Elliott Carter, 1908-2012

Started by bwv 1080, April 07, 2007, 09:08:12 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Joe Barron

 ;D Hi, y'all!  ;D

Just returned from Settlement Music School, South Philadelphia, where the Network for New Music repreated the Ten for Carter program performed at Symphony Space Friday night. Had a nice chat with a co0uple of the composers afterwards, and Bruce H, I also spoek with your friend Stephen Gosling, who remembered me with a little prompting. I enjoyed the program, but I wish there had been more Carter. A planned performance of the Triple Duo was canceled when one of the msuicians went to North Korea with the New York Philharmonic. That left only short pieces by Cartrer on the program---two of the four Lauds for solo violin, Figment No. 2 for solo cello, Steep Steps fopr bass clairnet, Retrouvailles for piano and Con Leggerezza Pensosa for violin, cello and clarinet, which was done twice. All were well played, and for me they bwere the nightlight of the afternoon.

The tribute pieces, by such composers as Jennifer Higdon, Jeffrey Mumford and Augusta Read Thomas,  were pleasant enough, but it stuck me while I was listening that commissioning  centenary tributes to Carter is  a little like commissioning composers like Hummel and Reicha to write occasional works for Beethoven's 50th birthday. The results may be fine, but it's the master himself you want to hear.

The most memorable pieces for me were the ones that quoted Carter directly, admittedly because I know Carter's music well enough to recognize the references. The last of the tributes, Variation by Jeffery Cotton, was based on the opening trumpet call of Carter's Symphony of Three Orchestras. It was suprising how much the theme sounds like Ives when played on the piano.
 

bhodges

I mostly enjoyed the concert here, although the venue (the Leonard Nimoy Thalia Theater) is a little too dry for piano music.  But the tributes were nice enough; several of them I wanted to hear again.  I did enjoy the Con Leggerezza Pensosa.  Just found a video here of the group rehearsing that piece!

--Bruce

Joe Barron

Quote from: bhodges on March 03, 2008, 07:00:31 AM
I mostly enjoyed the concert here, although the venue (the Leonard Nimoy Thalia Theater) is a little too dry for piano music. 

Interesting your should say that. Steve Gosling said he thought the hall at settlement was a much better venue, and the piano was better, too. The piano at symphony space was a Yamaha, which, he said, should tell you everything.

And I did enjoy the concert a lot. As I said, I just wish there had been more Carter. And it was apleasure to meet Jennifer Higdopn. For whom i got to demonstrate just how loudly I can talk. The composers were getting ready to sit down for a Q&A, but no one on the panel quite knew how to get the attention of teh crowd, which was still milling about and snacking. Linda Reichert wanted to, but she's a slip of a woman. I volunteered. She gave me the OK, I called everyone to order at the top of my voice. It was an arresting moment. As I said to Higdon afterward, I've had umpires at major league baseball stadiums ask me to keep it down. She should write a piece for  me... maybe a concerto for loudmouth and orchestra.

bhodges

 ;D 

Now we know whom to call when we need to get people's attention around here.  ;D

;D

--Bruce


Joe Barron

Quote from: bhodges on March 03, 2008, 09:04:10 AM
;D  Now we know whom to call when we need to get people's attention around here. 
--Bruce

I must use this power only for good.

karlhenning

Representatives from Coca-Cola, McDonald's, Apple, Ford and Wal-Mart have been trying all day to reach you, Joe.

rickardg

Now what was that thread again... aah, here it is: What do you sound like?  :)

Al Moritz

Lately I have listened more to Carter again after I had cooled off from the composer, in particular from his later works, for several years. I had not liked that he first had developed such a distinctive avantgarde style and then simply held onto it, with some variation but without radical further transformations that would have him kept at the forefront of avantgarde: his modernism became "traditionalist modernism", as it were.

However, I now realize that there is considerably more variation in Carter's output than I had given him credit for, and I have come to appreciate his music as less dry than it mostly had seemed to me, with the exception of a few works like the 2nd and 3rd string quartets and the Concerto for Orchestra, which to me were "red-hot" Carter, an attribute that until recently I would have given no later Carter work.

The Symphonia is a much more different work than the Concerto for Orchestra than I ever had realized, and with its many innovations, which I did not notice before, it is perhaps not so much "traditionalist modernism" after all. A radical shift of view after I had listened to the work many times and even had experienced it live in late 2004 with the BSO under James Levine in Boston.

Not that I had not invested in Carter quite a bit. Apart from frequent listening to CDs and the live Symphonia, I had also experienced the world premiere of the Cello Concerto (October 2001, in NYC, with Yo-Yo Ma and the Chicago Symphony) and the world premiere of the Boston Concerto in 2002 in, of course, Boston.

