Vaughan Williams's Veranda

[eyeresist]

My first conscious encounter with RVW was the piano concerto on the Piers Lane CD with Delius and Finzi. I thought, and still do, that the Delius was a better piece (though I'm not Delius fan). Later, I think I decided to explore him, not really knowing what to expect, and picked up the Naxos disc with symphonies 7 and 8. After this, I bought the Previn set and delved into it one hot summer. It was too much to take in at one go - a new (to me) language, and many different moods and flavours. That might be one of his strength/weaknesses, that you can't tell what you are going to get from one work to the next.

I rank him highly as a symphonist, but think he definitely improved as he went along. The first two are perhaps excessively Edwardian. The third was the breakthrough, with folk cadences and ancient modes fully imbibed and naturally expressed as part of his personality. I think he kept improving after that; I regret he only became a regular symphonist in his old age.

I'm not a fan of the 1st, though it's possible I haven't found the right performance yet. I don't really enjoy the way he writes for voice. I also have an aversion to Whitman; I understand that he was very important at the time, but I find his stuff too cheesy.

I love the 8th, and think it's usually tossed off too fast, so that it's dwarfed by all except perhaps the 3rd. That's why the Thomson is my go-to recording. He makes it sound grand, a work to be taken seriously in its own right, and not merely an amusing sidebar to the cycle. (I enjoy Previn in the 9th for similar reasons. I wish RVW had lived to "fix" the finale.)

[drogulus]

     Here's an early work, the Piano Quintet, from 1903 (1st mvmt.):

     http://www.youtube.com/v/91k78yYxYZA

     The last 3 min. of the 1st movement is part 2:

     http://www.youtube.com/v/4PGd_akQSCw&NR=1
     

     

[Mirror Image]

My first conscious encounter with RVW was the piano concerto on the Piers Lane CD with Delius and Finzi. I thought, and still do, that the Delius was a better piece (though I'm not Delius fan). Later, I think I decided to explore him, not really knowing what to expect, and picked up the Naxos disc with symphonies 7 and 8. After this, I bought the Previn set and delved into it one hot summer. It was too much to take in at one go - a new (to me) language, and many different moods and flavours. That might be one of his strength/weaknesses, that you can't tell what you are going to get from one work to the next.

I think not knowing what to expect from one work to the next is one of his strengths. Even after all this time, I'm still surprised when I hear his symphonies, especially played one after the other, which I did last night and tonight. For me, his music is constant discovery. I might pick up on a certain phrase one time around, but another time around I might pick up something completely different. I just always hear something new in his music. He was a fascinating man, but very enigmatic, which only adds to the mystery that his music seems to project. There's a book published by Oxford Press that details his life in depth. I'm planning on picking up this book at some point. In fact, I plan to do this with all of the composers I love at some point.

[drogulus]

     Only recently have I explored the 3rd Symphony in depth, and now I rank it among my favorite RVW symphonies (not an exclusive group, to be sure, since only No. 2 has never been in it).

[Sid]

1. What was the first RVW composition you heard? Did you enjoy it?

A music teacher played us the Fantasia on Greensleeves in my first year of high school. It didn't really make an impression on me, because I recognised it as the theme from "Lassie," which I thought was boring. I also saw RVW's Hymn tune on the old hundredth in a concert, but it didn't push any buttons either.

10 years after that, I heard the 8th symphony on radio & also saw some films on TV to which RVW composed the scores - The 49th Parallel & Scott of the Antarctic. These I liked quite a lot, & I ended up purchasing some of RVW's symphonies conducted by Boult on the now defunct Belart label. This was a matter of hitting two birds with the one stone, because it's hard for me to tell whether I liked RVW's music or Boult's conducting more. Boult may as well conduct Twinkle twinkle little star, and I'd probably still be enthralled & captivated.

2. What do you think of his symphonies? How do you think they stand up against the symphonies of say Mahler, Bruckner, Sibelius, or Nielsen?

I've heard all of RVW's symphonies except the 1st. I don't really think any of them quite reach the giddy heights or plumb the depths as those you mentioned. My impression is that he tended more towards the middle range, there are less extreme highs and lows in his music. But it's hard to compare UK composers with Continental European ones, because in between the times of Purcell and Elgar, the UK was called "the land without music." Instrumental music at least, because the choral tradition was always strong in the UK. The Brits, RVW being no exception, have always been largely derivative from things going on in Europe in particular, and a bit more conservative. But comparisons aside, UK composers add to the mix of what is on offer in classical, as do say USA, Japanese or Australian composers. Their histories of classical music are all very different, so it's difficult to compare them with any usefulness to eachother. We simply have to take them on their own terms.

