Prokofiev vs. Stravinsky

[karlhenning]

In the case of both Prokofiev and Stravinsky, I find a satisfyingly admirable quality-to-quantity ratio.

[Nick]

In response to the above question, here's a list of real undisputed masterpieces of Prokofiev's. To emphasize the quality of the list, let me mention that Semyon Kotko, Betrothal in a Monastery, Piano Sonata No.3, The Tale of the Stone Flower, and On the Dneiper did not make it to the list.

Opp. 2, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 33, 34, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 60, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 70, 71, 74, 75, 77, 78, 80, 82, 83, 84, 87, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96, 97, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 107,108, 109, 110, 111, 115, 116, 119, 120, 122, 123, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 131, 134.

[karlhenning]

What do you have against The Tale of the Stone Flower? 

[karlhenning]

You hit the nail on the head Larry, that was my point...

But, as a point, that swung wide of any nailhead, James.

Just saying . . . .

[karlhenning]

[ BTW, I continue not to vote here. ]

[Nick]

For Stone Flower, some of it is inconsistent, it seems to me. Some of the musical material is a little bit recycled. But it is beautiful music, just not perfect. Here's a list of stuff you've got to hear that you've never heard:

4 Etudes, Op.2,
Five Songs without Words, Op.35,
Quintet, Op.39,
Symphony No.2, Op.40,
Four Portraits from 'The Gambler', Op.49,
Sonata for Two Violins, Op.56,
Symphonic Song, Op.57,
October Cantata, Op.74,
The Year 1941, Op.90,
March for Band, Op.99,
Piano Sonata No.9, Op.103,
Pushkin Waltzes, Op.120,
Winter Bonfire, Op.122.

[The new erato]

Here's a list of stuff you've got to hear that you've never heard:

4 Etudes, Op.2,
Five Songs without Words, Op.35,
Quintet, Op.39,                                  Check! - need to relisten
Symphony No.2, Op.40,                        Check! -like a lot
Four Portraits from 'The Gambler', Op.49,
Sonata for Two Violins, Op.56,              Check! -great work
Symphonic Song, Op.57,
October Cantata, Op.74,
The Year 1941, Op.90,
March for Band, Op.99,
Piano Sonata No.9, Op.103,                 Check! - the greatest sonata cycle since Beethoven (I disregard             
                                                      composers with 2-3 sonatas - and apologize to Scriabin as runner                                     
                                                      up)

Pushkin Waltzes, Op.120,
Winter Bonfire, Op.122.

I supect I have a copule of the others as well - but need to check my collection.

[karlhenning]

For Stone Flower, some of it is inconsistent, it seems to me. Some of the musical material is a little bit recycled. But it is beautiful music, just not perfect.

Well, since you admit it's all beautiful, I won't argue about perfection.

Here's a list of stuff you've got to hear that you've never heard:

4 Etudes, Op.2,
Five Songs without Words, Op.35,
Quintet, Op.39,
Symphony No.2, Op.40,
Four Portraits from 'The Gambler', Op.49,
Sonata for Two Violins, Op.56,
Symphonic Song, Op.57,
October Cantata, Op.74,
The Year 1941, Op.90,
March for Band, Op.99,
Piano Sonata No.9, Op.103,
Pushkin Waltzes, Op.120,
Winter Bonfire, Op.122.

Understood that you mean "you" generally . . . .

The Quintet, Op.39 is not underappreciated, it is simply not known;  but it is a great little piece, and ought to be better known.

I personally have pounded the table for the Symphony No.2, Op.40 many a time before now.

[Nick]

You know, these works actually are almost up there on the very short list of "you've got to hear this/unknown" stuff.

Divertissment, Op.43,
Eugene Onegin, Op.71,
Sonata for Solo Violin, Op.115,
Sonata for Unaccompanied Cello (unfinished), Op.134

[greg]

4 Etudes, Op.2,
Symphony No.2, Op.40,
Four Portraits from 'The Gambler', Op.49,
Sonata for Two Violins, Op.56,
Symphonic Song, Op.57,
March for Band, Op.99,
Piano Sonata No.9, Op.103,
Divertissment, Op.43
Sonata for Solo Violin, 115

These I've heard.....
9/17- so far not too bad, i guess.

[Nick]

In response, James, if I had to put it in order of which unheard stuff needs to be listened to in greatest necessity, this would be the order,

Opp. 40, 35, 103, 74, 49, 2, 39, 56, 71, 90, 115, 57, 99, 43, 122, 120, 134.

[karlhenning]

That's neat, staightforward and linear.

Right up James's street 

[Nick]

Perhaps you, James, can provide us with a list of unknown Stravinsky works that need to be listen to in greatest necessity (in order, perhaps)?

[uffeviking]

I don't know where my comment fits in, but there is the name Stravinsky in this topic, so I take the liberty of barging in and telling you of my afternoon with an old, very old, VHS tape I found in the back of a pile of programs I recorded off TV when PBS was still a channel worthwhile watching:

The Recreation of the original Nijinsky choreography of Stravinsky's Sacre du Printemps. The tape includes a number of fascinating interviews with the composer and his comments on this work. Does anybody here know if this video has ever been issued on a DVD?

[karlhenning]

If not, Lis, it sure ought to.

[rappy]

I voted for Prokofiev because his amount of ideas was incredible and it makes each of his composition at least listenable. He was profound in almost all types of music, he could compose easy-listening music for kids (Peter and the Wolf) which is still never plain or trite. On the other hand, he could write very dark and complex works such as the first violin sonata. Stravinsky had to try out different things (like 12-tone music), while Prokofiev just wrote the music which came into his mind - he did not have to think about where to get inspiration, he was inspired himself!
And do you know why I think he had not much influence? Simply because his style was so very inartificial (in a positive way) and consistent that anybody who would have had the aim to bis his follower must have had the same amount of inspiration and resourcefulness. - While it was a lot easier to adapt Stravinsky's inventions of rhythm etc.
Not that I don't like Stravinsky, but I think Prokofiev was the more musical composer, maybe the most musical of the 20th century (although there are other candidates: Shota, Bartok, Britten, etc.).

Note that all the above is just my personal view and opinion.

[greg]

i pretty much agree- his music seemed to flow from himself, with no outside influence- he "danced to his own rhythm", as it is written.

[Guido]

This thread really surprises me.

[Maciek]

This thread really surprises me.

Yes, it is quite unrelenting.

[Superhorn]

   I admire Stravinsky, but love Prokofiev. Sttravinsky is generally more interesting than moving.

  I would say that Prokoiev's music is more spontaneous and fresher in invention than much of Stravinsky. Prokofiev's music has greater range of expression ; from witty,sardonic, joyous, etc to tragic and tenderly lyrical.

   There is the witty and elegant "Classical Symphony", and the savagely dissonant 2ns symphony, which makes Stravinsky's Sacre sound like Mendelssohn. In his operas, there are the zany "Love For 3 Oranges", the weird,sinister and terrifying "Fiery Angel",  and the epic sweep of "War and Peace" .

   In his ballets, you have the glowingly lyrical "Romeo and Juliet", the bizarre and fanciful "Bufoon", and the charmingly folkloric "Stone Flower".

   Stravinsky's  post Sacre music is  often ingenious and intriguing, but it often leaves me cold, unlike Prokofiev.