Elliott Carter, 1908-2012

[Catison]

He's right there.

[Spotswood]

Well, so much for fun and games.

On the serious side, word from David Starobin is that Mr. Carter has completed his new woodwind quintet, which is scheduled for premiere in February. No word yet on where, or who the performers will be.

[Spotswood]

Here is David Starobin's description of the Flute Concerto (2009), posted at bridgerecords.com:

I hope we can add this to Vol. 9.  I just heard this lovely work, about 14 minutes in duration, for the first time.   The opening section is incredibly inventive-  placing the solo flute in dozens of orchestral 'situations'.  Memorable encounters with the orchestral flutes, with harp, tuttis, and with contrabassoon, make this kaleidoscopic movement completely unpredictable, yet completely logical in the way it unfolds.  Amazing!  The central slow section gradually yields to a brief fast and very mercurial section, with a short, and again, unpredictable ending.  In this concert performance flute soloist Emmanuel Pahud and the Berlin Phil. under Daniel Barenboim play brilliantly.  Bravi!

So, Vol. 8 isn't even on the shelves yet, and they're already planning Vol 9.

I must confess I'm disappointed that the BSO chose not to bring the Flute Concerto to Carnegie Hall this year, opting instead for another performance of Dialogues. (What's up with that?) I may have to wait until there's a Vol. 9 on Bridge before I hear the piece, unless there's a Webcast of the February US premiere.

Meantime, I'll go back to that Fourth Quartet that James seems to think isn't very memorable.

[CRCulver]

Here is David Starobin's description of the Flute Concerto (2009), posted at bridgerecords.com:

I hope we can add this to Vol. 9.  I just heard this lovely work, about 14 minutes in duration, for the first time.   The opening section is incredibly inventive-  placing the solo flute in dozens of orchestral 'situations'.  Memorable encounters with the orchestral flutes, with harp, tuttis, and with contrabassoon, make this kaleidoscopic movement completely unpredictable, yet completely logical in the way it unfolds.

So it sounds like the other many concertos Carter has written over the last 10+ years or so. I'm not complaining -- it's great Carter is still composing at his age -- but I don't understand why Starobin hypes something which is already so commonplace in Carter's music.

[Guido]

looking forward to the new Bridge release.

I've been wanting to hear the  song cycle "In the Distances of Sleep" for a long time - is a recording of this being planned?

In the words of Robin Holloway:

Perhaps most surprising of all in the late spate is the virtual absence of any music sounding 'old' or 'late'. One thinks of Fauré, Strauss, Vaughan Williams: distillation, strangeness, retrospect, farewell. One recent Carter score alone seems like the product of a very old man, a song-cycle on Wallace Stevens entitled In the Distances of Sleep, composed in 2006. Some passages of reflective amplitude betoken long, long experience, and one song goes beyond, into a region of bare austerity unique in this composer whose norm is fantastical busyness, accompanying the soprano simply with a single line passed among the strings from infinitely high to the bottom of the double basses.

[Spotswood]

I don't understand why Starobin hypes something which is already so commonplace in Carter's music.

Perhaps what is commonplace for Mr. Carter is exceptional for everyone else ...

Guido, thanks for the posting about In the Distances of Sleep. I'll have to go back to my broadcast recording of it and listen again. I think I disagree with Holloway's contention that the song he discusses is unique in Carter late work, though some of the things I'm thinking about, like the Zukofsky songs and Sound Fields, may have been written after Holloway was writing.

I know of no planned commercial recording, unfortunately.

[Spotswood]

Exactly what I was thinking too ...it's no longer fresh or exciting, esp. for those of us who have listened-to and followed him for years now & I've heard most of these newer pieces. It's all minor stuff.

Art of Fugue? What? He's just writing more fugues? He's just repeating himself! It's no longer fresh and exciting!

We should all  be so minor when we're  100 ...

[bhodges]

We should all  be so minor when we're  100 ...

That's what I was thinking.   To be writing anything of consequence at that age is nothing short of miraculous.

--Bruce

[Spotswood]

And it is good stuff. Perhaps not as monumental and groundbreaking as what he was writing, say, in his 50s (Beethoven's age in his late period) --- though I would be prepared to make a case for the Boston Concerto and the Clarinet Quintet --- but quite attractive and full of good spirits.

I think it's unreasonable to expect constant innovation from anyone, let alone a centenarian. I'm content just to see what he comes up with next.

And Catenaires really is kick ass.