[Sid]

I've been having problems with this computer, but I hope I can quickly discuss some of RVW's strengths -

1) Bringing harmonies into the concert hall that had lain "dormant" in the church choirs for centuries - eg. Tallis Fantasia. RVW edited the British hymnal.

2) Works for string orchestra are top-notch & pass the baton over from Elgar to Britten, Tippett, etc.

3) His humanity & humility. Eg. standing up for Tippett, who was sent to jail briefly for being a pacifist during WW2. Not accepting a knighthood, not wanting to be a part of "The Establishment," seeing himself as just an ordinairy person...

[Lethevich]

There's a book published by Oxford Press that details his life in depth. I'm planning on picking up this book at some point.

I have my eye on this one too...

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I have my eye on this one too...

Recommended unread... I read his book Profound Logic about Beethoven and Sibelius, and an essay about Brian in the HBS Newsletter, both excellent.

[Mirror Image]

Here's the RVW book I'm considering...

[asin]0192820826[/asin]

But Lethe, that book you recommended looks rather tempting as well.

[Mirror Image]

It's hard for me to tell whether I liked RVW's music or Boult's conducting more. Boult may as well conduct Twinkle twinkle little star, and I'd probably still be enthralled & captivated.

Surely you like RVW's music as there have been many excellent cycles of of his symphonies recorded after Boult's. Bryden Thomson's on Chandos has proved to be my to-go-to recordings for the symphonies and the concertos as well.

[vandermolen]

Time to revive this thread:

I figured I would forward an exchange between Sid and I from the "What are you listening to now?" thread:

I actually enjoy all of RVW's symphonies except the first, which, in my opinion and I hope I don't get blasted by the RVW police for saying this, doesn't have enough musical material for it to be considered a substantial or memorable work. The opening of the first movement to A Sea Symphony always gets my attention, but the rest of the symphony seems to drag on a little too long. The 8th is very special for me as well. I recall not being particularly impressed with on the first or second hearing, but I revisited it after a few years away from it and it is a magical work, and, as you say, a lot of fun. It has many gorgeous moments. The two darker symphonies, the 4th and 6th, have always struck me as interesting works that reveal a very demonic side to a composer who is too often viewed as a composer of "cowpat" music. I'm less and less interested in his more pastoral music, though the 3rd and 5th symphonies are absolutely gorgeous for me and contain some of the most remarkable music to come from his pen. The Lark Ascending despite it's popularity or whatever you want to call is still a favorite of mine. I find the music uplifting and it always gives me a feeling of satisfaction. I know you admire the work Partita for String Orchestra and I can see why you do, it is wonderful. I feel the same way about his Concerto Grosso. I never was too interested in Fantasia on a Theme by Thomas Tallis. I found more diversity in the two works for string orchestra I just mentioned. The ballet Job is a fun piece. It has some of those demonic twists like in the 4th and 6th symphonies, but then it was written around the time of the fourth and a time of inner turmoil. I have not heard any of his operas, but I might change this one day. I have enjoyed most of his chamber works. His choral works are also rewarding. I particularly enjoy Five Tudor Portraits, Serenade To Music, Toward The Unknown Region to name a few.

A few questions to all:

1. What was the first RVW composition you heard? Did you enjoy it?

2. What do you think of his symphonies? How do you think they stand up against the symphonies of say Mahler, Bruckner, Sibelius, or Nielsen?

3. If you had to list some of RVW's weaknesses as composer what would they be? What do you think his strengths are?

1. The Tallis Fantasia, English Folksong Suite and Greensleeves performed by Morton Gould and his Orchestra on an RCA LP. As a 16/17 year old I quite enjoyed them and it made me want to listen to more. When I purchased a Decca Eclipse LP of Symphony No 6 (Boult, LPO) shortly afterwards I was won over forever.

2. I especially like the 1913 version of A London Symphony (the best bit, just towards the end, Vaughan Williams later excised from the score  ) I think that the greatest symphonies are 5 and 6 although I find No 9 very moving in its grim defiance.  Difficult to compare with Mahler or Bruckner as they are so different (having said that there is a section in Bruckner's 9th Symphony which reminded me of the Tallis Fantasia!) I would certainly rate him alongside Nielsen and I like all the VW symphonies and only nos 4-6 of Nielsen.  Sibelius was greater I think (Tapiola and Symphony No 4 being in a class of their own), although I personally would not disagree with VW being placed alongside him.

