Critical Mass

[Cato]

Duly noted.

There are two types of record reviews that tick me off.  One is where the reviewer offers objective statements without ever giving an opinion of the merit of the performances.  The other is when it's clear that the reviewer has a bias that ruins the review - like when a reviewer covers a period instrument performance but hates the sound of period instruments.

I have read reviews where the reviewer starts to sound like a wine connoisseur, "a forward taste, yet slightly reserved, evoking the spirits of the ancient Tuscans, but without disturbing the mintiness of their spears."

He offers you his opinion, but you still have no idea what the performance is like!   

[Cato]

An example using sports metaphors by Sally Vallongo of the Toledo Blade about a performance of the Tchaikovsky Second Piano Concerto:

"A commanding presence physically, (William) Wolfram also brought authority to the keyboard, particularly during the long first movement, Allegro Brillante. A consummate ensemble player during tutti passages, he stepped up during an extended, cadenzalike solo in the same movement. There, it was simply pedal to the metal, although speed and dexterity never overtook clarity and definition.

The tenderest moments came during the second movement, an Andante, in which Wolfram was joined by concertmaster Kirk Toth and principal cellist Martha Reikow, as soloists with the orchestra - a later version of the concerto grosso.

Opening with one of Tchaikovsky's most heartfelt chords, the Andante proceeded delicately from solo violin to duo to trio. Each player melded with the orchestra, then emerged for a brilliant turn of musical phrase.

The final movement, Allegro con fuoco, lived up to the tempo marking that translates, with fire, once more casting Wolfram in the starring position.

It seemed his hungry fingers were eating up the keyboard, spinning out complex runs on all 88 keys, then breaking for a powerful melodic statement.

After the final thundering chord, the large audience drew him back for three curtain calls."

My emphasis above.

http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080510/ART10/805100438

[karlhenning]

It occurs to me that I have not ever heard the Second Concerto, and I cannot think why.

[not edward]

It occurs to me that I have not ever heard the Second Concerto, and I cannot think why.

This definitely needs rectified, then, as I think it's one of his most underrated works. Unfortunately most recordings cut out large parts of the slow movement (blame Siloti for this piece of butchery, which removes some of the most lyrical music Tchaikovsky ever wrote). However Scherbakhov on Naxos, Pletnev on Virgin and Donohoe on EMI all give good accounts of the complete score (though IIRC a few minor cuts are retained in the case of the first two). I don't think any of them are quite up to the level of Gilels in the outer movements, though.

[Cato]

Serendipity!  I have noticed that another topic brought up Eduard Hanslick, the (in)famous critic from the last half of the 19th century in Vienna.

Here is an excerpt from his review of the premiere of Tchaikovsky's Sixth Symphony.

"The new symphony surprised us, first of all, by its peculiar form.
In the first movement, an introductory Adagio leads to a nervous,
passionate Allegro. This gives way to a dreamy Andante in D major
which, following a short interlude, dominates to the end. Thus it
happens that in this first fast movement a slow tempo prevails.
Another peculiarity is the Scherzo, in five-four time. This disagree­
able rhythm, actually a continual wavering between simple and
compound time, is used rarely and only episodically (as in Delibes'
Le Roi l'a dit and in the third act of Tristan and Isolde). Consistently
retained through a long symphonic movement, it is disturbing to
listeners and players alike. The ear is always substituting more
comfortable measures, dividing five-four into two and three parts,
or into three and two -- an intolerably worrisome procedure. It is,
moreover, superfluous, since the piece could be adapted to six-eight
time without damage."

The 5/4 time concerns the second movement, not the "Scherzo" which he dislikes for its "Cossack" atmosphere.  But on the whole the review is not unsympathetique, so to speak!

Would a modern critic dare to advise a composer on how to handle the tempi in his composition?     

[karlhenning]

The 5/4 time concerns the second movement, not the "Scherzo" which he dislikes for its "Cossack" atmosphere.  But on the whole the review is not unsympathetique, so to speak!

