Purchases Today

[Mirror Image]

Just bought:



Bought this for $13. Maazel in Strauss can't be a bad thing at all.

[listener]

taking advantage of the Supraphon sale at hbdirect  and ordering early to ensure arrival before Christmas:
• Emanuel Moór (1863-1931): Cello Concertos / Peter Szabo, Ildiko Szabo, cellos. Zsolt Hamar
• Enescu: Poème roumain, Vox Maris, Voix de la nature/ Mandeal
• Jenö Hubay: Works for Violin and Piano, Vol. 11
• Korngold: String Sextet, Piano Trio / Göbel Trio, Berlin

[Cosi bel do]

I'd give Bach the finger if he were like Boulez as a person.

That's not a very nice thing to say about our dear Bouboule

[ritter]

That's not a very nice thing to say about our dear Bouboule

...who's pen may have been very sharp, but personally is extremely well-mannered and pleasant. I had the chance to briefly exchange some words with him; as a teenager--me, not him  --in Bayreuth in 1979, and then more recently in the nineties in Madrid and in a on-line conversation in the now extinct Deutsche Grammophon forum, and he was charming...

[Cosi bel do]

...who's pen may have been very sharp, but personally is extremely well-mannered and pleasant. I had the chance to briefly exchange some words with him; as a teenager--me, not him  --in Bayreuth in 1979, and then more recently in the nineties in Madrid and in a on-line conversation in the now extinct Deutsche Grammophon forum, and he was charming...

Yes. I guess he's actually very French : a little egocentrical, with sharp ideas and a will to express them, but well-mannered, polite and (as far as I know) quite humane.

[Ken B]

Yes. I guess he's actually very French : a little egocentrical, with sharp ideas and a will to express them, but well-mannered, polite and (as far as I know) quite humane.

Who organizes riots to suppress music he doesn't like.
If he had had the power he's have been a second Zhdanov.

[Karl Henning]

Ordered a couple of used copies on Amazon MP, to fill some gaps :

[asin]B000MM0CB8[/asin]

[asin]B00005ATDA[/asin]

Beauties, both of these.

[Mookalafalas]

Who organizes riots to suppress music he doesn't like.
If he had had the power he's have been a second Zhdanov.

Yeah, at least according to Ross's book, when he was younger he was a manipulative little &%$#.  As I recall, he would vindictively attack Stravinsky behind his back for not being radical enough and selling out progressive ideals, and then turn around and kiss his ass because he needed him on a bill with "good" (i.e.. more "modern") composers so as to get funding and sell tickets.  Whats more surprising is he later he built up his rep by conducting the Stravinsky oeuvre.   Not particularly admirable.
    But then conductors, like generals, are often unattractive when studied closely.  Best to just measure them by what they produced.

[Cosi bel do]

Who organizes riots to suppress music he doesn't like.
If he had had the power he's have been a second Zhdanov.

Well, he was 20 years old, and he led a riot against the neoclassical programs (with Stravinsky works, but that was a secondary question) of the first concerts of contemporary music in Paris after the Libération.
So, 2 things :
- first, I think anyone i entitled to a few mistakes or excessive acts at such a young age, and such "mistakes" are certainly preferable to those of an old Cortot ;
- furthermore, I don't think his position, at such a time, was entirely uncalled for : for years so much music had been banned as entartete and, when it was possible again to play it, the fact that some neoclassical Stravinsky was programmed could not only be conceived as timid, but might have fueled the feeling that it was also kind of a forced choice, when American troops were still everywhere around.

I therefore think these accusations are really utterly ridiculous and insulting for a man who has always resisted political establishment (refusing to conduct in Paris Opera for the rest of his life after Barenboim was unfairly sacked) but used it also when it was useful for others (to fund the permanent Ensemble InterContemporain in Paris, for instance). A man who defended the works of so many composers (including Stravinsky) at times and in places when it was not always easy to play them, and fought at the same time for low ticket prices and free educative concerts. Nobody is perfect, and Boulez is not the only one who did such things, but he is certainly among the best models for younger conductors.

