Dmitri's Dacha

Started by karlhenning, April 09, 2007, 08:13:49 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lisztianwagner

Quote from: karlhenning on March 20, 2012, 06:08:19 AM
You certainly want to make the acquaintance of the e minor piano trio, Ilaria!

Do you mean No.2? I've got it, that's a gorgeous piece!
"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire." - Gustav Mahler

Karl Henning

Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

Mirror Image

Quote from: Lisztianwagner on March 20, 2012, 06:05:11 AM
Thanks, John :) I'm afraid not, I've heard just excerpts from the ballet; but I would really like to buy the complete work, it sounds so amazing! I saw both Serebrier and Rozhdestvensky recorded the ballet, but is there any other recording though?

There are three complete recordings of The Golden Age: Rozhdestvensky/Royal Stockholm, Simonov/Bolshoi, and Serebrier/RSNO. The best one is Serebrier IMHO. I think Serebrier has the better orchestra and the audio quality is great. It can also be bought a lot cheaper than the other two recordings which are more or less full-priced.

North Star

Quote from: karlhenning on March 20, 2012, 06:08:19 AM
You certainly want to make the acquaintance of the e minor piano trio, Ilaria!
Yes, a superb piece, that one.
I think I'll give it a spin now - with Argerich, Kremer & Maisky
"Everything has beauty, but not everyone sees it." - Confucius

My photographs on Flickr

Lisztianwagner

Quote from: Mirror Image on March 20, 2012, 06:53:32 AM
There are three complete recordings of The Golden Age: Rozhdestvensky/Royal Stockholm, Simonov/Bolshoi, and Serebrier/RSNO. The best one is Serebrier IMHO. I think Serebrier has the better orchestra and the audio quality is great. It can also be bought a lot cheaper than the other two recordings which are more or less full-priced.

It sounds great, thanks for the feedback, John :)
"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire." - Gustav Mahler

Mirror Image

Quote from: Lisztianwagner on March 20, 2012, 12:47:12 PM
It sounds great, thanks for the feedback, John :)

My pleasure, Ilaria.

Madiel

Today's random question...

Is it just me, or is anyone else annoyed at all the attention that String Quartet No. 8 gets at the expense of all the others?

Honestly, attach a bit of a programmatic hint to something and everyone gets all excited.  To me it's one of the least satisfying of the quartets.

Grumble.
I am now working on a discography of the works of Vagn Holmboe. Please visit and also contribute!

DavidW

The 8th string quartet has such a memorable tune that I can still recall it with ease.  I can't say the same for the others... although I will admit that most of them are on par with that quartet, and the late ones surpass it on the grounds of aesthetics and the nuanced emotional landscape they create.  Eh still my favorite though! :D

Karl Henning

Quote from: DavidW on April 30, 2012, 06:29:18 AM
The 8th string quartet has such a memorable tune that I can still recall it with ease.

A fact which, I should think, comes close to ranking the piece with the Beethoven Fifth Symphony.
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

eyeresist

Quote from: karlhenning on April 30, 2012, 06:34:27 AM
A fact which, I should think, comes close to ranking the piece with the Beethoven Fifth Symphony.

I guess knock at door + music = sure-fire hit?

"You keep a-knockin' but you can't come in!"

Mirror Image

Shostakovich = brilliant composer. My absolute favorite of the whole lot.

DavidW

Quote from: karlhenning on April 30, 2012, 06:34:27 AM
A fact which, I should think, comes close to ranking the piece with the Beethoven Fifth Symphony.

That reminds me of that Simpsons episode where everyone goes to the new concert hall (it was spoofing the walt disney hall and even had the architect as a guest star) and they hear the opening of Beethoven's 5th and promptly leave because they associate the symphony with the ringtone on their cell phones! :D

raduneo

Indeed a truly magnificent composer. I remember reading in Plotkin's book on classical music that it usually takes over 50-70 years for a composer to truly get recognizes to his real value. Just as Mahler got his deserved spot, I really hope Shostakovich does to! He is very dear to me: not only is he probably the composer who was interested the most in the sufferings of the people in the 20th century, but his musical talent is brilliant enough to be able to express his ideas and make great music in the process!

I was reading a quote on a chapter on Manet from this book I'm reading, and I ran across a quote by Baudelaire: "Great colorists know how to create color with a black coat, a white cravat and a gray background". I have a feeling this applies to Shostakovich quite well! :)


kishnevi

Quote from: jlaurson on May 11, 2012, 06:19:14 AM


Gergiev's Munich Shostakovich - Symphonies 6 & 10




http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2012/05/gergievs-munich-shostakovich-symphonies.html


sounds like, yet again, he did a better job in concert than in the recording studio. 

