Vaughan Williams's Veranda

[Luke]

The First World War may well have influenced A Pastoral Symphony and 'Job' but it's difficult to know.

In the case of the Pastoral he said it did, so we cab be pretty sure. Most famously in that letter to Ursula in which he wrote about his experiences in Ecoivres being formative (the 'Corot like landscape' description)

[vandermolen]

In the case of the Pastoral he said it did, so we cab be pretty sure. Most famously in that letter to Ursula in which he wrote about his experiences in Ecoivres being formative (the 'Corot like landscape' description)

Yes, that's true. It could be seen as his 'War Requiem'.

[relm1]

In the case of the Pastoral he said it did, so we cab be pretty sure. Most famously in that letter to Ursula in which he wrote about his experiences in Ecoivres being formative (the 'Corot like landscape' description)

Martyn Brabbins said Pilgrims Progress referenced his experiences in the war and since that transcended his career through multiple other works, one could say the shadow of the war loomed large over much of what he did. 

[Irons]

Some time ago I bought a second-hand copy of 'The Record Guide' by Edward Sackville-West and Desmond Shawe-Taylor. This was the first Record Guide published in Britain and was from 1951 when the likes of VW and Bax were still alive. I was amused by how opinionated it is. Here's an extract about VW's First Symphony '[it] has never been recorded. We do not regret this, for it is not characteristic of the composer at his best and would be exceedingly hard to record satisfactorily'. At the time VW had only composed six symphonies. Of 'Job' it states 'The music is full of fine things, but on the whole the flame of inspiration burns rather low'. The only recording was the premiere one with Boult conducting the BBC SO (now available on Dutton). The Decca Boult symphony cycle lay in the future. Wood's recording of A London Symphony was available as was Barbirolli's Hallé recording of the 5th Symphony + Boult's LSO recording of Symphony No.6 which is given a very warm welcome. Bax was only represented by the 3rd Symphony (Hallé, Barbirolli) The Garden of Fand (RPO/Beecham) and by 'Maytime in Sussex' (Cohen/Sargent).

Ah Jeffrey, Sackville-West and Shawe-Taylor were to revise their opinion of RVW 1st. I was late to the party - not for first time - with the 1955 edition. By that date No.7 was recorded twice by Boult and Barbirolli. Anyway back to the 1st, they had this to say - Nevertheless, to hear the Sea Symphony again after a long interval is to realize how much good music there is in it.

I enjoy reading the essay's on each composer prior to the reviews.

[vandermolen]

Ah Jeffrey, Sackville-West and Shawe-Taylor were to revise their opinion of RVW 1st. I was late to the party - not for first time - with the 1955 edition. By that date No.7 was recorded twice by Boult and Barbirolli. Anyway back to the 1st, they had this to say - Nevertheless, to hear the Sea Symphony again after a long interval is to realize how much good music there is in it.

I enjoy reading the essay's on each composer prior to the reviews.

Interesting Lol - I recall that Shostakovich's 4th Symphony was considered 'nothing special' in an early guide.

[LKB]

Interesting Lol - I recall that Shostakovich's 4th Symphony was considered 'nothing special' in an early guide.

I expect nearly every major composer in history has suffered from critical misperception at times. As far as A Sea Symphony is concerned, l was a believer from the moment l heard Boult's 1968 recording. While the local newspaper music critic was unimpressed with our performance decades ago, he at least had enough integrity to admit that he had never understood the work. His loss...

[vandermolen]

I expect nearly every major composer in history has suffered from critical misperception at times. As far as A Sea Symphony is concerned, l was a believer from the moment l heard Boult's 1968 recording. While the local newspaper music critic was unimpressed with our performance decades ago, he at least had enough integrity to admit that he had never understood the work. His loss...

It was Haitink's performance (Warner box set) which made the work come alive for me.
The same is true for Shostakovich's 13th Symphony 'Babi Yar'.

[Irons]

Interesting Lol - I recall that Shostakovich's 4th Symphony was considered 'nothing special' in an early guide.

Seems by 1955 the 4th has fallen from view. The 5th is highly rated and for the others they have this to say - At the time of writing, Shostakovich symphonies are ten in number (Nos 2 and 3 have fallen into complete disfavour; no.4 has never been performed). The celebrated 'Leningrad' contains some fine pages, but it does not improve with time. No.8 again very long and monumental and No.9 self-consciously simple mark no advance, and seem to placate the ever-changing moods of the Soviet academy. No.10, a remarkable work, was first played in this country in 1955.

I don't think such a review would be written today, Jeffrey. But is it any less valid? I find music reviews in The Record Guide and old issues of Gramophone far more interesting then those written today. After all "critic" is a shorten form of "criticise". 

