(Note that this post is not meant to make any statement about his skills as a composer. FWIW, I actually like a lot of his music.)
Does anyone get the impression that Stravinsky is slowly being forgotten? While The Rite of Spring and Petrouchka may still get a lot of airplay, I've never come across people in music fora who have much to say the bulk of his output. In new music communities, his name rarely comes up even though people are passionate about seemingly every other modernist, and among my acquaintances who are conservative listeners even the neoclassical works are considered too "dissonant" for pleasure. For all his influence on 20th century music, he seems to have fallen between two audiences.
Quote from: CRCulver on October 27, 2008, 10:13:01 PM
Does anyone get the impression that Stravinsky is slowly being forgotten?
I wouldn't phrase it that way, since it's clear that a few of his works still get played a lot. Rather, I would say that his reputation and image depend too heavily on that much-played handful of works.
Me, I'd love to hear a performance of
Requiem Canticles, or the
Septet, or the
Symphony in C, or
Agon, but they hardly ever get played, even here in Moscow.
Maybe his ideas are greater than his music?
Quote from: CRCulver on October 27, 2008, 10:13:01 PM
For all his influence on 20th century music, he seems to have fallen between two audiences.
Not with me certainly, but it's been a long time since I've seen him performed locally.
QuoteCRCulver
Does anyone get the impression that Stravinsky is slowly being forgotten? While The Rite of Spring and Petrouchka may still get a lot of airplay, I've never come across people in music fora who have much to say the bulk of his output.
I listen to Stravinsky and, believe me, with a great pleasure. I accept that the Rite of Spring and Petrushka are his absolute masterpieces. But he composed so many beautiful music! Listen to Les Noces, the Cantata, the Symphony in three movements, Renard, L'Histoire du Soldat, the Symphony of Psalms, the Mass, In Memoriam Dylan Thomas, among other masterpieces.
To forget Stravinsky - or Schönberg, Debussy or Bartok - would be the same as to forget Mussorgsky, Brahms, Berlioz or Liszt.
Quote from: CRCulver on October 27, 2008, 10:13:01 PM
Does anyone get the impression that Stravinsky is slowly being forgotten?
By musicians? Never.
By the orchestra subscribers? Maybe.
At
Symphony Hall in Boston, I've actually heard as many
Stravinsky works programmed as
Sibelius . . . maybe
Sibelius is being forgotten, too?
And NEC actually (to borrow the adverb from the subject header) staged The Rake's Progress not all that long ago.
Keep in mind the overall arc of Stravinsky's career, too: he began by writing orchestral ballet scores for the Russian Seasons . . . and then came WWI, when composing for large orchestra became suddenly impractical. A lot of Stravinsky's subsequent work has something of a 'chamber music' mentality (even some orchestral scores, such as Agon, although written for orchestra, seldom make use of the full ensemble together).
Oh! And I have heard two live performances of the Mass over the past few years. Also heard the Symphonies of Wind Instruments live at NEC.
Stravinsky would certainly not be happy to think that interest in him was declining. Even more so, he would have continued to struggle with the constant reference to his early ballet works in favor of the rest of his ouevre. . .
A related question, then, is: whose stocks are on the rise (among classical composers)?
Quote from: Ugh! on October 28, 2008, 06:07:33 AM
A related question, then, is: whose stocks are on the rise (among classical composers)?
Sibelius... possibly Martinů?
Quote from: Ugh! on October 28, 2008, 06:07:33 AM
A related question, then, is: whose stocks are on the rise (among classical composers)?
No one is on the rise. Classical music is being marginalized with each passing generation.
Here we go again. (http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z245/tapiola/yawn.gif)
Quote from: Ugh! on October 28, 2008, 06:07:33 AM
A related question, then, is: whose stocks are on the rise (among classical composers)?
Shostakovich. It is not really all that long ago that he was marginalized in the West as a tonal Communist lapdog; even if some of the rise is to some extent biography-driven, on the whole he is rising in musical estimation even in academia.
Carter. Again, one might argue that his centenary is not a
musical reason for the attention, but his work is worthy of the attention.
Golijov. Still a rarity among younger composers in the amount of press he's getting.
Quote from: Corey on October 28, 2008, 06:28:29 AM
Here we go again. (http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z245/tapiola/yawn.gif)
Well of course, i have a reputation to maintain.
Quote from: karlhenning on October 28, 2008, 06:35:36 AM
Shostakovich. It is not really all that long ago that he was marginalized in the West as a tonal Communist lapdog; even if some of the rise is to some extent biography-driven, on the whole he is rising in musical estimation even in academia.
Carter. Again, one might argue that his centenary is not a musical reason for the attention, but his work is worthy of the attention.
Golijov. Still a rarity among younger composers in the amount of press he's getting.
I agree with these. Although I'm scratching my head about the one in the middle. ???
Bruckner has been on the rise over the past decades, as well as Sibelius. Perhaps even Vaughan Williams?
Well, certainly Grieg's stocks were rising to new heights during the Grieg 2007 centennary in Norway, don't know about his stocks elsewhere...
I've never been a big Stravinsky fan. Though the "hits" are fun sometimes.
Quote from: mn dave on October 28, 2008, 08:33:25 AM
I've never been a big Stravinsky fan.
"Why is that,
Dave?"
Quote from: karlhenning on October 28, 2008, 08:37:07 AM
"Why is that, Dave?"
Why are you using quotes? I assume because you're quoting something else. :)
I dunno. His music doesn't do much for me, I guess. The usual reason. :)
A good way to keep hearing Stravinsky is to attend the ballet, especially a company that maintains many of the Stravinsky-Balanchine collaborations in repertory, such as (obviously) the City Ballet here in NY. In the past few years I've seen/heard Agon, the Symphony in 3 Movements, the Capriccio, Les Noces (choreographed by Jerome Robbins), the Violin Concerto, Movements (which Balanchine coupled with the Monumentum pro Gesualdo), the Divertimento from Le Baiser de la Fée, Apollon Musagète, and probably more I can't recall just now.
I have actually been listening to The Firebird every Sunday, or at least every other Sunday, for 3 or 4 months now. My daughter is absolutely crazy about a DVD we have of the ballet, so we've made watching it a sort of Sunday ritual.
