Elgar's Hillside

[DavidRoss]

Thank you, sieur! I am glad, since, to have listened to her recording of the Ives sonatas, which is very good . . . as the recording of the Elgar did not give me the best impression of her capabilities.

Can't say I'm thrilled by Hahn's Elgar VC recording, either, not that it's bad, but I'm partial to Kennedy--but the RVW Lark on Hahn's disc is to die for.

[Elgarian]

but the RVW Lark on Hahn's disc is to die for.

That wouldn't surprise me. Very different kettle of fish birds.

[madaboutmahler]

Unfortunately (so I understand) he has recently brought himself close to bankruptcy by his reckless and irresponsibly excessive purchases of Haydn recordings.

Oh dear. He has my sympathy.

[Vesteralen]

Oh you'll like that. Very different - she doesn't 'coo' like Dorabella, and she doesn't adopt Billy Reed's reverence. She tells it like she saw it. She is, after all, the woman who claimed not to be a variation, but to be the theme!

I came away from this book with a very high opinion of Miss Burley, and a much, much lower one of Elgar.  She continuously and forcefully proclaims his genius but, in spite of the excuses she purports to find for his boorishness, effectively destroys my sympathy with him as a human being.

What his music tells me is still there, of course, don't get me wrong.  But, I really came away from this book wondering how the person described therein could ever have produced it.

[Elgarian]

I came away from this book with a very high opinion of Miss Burley, and a much, much lower one of Elgar.  She continuously and forcefully proclaims his genius but, in spite of the excuses she purports to find for his boorishness, effectively destroys my sympathy with him as a human being.

What his music tells me is still there, of course, don't get me wrong.  But, I really came away from this book wondering how the person described therein could ever have produced it.

Interesting! I come away with a not particularly high regard for Miss Burley! I'm pretty sure that half an hour in her company would be all I could tolerate. I think she had an axe to grind. I'm not sure what it was, but I think there was an element of 'bringing him down to size', and of striving to assert the importance of her role. It's by no means a balanced account (none of the 'I knew Elgar' accounts are balanced - that's partly why they're so compelling: each one shows us Elgar through a different lens). I'm not saying Elgar didn't have plenty of rough edges; and I'm sure there would have been times when his friendship would be trying. But a man who can retain the affection and admiration of characters as disparate as Dora Penny, Billy Reed, and Jaeger must have had something going for him apart from being a great composer.

[Vesteralen]

Interesting! I come away with a not particularly high regard for Miss Burley! I'm pretty sure that half an hour in her company would be all I could tolerate. I think she had an axe to grind. I'm not sure what it was, but I think there was an element of 'bringing him down to size', and of striving to assert the importance of her role. It's by no means a balanced account (none of the 'I knew Elgar' accounts are balanced - that's partly why they're so compelling: each one shows us Elgar through a different lens). I'm not saying Elgar didn't have plenty of rough edges; and I'm sure there would have been times when his friendship would be trying. But a man who can retain the affection and admiration of characters as disparate as Dora Penny, Billy Reed, and Jaeger must have had something going for him apart from being a great composer.

Well, that's certainly food for thought.

I want to think the best of Elgar.  After all, it's hard to imagine the composer of the Enigma Variations was without a scrap of empathy in his being, as Miss Burley might lead one to believe. 

On the other hand, it can't be denied that a number of composers of some of the world's most moving music, music that seems to echo the human condition with all its varied facets (Beethoven and Brahms come immediately to mind) were apparently egocentric, irascible and generally unfriendly people.  It's one of the great mysteries, in a way.

It's interesting to me that two such different accounts of Elgar's life as Reed's and Burley's could each individually have the ring of truth about them.

Taking everything in to account, what would you say would be a balanced way of looking at Elgar the man?

(I'm going to add on to this, since I've been thinking more about it while working)

Perhaps another factor that enters into this that should be mentioned is that the excuse that Rosa Burley gives for Elgar's tactlessness and lack of fellow feeling doesn't resonate easily with most of us - his emotional hurt and sensitivity over his socio-economic background within the class-conscious English society of his day.

When it comes to Beethoven or Brahms, few people even today, even if they have no personal experiences of a similar nature, would find it hard to sympathize with a young boy brutalized by a drunken father, or a young boy taken advantage of by prostitutes in a brothel where he had to play the piano for money.

But, how can we have the same fellow-feeling for Elgar's resentment over his social status, especially when thousands of other people of his day and age experienced the same thing without its causing such bitterness and insensitivity?  This is where I'd like to be more enlightened.  Is there reason to sympathize with him more, or is there something more to his makeup than this particular experience to begin with?