Would a modern critic dare to advise a composer on how to handle the tempi in his composition?     

You mean meter, not tempi, right? 

"Another peculiarity is the Scherzo, in five-four time. This
disagree­able rhythm, actually a continual wavering between
simple and compound time, is used rarely and only episodically
(as in Delibes' Le Roi l'a dit and in the third act of Tristan and
Isolde). Consistently retained through a long symphonic
movement, it is disturbing to listeners and players alike. The
ear is always substituting more comfortable measures, dividing
five-four into two and three parts, or into three and two -- an
intolerably worrisome procedure."

This snapshot of Hanslick's discomfort with quintuple meter is fascinating.

And a reminder that the unthinking belief that one's own musical experience is normative for everyone, is a misprision not unique to (* ahem *) some among us  0:)

[Cato]

You mean meter, not tempi, right? 

This snapshot of Hanslick's discomfort with quintuple meter is fascinating.

And a reminder that the unthinking belief that one's own musical experience is normative for everyone, is a misprision not unique to (* ahem *) some among us  0:)

Duh, meter!  Right!  I have always found that objection so fascinating: is it possible he was hearing something differently?  I thought, when I first read this review over 4 decades ago that perhaps the conductor did not handle the 5/4 correctly, but Hanslick thinks the meter is by definition unpleasant.

What would he have thought of the very definite 5/8 in Rachmaninov's Isle of the Dead ?
On the other hand, Hanslick was an acolyte of Brahms in the Kampf gegen Wagner!

On the other other hand, he was sniffily dismissive of Bruckner and not just because Bruckner was included in the Wagner camp-Kampf! 

[BorisG]

I have read reviews where the reviewer starts to sound like a wine connoisseur, "a forward taste, yet slightly reserved, evoking the spirits of the ancient Tuscans, but without disturbing the mintiness of their spears."

He offers you his opinion, but you still have no idea what the performance is like!   

Has it not dawned on you? They are drinking while reviewing. A deadly combo, with sleep being the only winner.

[Cato]

Has it not dawned on you? They are drinking while reviewing. A deadly combo, with sleep being the only winner.

Oy!  Oenophilia strikes again!

[Monsieur Croche]

Adorno was an idiot.

I thought I should familiarize myself with Adorno's writings before making another contribution on this thread. Thank you for the much-needed impetus, David!

I have read reviews where the reviewer starts to sound like a wine connoisseur, "a forward taste, yet slightly reserved, evoking the spirits of the ancient Tuscans, but without disturbing the mintiness of their spears."

He offers you his opinion, but you still have no idea what the performance is like!   

This is why I mentioned in my first post that a reviewer needs to be proficient on the linguistic front, in order to avoid resorting to vague and inappropriate analogies... Has it occurred to you, in any case, that the reviewer is perhaps being intentionally vague, in order to mask his lack of opinion and put on airs of sophistication at the same time? Perhaps I'm being too cynical here, but then the profession of music criticism has had more than its fair share of charlatans over the years.

George Orwell reported a story about someone giving a talk about either music or art to a group of socialists.  At the end somebody asked the speaker: "Is there socialism in this piece?"

To the man with the hammer... 

and we don't mean M.C.!   

The best answer to that will of course be: "Only if you're a socialist yourself, fella."

M.C = Monsieur Croche, right?

Duh, meter!  Right!  I have always found that objection so fascinating: is it possible he was hearing something differently?  I thought, when I first read this review over 4 decades ago that perhaps the conductor did not handle the 5/4 correctly, but Hanslick thinks the meter is by definition unpleasant.

What would he have thought of the very definite 5/8 in Rachmaninov's Isle of the Dead ?
On the other hand, Hanslick was an acolyte of Brahms in the Kampf gegen Wagner!

On the other other hand, he was sniffily dismissive of Bruckner and not just because Bruckner was included in the Wagner camp-Kampf! 

