Northern Flowers' series - "Wartime Music"

[wunderkind]

I wonder how many here have been following the excellent series produced by the Russian label Northern Flowers and titled "Wartime Music."

Every one of the discs present hitherto lightly recorded, or never recorded, works.  I have enjoyed each one - especially the Vladimir Scherbachov Symphony No.5 and the CDs dedicated to Gavriil Popov.

Of the latter, Popov's hardly-known 15-minute Symphonic Aria for Cello and String Orchestra, Op.43, is one of the most powerful things I've heard for that instrument.  The constant weight of the dense string instrumentation and the ever-increasing tension nearly is overwhelming.  Written as a eulogy for Tolstoy and in the repertoire of Rostropovich, this is a compelling mini-concerto which makes quite an impression, to say the least.

[DennisS]

Hello

I have both the Wartime Music cds of Popov's music referred to by Wunderkind and can also recommend them. In addition to the Symphonic Aria for Cello, you also get Popov's symphonies nos 2 and 3. I am a great fan of Popov, who incidentally was well thought of by Shostokovich, both composers having had their "difficulties" under Stalin!!! Re-Popov, I particularly enjoy his Symphony no 5 and have a special affection for his Symphony no 6, even though for some, it is a bit "over the top"! His Chamber Symphony for 7 Instruments is also a very affecting piece. Symphony no 1, the most easily found on CD of his 6 symphonies is also a very interesting work.Are other members familiar with Popov's works and what do they think of them?

cheers
Dennis

[wunderkind]

Thank you, Dennis, for the response re Popov.  As a matter of fact, I think most of his music can be described as "over the top," or certainly nearing the top.

Take, for example, the Symphony No.3, which is on the same disc as the aforementioned Symphonic Aria for Cello & String Orchestra.  The Third Symphony is subtitled "Heroic" (Eroica?) and is scored for a "large string orchestra."  Popov says he was inspired by Schoenberg's dramatic poem for strings, Verklärte Nacht, but he took the form to more full-scale proportions.  Using divisi Popov evokes an amazing richness of texture and brilliant harmonics in this Symphony.  I don't know for sure - but wonder if another piece written only for strings ever has assumed the massive bulk of Popov's Third.  It is in five movements, lasting about 55 minutes.  The Largo (fourth movement) runs for 20 minutes and is structured in waves and cascades of sound.  It is the dramatic climax of the Symphony and, as the notes point out, echoes the national tragedy of the War.

[Mark Thomas]

Certainly Popov's Sixth is far too "over the top" for me. So far over the top in its "throw in the kitchen sink" self-indulgence that, after repeated listenings, I find it rather risible.  The same goes, to a lesser degree, for the First. He was certainly inventve but just didn't know when to stop inventing in these two pieces. His Second, however, seems to me to be a much more considered, sober and impressive work, although I am aware in writing that, that I'm also tacitly agreeing with Stalin's musical taste. The Fifth, especially in its outer pastoral movements, also has some lovely music. Of the remaining works on CD, the sombre Chamber Symphony I'm finding a difficult nut to crack and I found the Symphonic Suite No.1 a showy, shallow work. I have the disk with the Third Symphony and Symphonic Aria on it, but haven't listened properly to it yet.

[wunderkind]

Hello

I have both the Wartime Music cds of Popov's music referred to by Wunderkind and can also recommend them. Re-Popov, I particularly enjoy his Symphony no 5 and have a special affection for his Symphony no 6, even though for some, it is a bit "over the top"!
cheers
Dennis

And, Dennis - good for you re the Sixth.  It is a fascinating work.  There's so much going on in it that it is like a kaleidoscope and one needs to view it from different angles (or multiple listenings) to grasp the power.  The slow movement is typical Popov - dense and with lots of tension.  And, when Popov is performed by an authentically noisy Russian orchestra, the piece reverberates.

Some traditionalists would be put off by an iconoclastic composer like Popov - he pushed the envelope, so to speak.  But I also would recommend his music to adventuresome listeners and lovers of the Soviet-era mid-20th century school.

[DennisS]

Hello Wunderkind

It seems that you and I are on the same wavelength as regards Popov and in particular, his 6th symphony.I am very fond of Popov and think he was quite an original, very creative, a bit quirky,and not afraid to take risks in his music. I also like many of the little touches in his music reminiscent of both Prokofiev and Shostokovich, 2 composers I am particularly fond of, even more so for their incorporating a touch of the grotesque into their compositions on occasion. I guess though I am a sucker for all Russian music and have quite a collection of Russian cds.

I do however understand those who believe Popov is a bit/lot "over the top". If I were being totally objective, as far as the 6th symphony is concerned,I would have to agree with Mark but only with reference to the closing passages of the final movement, where even I feel that Popov threw in "everything but the kitchen sink"! Still works for me though anyway!!!

It will be interesting to see whether other members have a view on Popov?

Cheers
Dennis

[wunderkind]

Dennis:  I believe it is a waste of time and close to criminal to look at any composition "objectively."  Listening to music is a personal experience; therefore, there should be no objectivity involved at all.  It's all about how you feel - and that is a subjective situation, isn't it?

Yes, if you're studying a score in a, say, music appreciation class, then it's possible to approach the work from a scholarly, read: objective, vantage point.  But, when you're hearing a piece it is all about the intangibles.  The guy sitting in the seat next to you at the concert, in the same venue, listening to the exact performance, could have an entirely different opinion.  "...the eye of the beholder," agree?

I mean, when we look at a painting hanging on a museum wall - the important result is what "impression" the art gives us. How does it move us?  What emotions does it evoke?  How do we feel about it?  Objectively, a Mark Rothko canvas is little more than a solid block (or blocks) of color. 