[Elgarian]

Perhaps another factor that enters into this that should be mentioned is that the excuse that Rosa Burley gives for Elgar's tactlessness and lack of fellow feeling doesn't resonate easily with most of us - his emotional hurt and sensitivity over his socio-economic background within the class-conscious English society But, how can we have the same fellow-feeling for Elgar's resentment over his social status, especially when thousands of other people of his day and age experienced the same thing without its causing such bitterness and insensitivity?  This is where I'd like to be more enlightened.  Is there reason to sympathize with him more, or is there something more to his makeup than this particular experience to begin with?

The way I see it is that (a) he was deeply neurotic (yes I know we all are, but Elgar very much so); (b) he was an intensely sensitive individual. I think that sensitivity pervades all his great music; the violin concerto alone is, I'd say, a painful autobiographical statement quite apart from being a musical masterpiece.

Combine those characteristics with (a) his family background in trade; and (b) his Catholicism, seen in the context of his aspirations in the society of his day, and I think we need look no further for explanations of much of his 'bad behaviour'. I don't say it excuses it; I just say that we can't know what his moment-to-moment experience of being alive was like. I think there was a lot of pain mixed into it.

As for Rosa Burley, I feel uneasy about her account, and the way she tells it - particularly when contrasted with Dora's, Billy's, and the long and deep friendships he was able to sustain with others. I don't say the basic facts are wrong, but (as always) there's always more than one way to recount them. And it is pretty clear, don't you think, that she felt some grievance towards Elgar? I think that comes through, and will have clouded her memories and judgment.

The outcome of all my reading and listening is this: if I could invite a handful of historical characters to dinner, Elgar would be top of my list. I might expect that at some point in the evening, I might get a rebuff or two. OK. He'd still be top of my list, because his account is so enormously in credit. Just as he'd have been at the top of Dora's, Billy's, and Nimrod's, and a host of others - and for all the right reasons.

[Vesteralen]

As for Rosa Burley, I feel uneasy about her account, and the way she tells it - particularly when contrasted with Dora's, Billy's, and the long and deep friendships he was able to sustain with others. I don't say the basic facts are wrong, but (as always) there's always more than one way to recount them. And it is pretty clear, don't you think, that she felt some grievance towards Elgar? I think that comes through, and will have clouded her memories and judgment.

The outcome of all my reading and listening is this: if I could invite a handful of historical characters to dinner, Elgar would be top of my list. I might expect that at some point in the evening, I might get a rebuff or two. OK. He'd still be top of my list, because his account is so enormously in credit. Just as he'd have been at the top of Dora's, Billy's, and Nimrod's, and a host of others - and for all the right reasons.

Well, it has helped me having you assist me to view Rosa Burley's account with a more critical eye.  (Input of this nature, by the way, is one of the few things that makes participation in a site like this worthwhile.  I've cut way back on my board involvement, but there are these exceptional circumstances.) 

And, although the presence of both Elgar and Mrs Elgar might make for too much of an on-edge experience for good digestion, I might take my chances on a dinner with Elgar himself.  Maybe asking him about chemistry or bicycling instead of music would be a good plan. 

[Karl Henning]

How about them Orioles?

[Elgarian]

Maybe asking him about chemistry or bicycling instead of music would be a good plan. 

Spot on. If one were expecting Elgar, it would be necessary to have a supply of test tubes and a good stock of basic materials like copper sulphate and granulated zinc, as well as a working knowledge of the mechanics of the Royal Sunbeam bicycle.

I suspect that the outcome of such conversation would be that he would then invite you to dinner.

[Karl Henning]

. . . she makes meatloaf which tastes like wing nuts . . . .

[mc ukrneal]

I'd like to add something too. I have not read the books on Elgar, but in your discussions over the last few pages, something jumped out at me. These authors are writing two things: 1) Recounting the facts of the composer's life and 2) Telling a story about the composer's life (essentially interpreting #1). It is with #2 that we get in trouble. If I yell at someone, am I rude? What if I really freak out and raise my voice? The fact is I did those things. But maybe I didn't like you. Or maybe you stepped on my toe and hurt me? Or maybe you are about to get run over by a car and I am trying to warn you? I think you see where I am going with us.

We are getting third party interpretations of the facts, and there is always risk in that. That risk can go the other way too, where the author tries to play down or explain away imperfections.  There is also #3, a little sensationalism never hurt sales. And there is also #4, she may be trying to show us how smart and important she is. Or it could just be her style of story telling. Whatever the case, I find that these types of imperfections help me to appreciate the music even more. If the composer had to be morally good and kind all the time, well there would be few composers we would listen to. They all make mistakes, and that is part of makes them human (as well as the composer they are and will be). We can learn from that (on both a personal and musical level).

