"Welcome to Shorworld": the rise of wealthy dilettante composer Alexey Shor

[Florestan]

I'm sorry, but I think that statement unjust towards anyone who genuinely possesses a very modest musical talent.

I think you're being too harsh. In my book, any person who can write music, ie can put to paper what they hear in their head, does possess musical talent, albeit minimal. Take me, for instance: I often dream melodies of my own, of which I recall a piano concerto movement and an operatic aria --- yet I am completely unable to write them down. I mean, I could indicate the tempo and the dynamic markings but I'm at a complete loss and irremediable clueless when it comes to notes, chords and keys. The reverse is also true: I can play Eine Kleine Nacht Musik in my head --- but if I look at the score it's all the same as a calf looking at a new gate. Saul Dzorelashvili is obviously at least a class above on both counts.

[Florestan]

Actually, I see nothing wrong, morally or otherwise, in what Shor does. He composes music and lavishes large sums of money on whoever is willing to play it. What is wrong in all that, honestly?

[Karl Henning]

Actually, I see nothing wrong, morally or otherwise, in what Shor does. He composes music and lavishes large sums of money on whoever is willing to play it. What is wrong in all that, honestly?

Socially fascinating.

Insofar as I have an actual answer: probably nothing within the confines of that transaction. As with The Valley of the Dolls, there's some degree of fraud involved, but there's arguably no victim of this species of fraud. Let the fraudsters look to their conscience, though one scarcely expects a Russian fraudster to be possessed of much of a conscience.

[Florestan]

It is somewhat shocking however to hear Shor's work played by a violinist as qualified as Daniel Lozakovich, whose Tchaikovsky concerto is one of the best I've heard. Shor must pay well.

Well, exactly. I wonder how much was Lozakovich paid by DG for his Tchaikovsky concerto recording (which is indeed superb) as against how much Shor paid him for playing his (Shor's) music.

I think it's high time to discard once and for all one of the most ludicrous notions inherited from Romanticism, namely that of the poor but brilliant artist who would rather starve than compromise his lofty ideals. In reality there has never been such a beast, and the extremely lucrative careers of such arch-Romantics as Paganini and Liszt suffice to expose the pretentiousness and conceit behind the concept.

[Florestan]

Insofar as I have an actual answer: probably nothing within the confines of that transaction. As with The Valley of the Dolls, there's some degree of fraud involved, but there's arguably no victim of this species of fraud. Let the fraudsters look to their conscience, though one scarcely expects a Russian fraudster to be possessed of much of a conscience.

I'm not sure I can agree, Karl.

Here is how the Cambridge dictionary defines fraud:

the crime of getting money by deceiving people

This is the exact opposite of what Shor does: he pays good money to people willing to play his music. Seems to me this is much more like a freely-agreed-upon contract than a fraud. YMMV.

[Brian]

Actually, I see nothing wrong, morally or otherwise, in what Shor does. He composes music and lavishes large sums of money on whoever is willing to play it. What is wrong in all that, honestly?

The only previous mention of Shor on this forum - per a search that I did - was you saying that you had heard his piano music and liked it!

[Karl Henning]

I'm not sure I can agree, Karl.

Here is how the Cambridge dictionary defines fraud:

the crime of getting money by deceiving people

This is the exact opposite of what Shor does: he pays good money to people willing to play his music. Seems to me this is much more like a freely-agreed-upon contract than a fraud. YMMV.

Hard to believe that a Cambridge dictionary doesn't recognize non-monetary fraudulence. The fraud I'm speaking of is exemplified by this cover:

What is your expectation of Shor, when the name sits beside those of Brahms and Chopin?

[(poco) Sforzando]

I think you're being too harsh. In my book, any person who can write music, ie can put to paper what they hear in their head, does possess musical talent, albeit minimal. Take me, for instance: I often dream melodies of my own, of which I recall a piano concerto movement and an operatic aria --- yet I am completely unable to write them down. I mean, I could indicate the tempo and the dynamic markings but I'm at a complete loss and irremediable clueless when it comes to notes, chords and keys. The reverse is also true: I can play Eine Kleine Nacht Musik in my head --- but if I look at the score it's all the same as a calf looking at a new gate. Saul Dzorelashvili is obviously at least a class above on both counts.