The Cello Concerto had not left a lasting impression, except that the complex flurries had given way to short orchestral interruptions – not convincing at the time; it reminded me of the sparseness of late Schnittke, but without the incisive effect. A major problem had been that we sat way up high in Carnegie hall, far removed from the stage. You couldn't hear much at all, or at least, until it finally reached us listeners, the sound did not have the strength to make a powerful impression – sometimes listening to a CD is better than live indeed.

The Boston Concerto seemed quite pleasant upon hearing it at the world premiere, with a nice return of the flurries but at the same time more of the same old Carter. Ultimately not too interesting, and the most memorable impression of that evening was that we had a nice drink with Joe afterwards (not that that is a bad thing at all:-)

About a year ago I listened again to the Cello Concerto, this time on the Bridge CD, and it seemed just pointless noodling at that time. The Boston Concerto seemed Carter Light – the composer as a playful shadow of his former, weightier self.

Recently, however, I have discovered that the Boston Concerto is a fantastic work. The way the game question-answer between instrumental groups in the faster passages creates tight, yet kaleidoscopically colorful textures, is amazing. The slow passages are of great strength; the woodwind harmonies in track 3 and the brass harmonies in track 9 of the Bridge CD are beautiful. The constant switch between fast and slow passages, dividing the music into many varied sections, gives an impression of "lots of music per minute" in this work. Perhaps this more recent music is red-hot Carter after all.

Even though the Cello Concerto is still a bit dry for me, I am warming up to it more and more – considerably so.

The Dialogues are terrific as well, with beautiful gestural correspondence – indeed dialogue – between piano and orchestra.

***

Last weekend I listened to the Symphonia again – twice – and now was the first time that I did not just admire the music, but truly enjoyed it. The density of the first movement and the fast "tossing the ball" between instrumental groups is exhilarating. The dark Adagio features a high level of harmonic sophistication in its very controlled interplay between dissonant chords and ones that are less so. The climax, devastating as it is, is actually a brief return to the playfulness of the first movement, but then in a grossly and painfully distorted, slowed-down manner. The attraction of the Finale does not just consist in the simultaneous playing of fast strands of flurry-like activity against slower moving music, but also in the morphing of these two kinds of music into one another.

For a long time, Stockhausen's tremendous and continuous innovation up to his last works distracted my attention away from Carter who, as I thought, could not only not compete in this area, but was a hopeless under-achiever. Yet hardly any composer has shown as much innovation as Stockhausen, and as I said, I discovered that Carter is considerably more innovative than I had given him credit for. Paradoxically, after it had led me away from Carter, engagement with Stockhausen's music again led me back to Carter: in the process of writing an essay on Licht-Bilder I felt the urge to listen to Carter in comparison. How things can come full circle in their own particular manner.

Mark G. Simon

What, is someone keeping score? The composer with the most innovations wins?

Al Moritz

#469
Quote from: Mark G. Simon on March 03, 2008, 06:30:09 PM
What, is someone keeping score? The composer with the most innovations wins?

That is hardly the point. However, what I have a problem with is stagnation in an "avantgarde" style since this is self-defeating by definition: it leads to the oxymoron of "traditionalist modernism" (and indeed, comparison with Stockhausen tends to highlight this problem particularly sharply). But as I said, I have ultimately found that this is not quite the case with Carter too.

I had never any issue with "innovation" in Nono, Schnittke, Ferneyhough, Rihm etc.

karlhenning

In broadly similar fashion, Al, my first impressions of both the Boston Concerto and the Symphonia &c. did not at all foretell the very high regard both pieces now enjoy by me.

Mark G. Simon

Quote from: Al Moritz on March 03, 2008, 09:46:02 PM
That is hardly the point. However, what I have a problem with is stagnation in an "avantgarde" style since this is self-defeating by definition: it leads to the oxymoron of "traditionalist modernism" (and indeed, comparison with Stockhausen tends to highlight this problem particularly sharply). But as I said, I have ultimately found that this is not quite the case with Carter too.

I had never any issue with "innovation" in Nono, Schnittke, Ferneyhough, Rihm etc.

Then I have to say I have a problem with the whole notion of an "avant-garde", the status of which is, as you note, quite ephemeral. A composer either writes good music or not.

Al Moritz

Quote from: Mark G. Simon on March 04, 2008, 04:15:05 AM
Then I have to say I have a problem with the whole notion of an "avant-garde", the status of which is, as you note, quite ephemeral. A composer either writes good music or not.

The notion of "avant-garde" aside, I agree that compositional quality is paramount. Innovation in itself is of limited value. I couldn't care less about Stockhausen's innovations if his music wasn't as extraordinarily well composed as I perceive it to be. Conversely, Carter has grabbed my attention much more now because I realize that his later works are much better -- more interestingly -- composed than I had given him credit for.

