Elgar's Hillside

[lordlance]

I don't think of it as an "ideal" that we experience the same emotion as the composer, and I think it probably rarely happens. How a composer motivates him or herself to invent beautiful music is none of my business. Of course, there is music which has an overt program, Beethoven's 6th, Strauss' Alpine. If the program notes are really required, it is a detriment to the music, in my personal view.

I enjoy ditching programmatic aspects and just enjoying music for what it is honestly... 

[Elgarian Redux]

I don't think of it as an "ideal" that we experience the same emotion as the composer, and I think it probably rarely happens. How a composer motivates him or herself to invent beautiful music is none of my business.

I was using the word 'ideal' to mean 'in accordance with Langer's idea', rather than setting it up as something perfect or desirable. There's no external test I can think of that would suggest whether we are getting an emotion similar to what the composer intends - there's only the experience itself, which often seems to persuade us that there is a perceived truth in it. This is not entirely subjective, because it's possible to compare one's experience with others. A lot of people who love Elgar's music do seem to experience broadly similar feelings - at least, within the limits of how well language can convey them.

In the course of learning what I can about Elgar through fairly extensive reading, I can't help but become aware of some of his intentions when composing his music - so then it becomes very much my business. I can't unread what I've read (nor would I want to). And when Elgar, as conductor of his 1st symphony, asks his orchestra to play the slow movement 'like something you heard down by the river', that provides a pretty strong clue about his intentions, which I find very helpful when listening to the music. I don't think this is a 'program' by the way: it just helps me to 'tune in', in my attempt to get as close as I can to what the composer is expressing through his music.

[Elgarian Redux]

It's all subjective

If that were true, then all these conversations we have here would merely be barely disguised expressions of our own likes and dislikes. That is, we would merely be talking about ourselves. Sometimes of course, we do that; but mostly we are doing better than that, I think. I owe a great deal to discussions I've had with posters here that have enriched my listening. Not discussions of the type 'I like this or don't like that', but rather (to roughly quote something Luke wrote recently): 'have you noticed the similarity between the violins thrumming at the end of the Elgar violin concerto, and the sound of an aeolian harp?'. Nothing to do with liking or disliking, or everything being subjective, but all to do with enhancing perception. I hadn't actually made that connection myself. I will never listen to the cadenza of the Elgar violin concerto in the same way, now, thanks to Luke's drawing my attention to it.

[Elgarian Redux]

I enjoy ditching programmatic aspects and just enjoying music for what it is honestly...

Is there something dishonest about listening to Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique, while imagining the various encounters with his 'Beloved'? Or thinking about the characters who inspired the Enigma Variations? If so, then somebody call the Music Police. I give myself up.

[Spotted Horses]

I was using the word 'ideal' to mean 'in accordance with Langer's idea', rather than setting it up as something perfect or desirable. There's no external test I can think of that would suggest whether we are getting an emotion similar to what the composer intends - there's only the experience itself, which often seems to persuade us that there is a perceived truth in it. This is not entirely subjective, because it's possible to compare one's experience with others. A lot of people who love Elgar's music do seem to experience broadly similar feelings - at least, within the limits of how well language can convey them.

In the course of learning what I can about Elgar through fairly extensive reading, I can't help but become aware of some of his intentions when composing his music - so then it becomes very much my business. I can't unread what I've read (nor would I want to). And when Elgar, as conductor of his 1st symphony, asks his orchestra to play the slow movement 'like something you heard down by the river', that provides a pretty strong clue about his intentions, which I find very helpful when listening to the music. I don't think this is a 'program' by the way: it just helps me to 'tune in', in my attempt to get as close as I can to what the composer is expressing through his music.

Broadly speaking, I wouldn't dispute. I tend to hear Elgar in the context of a person who was intoxicated by the idea of the British Empire as an ennobling force in the world, and who become disillusioned when the Great War brought unimaginable horror and futility to the western world, when when the dissolution of the British empire revealed that its former subject regarded themselves as victims of a cruel, brutal foreign power. But aside from the vague characterization, I let the music speak for itself.