The Clevelanders will be doing the 10th here in Miami with Welser-Most next year. 

And, relative to DSCH,  I gave a first listen to the Petrenko recording of 2 and 15 this afternoon; it seems to keep to the high quality of the earlier issues in that series.  Just have to cross our fingers that he completes the cycle for EMI if he doesn't do it for Naxos.

jlaurson

#715


Gergiev's Munich Shostakovich - Symphonies 7 & 9




http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2012/05/gergievs-munich-shostakovich-symphonies_11.html


Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 11, 2012, 03:24:08 PM
sounds like, yet again, he did a better job in concert than in the recording studio. 

The Clevelanders will be doing the 10th here in Miami with Welser-Most next year. 

And, relative to DSCH,  I gave a first listen to the Petrenko recording of 2 and 15 this afternoon; it seems to keep to the high quality of the earlier issues in that series.  Just have to cross our fingers that he completes the cycle for EMI if he doesn't do it for Naxos.

His DSCH Piano Concertos (with Matsuev, not a natural favorite of mine) are excellent on disc. That's about it, though, as of late. Oh, and his Mahler 5.

But tonight I heard the best DSCH of them all: Stanisław Skrowaczewski. A clearer beat and more limber arms than colleagues half his age. And the most kick-ass Shostakovich 5th I've heard in... so far. Holy Mackerel! And that's despite already expecting a lot from one of my favorite underrated conductors.

Sandra

Quote from: eyeresist on March 19, 2012, 09:44:50 PM
Testimony. A waste of time.

Why? Is Volkov a fraud? I heard a lot of favorable opinions about him, but certain people feel he was cashing in on a famous biography.
"Pay no attention to what the critics say... Remember, a statue has never been set up in honor of a critic!" - J. Sibelius

kishnevi

Quote from: Sandra on May 11, 2012, 07:54:32 PM
Why? Is Volkov a fraud? I heard a lot of favorable opinions about him, but certain people feel he was cashing in on a famous biography.

As I understand it, the problem with Testimony is that of deciding:
--what Shostakovich actually said (that is, what "quotes" are actual quotes)
--what Shostakovich might have said (that is, what "quotes" can be described as "fake but accurate")
--what Volkhov wanted people to think Shostakovich said (that is, what "quotes" are totally inauthentic)

jlaurson

Quote from: Sandra on May 11, 2012, 07:54:32 PM
Why? Is Volkov a fraud? I heard a lot of favorable opinions about him, but certain people feel he was cashing in on a famous biography.

He's a fraud from A to Я.

Here's what his Third wife Irina has to say about Volkov. Not that she's 100% reliable, either, but this gets to the point nicely and is more easily read than Fay's excellent analysis.

QuoteVolkov and 'Testimony'

During interviews, I am often asked about the veracity of the book "Testimony" by Solomon Volkov, published as Shostakovich's memoirs. Here is what I think.

Mr. Volkov worked for Sovetskaya Muzyka magazine, where Shostakovich was a member of the editorial board. As a favor to Boris Tishchenko, his pupil and colleague, Shostakovich agreed to be interviewed by Mr. Volkov, whom he knew little about, for an article to be published in Sovetskaya Muzyka. There were three interviews; each lasted two to two and a half hours, no longer, since Shostakovich grew tired of extensive chat and lost interest in the conversation. Two of the interviews were held in the presence of Mr. Tishchenko. The interviews were not taped.

Mr. Volkov arrived at the second interview with a camera (Mr. Volkov's wife, a professional photographer, always took pictures of Mr. Volkov with anyone who might become useful in the future) and asked Mr. Tishchenko and me to take pictures "as a keepsake." He brought a photograph to the third interview and asked Shostakovich to sign it. Shostakovich wrote his usual words: "To dear Solomon Maseyevich Volkov, in fond remembrance. D. Shostakovich 13.XI.1974." Then, as if sensing something amiss, he asked for the photograph back and, according to Mr. Volkov himself, added: "In memory of our talks on Glazunov, Zoshchenko and Meyerhold. D. Sh."

That was a list of the topics covered during the interviews. It shows that the conversation was about musical and literary life in prewar Leningrad (now St. Petersburg) and nothing more. Some time later, Mr. Volkov brought Shostakovich a typed version of their conversations and asked him to sign every page at the bottom. It was a thin sheaf of papers, and Shostakovich, presuming he was going to see the proof sheets, did not read them. I came into Shostakovich's study as he was standing at his desk signing those pages without reading them. Mr. Volkov took the pages and left.

