and the deeply affecting close.)

Or - why not have the Burlesque Variations on the last night of the Proms; that rabble-rousing finale would bring the house down!

[Dundonnell]

Volume 2 of the Toccata releases of Brian's music extracted from the operas gets an enthusiastic 2 column review in the new issue of IRR.

So too does the Dutton release of the Bate/Reizenstein piano concertos. Again, the review(written by Malcolm MacDonald) extends to 2 closely printed columns occupying half a page.
Similar treatment is provided in a review by Martin Anderson of the Kinsella Symphonies Nos. 6 and 7 and this new release is awarded an 'IRR Outstanding' classification and is described as "a knock-out cd" by Anderson.

These are reviews which consider the music concerned in real depth and-once again-point out the contrast with the minimal coverage offered by what now only purport to be 'reviews' published by The Gramophone magazine.

If you want to read in-depth, detailed analyses of the music being reviewed the best place to go now for British readers at least is IRR......and NO I am not on a retainer from the publishers

[cilgwyn]

I just 'found' a performance of the Tenth symphony,conducted by Stanley Pope,on the HBS website. I haven't had time to listen to this just yet,but have not seen any mention of it? Has anyone got an opinion on this,postive or negative?
(Which reminds Mr 'Cassette Man!' I MUST get some more cd-r's!).

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I just 'found' a performance of the Tenth symphony,conducted by Stanley Pope,on the HBS website. I haven't had time to listen to this just yet,but have not seen any mention of it? Has anyone got an opinion on this,postive or negative?
(Which reminds Mr 'Cassette Man!' I MUST get some more cd-r's!).

I'll have a look! And a listen!


It's here:


http://www.havergalbrian.org/download.htm

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Just listened... This really is a historic recording - the first performance of Symphony No. 10, recorded in 1958, only four years after the work was completed. Stanley Pope had nothing to go on, the idiom was new, the single-movement structure with all the tempo fluctuations was something he had to 'unlock' for himself. I think he does a more than creditable job.


I read along with the score and I noticed that Pope doesn't follow some of Brian's directions, as if he and the orchestra are still getting used to the style... The first few minutes are slow, very slow, even when Brian asks for a slight accelerando or a più vivo (more lively). Loughran is more precise here, and Brabbins even more. The quiet before the storm is very beautifully done and the 'storm scene' proper also comes off very well. But where Pope scores over his rivals is the second half of the symphony. The violin solo is the best I have heard so far, and the martial music that follows it has all the grimness and triumph you could wish for. After that there is a transitional passage (to the Coda), marked espressivo by Brian, which has never been so affecting. And the 'sphinx-like' supernova chord is really mysterious, even better than in the LSSO performance (I wonder, by the way, why it is so difficult for the bass drum to play in time with the timpani - the first stroke on the third beat goes here wrong, too...) The ending is magical.


I am very glad I know this performance now. What a present!!

[cilgwyn]

I've downloaded it. I was cooking supper so I didn't want to burn it (the food!)....this time,anyway!
I actually clicked on the downloads to 'fill some time',as I thought I had downloaded the music on the HB site before.
I'm going to have to get those cdr's! The pc is upstairs & I can listen more comfortably,then. It sounds like a performance I need to hear.
I've got Sennheiser cordless headphones,but the cheaper,inferior Philips transmitter is attached to the pc! I could swap them,but I'm not too keen to muck about at this time of night.
As if to make matters worse,for some reason my stone age pc is having trouble loading the HB website pages on Brian premieres & performances!
I was looking up Pope's performances of Brian symphonies & stuff about No 10.

Wait a minute......I've got the book now,haven't I?!!!!!