[ritter]

Yeah, at least according to Ross's book, when he was younger he was a manipulative little &%$#.  As I recall, he would vindictively attack Stravinsky behind his back for not being radical enough and selling out progressive ideals, and then turn around and kiss his ass because he needed him on a bill with "good" (i.e.. more "modern") composers so as to get funding and sell tickets.  Whats more surprising is he later he built up his rep by conducting the Stravinsky oeuvre.   Not particularly admirable.
    But then conductors, like generals, are often unattractive when studied closely.  Best to just measure them by what they produced.

Well, Ross's statements are not quite exact (and, AFAIK, Ross is not really much of a Boulez fan). Boulez never made a secret of his distaste for anything neoclassical (including Stravinsky's music of the 30s and 40s). Simultaneously, he has always acknowledged his admiration for the "Russian" works (Sacre, Les Noces, etc., etc.).  Igor Stravinsky was fully aware of this, but yet maintained a cordial relationship with the junior composer that had started on a very good note at a dinner party in NYC (organized by Virgil Thomson, IIRC) in the late 40s . There were lots of disagreements (most notably, after the disatrous Paris première of Threni), but still, both men respected and, I'd say, were fond each other until Stravinsky's death. This might be difficult to assess completely, of course, because our knowledge of late Stravinsky is somewhat distorted (for lack of a better word) by Robert Craft--and it does seem there was no love lost between Craft and Boulez from the late 1950s onwards.

I for one can perfectly understand the"angry young man" Boulez (in the immediate post-WW II period) vehemently attacking what was considered the musical "establishment", in order to publicize his ideas and promote a (then) new and radical aesthetics. And the main symbol of that establishment were Stravinsky's works of the 30s and 40s, which were given in the infamous concert in 1945 or 1946--conducted by Manuel Rosenthal and booed by members of the "younger generation" (apparently Boulez himself was not present that evening, but he has said he would have booed if he had been  ).

[ritter]

Well, he was 20 years old, and he led a riot against the neoclassical programs (with Stravinsky works, but that was a secondary question) of the first concerts of contemporary music in Paris after the Libération.
So, 2 things :
- first, I think anyone i entitled to a few mistakes or excessive acts at such a young age, and such "mistakes" are certainly preferable to those of an old Cortot ;
- furthermore, I don't think his position, at such a time, was entirely uncalled for : for years so much music had been banned as entartete and, when it was possible again to play it, the fact that some neoclassical Stravinsky was programmed could not only be conceived as timid, but might have fueled the feeling that it was also kind of a forced choice, when American troops were still everywhere around.

I therefore think these accusations are really utterly ridiculous and insulting for a man who has always resisted political establishment (refusing to conduct in Paris Opera for the rest of his life after Barenboim was unfairly sacked) but used it also when it was useful for others (to fund the permanent Ensemble InterContemporain in Paris, for instance). A man who defended the works of so many composers (including Stravinsky) at times and in places when it was not always easy to play them, and fought at the same time for low ticket prices and free educative concerts. Nobody is perfect, and Boulez is not the only one who did such things, but he is certainly among the best models for younger conductors.

+1 , Cosí bel do! Hadn't read your comment when I posted mine...

[Cosi bel do]

Thanks ritter for the factual precision of your message, that reinforces what I tried to express in mine

[Karl Henning]

Well, Boulez is within his rights to express his musical distastes with scorn and disdain (which is a practice he has not particularly grown out of);  but I am under no obligation to admire him for that practice (weakness, I should say).

Also (probably predictably, as I am both a composer and a conductor) I am loth to generalize about either conductors or composers based on Boulez as an individual.  I appreciate the efforts here to think the best of Boulez;  I just wonder how many misdemeanors we must wink at, over the long years.

[Mirror Image]

Well, Boulez is within his rights to express his musical distastes with scorn and disdain (which is a practice he has not particularly grown out of);  but I am under no obligation to admire him for that practice (weakness, I should say).

Also (probably predictably, as I am both a composer and a conductor) I am loth to generalize about either conductors or composers based on Boulez as an individual.  I appreciate the efforts here to think the best of Boulez;  I just wonder how many misdemeanors we must wink at, over the long years.