Al Moritz

#473
On the other hand, I should add that the combination of great innovation with great compositional quality can make for a rousing experience. This gives an added punch to, for example, my interest for Stockhausen.

Also, just "well-crafted" music without any innovation is uninteresting. If "innovation" even just consists of finding a personal style (and sufficiently extending, varying on it when it comes to follow-up works) this may be enough.

bhodges

Quote from: Al Moritz on March 03, 2008, 05:49:25 PM
For a long time, Stockhausen's tremendous and continuous innovation up to his last works distracted my attention away from Carter who, as I thought, could not only not compete in this area, but was a hopeless under-achiever. Yet hardly any composer has shown as much innovation as Stockhausen, and as I said, I discovered that Carter is considerably more innovative than I had given him credit for. Paradoxically, after it had led me away from Carter, engagement with Stockhausen's music again led me back to Carter: in the process of writing an essay on Licht-Bilder I felt the urge to listen to Carter in comparison. How things can come full circle in their own particular manner.

Excellent, thoughtful post, Al.  As I think Karl and some others have said, it's not good to criticize a composer for "not being someone else."  I also very much empathize with the idea that one's musical discovery can lead you back to works that you may have misunderstood, disliked or just jettisoned for some other reason.  (Speaking as a fairly recent admirer of Carter's output.)

--Bruce

Joe Barron

Thought provoking and well expressed as always, Al. And perceptive. Back in the early nineties, I spoke with a cellist who had just taken part in a performance of Carter's first four string quartets, and he told me that the pieces dealt consistently with the same concerns, despite having been written decades apart. The critic the next day said the same thing, but less sympathetically. In essence, he said, Carter had not done anything new in thirty years, though I got the impression that if Carter had progressed more obviously, this critic would have accused him of innovation for innovation's sake. Sometimes, you can't win. I have said in an earlier post that I do not regard Carter as an innovator in the same sense as  Ives or Schoenberg, or perhaps Stockhausen. He does seem to have been content to explore the possibilities of his own personal voice within a range of technical possibilities he had discovered by the 1960s. (This is not to say he has not expanded the musical language.) All I can say is 1) It never struck me as a drawback, given the richness of his output, and 2) other great composers in the past have also settled for what Al calls a personal style and worked in it consistently over time. Bach, Haydn and Brahms come to mind. Once these masters found their voice, it did not seem to change much on a technical level. Still, I don't remember anyone ever accusing Bach of repeating himself even when, later in life, he was rearranging earlier material into his keyboard concertos. Haydn, too, wrote twenty-five symphonies in his mature style, and dozens of string quartets, and still kept it fresh.

I'm glad you've come like the Boston Concerto. It is a wonderful piece. My impression of the Cello Concerto was quite different from yours. I was in awe of it and remain so to this day. I think it's one of his greatest works, and to my ear, it is a direct descendant of the the white hot manner you admire. Interstingly, the white hot pieces, as you call them, such as the Concerto for Orchestra and the Second are Third string quartets, were the most forbidding to me at first. It took me a long time to appreciate them, although now they are among my all-time favorite music. I'm especially excited that Knussen is scheduled to conduct the Concerto for Orchestra at Tanglewood this summer. It's the only one of carter's orchestral works I have not heard live.

I remember that post-concert drink, too. I assume Josie has recovered from the peanut bombardment.  ;)

Joe Barron

Oh, and here's a good, thorough review of Sunday's program.

A tribute takes unexpected turns

By David Patrick Stearns

Inquirer Classical Music Critic

Only at a new-music concert would a creaky piano bench receive ironic applause - what a clever opening chord! - since these audiences tend to be ready for anything. And in the composer summit meeting that was the Network for New Music's "Ten for Carter" concert Sunday at the Settlement Music School, the most seasoned ears enjoyed pleasantly defied expectations.

The concept was to pay tribute to the great American composer Elliott Carter - who turns 100 on Dec. 11 - not only in a handful of his own pieces, but in short, newly commissioned solo piano works composed by others. The low-stakes, entre-nous circumstances meant these composers had little to lose, but had Carter's high standard to shoot for. Every piece was notable in its own way, and the performance quality was extraordinarily high, with guest pianists Stephen Gosling and Marilyn Nonken.

A number of composers were simply themselves, as in Ellen Taaffe Zwilich's forthrightly affectionate, harmonically rich A Poem for Elliott. In contrast, Augusta Read Thomas departed from her tough modernist personality in Bells, written for two pianists playing a single instrument, one at the keyboard, one plucking strings beneath the lid. Spare, elegantly chosen notes created a spacious, rarefied world.