I asked Shostakovich why he had been signing every page, as it seemed unusual. He replied that Mr. Volkov had told him about some new censorship rules according to which his material would not be accepted by the publishers without a signature. I later learned that Mr. Volkov had already applied for an exit visa to leave the country and was planning to use that material as soon as he was abroad.

Soon after that, Shostakovich died, and Mr. Volkov put his plans into further action.

Mr. Volkov had told a lot of people about those pages, boasting his journalist's luck. This threatened to complicate his exit. It seems that he managed to contrive an audience with Enrico Berlinguer, secretary of the Italian Communist Party, who happened to be visiting Moscow, showed him the photograph signed by Shostakovich and complained that he, Mr. Volkov, a friend of Shostakovich's, was not allowed to leave the country for political reasons. In any case, an article about Mr. Volkov and the same photograph appeared in the Italian Communist newspaper La Stampa. Apparently, it did the trick.

I met Mr. Volkov at a concert and asked him to come and see me (but without his wife, as he had wanted) and leave me a copy of the material he had, which was unauthorized (since it had never been read by Shostakovich). Mr. Volkov replied that the material had already been sent abroad, and if Mr. Volkov was not allowed to leave, the material would be published with additions. He soon left the country, and I never saw him again.

Later on, I read in a booklet that came with the phonograph record of the opera "Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District" conducted by Mstislav Rostropovich, which was released abroad, that Mr. Volkov was Shostakovich's assistant with whom he had written his memoirs. Elsewhere I read that when Shostakovich was at home alone, he would phone Mr. Volkov and they would see each other in secret.

Only someone with rich fantasy could invent something like that; it was not true, if only because at that time Shostakovich was very ill and was never left on his own. And we lived outside Moscow at the dacha. There was no opportunity for secret meetings. Mr. Volkov's name is nowhere to be found in Shostakovich's correspondence of the time, in his letters to Isaak Glikman, for example.

Mr. Volkov found a publisher in the United States, and the advertising campaign began. Extracts from the book appeared in a German magazine and reached Russia, where at that time there was state monopoly on intellectual property. VAAP, the Soviet copyright agency, asked for verification of Shostakovich's signature. American experts confirmed its authenticity. The book was published. Each chapter of the book was preceded by words written in Shostakovich's hand: "Have read. Shostakovich."

I can vouch that this was how Shostakovich signed articles by different authors planned for publication. Such material was regularly delivered to him from Sovetskaya Muzyka magazine for review, then the material was returned to the editorial department, where Mr. Volkov was employed. Unfortunately, the American experts, who did not speak Russian, were unable and certainly had no need to correlate Shostakovich's words with the contents of the text.

As for the additions, Mr. Volkov himself told me that he had spoken to a lot of different people about Shostakovich, in particular to Lev Lebedinsky, who later became an inaccurate memoirist and with whom Shostakovich had ended all relations a long time before. A friend of Shostakovich's, Leo Arnshtam, a cinema director, saw Mr. Volkov on his request, and Arnshtam later regretted it. A story about a telephone conversation with Stalin was written from his words. All this was included in the book as though it were coming from Shostakovich himself.

The book was translated into many languages and published in a number of countries, except Russia. Mr. Volkov at first claimed that the American publishers were against the Russian edition, then that the royalties in Russia were not high enough, then that those offering to publish it in Russia were crooks and, finally, that he had sold his manuscript to a private archive and it was not available anymore. Retranslation into Russian relieves the author of responsibility and permits new liberties.

eyeresist

Quote from: Sandra on May 11, 2012, 07:54:32 PMWhy? Is Volkov a fraud? I heard a lot of favorable opinions about him, but certain people feel he was cashing in on a famous biography.

This has handily been addressed by JLaurson, above. I'll only add that for me the prime reason Testimony must be openly refuted is that it claims to be the revealed truth of the music itself. Ian MacDonald was the foremost apostle of this revelation, with his book "The New Shostakovich", in which he claimed to be able to decode the intended political meaning of the symphonies note by note. Of course Shostakovich, like all composers, associated external meanings with his music, but abstracting the whole artwork into a coded essay on resistance to totalitarianism only belittles the music, IMO. What makes music great is that it creates expressions and experiences that cannot be translated into a prose equivalent.


To change the subject, I wonder if anyone has written anything on the connection between Nielsen and Shostakovich? There is nothing in Elizabeth Wilson's book - she says that Shost studied contemporary works as a student in the 20s, mentions Hindemith and another name I don't recall, but no mention of Nielsen, whose 5th and 6th symphonies relate so closely to the style of Shostakovich's music up to the 4th symphony that I don't think it could be a coincidence. (I've also wondered if the 1st mvt of the 5th symphony inspired Ravel's Bolero!)