The "down by the river" remark is particularly puzzling to me, because I can't imagine what it is supposed to convey. What river? The Thames? Based on my familiarity with Dickens, I would think you'd hear nothing good. What it most brings to mind is a well know sketch on Saturday Night Live. Down by the river is a place where you never want to find yourself!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv2VIEY9-A8

[Roasted Swan]

Broadly speaking, I wouldn't dispute. I tend to hear Elgar in the context of a person who was intoxicated by the idea of the British Empire as an ennobling force in the world, and who become disillusioned when the Great War brought unimaginable horror and futility to the western world, when when the dissolution of the British empire revealed that its former subject regarded themselves as victims of a cruel, brutal foreign power. But aside from the vague characterization, I let the music speak for itself.

The "down by the river" remark is particularly puzzling to me, because I can't imagine what it is supposed to convey. What river? The Thames? Based on my familiarity with Dickens, I would think you'd hear nothing good. What it most brings to mind is a well know sketch on Saturday Night Live. Down by the river is a place where you never want to find yourself!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv2VIEY9-A8

The river is the Severn

[Irons]

Broadly speaking, I wouldn't dispute. I tend to hear Elgar in the context of a person who was intoxicated by the idea of the British Empire as an ennobling force in the world, and who become disillusioned when the Great War brought unimaginable horror and futility to the western world, when when the dissolution of the British empire revealed that its former subject regarded themselves as victims of a cruel, brutal foreign power. But aside from the vague characterization, I let the music speak for itself.

It is true that Elgar is associated with the British Empire and all that goes with it - The Crown of India Suite may be more to lordlance taste, or maybe not. I try to ignore all that baggage as I think it does Elgar more harm then good. Elgar, unlike his image was a passionate man who loved his wife dearly. He said music is everywhere and he simply pulled it from the air around him. The music itself inspired him not the British Empire or Great War, at least that is how I prefer to listen to him. He wrote ceremonial marches to earn a few bob as serious composers after him composed music for films but that is not the real Elgar. 

[Luke]

...Not discussions of the type 'I like this or don't like that', but rather (to roughly quote something Luke wrote recently): 'have you noticed the similarity between the violins thrumming at the end of the Elgar violin concerto, and the sound of an aeolian harp?'. Nothing to do with liking or disliking, or everything being subjective, but all to do with enhancing perception. I hadn't actually made that connection myself. I will never listen to the cadenza of the Elgar violin concerto in the same way, now, thanks to Luke's drawing my attention to it.

I've missed all of this discussion - it's been a busy time at work - so I'm just catching up. I should just clarify, re. these kinds words, that the VC/aeolian harp observation is not my own but one I picked up from Matthew Riley's fascinating book on Elgar and Nostalgia. Essential Elgar reading, I think. Riley also has a lot of interesting stuff on the 'down by the river' theme in Elgar's music, as well as the themes of wind in the branches and the rushes - the Wind in the Willows, in fact, and the wind of Shelley's Ode (which Elgar set). These airy, intangible sensations, as unputdownable as the drift of fragrance, memory, sensation and emotion, are I think the key to Elgar's music, much more than Empire is (that's more an Alice Elgar thing than an Edward one, in any case, I think).

The 'something you hear down by the river' quotation chimes with the 'music is in the air' one, and the 'trees are singing my music' one, and above all the 'I am still the same child who was found down by the river trying to catch the sound of the wind in the reeds' one (not the exact words). As I've said previously on this thread, when writing my book I found myself down by the side of the Severn in what may have been one of Elgar's spots, at 2 a.m., in deep darkness, listening to the breeze as it cut through the reeds around me in the otherwise silent night. It was quite a profound moment for me.