If there was anything Carteresque there, it was the miniature epic quality. Among the Carter pieces on the program, Lauds for solo violin and Con Leggerezza Pensosa (which was performed twice, the second time being more relaxed and marvelously revealing) pack worlds of expression into compressed, eventful time periods. In Tempus Carmenium, Maurice Wright took that idea further with a multi-episode suite including canonic counterpoint that unexpectedly led to a lovely, choralelike series of freestanding chords. More daringly terse was Jeremy Gill's superb Eliot Fragments, whose episodes jumped off from T.S. Eliot quotations to create stark, explosive sound pictures that went to extremes within seconds.

One such Eliot quotation, "In my end is my beginning," was the concert's unofficial talisman. Carter's musical narratives often conclude with the composer opening one final door, exclaiming "Ah!" but not entering. Consciously or not, others did the same: Though Uri Caine's 4 short pieces for 2 hands began engagingly like Thelonious Monk driving with brake failure, the final seconds cleared all wreckage to reveal elegant chords and dotted rhythms that intently expanded and contracted time. Alvin Curran's quasi-minimalist E Poi dropped its severe demeanor in the final seconds with an arresting flourish worthy of Rachmaninoff.

Not normally a contrarian, Jennifer Higdon, in Mr. Carter's Notes, grabbed gestures from Carter's sprint-paced Triple Duo, gently sat them down, and made them submit to an amiable, fruitful examination, though its final seconds had bass notes that telegraphed finality - a welcome switch.

bhodges

That's a pretty nice review, Joe.  I do wish I could have heard this in Philly.  The more I hear in the Leonard Nimoy Thalia Theater here, the more I'm convinced that it may be fine for film and lectures, but it's not good for music.  The place looks great (completely gutted and renovated a few years back) but the sound is as dry as the Mojave.

--Bruce

Joe Barron

#478
Quote from: James on March 04, 2008, 08:53:11 AM
the passion of this discussion is all good ...but the best music from the 3 names above is mainly found in their late/mature output, showing that they continued to hone and develop and most importantly distill all that into profound pieces that for the most part greatly surpassed many prior achievements...not so sure the same can be said for Elliott Carter..who's best stuff seems to be largely behind him (50s & 60s) and fewer highlights since those days...

I would have to disagree. Certainly, late Carter does represent a distillation of the previous work. He is still honing, as you say, stripping his language to its essentials. We could argue, too, whether his best work is behind him, but as I said in my review of the Horn concerto, he's got nothing left to prove. He doesn't have to make the big statements anymore. He can relax and just do as he pleases, and what he pleases is plenty good enough for me.  

Remember,too, that Haydn, Brahms and Bach wrote their own late work in their fiftes and sixties, about the same age as Carter was when he composed his Third Quartet and A  Symphony of Three Orchestras. None of them lived into his nineties. If they had, maybe their best work would have been behind them, too. Lateness is relative to biography. Beethoven's late music was written by a man in his mid-fifties.

Al Moritz

Quote from: Joe Barron on March 04, 2008, 08:20:12 AM
I have said in an earlier post that I do not regard Carter as an innovator in the same sense as  Ives or Schoenberg, or perhaps Stockhausen. He does seem to have been content to explore the possibilities of his own personal voice within a range of technical possibilities he had discovered by the 1960s. (This is not to say he has not expanded the musical language.) All I can say is 1) It never struck me as a drawback, given the richness of his output, and 2) other great composers in the past have also settled for what Al calls a personal style and worked in it consistently over time. Bach, Haydn and Brahms come to mind. Once these masters found their voice, it did not seem to change much on a technical level. Still, I don't remember anyone ever accusing Bach of repeating himself even when, later in life, he was rearranging earlier material into his keyboard concertos. Haydn, too, wrote twenty-five symphonies in his mature style, and dozens of string quartets, and still kept it fresh.

Yes, but the "problem" with Carter was that his modernist style was so radical and new when it broke through that obviously it had to elicit associations with the "avant-garde" concept very much alive at the time (I am apparently not the only one who perceived it that way). And the avant-garde promise, which involves constant future change, is hard to keep – Stockhausen is one of the very few composers who actually has managed to do that throughout his career; Rihm is relatively good at that too (and when a composer can, it is riveting). That apparently for Carter it was never about avant-garde but simply about acquiring a personal style is an insight that is not readily open to everyone, but an insight essential to the appreciation of his wider output. I was, as it were, "blinded by the light" of the avantgarde promise that seemed to be there in the 50s and 60s, and only once I stopped being blinded by this light I could see the rich palette of shadows, i.e. the variation in his output.

Like you said:

QuoteBack in the early nineties, I spoke with a cellist who had just taken part in a performance of Carter's first four string quartets, and he told me that the pieces dealt consistently with the same concerns, despite having been written decades apart. The critic the next day said the same thing, but less sympathetically. In essence, he said, Carter had not done anything new in thirty years, . . .

***

QuoteI remember that post-concert drink, too. I assume Josie has recovered from the peanut bombardment.  ;)

Sure, peanuts can never be enough ;)