3. I was listening to an old interview with the conductor Vernon Handley (a CD included in his boxed set of the Bax symphonies) and he felt that Bax was the better composers of tunes (and their development) but that VW's strength lay in the 'placing' of the musical material.  I think that Bax's scores (Symphony No 2 for example) are more personal but that the oddly impersonal quality of much of VW's music is also appealing.  I also admire the fact that VW kept going for so long and responded (in his eighties) to the description of himself as 'The Grand Old Man of British Music' by saying that he was 'neither grand nor old'.

[Mirror Image]

3) His humanity & humility. Eg. standing up for Tippett, who was sent to jail briefly for being a pacifist during WW2. Not accepting a knighthood, not wanting to be a part of "The Establishment," seeing himself as just an ordinairy person...

This is perhaps one of his greatest strengths, Sid. The year 1934 was an troubling one for RVW as Holst, Delius, and Elgar died, which blasted him into the spotlight, which RVW wanted no part of. I admire his persistence in trying to maintain a normal life and keeping in touch with ordinary people, which, in turn, gave him a likable, more down-to-Earth outlook.

[vandermolen]

Here's the RVW book I'm considering...

[asin]0192820826[/asin]

But Lethe, that book you recommended looks rather tempting as well.

The UVW biography is fine but a little bit of a 'desk diary' of what the composer did and needs to be read in Michael Kennedy's book on 'The Works of Ralph Vaughan Williams'. There is a short biography by Simon Hepher which is ok as an introduction but no more than that.  We badly need a new biography which included the more controversial material made available since the death of Ursula Vaughan Williams.

[Mirror Image]

3. I was listening to an old interview with the conductor Vernon Handley (a CD included in his boxed set of the Bax symphonies) and he felt that Bax was the better composers of tunes (and their development) but that VW's strength lay in the 'placing' of the musical material.  I think that Bax's scores (Symphony No 2 for example) are more personal but that the oddly impersonal quality of much of VW's music is also appealing.  I also admire the fact that VW kept going for so long and responded (in his eighties) to the description of himself as 'The Grand Old Man of British Music' by saying that he was 'neither grand nor old'.

As time progresses, I'm becoming less and less impressed with Bax's symphonies. Don't get me wrong he was an exquisite craftsman and did, in fact, compose many interesting compositions. But while you consider Bax's symphonies more personal, I find them incredibly impersonal. I don't think I've even remembered one of Bax's symphonies and I can't even think of one that I think is personally memorable to me. They simply don't stick in my mind like RVW, Sibelius, Mahler, Sibelius, Nielsen, or Bruckner. This doesn't mean they're not worth listening to and appreciating, but this simply means that I don't get much out of them like many Baxians here do.

As far as Handley's opinion, I think it's purely subjective as with anything. To say Bax wrote better tunes doesn't really mean that much to me as I was walking down the street many months ago and suddenly I was reciting last movement from A Pastoral Symphony in my head and humming one of the big tunes that occurs towards the end of that movement. Somebody looked at me as if I was a mental patient. I think RVW wrote better tunes as I remember them more readily than anything Bax composed, which may not mean much, but I think it puts lie to the fact that Bax wrote the better tunes.

[Mirror Image]

The UVW biography is fine but a little bit of a 'desk diary' of what the composer did and needs to be read in Michael Kennedy's book on 'The Works of Ralph Vaughan Williams'. There is a short biography by Simon Hepher which is ok as an introduction but no more than that.  We badly need a new biography which included the more controversial material made available since the death of Ursula Vaughan Williams.

Thanks, I'll checkout Kennedy's book, which Lethe suggested as well.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

As time progresses, I'm becoming less and less impressed with Bax's symphonies. Don't get me wrong he was an exquisite craftsman and did, in fact, compose many interesting compositions. But while you consider Bax's symphonies more personal, I find them incredibly impersonal. I don't think I've even remembered one of Bax's symphonies and I can't even think of one that I think is personally memorable to me. They simply don't stick in my mind like RVW, Sibelius, Mahler, Sibelius, Nielsen, or Bruckner. This doesn't mean they're not worth listening to and appreciating, but this simply means that I don't get much out of them like many Baxians here do.

As far as Handley's opinion, I think it's purely subjective as with anything. To say Bax wrote better tunes doesn't really mean that much to me as I was walking down the street many months ago and suddenly I was reciting last movement from A Pastoral Symphony in my head and humming one of the big tunes that occurs towards the end of that movement. Somebody looked at me as if I was a mental patient. I think RVW wrote better tunes as I remember them more readily than anything Bax composed, which may not mean much, but I think it puts lie to the fact that Bax wrote the better tunes.