A lot of the matters you bring up are indeed difficult, but they can be learned by someone willing to invest the time and care to learn them. It's like trying to learn a foreign language, especially later in life. I would be more supportive of Mr. Dz if I had seen in him any willingness to learn beyond the elementary knowledge he brought to these message boards when he started posting his music. For example, I recall when in one of his scores he notated a whole-note chord for harp that was tied for about a dozen measures following. Well, no, a note or chord struck on the harp decays almost immediately; a note tied at all beyond a short laisser vibrer is a physical impossibility. But any attempt to educate Saul was invariably greeted by spite or anger.

[Florestan]

The only previous mention of Shor on this forum - per a search that I did - was you saying that you had heard his piano music and liked it!

When was that? An exact quote would be most helpful.

[Brian]

When was that? An exact quote would be most helpful.

five years ago!

Alexey Shor - Childhood Memories

Listened to them on this disc:



and the music charmed me no end from the very first bar to the very last.

Here it is, played by Ingolf Wunder

[flash=200,200]https://www.youtube.com/v/uPkkXLomW4s&t=43s[/flash]

[Florestan]

What is your expectation of Shor, when the name sits beside those of Brahms and Chopin?

None whatsoever. I might or might not like his music, but only after listening to it. The fact that he's sandwiched between Chopin and Brahms is a ommonplace marketing trick which by 2024 AD should not be shocking anymore.

[Mandryka]

Hard to believe that a Cambridge dictionary doesn't recognize non-monetary fraudulence. The fraud I'm speaking of is exemplified by this cover:

What is your expectation of Shor, when the name sits beside those of Brahms and Chopin?

The piece there is a joint composition by Shor and Pletnev.

[Florestan]

five years ago!

Thanks!

Well, I'll have to listen again and see if I have the same reaction. Heck, 30 years ago Beethoven was my favorite composers and today I mostly can't stand his music. 

[Karl Henning]

The piece there is a joint composition by Shor and Pletnev.

I think Maestro Pletnev would ensure that [it not sound too bad], and arguably the typography supports that  reading, nevertheless suggests that Shor is heavier business than his talents merit. I guess Saul's only artistic misfortune is not having the wealth to purchase access.

[Florestan]

any attempt to educate Saul was invariably greeted by spite or anger.

No argument from me on this. I incurred his wrath by stating the verifiable fact that Moses Mendelssohn was a "protected Jew" in the Kingdom of Prussia.

[Florestan]

I guess Saul's only artistic misfortune is not having the wealth to purchase access.

True dat!

[(poco) Sforzando]

five years ago!

I am listening to that one now. In fact, when I hit the Juilliard Store this weekend, I might just pick up the score (braving as best I can the smirks from the store personnel). I think this suite on the whole more successful than the 4th violin concerto, probably because it is simpler and less ambitious. But it shares some of the same basic problems - an utter inability to develop anything beyond just repeating the same idea over and over - as I hear in the concerto. The concerto, I would say, is more of a failure because it attempts so much more and is so much more long-winded.

Even so, as the suite progresses, I hear a depressing sameness to most of the pieces, and nothing that stands out melodically or harmonically. Perhaps I'll save my money at the store.

[Florestan]

an utter inability to develop anything beyond just repeating the same idea over and over

a depressing sameness to most of the pieces, and nothing that stands out melodically or harmonically.

Satie, anyone?

[CRCulver]

Nothing unique about being a "wealthy dilettante composer." Before there was Shor, there was this guy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nanes

It exists in the pop and rock world, too. (Leaving aside obvious cases like Uzbekistan dictator Islom Karimov's daughter making a career as a pop musician,) the guitarist Henry Kaiser is said to be mediocre but has been able to play with a great many respected musicians because he is heir to a massive fortune.

The first time I ever thought about corruption in the classical music world, many years into my fandom, was seeing Kaija Saariaho setting up her children as nepo-babies, taking advantage of the fact they have a different surname than her. There was definitely a feeling of innocence lost.

[Todd]

He's also a multimillionaire

Shor must pay well.

The former hints at the latter.  There's no shame in performing artists taking money to perform.