I'm really looking farward to the Bridge release. 

[Spotswood]

So he's 100 and still writing "stuff" ... that's fine but besides the valid point that was made earlier.

Yes, and the valid point was mine: Much of the "stuff" is quite good.

This conversation is over. It really rankles that you're deliberately twisting my words to make it sound as though what I'm saying is that is doesn't matter what the old dog says as long as the old dog contiinutes to talk. That's not what I'm saying at all, and you know it.

[Catison]

me thinks thou doth protest too much.

Yeah, and what are you doing on this thread?

[Spotswood]

Hey, great news! This ignore function really works ... 

[CRCulver]

I don't understand what the problem is with expressing one's opinion that recent Carter is pleasant but somewhat repetitive. On another forum I frequent, a poster has stated often in discussions of Pierre Boulez's music that he feels Boulez's post-1970s music is weak compared to what the composer wrote earlier, but as much as I disagree I don't see the need to start ignoring him and calling for him to be silent.

[greg]

Same here. "Fans" like we're seeing here, who border on obsessive or compulsive worship often lose a clear perspective & a grip on things, their view is deluded, blinkered and they get emotional quickly or too hurt when a valid point is made about their "hero" who can do no wrong in their eyes...

lol coming from James... no comment.

[Spotswood]

I don't understand what the problem is with expressing one's opinion that recent Carter is pleasant but somewhat repetitive.

CR, I acknowledge and have acknowledged the repetitive part, though I object to the connotations of that word. As I have said before on this thread, it is reasonable to expect an older artist who  found his voice long ago to repeat himself. That fact alone does not indicate a falling off of powers. In this sense, Haydn and Bach were repetitive in their final years, polishing and working out ideas that had occupied them for years, even to the point, in Bach's case, of rearranging earlier works. And yet no one would call them repetitive. 

Second, I simply disagree with the statement that all of Mr. Carter's recent work is "minor." I don't accept it in regard to Cello Concerto or the Boston Concerto or esp. the Oboe Quartet, which is as fine a thing as he's ever written, the equal of the early harpsichord sonata. Not a breakthrough in any sense: I don't expect breakthroughs at this late date. But a good, strong work. A masterpiece, in short. If that opinion makes me obsessive compulsive, so be it.

I have put J. on ignore not because I disagree with him, but because he is a troll. Calling me obsessive compulsive and putting "fan" is quotation marks (as I see in your quote) are calculated insults, and it's obvious the person who wrote them is not interested in friendly, enlightening discussion.

[karlhenning]

And, of course, James's catty remarks ("Fans" like we're seeing here, who border on obsessive or compulsive worship often lose a clear perspective & a grip on things, their view is deluded, blinkered and they get emotional quickly or too hurt when a valid point is made about their "hero" who can do no wrong in their eyes...) have ironic applicability to his own personal "fandom" of Stockhausen, e.g.  Hence, Greg's amusement in that post.

[Spotswood]

And, of course, James's catty remarks ("Fans" like we're seeing here, who border on obsessive or compulsive worship often lose a clear perspective & a grip on things, their view is deluded, blinkered and they get emotional quickly or too hurt when a valid point is made about their "hero" who can do no wrong in their eyes...) have ironic applicability to his own personal "fandom" of Stockhausen, e.g.  Hence, Greg's amusement in that post.

You know, if you keep quoting him in your posts, the whole point of the ignore function is lost.

[karlhenning]

Whenever I see James in his giddy Scorn Mode, all I need do is think, This is the guy who must own the entire Stockhausen oeuvre. One can't take anyone like that seriously.

[Brahmsian]

Whenever I see James in his giddy Scorn Mode, all I need do is think, This is the guy who must own the entire Stockhausen oeuvre. One can't take anyone like that seriously.

Well, then that really isn't fair, is it Karl? Isn't that saying the same thing as anyone who owns the entire Beethoven, Carter or Haydn catalogue can't be taken seriously?

Not saying that James isn't in the 'scorn mode' from time to time, but your reason to ignore him isn't really valid when you think about it.

[Franco]

I find my interest in someone's comments are in an inverse ratio to the strength with which they express themselves.

I.e., when someone makes broadly dismissive statements about a composer, performance, work, or another poster - I tend to ignore future comments from that person.  I feel that nothing is ever so black/white so as to render broadly dismissive statements meaningful, worthwhile or even remotely true, and it calls into question the person's motivation in making those kinds of comments.

Call me a fan of nuanced opinions.