RVW is a very earthy visionary. Bax is an arch-Romantic, with all the atmosphere and (abstracted) emotionality that entails; though strangely enough, in his case it is as if he writes everything in the third person. I do remember several of his symphonies and tone-poems, though, especially 1 and 3, Tintagel and The Happy Forest.

[Luke]

As far as RVW writing goes, I continue to staunchly recommend Wilfrid Mellers' book - VW and the Vision of Albion. It gets slated now and then by those who don't like Mellers style; personally I think you just have to learn to 'go with' Mellers and all of a sudden he is showing you things which are utterly, dumbfoundingly revelatory. A huge proportion of the music writing that has influenced me most is by either Charles Rosen or Mellers, great musical thinkers both. Whole swathes of their work totally rewrote the way I understand music, and the VW book is, IMO, among the best things Mellers did. (It's odd, btw, because I strongly suspect Rosen would detest Mellers' thinking, but personally I don't have any problem combining the two)

[Lethevich]

I was listening to an old interview with the conductor Vernon Handley (a CD included in his boxed set of the Bax symphonies) and he felt that Bax was the better composers of tunes (and their development) but that VW's strength lay in the 'placing' of the musical material.

I was about to dispute this until I realised that it was correct

My logic was "I don't remember Bax's tunes, I do remember RVW's tunes, and a heck of a lot of them too", but that leads to his second part of his observation. VW quite calculatingly spreads them around for maximum effect (such as the two competing themes of the 1st movement of the sixth symphony), whereas Bax's style is too dense and constantly evolving in a Wagnerian/Delian manner to 'sign-post' sections in such a way. I would place them about equally as melodists.

I think that Bax's scores (Symphony No 2 for example) are more personal but that the oddly impersonal quality of much of VW's music is also appealing.

But while you consider Bax's symphonies more personal, I find them incredibly impersonal. I don't think I've even remembered one of Bax's symphonies and I can't even think of one that I think is personally memorable to me.

RVW is a very earthy visionary. Bax is an arch-Romantic, with all the atmosphere and (abstracted) emotionality that entails; though strangely enough, in his case it is as if he writes everything in the third person. I do remember several of his symphonies and tone-poems, though, especially 1 and 3, Tintagel and The Happy Forest.

It is boring of me, but I once again would call a "draw" on this, like Johan. Bax's style is at both Romantic and yet evasive, as exemplified in his choices of subject matter and his somewhat artificial - or distanced - manner of writing his pieces in which he explores byways, reveals pinnacles, but seems to struggle to attain the mastery of discipline fused with concept to entirely make sense of it. I get a sense that his is a style that waited for a white hot moment, and he sought it out in many places, but never quite found it.

RVW may be the opposite. He has perfect 'vision' (to pinch a word) to provide a lucidity, balance and rightness to everything, but it is lacking that devil may care ardor of Bax which could truly make it "personal" music. The frigid beauty of the fifth symphony I find slightly glassy, mask-like, and I don't think that it's a coincidence that this symphony - his most overtly religious in concept - is the work which offers this observation to me most readily. The composer's personality seems not to have felt the need to write music to represent himself or his feelings, but rather to harness both his and the listener's wider interests for that means of connection.

(It was unbelievably difficult to try to write something after the first two sentences of the last paragraph - it is certainly explainable, but I just can't at the moment.)

[Sid]

I'm also one of those listeners who has connected more with RVW (or any other UK composer for that matter) than with Bax.

I agree that there is a "sameness" in Bax's symphonies, especially compared to the more eclectic approach of RVW. Having said that, Bax probably has more stylistic (& maybe even thematic?) cohesion and unity in his symphonies, generally speaking. It might also be useful to see Bax's symphonies as all comprising one big work (rather than seperate works in themselves), they're like a collective journey. That's not a bad thing, because the greatest composers also did this, eg. Vivaldi's violin concertos making up "The Four Seasons," Beethoven's late string quartets, Wagner's Ring cycle of operas are all basically bundles comprising one big work as a group. Most listeners tend to be familiar with all of these works rather than just one, & I personally also see them as being inseperable from eachother (although I've only seen one opera of Wagner's Ring cycle on DVD, but I'm no huge opera fan, so maybe I can be excused?). On the other hand, RVW's symphonies contrast more with eachother and are basically self-contained creations. They have little more to do with eachother except that they all came from the pen of the same composer. RVW was a true synthesist and eclectic...

[karlhenning]

Do you know, I'm thinking about that 30-cd box, even though it would duplicate my Handley symphonies set.