(So that means 4 people listening to the whole ballet and watching it on a regular basis. ;D)
Quote from: mn dave on October 28, 2008, 08:44:33 AM
Why are you using quotes?
"What was that part in the middle again?"
Quote from: mn dave on October 28, 2008, 08:33:25 AM
I've never been a big Stravinsky fan. Though the "hits" are fun sometimes.
I used to think the hits were the only true Stravinsky worth listening to, but I've since discovered how blatantly wrong I was. Stravinsky, throught his entire career, kept writing some immensely great and important works, and this is something that is sadly not appreciated by a great many people.
Quote from: Norbeone on October 28, 2008, 10:02:33 AM
I used to think the hits were the only true Stravinsky worth listening to, but I've since discovered how blatantly wrong I was. Stravinsky, throught his entire career, kept writing some immensely great and important works, and this is something that is sadly not appreciated by a great many people.
I seldom listen to his "hits" anymore. His true masterpieces lies elsewhere, this composer has so much to offer in areas most of the public is largely unaware of.
So far I have listened to the hits, mainly, but not just the big 3 ballets. It wouldn't surprise me if Stravinsky went through a period of relative neglect compared to his exalted status in the mid 20th century (as my "Golden Age"-dominated recording collection shows). His status as the revolutionary who could attract many concert-goers who don't like revolutionaries puts him in a special place, so I think he will be back.
(http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/4458/clipboard01jv2.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)
Well it's not completely inarguable that Shostakovich' rise in the public view the last twenty years or so has done some harm to composers like Stravinsky and Prokofiev. Compared to Shostakovich these composers seem to wear their hearts less on their sleeve. That's why the most frequently heard Stravinsky works are from the early, Russian period: these works sound more visceral.
However, if you want to hear Stravinsky live on a regular basis, beautiful works like Apollo Musagete, Agon, Violin Concerto and many others, it really helps if you share Stravinsky's love for the neo-classical ballet, 'cause that's where these works are being played all the time.
Quote from: Two-Tone on November 03, 2008, 10:12:54 PM
That is not "classical" music... ::)
That's another discussion; though one notes that you cast
classical in scare-quotes . . . which partly underscores the point.
Quote from: HermanHowever, if you want to hear Stravinsky live on a regular basis, beautiful works like Apollo Musagete, Agon, Violin Concerto and many others, it really helps if you share Stravinsky's love for the neo-classical ballet, 'cause that's where these works are being played all the time.
Curious that this is the case even for the
Violin Concerto, which (I thought, and notwithstanding the fact that
Balanchine adopted it with excellent results on stage)
Stravinsky wrote for a concert work.
You can't beat those savage, pounding chords which open the Symphony in Three Movements :) :) First heard it when it was used as the introductory music for a serial on steam radio back in the early 1960s-put the fear of death into me ;D
Quote from: Dundonnell on November 04, 2008, 04:09:20 AM
You can't beat those savage, punding chords which open the Symphony in Three Movements
Tremendous piece to hear live. I heard it once in Chicago, Boulez conducting, and I was sitting in my favorite spot
behind the orchestra...the opening sounded like a bomb going off beneath my feet.
Quote from: Spitvalve on November 04, 2008, 05:02:14 AM
Tremendous piece to hear live.
Aye, it is. Heard it played by the Clevelanders at the Blossom Music Center.
Quote from: Spitvalve on November 04, 2008, 05:02:14 AM
Tremendous piece to hear live. I heard it once in Chicago, Boulez conducting, and I was sitting in my favorite spot behind the orchestra...the opening sounded like a bomb going off beneath my feet.
Why is behind the orchestra your favorite spot?
Quote from: karlhenning on November 04, 2008, 03:21:16 AM
Curious that this is the case even for the Violin Concerto, which (I thought, and notwithstanding the fact that Balanchine adopted it with excellent results on stage) Stravinsky wrote for a concert work.
Well, hasn't there been a terrible attrition in the concerto repertoire the past 25 years? Even in a sophisticated place like Amsterdam piano soloists rarely stray from the Beethoven, Mozart, Schumann, Brahms warhorses, and you can hear the Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Beethoven violin concerto pretty much on a weekly basis. All those other equally (or often even more) beautiful concertos by Stravinsky, Walton and countless others are rarely programmed.
Some time ago the very much hyped violinista Janine Jansen performed the Britten concerto, and much of the promo copy seemed geared to help people getting used to her playing something as unusual as that.
Me, actually.
I have downloaded Rattle's recording of the three symphonies to iPod where they will join Nagano's 'Persephone.'
However, although the Symphony in 3 movements and of Psalms are a couple of my favourites I do struggle to like the Symphony in C. :(
The Symphony in C hasn't captured me the way that the Symphony in Three Movements or the Symphony in Psalms has (or the way much else in Stravinsky's oeuvre has) . . . but I'm going to try it again.
Quote from: Catison on November 04, 2008, 06:20:38 AM
Why is behind the orchestra your favorite spot?
First, for the visual advantages. I can see the conductor from the front and observe the interplay of the orchestra more easily. Second, for the visceral impact and closeness of the sound.
Quote from: karlhenning on November 04, 2008, 06:42:34 AM
The Symphony in C hasn't captured me the way that the Symphony in Three Movements or the Symphony in Psalms has
That was true for me for a while, until I sat down and tried to make sense of it. I think my initial problem is that it's a classical-style symphony which doesn't necessarily behave like one - for instance, that drawn-out, inconclusive ending (actually the whole finale is kind of confusing and episodic on first listen).
Quote from: Herman on November 04, 2008, 06:34:38 AM
Well, hasn't there been a terrible attrition in the concerto repertoire the past 25 years?
And before the last 25 years - was the situation much better than it is now? My impression (nothing but an impression, no evidence, sorry) is that this is the way things have been for quite a long time.
Quote from: Spitvalve on November 04, 2008, 07:54:52 AM
And before the last 25 years - was the situation much better than it is now?
I think the repertoire was not as slim as it is now.
Peter Serkin playing the premiere of Wuorinen's Fourth Concerto did feel like an unusual event, and not for the mere fact of its being a premiere . . . .
