Gustav Holst - The Planets

[Renfield]

No, but those are also the names the astrologers use.  And if it were the mythological gods Holst was portraying, why is "Venus" called "The Bringer of Peace"?  That was not her function in Greco-Roman mythology; she was the goddess of sex (not Love; that was Cupid/Eros).

Slightly off-topic, but Aphrodite was the goddess of love in terms of physical attraction, and sex. Eros was more of a tool for her to achieve her purposes, than an independent diety. So love is essentially ascribed to sex, in Aphrodite's "mythos".

Regarding the current argument, I see The Planets as being almost equally influenced by astronomy and myth; not necessarily Greek myth alone, but a lot of it sounds like a picture of traditional views of the "heavenly bodies" presented in the piece.

[vandermolen]

Favourite Planets

Votes so far:

Venus: 2 votes
Mars: 1 vote
Saturn: 1 vote
Mars: 1 vote
Jupiter: 1 vote
Neptune: 1 vote

No votes for Mercury or Uranus

[hornteacher]

No votes for Mercury or Uranus

<insert joke here>

[Stonemason]

My Favourites have always been Jupiter (the first piece I heard seperately before purchasing the entire Suite) and Uranus, with Mars being an all round good pick-me-up for the non-classically inclined.

Now I've actually been listening to the other movements, great for introspection on the work. It was all not happened sooner because of its role as a CD for newbies to riding with me in my car... ahahaha only played Mars, Jupiter, Uranus.

As for the Pluto thing, I have the CD with Colin Matthews Pluto on it and a ending-changed Neptune (to fit in with Matthew's Pluto) by the way, I guess Holst was right all along, as Pluto is no longer a planet. Screw St.Matthew's crap.

[Stonemason]

My Favourites have always been Jupiter (the first piece I heard seperately before purchasing the entire Suite) and Uranus, with Mars being an all round good pick-me-up for the non-classically inclined.

Now I've actually been listening to the other movements, great for introspection on the work. It was all not happened sooner because of its role as a CD for newbies to riding with me in my car... ahahaha only played Mars, Jupiter, Uranus.

As for the Pluto thing, I have the CD with Colin Matthews Pluto on it and a ending-changed Neptune (to fit in with Matthew's Pluto) by the way, I guess Holst was right all along, as Pluto is no longer a planet. Screw St.Matthew's crap.

[Stonemason]

My Favourites have always been Jupiter (the first piece I heard seperately before purchasing the entire Suite) and Uranus, with Mars being an all round good pick-me-up for the non-classically inclined.

Now I've actually been listening to the other movements, great for introspection on the work. It was all not happened sooner because of its role as a CD for newbies to riding with me in my car... ahahaha only played Mars, Jupiter, Uranus.

As for the Pluto thing, I have the CD with Colin Matthews Pluto on it and a ending-changed Neptune (to fit in with Matthew's Pluto) by the way, I guess Holst was right all along, as Pluto is no longer a planet. Screw St.Matthew's crap.

=======
....Mercury on Uranus would hurt....?

[Greta]

Is it a masterpiece? Well, I wouldn't have collected over 50 recordings and began studying it in depth if I didn't think so...

It's just a great, great piece, totally attractive but still challenging once you get into really looking at the score, something for all. And the moods are so varied between the movements, one of my favorite things about it. It's fascinating for studying how different conductors interpret a piece.

I agree about the Richard Greene Cambridge handbook, it's a must-get if you like the piece, or Holst in general. but you pretty much have to have the score as well (very cheap from Dover) because he goes in a lot of detail with specific measure numbers as to the theory and the themes and transformations, and the way they link between the movements. It's a superb analysis. You also get to find out the full history of the work, the conception, the premiere, how it was first received. He also has a chart at the end with a few recordings and tempos they take (which would be very interesting to expand upon). Greene also talks a lot about Holst's other works throughout too, so good to be familiar with those.