[lordlance]

If that were true, then all these conversations we have here would merely be barely disguised expressions of our own likes and dislikes. That is, we would merely be talking about ourselves. Sometimes of course, we do that; but mostly we are doing better than that, I think. I owe a great deal to discussions I've had with posters here that have enriched my listening. Not discussions of the type 'I like this or don't like that', but rather (to roughly quote something Luke wrote recently): 'have you noticed the similarity between the violins thrumming at the end of the Elgar violin concerto, and the sound of an aeolian harp?'. Nothing to do with liking or disliking, or everything being subjective, but all to do with enhancing perception. I hadn't actually made that connection myself. I will never listen to the cadenza of the Elgar violin concerto in the same way, now, thanks to Luke's drawing my attention to it.

Yes, well, those aren't preferences but things that can be noticed.

Is there something dishonest about listening to Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique, while imagining the various encounters with his 'Beloved'? Or thinking about the characters who inspired the Enigma Variations? If so, then somebody call the Music Police. I give myself up.

I'll be honest in that reading up programmatic notes for such pieces and trying to make connections is far too much work for me. I just put the music on and if I like it, I do.

[Roasted Swan]

It is true that Elgar is associated with the British Empire and all that goes with it - The Crown of India Suite may be more to lordlance taste, or maybe not. I try to ignore all that baggage as I think it does Elgar more harm then good. Elgar, unlike his image was a passionate man who loved his wife dearly. He said music is everywhere and he simply pulled it from the air around him. The music itself inspired him not the British Empire or Great War, at least that is how I prefer to listen to him. He wrote ceremonial marches to earn a few bob as serious composers after him composed music for films but that is not the real Elgar.

My feeling is strongly that in many many ways Elgar was - music aside - an "ordinary man".  As such it is completely normal that he should reflect the commonly held beliefs of the society in which he lived.  So yes - at that time The British Empire was perceived as a civilising force for good and something Britain should be proud of.  Elgar's genius as a creative artist was to be able to embody the "Spirit of England" in his music in a way that chimed with the zeitgeist but also remained deeply and personally true to himself as well.  The trouble now is that because Elgar is one of the few representatives of that time whose art has endured - so now instead of being acknowledged as representing his time it is criticised as though in some way he created/defined it.  As though Elgar himself was responsible for the excesses of Empire.

I do enjoy all the Elgar Marches as well because they are a legitimate and sincere part of his personality as well - apart from anything else they are stonkingly good!  Likewise all his salon pieces from Salut d'amour on are just gorgeous.  Not only because he could write a memorable tune but because even in those slight inconsequential works there burns an emotional sincerity and brilliance that few if any other "serious" composers ever came close to matching in equivalent works.

[Elgarian Redux]

the VC/aeolian harp observation is not my own but one I picked up from Matthew Riley's fascinating book on Elgar and Nostalgia. Essential Elgar reading, I think. Riley also has a lot of interesting stuff on the 'down by the river' theme in Elgar's music, as well as the themes of wind in the branches and the rushes - the Wind in the Willows, in fact, and the wind of Shelley's Ode (which Elgar set).

Yes I see it came from Matthew Riley, but still you were the valuable conduit through which the information came to me, whatever its original source, and for that I'm grateful. I'd have missed it otherwise!
 

These airy, intangible sensations, as unputdownable as the drift of fragrance, memory, sensation and emotion, are I think the key to Elgar's music, much more than Empire is (that's more an Alice Elgar thing than an Edward one, in any case, I think).

Perfectly expressed. And I couldn't agree more.

[Elgarian Redux]

Yes, well, those aren't preferences but things that can be noticed.

At last, a statement we can appear to agree on. The difference would seem to be that for me (in all the arts), the noticing is pretty important. Extremely important, in fact. You might even rightly accuse me of stating a preference for noticing things! But that's another story.