Quote from: karlhenning on November 04, 2008, 12:08:23 PM
Peter Serkin playing the premiere of Wuorinen's Fourth Concerto did feel like an unusual event, and not for the mere fact of its being a premiere . . . .
Of course that's an unusual event. I wasn't even talking about new, contemporary music (most of which gets a couple of performances and then it's over), but concertos that should be considered as 20th century classics.
Quote from: Herman on November 05, 2008, 01:44:20 AM
Of course that's an unusual event. I wasn't even talking about new, contemporary music (most of which gets a couple of performances and then it's over), but concertos that should be considered as 20th century classics.
Understood. In the case of this piece, my opinion is that on musical merits it has the legs to become a classic; but the environment is a question . . . and as you rightly observe, when the program says "world premiere," it tends to mean "final performance."
Quote from: Spitvalve on November 04, 2008, 07:51:34 AM
Quote from: karlhenningThe Symphony in C hasn't captured me the way that the Symphony in Three Movements or the Symphony in Psalms has
That was true for me for a while, until I sat down and tried to make sense of it. I think my initial problem is that it's a classical-style symphony which doesn't necessarily behave like one - for instance, that drawn-out, inconclusive ending (actually the whole finale is kind of confusing and episodic on first listen).
I don't think it was the ending that tripped me up earlier (I might not have made it that far my first couple of listens). Now, that last movement is one of the things I love best about the piece . . .
Stravinsky's trademark 'timeless' coda emerging out of energetic symphonism . . . .
I listened recently to the 'Symphony of Psalms' which came with BBC Music Magazine. This is possibly my favourite work by Stravinsky alongside The Rite of Spring, Firebird and Apollo.
I'd still have to rank Les Noces as his masterwork.
For some reason, I used to need to listen to the middle movement of the Ebony Concerto whenever I got dumped. Something about the sour and moody feel would speak to me. The ending is also real strong. One of his best.
(the obvious early ballets are an obvious choice. There is nothing I love more than the Firebird, and Le Sacre is hard to turn down. I must admit that Petrushka doesn't move me as much).
I like his stuff in the Early 20s a lot-- the Octet, Symphonies for Wind, and Piano Concerto. Get into the later 20s and a different story. the Fairy's Kiss bores me, and Apollo is tough to sit through, although the last minute or so is brilliant. Ihave the last couple minutes as a separate track on my mp3 player.
I'd have to rank the Symphony of Psalms and last movement of Dumbarton Oaks as faves.
The Tango is a nice.
And I really like Agon. I think it is one of the coolest 12 tone forays I've ever heard.
I would also rank the 45 Symphony over the one in C, which I never really got, either.
Oh! The Nightingale! Definitely a winner!
One of the tradeoffs of someone like Stravinsky who was compelled to invent new styles is that you get some transitional works that are neither fish nor foul.
Quote from: jowcol on November 07, 2008, 02:49:13 PM
I'd still have to rank Les Noces as his masterwork.
All the versions with the different instrumentations truly makes this a fascinating work to dwelve into, I agree. Personally I rank many of his short miniatures highly, but right now the focus is all on the Octet. There is simply no end to the musical complexities and details to discover in that piece...
Gee, I listen to Stravinsky a lot!! He's one of my two favorite composers (Haydn's the other).
And judging by all the chatter last year, when the 22 CD Stravinsky conducts Stravinsky box came on sale, he's a favorite of a lot of folks here.
I recently listened to Stravinsky's Violin Concerto. Rarely performed and with good reason, in my opinion. Too esoteric relative to his better known works.
Well, it would be a dull world if all violin concerti sounded like Mendelssohn.
Quote from: Living_Stradivarius on November 09, 2008, 10:00:09 AM
I recently listened to Stravinsky's Violin Concerto. Rarely performed and with good reason, in my opinion. Too esoteric relative to his better known works.
well, give it another listen or two, and you'll find it gets less esoteric every time.
it's a gem.
Stravinsky Violin Concerto is a lovely piece. I got to know it from a recording with Ivry Gitlis as the soloist (Hindemith Violin Concerto on the other side). Very peculiar tone that violinist had, but somehow that made the music sound all the more distinctive. There are no doubt better recordings out there, in fact I have one of them come to think of it. Arthur Grumiaux is the soloist.
I heard it performed live by the Atlanta Symphony (I think) with Ruth Posselt as soloist (I'm not certain here; I may be totally wrong on both counts) in 1971 in a huge hall that dissipated the delicate sound of the orchestration. As a Stravinsky fanatic, I was thrilled just the same.
Yes, the violin concerto is a great work. I have recordings by Mullova (Philips) and Kyung-Wha Chung (Decca).
Can't understand the hostility.
Quote from: Mark G. Simon on November 09, 2008, 02:42:51 PM
Stravinsky Violin Concerto is a lovely piece. I got to know it from a recording with Ivry Gitlis as the soloist (Hindemith Violin Concerto on the other side). Very peculiar tone that violinist had...
Still alive, still performing and I should hear him in about two weeks playing Chausson and Saint-Saens. I'm very curious to hear if that gurgling tone of his is still there.
Quote from: Herman on November 09, 2008, 11:56:26 AM
well, give it another listen or two, and you'll find it gets less esoteric every time.
it's a gem.
I agree, and when seen in the Balanchine choreography it acquires a whole new dimension. (Easily available on one of the Nonesuch DVDs, danced by NYCB greats like Peter Martins, Kay Mazzo, and Karin von Aroldigen.) Hardly esoteric either, if anything a representative and fairly easily digested example of Stravinsky's neo-classic style in the period that culminated in The Rake's Progress. I would say that you want a truly "esoteric" work of Stravinsky's, my prime candidate would be Threni - a piece that after some 40 years still seems to me austere, strange, and impenetrable to a degree matched by nothing else in his output.
I listened to the Violin Cto last night, the only version I could find at that time, Perlman, Barenboim, CSO (other ones turned up this morning), and it's just such marvellous, mysterious music.
BTW one thing to keep in mind with the Nonesuch DVD is that Balanchine had adapted the choreography to suit the tv-representation. All the action is strangely oriented towards the camera. Nowadays people don't do this anymore, but in the sixties and seventies this was a hip idea.