Almost everyone was dismissive of Bruckner at that time. I won't go into detail about Bruckner's music itself as I feel that there are many other threads on this forum where one can discuss this topic. Just a minor, perhaps banal, observation: Bruckner's symphonies are enormously long, and he wrote them at the time where the prevailing symphonic tradition dictated any symphony beyond a certain length would inevitably be doomed to failure. There's no preventing lazy critics from taking cheap shots at the works' lengths, and to level charges normally associated with overly long pieces - incoherence, for example - rather than trying to evaluate them on their own merits. His image as a country bumpkin certainly doesn't help much either.

I'm not fully sure if calling Hanslick an "acolyte" of Brahms is a really fair assessment of the man. Most of what we know (or at least, what I know) of Hanslick are bits and pieces from the biographies of other composers, which perhaps tend to spotlight him at his most extreme. Is there a published collection of his writings somewhere? I have three volumes of writings by George Bernard Shaw (Haven't finished reading the entire thing, to be honest) and I get this impression that Shaw was generally more perceptive than his more famous quotes would indicate.

I am more interested in knowing Hanslick's reaction to Stravinsky's Rite of Spring. I imagine he would just drop dead out of shock.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I am more interested in knowing Hanslick's reaction to Stravinsky's Rite of Spring. I imagine he would just drop dead out of shock.

He had a pre-shock - he died in 1904. 

[Cato]

Is there a published collection of his writings somewhere? I have three volumes of writings by George Bernard Shaw (Haven't finished reading the entire thing, to be honest) and I get this impression that Shaw was generally more perceptive than his more famous quotes would indicate.

I am more interested in knowing Hanslick's reaction to Stravinsky's Rite of Spring. I imagine he would just drop dead out of shock.

Yes, there are collections of reviews and his books on aesthetics available on Amazon.

The original German is also available there, if you can read Deutsch.

If Hanslick had ever heard Stravinsky's Firebird, let alone Le Sacre  , he would have been fulminating about "Coassack barbarism" for sure! 

[Monsieur Croche]

He had a pre-shock - he died in 1904. 

What a tragic incident, and oh, what a cowardly thing to do by Mr. Hanslick! One would think that after all those mean-spiritedness and maliciousness towards fellow musicians throughout his career, he could at least have the dignity of dying, as Shostakovich put it, 'with a clear conscience'! I am deeply distressed by this knowledge; I wonder if there are any members here who are intelligent and courageous and kind-hearted enough to defend Herr Doktor Hanslick, such that I may feel better?

Yes, there are collections of reviews and his books on aesthetics available on Amazon.

The original German is also available there, if you can read Deutsch.

If Hanslick had ever heard Stravinsky's Firebird, let alone Le Sacre  , he would have been fulminating about "Coassack barbarism" for sure! 

Thanks, I will check those books out.

[Cato]

Conrad Osborne offered this obituary about Richard Dyer, music critic for The Boston Globe.

(This might interest @Karl Henning! )

I must open on a sad note by recording the death of a longtime colleague and friend, Richard Dyer, who for thirty years was the highly respected chief music critic for The Boston Globe.

Though we wrote for several of the same magazines (notably High Fidelity) from the 1960's onward, and Richard even reviewed me twice (once as novelist, once as actor) we did not actually cross paths except in passing until the last decade or so, when we finally had a couple of luncheon meetings up in the Berkshires (Tanglewood having been on his beat for all those years) and began a regular correspondence.

Richard's letters were full of keen observations and reminiscences, both professional and personal, and of a love of music and an optimism he somehow maintained to the end despite full awareness of the worsening trends. He was as knowledgeable about theatre as about music, and eagerly shared obscure materials in both areas. I'll miss Richard, as will all who knew him, and the world of classical music at large.

See:

https://conradlosborne.com/2025/01/18/the-mets-new-aida/

[Karl Henning]

Never met him but yes, I remember reading his column.