Pianophilia

For Rob, other Englishmen with Freeview, and viewers in Northern France and Benelux
with a satellite dish pointing at Astra2 (28E), please note that on Friday 27th. May at
7.30 p.m. on BBC4, there's a 90 minute-long programme presented by Prince Charles
exploring the music of Hubert Parry. The programme is repeated six hours later on BBC HD.

Timtin wrote:For Rob, other Englishmen with Freeview, and viewers in Northern France and Benelux
with a satellite dish pointing at Astra2 (28E), please note that on Friday 27th. May at
7.30 p.m. on BBC4, there's a 90 minute-long programme presented by Prince Charles
exploring the music of Hubert Parry. The programme is repeated six hours later on BBC HD.

Thanks Tim. I really ought to spend some time with Parry's symphonies and chamber music again. Most of it is recorded reasonably well now. I will put Stanford on my to do list too...

Stanford's chamber music is very Brahmsian. As a composer, he's often been
criticised for being 30-odd years behind the times with the sort of music he wrote,
but, strangely, nobody ever seems to accuse Rachmaninov of this same 'crime'.
Btw, today I forked out a small fortune to buy Jeremy Dibble's book about him.

I pretty much like all of the Stanford I have heard and consider him one of the great English composers. I was distinctly unimpressed with Sorabji's comments about Stanford in his Mi Contra Fa, to the extent I chucked the book out of my bedroom window.

How can Sorabji criticise someone like Stanford??

Stanford is lyrical and warmly romantic whereas Sorabji is plinky plonky tinkle crash bang.

Thal

thalbergmad wrote: Stanford is lyrical and warmly romantic whereas Sorabji is plinky plonky tinkle crash bang.

Thal

Thal I think some people will say you missed out "yawn" from your description, what say you?
regards
Brian

I think I missed off a few words, but I have to take into consideration that some people might well prefer Sorabji to Stanford and I would not wish to offend

My remarks were spurred by reading Sorabji's book, which was so full of criticism for other composers that I am amazed he never poisoned himself with his own venom.

Thal

thalbergmad wrote:My remarks were spurred by reading Sorabji's book, which was so full of criticism for other composers that I am amazed he never poisoned himself with his own venom.

Sorabji was known for being very polemical in his writing, but it should also be noted of course that his were just one man's opinions. He was an extremely harsh critic at times (perhaps sometimes unfoundedly so), but was a beacon of light and a real advocate and champion of others who were unfashionable, overlooked or forgotten in Britain at the time (Alkan, Medtner, Busoni, Szymanowski to name but a few).

I'm surprised it caused you to throw your copy of Mi Contra Fa out the window though!

For my part, I'm not the biggest Sorabji fan, but I do like his nocturnes and pieces in the nocturne style (not boring at all!) and admire the vast technicality of his larger works, whilst not necessarily falling over myself for them.

I cannot comment on Stanford as, to my shame, I know very little of his output, save for the odd piano piece, the odd choral work and his piano concerto

4candles wrote:
I'm surprised it caused you to throw your copy of Mi Contra Fa out the window though!

I did go and get it back. Bloody expensive these first editions and in 20 years time I might just make a profit.

Thal

thalbergmad wrote:

4candles wrote:
I'm surprised it caused you to throw your copy of Mi Contra Fa out the window though!

I did go and get it back. Bloody expensive these first editions and in 20 years time I might just make a profit.

You could make a handsome one now, almost certainly. This "first edition" was an only edition and I rather suppose that you weren't around in 1947 to acquire a copy when it was hot off the press, but they go for hundreds of pounds sometimes these days. You should consider yourself fortunate that no one in the know in Gravesend happened to be passing by in the street below your window at the time you threw your copy through it, otherwise that person might have made an even more handsome profit out of it!

And do let's dispense with this "plinky-plonk" stuff which is so obviously out of context where Sorabji is concerned; his music may not appeal to you, but that no more makes it "plinky-plonk" than the most ardent and well-meaning advocacy makes Stanford more than an average composer of his time and place.

Best,

Alistair

The more you get to know the music of Stanford, the more you realise that
he certainly wasn't just an average composer. I've just been playing through
his 3 Dante Rhapsodies, and there's nothing average about them, or indeed
the dozens of other very high quality instrumental, chamber, orchestral,
and choral works which I had the pleasure of discovering by him over the
past few years. Give his Stabat Mater a listen for example. Was that
written by just an average composer? I think not. Reading Dibble's book
about the man also makes one realise that he was far from average.