Quote from: karlhenning on November 04, 2008, 06:42:34 AM
The Symphony in C hasn't captured me the way that the Symphony in Three Movements or the Symphony in Psalms has (or the way much else in Stravinsky's oeuvre has) . . . but I'm going to try it again.
Likewise. It pays dividends to persist I find.
Somwhat on topic, here's an article I just wrote about an upcoming perfromance of another one of my favorites:
By Joe Barron
Staff Writer
"A Soldier's Tale," Igor Stravinsky's low-rent traveling show, is a protean masterwork. It may be performed as pure, abstract music in the composer's 25-minute concert suite, as a fully staged theater piece with actors, dancers and sets, or in any one of a number of intermediate forms.
While the music works wonderfully by itself, the spoken libretto — written in French but usually performed in the language of the audience — gives it greater emotional and illustrative power, and in the 90 years since the work's premiere, an optimal version with a single narrator has evolved. It is this version the Curtis Institute of Music will present at Cheltenham High School Nov. 18.
Curtis students will make up the seven-piece band called for in his score, and David Ludwig, a member of the Curtis composition faculty, will provide both the narration and the voices of the work's two characters — the solder of the title and the devil. With the tryout in Cheltenham under their belts, the young musicians will take the work on tour as part of Curtis' outreach program.
"I think they've definitely chosen students who are outstanding," Ludwig said last week. "These are the students who are going to represent the school in Maine, in Seattle, all over. Every student at that school is up to playing anything we put in front of them, and not just in theory."
Ludwig's presence onstage Nov. 18 continues another tradition that has grown up around the piece — that of casting composers in the stage roles. Such eminences as Aaron Copland, Elliott Carter, Milton Babbitt and John Cage have all taken part in staged readings of the piece, paying homage to the Holy Ghost of 20th century music.
"If you're a composer today, it's hard to not count Stravinsky as one of your influences," Ludwig said. "It's in everything. It's taken all of us in different ways."
In another, more explicit homage, Ludwig is writing a piece with the same instrumentation as "A Soldier's Tale," to be performed on the Curtis concert tour (though not at Cheltenham High).
When he first heard the piece in the early 1920s, the Danish composer Carl Nielsen, who was only 17 years older than Stravinsky, objected to its lean, vibrato-less textures in a striking metaphor. "The human body is equally unattractive to me when it is too fat and when the skeleton is clearly visible," he said. But Nielsen overlooked the muscle, and besides, Stravinsky's scoring is a model of small-color coloration. He calls for one high and one low instrument from each of the three major instrumental groups — violin and bass, clarinet and bassoon, trumpet and trombone — and a single percussionist whose prominent role is unprecedented in the history of chamber music. Stravinsky had discovered jazz during the First World War, and he once likened his little orchestra to a jazz band with the bassoon subbing for a saxophone.
"For sure, it's definitely a landmark piece for a percussionist," Ben Folk, the drummer in the Nov. 18 performance, said in a telephone interview Nov. 3. "It definitely has a very strong voice. The ending is unique: He ends the piece with percussion. With the narration, it works beautifully. The soldier marching away. The devil dances."
Even though he gets the last word, Folk said his favorite part of the score is the tango, which allows him to perform a duet with violinist Josef Špacek. He has laid out his instruments in a way, he said, that requires him to cross his hands frequently during the three-minute section.
"I feel like I'm dancing with the violinist when I play it," he said.
At a basic, symbolic level, the tango presents the contrast between the devil and the soldier in its starkest terms. The percussionist plays the devil's music throughout the work, and the violin represents of the soldier's soul. In the first half, the devil purchases the soldier's fiddle with a book that can predict the future. In the second, the soldier wins the fiddle back by purposely losing to the devil at cards.
Stravinsky and his librettist, the Swiss writer C.F. Ramuz, based the narrative on a series of Russian folk tales. The soldier's name is Joseph — Joe the Soldier, in the parlance of the election just past. He is well meaning enough, but weak-willed and just a little dim. A well times suggestion from the narrator allows him to hold out against the devil's trickery, but in the end he forgets himself and is led off to hell.
"Ultimately, it's sort of dark and nihilistic," Ludwig said. "The devil is a classic character that appears later in [Stravinsky's opera] 'The Rake's Progress.' He's crafty and conniving. Not a being of pure evil, but a trickster."
Stravinsky, too, is a trickster, and in this score, a delightful one. Besides the tango, he has included a dizzy little waltz, an American rag scarcely recognizable as such, a hint of "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God," and a royal march in which, though some kind of musical alchemy, he manages to make his small ensemble sound like a full brass band.
For all of its macabre playfulness, however, the score also contains, in the little section marked "Pastorale," the loveliest music Stravinsky wrote after "The Firebird."
It's safe to say Stravinsky isn't heard very often in Montgomery County, and "A Soldier's Tale" promises to be the most memorable musical event of the year out here in the suburbs.
Schoenberg?
OK, R Craft. But have just read S Walsh's two volume Stravinsky biography and fail to see the devil in him.....
Quote from: ' on November 11, 2008, 12:41:39 PM
fear of litigation'
No...probablys just stupidity, but I'm willing to be educated.
Quote from: ' on November 11, 2008, 12:46:04 PM
Don't understand your comment. Stupidity on whose part?'
Thoughty that was I clear as I fail to see the devil in him and am willing to be educated. So please tell.....
Thanks. Most interesting!
Quote from: ' on November 11, 2008, 03:01:51 PM
Walsh showed the discretion (perhaps partly driven by that fear of litigation) to choose to write a book about Stravinsky, rather than a book that put Craft at the center.'
The key there, I think, is as simple as the fact that the book
is about
Stravinsky; that the literature needs good biography of
Stravinsky. Leave it to Time to see whether there is any need for a book about
Craft.
Quote from: karlhenning on November 12, 2008, 04:52:22 AM
Leave it to Time to see whether there is any need for a book about Craft.
The low demand for the several that Craft has written [about himself] may be an indication. I am amused that one is so aptly titled "An Improbable Life."'
The "if you build it they will come" theory of literature.
!bump!
Stravinsky is noted in all the scholarly tomes of music history as "The Bach of the 20th Century." (That regard is for the entire body of his work, not just the first three ballets.) That is no little thing in the measure of esteem he is held in -- as compared to the esteem given other great composers.