And I agree about Pluto or any other Planets-related works (the California Philharmonic is premiering an "Earth" next year) - they are not necessary. Good or bad pieces, that's irrelevant, a piece like this is perfect just as is, and should be left alone. It's fine to be influenced by it (Johan de Meij's 3rd Symphony 'Planet Earth' which takes off on Jupiter and Neptune) but to state you are "amending" the piece as is the intention with Matthews' Pluto, no. His piece is not bad, but I don't ever really have an urge to listen to it.

What I do have an "urge" to listen to often are Holst's wonderful other works that I have been introduced to as fillers (and all the other wonderful fillers as well, Grainger The Warriors, Varese Arcana, etc), his pieces such as St. Paul's Suite, Suite de Ballet and especially Egdon Heath and The Perfect Fool, they are amazing. Get Previn for those, you won't be sorry. Mackerras has an wonderful Perfect Fool as well.

As for the "best" Planets, that's like the question "who is the best orchestra in the world", there's no "right" answer. There are new ones (especially with young British conductors) coming out all the time, I've heard some and they're basically very good, if samey. It is a brilliant showpiece, but I'm most attracted to those who find something "more" there.

Most very famous conductors have recorded it at least once, Boult 5 times, Rattle 3, a good number twice, and some orchestras are on record with it 5 or 6 times, like LSO and Philharmonia, you're really spoiled for choice. I've gone to recommending recordings to people based on their specific taste or personality, lots have something unique and valid to offer.

This Mystery thread on the piece has a summation of some of my favorites, but don't look over the non obvious ones, there are some goldmines out there, like Svetlanov and Philharmonia, Walter Susskind in St. Louis or Maazel with ONdF, that remind me why I am still collecting. It's like that "first love" you never fall out of love with.

[karlhenning]

Well, and it's about time Greta made it here! 

[hornteacher]

As for the "best" Planets, that's like the question "who is the best orchestra in the world", there's no "right" answer. There are new ones (especially with young British conductors) coming out all the time, I've heard some and they're basically very good, if samey. It is a brilliant showpiece, but I'm most attracted to those who find something "more" there.

My favorite version is the Gardiner/Philharmonia CD.  The way he tackles Mars is fantastic.  Much slower than I'm used to hearing it but I enjoyed it more because of that.  Its like a line of slow moving tanks approaching on the horizon.  I also enjoy the Jupiter movement as done by Bernstein with the NY Phil (he really takes his time with the slow section and pulls a lot out of it).

[Xenophanes]

I hardly ever listen to it. If I want orchestral spectaculars, I'll go to the Mussorgsky-Ravel Pictures; or overtures by Mozart, Beethoven, Rossini, Auber, Suppe, Wagner; or tone poems by Liszt, Rachmaninoff, Mayuzumi, and so on.  The Planets just doesn't appeal to me, though it's obviously skillfully done.

I hardly ever listen to Scary Zade, too.

[Larry Rinkel]

I hardly ever listen to it. If I want orchestral spectaculars, I'll go to the Mussorgsky-Ravel Pictures. ... The Planets just doesn't appeal to me, though it's obviously skillfully done.

I hardly ever listen to Scary Zade, too.

I have to agree, and voted No, though I'd vote no to some of your alternatives as well. I heard it live a few years ago when the conductor of the local orchestra had the bright idea (put on irony cap) of displaying NASA movies of the various planets while he was conducting the music. Problem was, the footage was so evocative and striking in itself that Holst turned into background music. I don't much listen to Scary Zade either, but I think I prefer it to the Solar System.