[Elgarian]

I'd like to add something too. I have not read the books on Elgar, but in your discussions over the last few pages, something jumped out at me. These authors are writing two things: 1) Recounting the facts of the composer's life and 2) Telling a story about the composer's life (essentially interpreting #1). It is with #2 that we get in trouble. If I yell at someone, am I rude? What if I really freak out and raise my voice? The fact is I did those things. But maybe I didn't like you. Or maybe you stepped on my toe and hurt me? Or maybe you are about to get run over by a car and I am trying to warn you? I think you see where I am going with us.

We are getting third party interpretations of the facts, and there is always risk in that. That risk can go the other way too, where the author tries to play down or explain away imperfections.  There is also #3, a little sensationalism never hurt sales. And there is also #4, she may be trying to show us how smart and important she is. Or it could just be her style of story telling. Whatever the case, I find that these types of imperfections help me to appreciate the music even more. If the composer had to be morally good and kind all the time, well there would be few composers we would listen to. They all make mistakes, and that is part of makes them human (as well as the composer they are and will be). We can learn from that (on both a personal and musical level).

All eminently sensible stuff! Thanks for this. The colouring added by the writer is all part of the richness, part of the value of reading their work, isn't it? Dorabella's adoration of Elgar and Alice leaps out of every page, for example.  She was a Variation for heaven's sake (an exceedingly limited and exalted company), and it was so obviously one of the most important events of her life to have been so singled out. Rosa Burley, interestingly, was not; and I think that may partly explain some of the headmistress-ish tone of her writing. (Though of course there's also the fact that she was a headmistress .....)  'I was the theme!', she said. Good humoured, bitter, or cynical joke? Or outrageous swanking?

And we mustn't forget the story of Wittgenstein's Poker. In 1946, when Karl Popper addressed a group of Cambridge philosophers, including Ludwig Wittgenstein and Bertrand Russell, on the topic 'Are there philosophical problems?', there was a famous altercation between Wittgenstein and Popper involving Wittgenstein brandishing a poker. Many people were present to observe this, and yet no two descriptions of the event are  the same. The poker was, variously, red hot, cold, brandished threateningly, merely toyed with, or used as a pointer, thrown down into the fireplace with a clatter, or merely replaced; Wittgenstein stormed out slamming the door, or left quietly before the end. And on and on go the discrepancies concerning who was angry with whom, and how much. Take your pick.

So what was really going on when Elgar hit Dorabella's arm at the dinner table? How can we ever know? Is that what the cello concerto was really all about?

[Lethevich]

Upon going to rip one CD, the online tagging database suggested the following name for his Op.77:

A Voice in the Dessert

I'm sure that a far more witty person could make something of this material.

[Karl Henning]

Was it a tart voice?

[kishnevi]

Was it a tart voice?

I would think it would more on the sugary side myself.
And possibly a little overbaked.

[Leo K.]

This week I have been hearing the beginning of Elgar's first symphony in my head, and I've only heard it once before. I have one recording of it so I listened to it this morning and again was transported into this sublime work. I don't have the details of the recording with me now (age and bad memory) but now I want to explore this music and I'm about to hear the second symphony for I believe is the first time (Andrew Davis conducting)

[Elgarian]

This week I have been hearing the beginning of Elgar's first symphony in my head, and I've only heard it once before. I have one recording of it so I listened to it this morning and again was transported into this sublime work.

I understand completely. I first heard it when I was sixteen, and my response was something along the lines of 'My God, so this is what music can be ...' It remains, over 40 years later, the symphony I love most above all others. I feel as if it stamped its essence deeply and permanently inside me, once and for all.

[71 dB]

I first heard it when I was sixteen, and my response was something along the lines of 'My God, so this is what music can be ...'

The first time I heard Enigma Variations (it was played on a classical radio station) I had that response. I had found Elgar. 

[madaboutmahler]

This week I have been hearing the beginning of Elgar's first symphony in my head, and I've only heard it once before. I have one recording of it so I listened to it this morning and again was transported into this sublime work. I don't have the details of the recording with me now (age and bad memory) but now I want to explore this music and I'm about to hear the second symphony for I believe is the first time (Andrew Davis conducting)

I completely understand what you are going through as well. . For me, I found the second symphony even more of a powerful emotional experience than the first. I love the two symphonies so so much though, two of my favourite works ever written, but if I had to pick a favourite out of the two, it would have to be the second. Such a magical piece.
Let us know what you thought of the second symphony. I wouldn't have chosen Andrew Davis' recording.... I prefer Solti, or Elder, and of course Boult.