Maybe a poll here would show how how much of Stravinsky's oeuvre with which the members are well-familiar. I would not be surprised to find that more than just a few members here know of, and occasionally listen to, any number of Stravinsky works other than the first three ballets, lol.
I've found very little not to like throughout his entire oeuvre, (so much of it, imo, masterpieces, both small and large) and do listen to his works -- from throughout his career -- with some regularity.
Perhaps like Bach, he will fall into relative obscurity for eighty years, unknown to the general public but constantly well-known to all musicians.
If anything, his neoclassical scores and late period serial works are presented more often than they use to be. The Symphony of Psalms is often performed, Oedipus Rex gets concert presentations often enough, as well as the Symphony in C; The Rake's Progress is regularly performed in opera houses throughout the world. The violin concerto is more widely performed now than ever before.
I don't think 'he will go away,' either in the concert hall or later music performances, and his 'place' there, and in music history, is pretty well set.
There is this true and cynical fact: not long ago, performances, new recordings, air play of first Ravel then Debussy, started coming along with a regularity and frequency unprecedented in the immediately preceding years. The works had entered public domain = no more performance royalty fees. This is a truly basic "Do the math" proposition to figure out what went on there.
Don't base popularity solely on current programming, then. It would be more than a little mistake to do so. (As already stated, more, and a variety of his music, is what is now happening on concert programs, not less.) Newer recorded performances and Record sales in general might better show more of the how much and what of Stravinsky is still 'consumed.'
Concerto in D for string orchestra
https://www.youtube.com/v/YmS0fUASrW8
https://www.youtube.com/v/p6Yq3B5Nd_E
As the music of the earlier 20th century composers enters the realm of public domain, that is when it will start popping up all over the place.
Best regards.
Well, whenever they get the recently re-discovered work of his corrected and published, then performed, things should definitely be given a shot in the ol' arm.
This ol' thread may have fallen into disuse, simply because a reasonable sub-population of GMGers do, in fact, listen . . . two of them, not presently active: Ray (Chamber Nut) and John (Mirror Image).
Although my ears are presently in a mild Stravinsky drought 8) his music was an early and an enduring influence on my composition. Even when not listening to his work, I think about it all the time . . . I've been listening to Prokofiev's Le pas d'acier, and although in (I think) the liner notes to the Jurowski CD Taruskin is referred to as saying that it borrows from Le sacre, I've been inclined to contest that, I just hear too much in the Prokofiev which is indeed characteristic of himself.
Quote from: Ugh! on October 28, 2008, 06:07:33 AM
A related question, then, is: whose stocks are on the rise (among classical composers)?
Corigliano?? his works are being recorded, performed...
Quote from: Monsieur Croche on September 12, 2016, 07:01:36 PM
https://www.youtube.com/v/YmS0fUASrW8
https://www.youtube.com/v/p6Yq3B5Nd_E
A great many scores by
Игорь Фëдорович won me over immediately. But the
Concerto in D is a piece (another is
The Rake's Progress) which I appreciated only later.
Quote from: karlhenning on September 13, 2016, 05:14:50 AM
A great many scores by Игорь Фëдорович won me over immediately. But the Concerto in D is a piece (another is The Rake's Progress) which I appreciated only later.
Interesting comment. After more than35 years of admiring
Igor Feodorvich's work (he ranks very,
very high in my own personal pantheon of composers), I still really haven't learned to appreciate either one of the two pieces you mention in your post,
Karl. And, suprisingly, my lack of apprecaition for the
Rake only
increased after seeing the opera live (conducted by the late
Christopher Hogwood, no less). I've almost given up on these pieces, I must confess...
I prefer his other Concerto in D Major, for violin and orchestra.
;)
Even though the original post was 8 years ago, I guess I missed it then. I certainly listen to Stravinsky: he is on my short list of greatest of the 20th century, and I try to hear his major works (e.g., the ballets) at least once or twice a year, just to be reminded of their brilliance.
Looking forward to hearing Dudamel and the Orquesta Sinfónica Simón Bolívar do a couple of them in a few weeks.
PS, that Threni recording going around looks great. Adding it to the (impossibly large) to-hear pile.
--Bruce
Quote from: karlhenning on September 13, 2016, 01:34:38 AM
. . . I've been listening to Prokofiev's Le pas d'acier, and although in (I think) the liner notes to the Jurowski CD Taruskin is referred to as saying that it borrows from Le sacre, I've been inclined to contest that, I just hear too much in the Prokofiev which is indeed characteristic of himself.
Yes, I have read that same claim elsewhere, which seems to be a cliche' by now. One might make that comment in reference to
Seven, They Are Seven, although also with difficulty.
One could change the title here to "Who Actually Listens To
Late Stravinsky?" I am old enough to recall the excitement - and the controversy - in the 1960's whenever a new
Stravinsky work came out.
Requiem Canticles was particularly significant: and if one cannot hear the old
Stravinsky of
Le Sacre and
Les Noces then one should pay closer attention! 0:)
Complaints about the static nature of the work, claims that the work (and others from the same period) were more from the pen of
Robert Craft than
Stravinsky, claims that the master had lost his way in Post-Webernian serialism, etc. were abundant.
I have a sense that the late works still suffer from those complaints and claims, and are ignored in favor of the earlier compositions.
https://www.youtube.com/v/2cFwu196A_w
Quote from: Cato on September 13, 2016, 08:23:04 AM
Complaints about the static nature of the work, claims that the work (and others from the same period) were more from the pen of Robert Craft than Stravinsky, claims that the master had lost his way in Post-Webernian serialism, etc. were abundant.
I have a sense that the late works still suffer from those complaints and claims, and are ignored in favor of the earlier compositions.
Claims which could be put to rest if one were to simply read what Stravinsky said and wrote during the last two decades of his life (1951 was when
The Rakes Progress debuted, and was his last non-serial composition. One could argue that as early as 1947 he had begun a stylistic shift in his private studies). From 1954-1968 was one of his most prolific periods, when he wrote a group of large works, all using essentially the same serial-ish style.
His was a deliberate and serious change in his process which was entirely his own, as were the works.