[Dundonnell]

Having just watched a performance of 'The Planets' by the BBC Scottish Symphony Orchestra on BBC TV Scotland, I am reminded that I first fell in love with this great work back in 1956. Until then I had only heard 78s of Beethoven, Brahms, Wagner and Gilbert and Sullivan.
That year I was 9 years old and my father took me to my first orchestral concert-the BBC Symphony Orchestra conducted by Sir Malcolm Sargent in the Usher Hall in Edinburgh. I cannot remember what else was in the programme but I sat utterly enraptured listening to and watching a huge orchestra performing the Holst. (Incidentally, the offstage chorus in 'Neptune' was conducted by a very young Colin Davis). As I sat in wonder at the glorious sounds a full orchestra could make I knew then for certain that this was the sort of music I wanted to hear. For that reason 'The Planets' will always have a very special meaning for me.
My own favourite version is that by Dutoit and the Montreal Orchestra-a superb performance from a(perhaps) unlikely source.

I agree that 'The Planets' should not overwhelm Holst's other works, many of which-as others have said-are exceptionally fine and often visionary compositions. The Choral Fantasia is, I think, a particular masterpiece. It is, in a way, a great pity that the extraordinary powers of orchestration Holst demonstrated were never used again in a 'big' orchestral piece but clearly Holst wished to concentrate latterly on choral and smaller scale works. We should, I think, remember how 'advanced' 'The Planets' must have sounded when it was first performed. Yes, of course, there are echoes of contemporary European music(Stravinsky, Debussy etc) but this at a time in British musical history when very few other composers(Vaughan Williams to an extent in the London Symphony) had absorbed such influences. The shattering dissonances in 'Mars' are far ahead of virtually all other contemporary British music.

A masterpiece? For me, a definite affirmative!

[longears]

My favorite version is the Gardiner/Philharmonia CD.  The way he tackles Mars is fantastic.  Much slower than I'm used to hearing it but I enjoyed it more because of that.  Its like a line of slow moving tanks approaching on the horizon.  I also enjoy the Jupiter movement as done by Bernstein with the NY Phil (he really takes his time with the slow section and pulls a lot out of it).

Like this recording very much, too...but the most compelling Mars I've heard is Levine/CSO.

...if it were the mythological gods Holst was portraying, why is "Venus" called "The Bringer of Peace"?  That was not her function in Greco-Roman mythology; she was the goddess of sex (not Love; that was Cupid/Eros). 

Ever had make-up sex, Jo?

[jochanaan]

Ever had make-up sex, Jo?

Yes.  We're now divorced.

[Mark]

Ever had make-up sex, Jo?

For a second, I totally misread this. Thought you were implying impropriety with a rep from Max Factor ...

[jochanaan]

For a second, I totally misread this. Thought you were implying impropriety with a rep from Max Factor ...

I don't factor Max.

[quintett op.57]

like it - voted unsure - prefer Ma Vlast

[Tsaraslondon]

Which is the "best" Planet?

My favourite is Saturn the Bringer of Old Age.

My favourites are Venus (especially in Karajan's sensuous VPO recording from the 60s) and Neptune.

[Lisztianwagner]

I think it's definitely a masterpiece, very passionate and intense; I absolutely love how the atmosphere changes in every movement, some times powerful, bright and impressive, some times calm, evocative and mysterious; so thrilling! This music expresses a deep beauty, showing an wonderful orchestration a great, balanced harmony among the instrument. 
And the concept of "The Planets" was astrological, it was quite original.
Maybe the only negative aspect is that its huge success overshadowed the other Holst' works, like The Cloud Messenger, A Choral Fantasia, Savitri, etc., which are masterpieces as well. As a matter of fact, nowadays Holst is not very well known, except for "The Planets", what a pity......

[starrynight]

The favouirite part for me has always been Jupiter (all of it not just the big tune, great end too).   All of it is good though, and I can't think of another programatic several sectioned large scale work which is really as consistently good.  Maybe I haven't heard a great performance of Ma Vlast but the only part of that that has appealed to me is the river section.  The Planets is, naturally enough, more universal sounding.   Although some may dismiss it as an orchestral fireworks piece and nothing more I think in a good performance it is definitely much more than that.