[Spotted Horses]

I hope I didn't give the impression that I am disparaging Elgar in any way. I'm not. He wrote music that I greatly admire. But I'm not very interested in what exactly inspired him to write music. (For me, this applies to any composer.) An exception would be the music he wrote with an overt purpose (Pomp and Circumstance Marches, etc) I don't find it relevant to me. As Roasted Swan wrote, Elgar was personally ordinary; his way with music was the extraordinary thing about him. Whether the resignation I might hear in his late works is due to disappointment over the dissolution of the British Empire, or disappointment over the sogginess of his morning corn flakes doesn't change the music.

[Roasted Swan]

I hope I didn't give the impression that I am disparaging Elgar in any way. I'm not. He wrote music that I greatly admire. But I'm not very interested in what exactly inspired him to write music. (For me, this applies to any composer.) An exception would be the music he wrote with an overt purpose (Pomp and Circumstance Marches, etc) I don't find it relevant to me. As Roasted Swan wrote, Elgar was personally ordinary; his way with music was the extraordinary thing about him. Whether the resignation I might hear in his late works is due to disappointment over the dissolution of the British Empire, or disappointment over the sogginess of his morning corn flakes doesn't change the music.

At the time Elgar died in 1934 the Empire was still very much intact so it must have been the cornflakes (I share his pain regarding dank breakfast cereals but sadly I do not share his ability to express that existential sorrow in music)

[Luke]

The Muesli Makers....
Cornflaktacus...

[Spotted Horses]

At the time Elgar died in 1934 the Empire was still very much intact so it must have been the cornflakes (I share his pain regarding dank breakfast cereals but sadly I do not share his ability to express that existential sorrow in music)

Well, my knowledge of history is lacking, but I'm American, after all.

We'll settle on Corn flakes, or the Great War.

[Karl Henning]

We'll settle on Corn flakes....

Indeed, John Lennon sat on one. 

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

It is true that Elgar is associated with the British Empire and all that goes with it - The Crown of India Suite may be more to lordlance taste, or maybe not. I try to ignore all that baggage as I think it does Elgar more harm then good. Elgar, unlike his image was a passionate man who loved his wife dearly. He said music is everywhere and he simply pulled it from the air around him. The music itself inspired him not the British Empire or Great War, at least that is how I prefer to listen to him. He wrote ceremonial marches to earn a few bob as serious composers after him composed music for films but that is not the real Elgar.

I find it odd and rather unfair that Elgar gets singled out as some sort of propagandist for empire when he was just doing what 19th-century composers were supposed to do.

Brahms wrote a big bombastic Triumphlied celebrating the German victory in the Franco-Prussian War and the accompanying unification, yet nobody seems to care about that when evaluating Brahms as a composer. Similarly, nobody cares about Beethoven's Cantata on the Elevation of Leopold II to the Imperial Dignity, and the fact that he wrote that piece of schlock Wellington's Victory doesn't seem to be held against him.

[Elgarian Redux]

I hope I didn't give the impression that I am disparaging Elgar in any way. I'm not. He wrote music that I greatly admire. But I'm not very interested in what exactly inspired him to write music. (For me, this applies to any composer.) An exception would be the music he wrote with an overt purpose (Pomp and Circumstance Marches, etc) I don't find it relevant to me. As Roasted Swan wrote, Elgar was personally ordinary; his way with music was the extraordinary thing about him. Whether the resignation I might hear in his late works is due to disappointment over the dissolution of the British Empire, or disappointment over the sogginess of his morning corn flakes doesn't change the music.

Not at all - we've had discussions about Elgar in the past, and I know we have different approaches. We come at his music with different perspectives, that's all. I come to it soaked in a lifetime of memories of English landscape - most especially Elgar's landscape - and the music and the landscape, for me, can't be separated. So everything I write here is affected by that.

[DavidW]

I find it odd and rather unfair that Elgar gets singled out as some sort of propagandist for empire when he was just doing what 19th-century composers were supposed to do.

Romanticism and nationalism are heavily intertwined with each other in music, literature, and art.  Anyway, I'm off to listen to Elgar!