Quote from: Brewski on September 13, 2016, 07:33:12 AMthat Threni recording going around looks great. Adding it to the (impossibly large) to-hear pile.
I recently wrote a review of it. Believe the hype, that disc is GOOD: https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R9VAZ0EEP1WD6/
Quote from: Mahlerian on September 13, 2016, 08:40:24 AM
I recently wrote a review of it. Believe the hype, that disc is GOOD: https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R9VAZ0EEP1WD6/
Wow, excellent! Speaking as a professional writer, that is a quite well-written review. Thanks much.
--Bruce
Quote from: Heck148 on September 13, 2016, 05:06:56 AM
Corigliano?? his works are being recorded, performed...
:'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'(
Quote from: Brewski on September 13, 2016, 08:50:24 AM
Wow, excellent! Speaking as a professional writer, that is a quite well-written review. Thanks much.
--Bruce
Many thanks. If I've helped convince you to move it up in that to-hear pile, my review will have done its duty.
I find this thread title profoundly confusing ???
Quote from: sanantonio on September 13, 2016, 08:39:45 AM
Claims which could be put to rest if one were to simply read what Stravinsky said and wrote during the last two decades of his life (1951 was when The Rakes Progress debuted, and was his last non-serial composition. One could argue that as early as 1947 he had begun a stylistic shift in his private studies). From 1954-1968 was one of his most prolific periods, when he wrote a group of large works, all using essentially the same serial-ish style.
His was a deliberate and serious change in his process which was entirely his own, as were the works.
There is also the evidence of one's ears if you are familiar with much of the rest of Stravinsky. The serial works sound "too much like Stravinsky" to have been composed by anyone else: they have his musical fingerprints and DNA all over them, the motor habits, the choice of intervals, the harmonies, all.
(I make one exception from that later body of work, his Variations for Piano and Orchestra sounds like a really fine composer wanting to get one up on ole Anton, i.e. out-Webern Webern :-)If you've got ears, used them in having listened to a fair amount of Stravinsky up through the neoclassical period, there is no doubt as to who wrote his serial works.
Quote from: ritter on September 13, 2016, 06:07:45 AM
my lack of apprecaition for the Rake only increased after seeing the opera live (conducted by the late Christopher Hogwood, no less). I've almost given up on these pieces, I must confess...
What ugliness! :P
I wonder, have you ever disagreed with Boulez or was he simply right all the time?
I don't, any music of his I have heard just sounds awful. I don't even think the Rite of Spring is very good.
Quote from: calyptorhynchus on September 13, 2016, 03:47:44 PM
I don't, any music of his I have heard just sounds awful. I don't even think the Rite of Spring is very good.
This is all very well that his music may sound awful to your ears. What works have you heard that have influenced you to arrive at this opinion?
Quote from: Monsieur Croche on September 13, 2016, 02:23:21 PM
There is also the evidence of one's ears if you are familiar with much of the rest of Stravinsky. The serial works sound "too much like Stravinsky" to have been composed by anyone else: they have his musical fingerprints and DNA all over them, the motor habits, the choice of intervals, the harmonies, all.
If you've got ears, used them in having listened to a fair amount of Stravinsky up through the neoclassical period, there is no doubt as to who wrote his serial works.
Plus, there is the matter of the man's pride and character: Would
STRAVINSKY really let somebody else compose - or even help him compose - anything and then put his own name,
STRAVINSKY, on it?
From what I have read of and by
Stravinsky throughout the decades, I would say no.
I don't so much as listen to Stravinsky, really; rather, his music informs my entire being.
Quote from: karlhenning on September 13, 2016, 05:14:50 AM
A great many scores by Игорь Фëдорович won me over immediately.
Ditto
QuoteBut the Concerto in D is a piece (another is The Rake's Progress) which I appreciated only later.
Ditto again, mainly for
Rake, although at this point I can't say for certain whether I'll ever be completely won over by the work. It's sublime in places but the gaps separating the sublime bits can seem interminable, although, admittedly, waiting out the gaps is
always worth it!
But what I wouldn't give for the sublime bits to be strung closer together...
Quote from: Abuelo Igor on September 13, 2016, 03:00:35 PM
I wonder, have you ever disagreed with Boulez...?
Very seldom, but there's been the odd occasion... 8)
But really, whatever Boulez might have said about the
Rake or the
Concerto in D was nowhere near my mind when I wrote my comment or when I saw the
Rake live (actually, I don't reacll having read anything specific by Boulez on these pieces). And, as you can see in this thread, I'm not alone as far as my opinion on these two pieces is concerned. There are several neoclassical Stravinsky pieces I enjoy a lot (
Dumbarton Oaks, the
Danses concertantes,
Pulcinella, the
Violin concerto...), but the "tail end" of his neo-classical period leaves me cold. ¡
Qué se le va a hacer! Good for you if you like them... ;)
Your "what ugliness" remark baffles me... ???
Regards,
Quote from: calyptorhynchus on September 13, 2016, 03:47:44 PM
I don't, any music of his I have heard just sounds awful. I don't even think the Rite of Spring is very good.
Stravinsky's music is highly diverse; it encompasses rather different sound worlds. Already the three famous balletts are all different from each other. Firebird close to Rimsky and Debussy, Petrushka a collage of all kinds of stuff, Le Sacre establishing the "barbaric" style. But then the Soldier's tale is a completely different soundworld, the Symphony of Psalms another one. Than we have the lucid neobaroque of e.g "Dumbarton Oaks" and so on.
True, some pieces, above all the three early balletts are far better known than others. But the whole oeuvre is so diverse that one cannot really tell much from sampling e.g. only those balletts.
Quote from: Scion7 on September 12, 2016, 08:39:06 PM
Well, whenever they get the recently re-discovered work of his corrected and published, then performed, things should definitely be given a shot in the ol' arm.
You mean the
Funeral Song in memory of Rimsky-Korsakov? It's over a year now since it was discovered, and no sign of a performance/recording. It's supposed to be 12 minutes long, so I can't imagine that reconstructing the lost score from the parts is too big a job. Lack of money/will/interest, perhaps?
With late Stravinsky, surely some of the problem regarding (non-)performance is caused by the, shall we say, imaginative instrumental requirements.