Yes, I don't admire Boulez at all as a person. He's an amazing musician, but his personal likes and dislikes never interested me. At the end of the day, he's not doing himself any favors by expressing these dislikes however. I think a musician of his caliber should be a professional and knowing just the way he treated Dutilleux in his younger days alone is enough for me, like Ken, to give him the finger, but I can restrain myself of course.

[Cosi bel do]

Yes, I don't admire Boulez at all as a person. He's an amazing musician, but his personal likes and dislikes never interested me. At the end of the day, he's not doing himself any favors by expressing these dislikes however. I think a musician of his caliber should be a professional and knowing just the way he treated Dutilleux in his younger days alone is enough for me, like Ken, to give him the finger, but I can restrain myself of course.

Again, massive disrespect mainly based on rumors. For a long time, Boulez made a point not talking about Dutilleux, not even pronouncing his name, because he didn't feel like criticizing a colleague but didn't share much with him on a musical ground. But this changed in the 80s and Boulez frequently acknowledged his respect for the late compositions by Dutilleux. If not friends, they both had developed a deep respect for each other and mutually appreciated their contributions.

Anyone is entitled to see himself as a member of the "anti-boulezian" tendency. But let's stop pretending there are musical reasons under these postures, when everyone knows on which ground this opposition lies, really.

[André]

Back to the subject matter  , has anyone purchased the Anima Eterna (Jos van Immerseel) Carmina Burana ? I am interested in hearing opinions on that recording.

Link: http://www.outhere-music.com/fr/albums/carmina-burana-zzt-353   . Scroll down to the video of Immerseel discussing the work and its realization by Anima Eterna.

[Karl Henning]

Cheers, André!  (No, I've not heard that 'un.)

[ritter]

Again, massive disrespect mainly based on rumors. For a long time, Boulez made a point not talking about Dutilleux, not even pronouncing his name, because he didn't feel like criticizing a colleague but didn't share much with him on a musical ground. But this changed in the 80s and Boulez frequently acknowledged his respect for the late compositions by Dutilleux. If not friends, they both had developed a deep respect for each other and mutually appreciated their contributions.

Anyone is entitled to see himself as a member of the "anti-boulezian" tendency. But let's stop pretending there are musical reasons under these postures, when everyone knows on which ground this opposition lies, really.

I think you've got an excellent point there, Così.... It seems that if Boulez attacks something we like, then he's an unremitting ass. But Boulez's proselytizing is the result of a thoroughly intellectual approach to the art of music, and of the need (undiminished to this day) to put accross a certain way of looking at this art.

So, I may enjoy a Verdi opera thoroughly, but can understand Boulez when he says Verdi is "stupid, stupid, stupid!"  . For many reasons (I'm originally Venezuelan, I'm a bit of a francophile, and I really admire Marcel Proust), I have a weak spot for Reynaldo Hahn; so, when I read in an interview, that Boulez had said "Reynaldo Hahn died just one year after taking over the directorship of the Paris Opera, thank God"  , it kind of hurt, but I can appreciate Boulez not having any time to lose  with the Reynaldo Hahn's of this world. And there's many more examples...

I've read somewhere that Boulez is a hypocrite because he was very polite to Shostakovitch when he met him (in Moscow), even if he despises his music...What did people expect? For him to spit on good old Dmitri? Really...

Sorry! André is right...we're going way off-topic here. Aplogies for that 

[Sadko]

I didn't know anything about Boulez' behaviour and character before. In general though I dislike ideologies and their aggressive disciples. So many things were considered "the latest", "the only possible way, 'nowadays'", and history has passed over it ... It is so unwise and immature, and lacking respect for the other. I have no problem if someone passionately dislikes something, but I passionateley dislike it myself if someone proclaims his beliefs to be "the right way, and the only way".

I will never forget a little experience at school: I had newly discovered a composer I had never heard of before, and when I talked about it to my teacher his answer was "But he is so un-progressive/backward!". Oh, I thought (a pity I didn't say it then :-), that's how you judge, it's not about what he means to you, or what your student is enthusiastic about, it is about compliance with "the received way". I found this so shallow.

PS: I'm not very keen on this composer, Werner Egk, any more

[Florestan]

I have no problem if someone passionately dislikes something, but I passionateley dislike it myself if someone proclaims his beliefs to be "the right way, and the only way".

A big + 1!