[Roasted Swan]

Seems by 1955 the 4th has fallen from view. The 5th is highly rated and for the others they have this to say - At the time of writing, Shostakovich symphonies are ten in number (Nos 2 and 3 have fallen into complete disfavour; no.4 has never been performed). The celebrated 'Leningrad' contains some fine pages, but it does not improve with time. No.8 again very long and monumental and No.9 self-consciously simple mark no advance, and seem to placate the ever-changing moods of the Soviet academy. No.10, a remarkable work, was first played in this country in 1955.

I don't think such a review would be written today, Jeffrey. But is it any less valid? I find music reviews in The Record Guide and old issues of Gramophone far more interesting then those written today. After all "critic" is a shorten form of "criticise". 

Nothing new!  A favourite book of mine - always good for a laugh;

[vandermolen]

Seems by 1955 the 4th has fallen from view. The 5th is highly rated and for the others they have this to say - At the time of writing, Shostakovich symphonies are ten in number (Nos 2 and 3 have fallen into complete disfavour; no.4 has never been performed). The celebrated 'Leningrad' contains some fine pages, but it does not improve with time. No.8 again very long and monumental and No.9 self-consciously simple mark no advance, and seem to placate the ever-changing moods of the Soviet academy. No.10, a remarkable work, was first played in this country in 1955.

I don't think such a review would be written today, Jeffrey. But is it any less valid? I find music reviews in The Record Guide and old issues of Gramophone far more interesting then those written today. After all "critic" is a shorten form of "criticise". 

I'm inclined to agree Lol. Modern reviews can be rather bland or too brief.

[Pohjolas Daughter]

Nothing new!  A favourite book of mine - always good for a laugh;

That looks like it would be fun to wade through. 

PD

[LKB]

Nothing new!  A favourite book of mine - always good for a laugh;

That cover has sold me, if it's in print l shall stop at nothing to obtain it. 

[drogulus]

[Daverz]

Seems by 1955 the 4th has fallen from view. The 5th is highly rated and for the others they have this to say - At the time of writing, Shostakovich symphonies are ten in number (Nos 2 and 3 have fallen into complete disfavour; no.4 has never been performed). The celebrated 'Leningrad' contains some fine pages, but it does not improve with time. No.8 again very long and monumental and No.9 self-consciously simple mark no advance, and seem to placate the ever-changing moods of the Soviet academy. No.10, a remarkable work, was first played in this country in 1955.

I don't think such a review would be written today, Jeffrey. But is it any less valid? I find music reviews in The Record Guide and old issues of Gramophone far more interesting then those written today. After all "critic" is a shorten form of "criticise". 

But that review is so wrong it's grotesque.  Neither work was recieved well by the regime, to put it mildly.  They certainly didn't "placate the ever-changing moods of the Soviet academy", and both were banned after the 1948 Zhadonov decree.  Shostakovich narrowly escaped the fate of many other artists murdered by Stalin.

That same year, many of his closest friends and relatives were imprisoned or executed, including his patron Marshal Tukhachevsky; his brother-in-law, the distinguished physicist Vsevolod Frederiks; his great friend the musicologist Nikolai Zhilyayev; his mother-in-law, the astronomer Sofiya Mikhaylovna Varzar; his uncle Maxim Kostrykin; and his colleagues Boris Kornilov and Adrian Piotrovsky. In 1937, he himself was summoned for interrogation and only escaped due to a twist of fate: his interrogator was arrested before his own appointment came. His income dropped by 75% and he ran out of money. His wife was pregnant. He kept a small suitcase packed for his inevitable arrest. He began sleeping in the stairwell out of fear. As conductor Mark Wigglesworth says: "It is hard to imagine what that kind of fear must feel like. It is impossible to know what it must feel like as a permanent condition of life."

https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20150807-shostakovich-the-composer-who-was-almost-purged
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._8_(Shostakovich)#Reception
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._9_(Shostakovich)#Reception

   

[Karl Henning]

Seems by 1955 the 4th has fallen from view.

Shostakovich withdrew the Fourth while it was still in rehearsal. Too hot a potato. There wouldn't be a première until 30 Dec 1961.

[Karl Henning]

I'm inclined to agree Lol. Modern reviews can be rather bland or too brief.

The celebrated 'Leningrad' contains some fine pages, but it does not improve with time.

The Leningrad has aged incomparably better than that "review" of it.

[Irons]

The celebrated 'Leningrad' contains some fine pages, but it does not improve with time.

The Leningrad has aged incomparably better than that "review" of it.

Not only "that" review, Karl. A Keri Blickenstaff of Florida University in a study Re-Examining
 the Workhorse delves into the reviewing history of the 'Leningrad'. Long, but the opening paragraph is worth reading.

 https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/blickenstaff_keri_201005_ma.pdf

[Maestro267]

So how bout Vaughan Williams huh?

[Karl Henning]

So how bout Vaughan Williams huh?

I don't say that thought hadn't occurred to me.  😇

[Irons]

So how bout Vaughan Williams huh?

VW is now a solitary figure, for his influence has served but to produce a steady trickle of pentatonic wish-wash.

 

The world looked a different place in 1953. I don't agree with most critique but far more interesting then musical criticism of today.