In Memoriam Dylan Thomas: voice, string quartet and four trombones;
Elegy for JFK: voice and 3 clarinets;
Three Shakespeare Songs: voice, flute, clarinet, viola; the
Cantata (perhaps my all-time favourite Stravinsky piece): 2 vocal soloists, female chorus, 2 flutes, 2 oboes and cello. Sadly, very sadly, they're just awkward to fit into concert programmes.
Quote from: ritter on September 13, 2016, 11:06:25 PM
Your "what ugliness" remark baffles me... ???
It is supposed to be Pierre's remark on the
Rake première, as reported on a letter to John Cage. It is out there on Google somewhere...
Of course I am not entirely serious when I imply that you shape your opinons around whatever Boulez might have said on a particular musical subject, but, in my experience, whenever you don't like something French, for example, it can usually be traced to a statement by the man. I recall being surprised when an avowed Francophile like you expressed an open disdain for Poulenc's music. I did a little research to see if Pierre ever said anything about that composer, and there it was. Same for
Turangalila, which, if you only read this forum, would turn out to be the worst thing that Messiaen ever wrote. ;)
As for not being alone in one's opinion, well, I suppose that several people can be wrong together, including myself.
Sorry if I'm a little touchy on this subject, but, back in the days when I actually had personal contact with classical music lovers, I had to swallow a lot of contempt for Stravinsky from trendy "I only like the contemporary stuff" types who said that Igor had completely sold out from the 1920s onwards and that works like the
Violin Concerto were worth nothing. I suppose that the neoclassical period kind of threatened the post-Darmstadt world view, which is ironic considering the little attention Stravinsky's final works get from the same set of people.
As for
The Rake, the first act can be a little tough going, but after that I think it's fun. I attended that same performance and I have good memories of it, and not only because I took a girl to the dress rehearsal and she liked it...
I have limited experiences as an amateur.
The Stravinsky work I have performed the most is the Symphony of Psalms. It is very popular among community choirs.
Quote from: arpeggio on September 14, 2016, 02:19:42 AM
I have limited experiences as an amateur.
The Stravinsky work I have performed the most is the Symphony of Psalms. It is very popular among community choirs.
Deservedly so! A magnificent piece, marvelous scoring, and choral writing which is expert, gratifying, and gorgeous.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
I love the ending when the contra plays that low pedal C.
I quite like this moment in the third movement:
https://www.youtube.com/v/pbX3XXJrG-4
Quote from: arpeggio on September 14, 2016, 03:34:34 AM
I love the ending when the contra plays that low pedal C.
There are, to my ears, five dozen Perfect Moments like that in
Stravinsky, absolutely musical magic.
Lately, I love these two (from his late, serial period):
-Epitaphium:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uecxpgM44k4
-Abraham and Issac for Baritone and Orchestra:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wawoCDQDKMI
Quote from: Abuelo Igor on September 14, 2016, 01:15:51 AM
I I recall being surprised when an avowed Francophile like you expressed an open disdain for Poulenc's music.
Mmmm...you're talking to the man who opened a thread on
Reynaldo Hahn... 8)
Thanks for your detailed response, but let's not derail this
Stravinsky thread into yet another
Boulez discussion. I might reply to you in detail in a more appropriate thread (particularlly, as some books I've read recently include some gratuitous Boulez-bashing that I'd like to address).
As for the
Rake, those perfomances you and I attended made my dislike (perhaps that's too strong a word) increase, as I've already said. And I partially blame
Robert Lepage for this, as the circus aesthetics of his staging is particularly alien to me. In any case, I do not find the
Rake ugly (I think none of good old Igor Fyodorich's music is ugly at all), but simply bland and boring. And yet, as
Dancing Divertimentian points out, there are some very inspired moments (for instance, Anne's lullaby towards the end), but not enough to justify a full-length opera. And I've come to this position after many years of living with Stravinsky's oeuvre, including times when I had a much higher opinion of the
Rake.
This might be seen as a cliché, but I think that at that point in time (late 40s) Stravinsky had exhausted what he had to say in that style, had reached a point of stagantion, and could only escape from it by embracing serialism (fortunately for us, as we can now enjoy all the wonderful late works).
Regards,
I don't know if it has been mentioned (probably is known to most here, but anyway) regarding Stravinsky's last period, this book is an indispensable guide for the serious listener:
[asin]0521602882[/asin]
Quote from: sanantonio on September 14, 2016, 06:03:12 AM
I don't know if it has been mentioned (probably is known to most here, but anyway) regarding Stravinsky's last period, this book is an indispensable guide for the serious listener:
[asin]0521602882[/asin]
Very nice!
QuoteMore recently, of course, serialism's star, never very high, has fallen into almost total eclipse, and Stravinsky's late music has suffered the same neglect as other serial works from the 1950s and 1960s. As a result, to paraphrase Millton Babbitt's quip about Schoenberg, Stravinsky's late music was never in fashion, and now it is neglected as old-fashioned.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on October 28, 2008, 06:22:04 AM
No one is on the rise. Classical music is being marginalized with each passing generation.
I believe there may be a systemic problem in the US at least. There is a great deal of pressure for new music (some of which is very fine), and thus time must be made for these new works. We barely have the audience to support the number of concerts that exist at present, so it is unlikely that more performances in any given season will be possible. As a result, there is a longer time span between the playing of works by any composer (even Beethoven!) and it is getting more difficult to get concert performances of great but less "popular" works. This includes Stravinsky beyond the 3 famous ballets.
Q: Who listens to Stravinsky?
A: People who like his music.
Pretty simple. :P
He's faring better than Hindemith, who largely has already been forgotten >:( If in the interwar period, Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Bartok and Hindemith were the 'big four' names, Stravinsky's really not doing too badly, probably only lagging behind Bartok.
Hindemith's wonderful organ works are very rarely mentioned anywhere these days...
Quote from: Androcles on October 16, 2016, 01:32:11 PM
He's faring better than Hindemith, who largely has already been forgotten >:( If in the interwar period, Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Bartok and Hindemith were the 'big four' names, Stravinsky's really not doing too badly, probably only lagging behind Bartok.
You've left Ravel out whose music is still very much a concert staple and, no, I'm not referring to
Bolero. ;D Also, Janacek and Strauss were producing some of their most remarkable music between the wars and even they are performed and recorded more often than Hindemith.
Weill, Krenek and Eisler from that 'between the wars' period are barely performed apart from maybe a song here or there. Amazing cultural heaven coming out of Weimar in that time!
I think Strawinsky has written some marvelous music but the point is that his music is not always on this high level. For example "Apollon musagette" contains some really marvelous music which I love and on the other hand alot of music which I think is pretty boring. Le sacre on the hand is a "sensation" piece, very impressive if you listen to it for the first time but not the right piece for repeated listening. The firebird ballet is not heard very often, instead of this the suite.
I would say that the question "Who actually listens to Strawinsky" is wrongly asked. I think, most people who listen to classical music will know Strawinsky. He is somebody well known. But I assume that for many people who heard some of Strawinskys works, he becomes less important when they listen to more music. That means: Bach or Haydn for example can occupy you all your lifetime. But I doubt very much that this is the case with Strawinsky. At least this is my point of view.
Quote from: Martin Lind on October 17, 2016, 09:17:32 PM
I think Strawinsky has written some marvelous music but the point is that his music is not always on this high level. For example "Apollon musagette" contains some really marvelous music which I love and on the other hand alot of music which I think is pretty boring. Le sacre on the hand is a "sensation" piece, very impressive if you listen to it for the first time but not the right piece for repeated listening. The firebird ballet is not heard very often, instead of this the suite.
I would say that the question "Who actually listens to Strawinsky" is wrongly asked. I think, most people who listen to classical music will know Strawinsky. He is somebody well known. But I assume that for many people who heard some of Strawinskys works, he becomes less important when they listen to more music. That means: Bach or Haydn for example can occupy you all your lifetime. But I doubt very much that this is the case with Strawinsky. At least this is my point of view.
I think the exact opposite. But then again I listen to the Rite on a regular basis (because the sensation is far from the most important part of it), find Apollo sublime throughout, and always prefer the Firebird ballet score to the suites. Stravinsky wrote so much music of such great quality that he is certainly comparable to a Bach or a Haydn or a Mozart. Just digging in to some less well-known corner, like the Concerto for Two Pianos or his chamber arrangements of the works for string quartet, yields riches on a high level.
Of the first half of the 20th century, Stravinsky, Schoenberg, and Bartok were the foremost composers in quality and breadth of oeuvre, and despite his relatively greater prominence, often Stravinsky isn't any better understood than Schoenberg.
The Concerto for two pianos is magnificent.
I think anyone with a large and varied oeuvre will have many many works which rarely get performed or recorded, so by spending more and more time listening to every work by a composer like Haydn might be just as rewarding as listening to every work by Stravinsky.
Quote from: Mirror Image on October 16, 2016, 03:36:23 PM
You've left Ravel out whose music is still very much a concert staple and, no, I'm not referring to Bolero. ;D Also, Janacek and Strauss were producing some of their most remarkable music between the wars and even they are performed and recorded more often than Hindemith.
I think I include those four on the list as they would have been seen as the major 'progressive' composers at the time. Hindemith was sufficiently prominent to be violently attacked by Hitler, for example. His earlier Neo-Classical music and also works like the Ludus Tonalis would have been seen as quite important, I think.
Undoubtedly there are others from the period who have now come to be seen as more important - perhaps Janacek, but also maybe Martinu, Prokofiev and Shostakovich. Ives, Berg, Webern and Varese have probably had more influence on post WW2 music than any of Bartok, Schoenberg, Stravinsky or Hindemith, but at the time they were writing, I think they would have been seen as somewhat marginal figures. About Ravel, I don't really know. I suspect Strauss really belonged, like Elgar, to the period before WW1, and would have been seen as more of an 'institution' by the 20s and 30s. Played - certainly. At the cutting edge - probably not.
Quote from: Mahlerian on October 18, 2016, 03:42:17 AM
I think the exact opposite. But then again I listen to the Rite on a regular basis (because the sensation is far from the most important part of it), find Apollo sublime throughout, and always prefer the Firebird ballet score to the suites. Stravinsky wrote so much music of such great quality that he is certainly comparable to a Bach or a Haydn or a Mozart. Just digging in to some less well-known corner, like the Concerto for Two Pianos or his chamber arrangements of the works for string quartet, yields riches on a high level.
Of the first half of the 20th century, Stravinsky, Schoenberg, and Bartok were the foremost composers in quality and breadth of oeuvre, and despite his relatively greater prominence, often Stravinsky isn't any better understood than Schoenberg.
And, BTW, I completely agree on
Apollo's entire sublimity.
Quote from: Martin Lind on October 17, 2016, 09:17:32 PM
I think Strawinsky has written some marvelous music but the point is that his music is not always on this high level. For example "Apollon musagette" contains some really marvelous music which I love and on the other hand alot of music which I think is pretty boring. Le sacre on the hand is a "sensation" piece, very impressive if you listen to it for the first time but not the right piece for repeated listening. The firebird ballet is not heard very often, instead of this the suite.
I would say that the question "Who actually listens to Strawinsky" is wrongly asked. I think, most people who listen to classical music will know Strawinsky. He is somebody well known. But I assume that for many people who heard some of Strawinskys works, he becomes less important when they listen to more music. That means: Bach or Haydn for example can occupy you all your lifetime. But I doubt very much that this is the case with Strawinsky. At least this is my point of view.
Sorry, I can't agree on Stravinsky. I would say
Le Sacre is better the 50th time you listen to it. There is no other work like it. But that's so well documented I needn't belabour the point.
Apollo is an acquired taste for some, but not for me. I loved it the first time I heard it. In a way, it's a demanding work for the listener; so much of the music is sublime, it's hard to appreciate the understated brilliance of many of the passages...at least when first listening to the work. Though I resist narrated works,
Persephone is another work I listen to frequently. Stravinsky has the reputation as a modernist who uses rhythm in exciting innovative ways to break new ground. And that might be why some listeners think they won't enjoy his music, but his works are usually full of beauty as well as brilliance.
The ballets have some built-in "hype" because of being ballets, the historical reaction...but a lot of it is not hyped. Fanfare for Two Trumpets is just what it says it is. Maybe that's what the OP is sensing...no "hype."