So, the same, I think, with music.  And, if Popov appeals to you - if his Symphonies entertain you - if they touch a chord (pun intended) within - then it matters not what anyone else thinks.  I never understand what "listening properly" means.  I usually form my opinions of a work from the first hearing - it either appeals to me or it doesn't.  I'll be content, thank you, to continue this perhaps naïve way of assessing music - do I like it or do I not?  Keeps it simple.

[Steve B]

How refreshing, wunderkind, to see someone else talking about the primacy of emotional responses to music, whether it be classified, in the "canon, as "great" or "weak" or "imitative"(usually "of Mendelssohn and Schumann"). It IS (largely anyway) subjective. Popov sounds MY type of music, in the sense of when i am in the mood for a bit of OTT(used non-perjoratively!:)).

I dislike strongly the specious hierarchy of "valid" emotions in music: as rareified equals "great(er)"; "sentimental" is seen as the lowest form of emotion(as is usually used perjoratively). Hence poor Moszkowski

Conversely, I can be the biggest classical music geek in town, not so much with composer information and analysis, but in terms of obscure vinyl record labels, (though they, of course{Vox, Saga } have emotional "a la recherche de temps perdu" associations, which are emotional, rather than intellectual).So, I can talk..

Neither am I against musical analysis; it it very helpful in understanding some composers, but it doesnt often mean I shall, PERSONALLY/SUBJECTIVELY speaking, have an emotional response to the music.

Nor is it, of necessity, an intellectual appreciation v. the emotions duality; both can feed the other. Its just that hearing people speaking about an emotional response to the msuic on this and other forums, is fairly rare.

Thoughts, particuarly in regard to other (at least sometimes)OTT composers? Or new thread?

And the usual caveat, lest this be seen as pontificatory/didactic, ANY opinion ANYONE averts, or ANY predilection for informing us of any historical or musical fact, is, ultimately, subjective, ie. some people will want to talk re the historico-musical envitronment of a piece; others their emotional response; others a mixture.I find these varied approaches on this forum , and on the other good classical music forums, intriguing

Steve

[DennisS]

Hello Wunderkind

When I said "if I were being objective", I was merely accepting the fact that others may not share my opinion and that is just fine by me! As you yourself say, it's all a question of subjectivity!  Ultimately all that matters to me is whether I like a piece of music or not. On that point, you and I are in total agreement. Perhaps I did not make my opinion clear re-Popov and his 6th symphony. "Over the top or not", the fact is that I am very fond of all Popov's symphonies,and that includes the closing passages of the 6th symphony! As I said in my previous post, the 6th symphony, including its finale  "still works for me"! I would also like to add, to make the position even clearer, that when I listen to Popov, I just enjoy - I do not even think about whether the music is other the top or not! I do not however see anything wrong in trying to appreciate other people's viewpoints, especially when they do not share my point of view.

Cheers
Dennis

[wunderkind]

Steve B and DennisS - thanks for the responses.  I really agree and can write no more than an "amen" to your comments.  Enjoy the Popov kitchen-sink symphonies. 

[Alan Howe]

I think that the 'everything is subjective' response is fine on one level - i.e. I know what I like and I dislike being told what I should or shouldn't like, etc. However, for there to be any sort of debate there has to be discussion of objective things like structure, length, orchestration, harmony, rhythm, melody - otherwise there is no real discussion at all. If all this forum did was to share subjective views, I wouldn't be very interested. What I want to find out is whether the hegemony of the sung musical canon can be challenged by objectively-based arguments about the unsung repertoire. If all we have to offer the status quo is our subjective feelings, we are unlikely to get very far.

[Steve B]

I agree, Alan, that we have to make a case for individual works and composrs based on SOME  criteria, like the technical ones you mention. But I DO like subjective views, on like, rather than quality, too. No man/woman is an island! And I appreciate the fact that, on this particualar forum, we almost inevitably agree or agree to disagree... which keeps it friendly, with the occasional smidgeon of goodnatured jousting!....

Steve

[wunderkind]

And then there's the CD dedicated to Lev Knipper  (1898-1974):

The Symphony No.8 (Knipper wrote 20 symphonies and also the popular "Meadowlands") is structured in three movements - each one in a slow tempo.  It is almost Mahlerian, with long melodies.  The second movement especially is beautiful. It's brooding - as befits a work composed in 1942, in the depths of WWII.

The Violin Concerto No.1 (first of three by Knipper) is full of lush orchestration.  The long (20 minutes) first movement is striking and the entire work is worth of being much better known.

These pieces by Knipper certainly can stand next to those of, say, Miaskovsky and not pale in the comparison.

Another powerfully-realized CD from Northern Flowers' "Wartime Music" series.

[eschiss1]

I'm glad to see a Weinberg symphony - no. 1 (G minor, Op. 10), in fact - is being issued in this series. Not sure if this disc is available yet - I believe so, Records International lists it - has anyone heard it, any thoughts? I've only seen the score so far...
Eric

[petershott@btinternet.com]

Gentlemen: time for a touch of robust aesthetics in this debate about the alleged subjectivity of musical judgments.

There is a world of difference between judgments about, for example, tastes, colours or smells, and those about music (or for that matter painting, literature and the arts generally). I happen to relish the taste of aubergines. My partner doesn't, and considers them abhorrent. That is simply a question of taste, and can't be the subject of any rational disagreement. If I claim 'That's a really fine aubergine' I recognise my view is based solely and entirely on my own tastes, and I don't expect for a minute others to either agree or disagree. If you happen to detest my cherished aubergine there is no room at all for me to say you are wrong.

Now 'That's a fine symphony' appears on the face of it to be a similar sort of claim. Both it and 'That's a fine aubergine' aren't factual claims that can be true or false. In the end, yes, both are based on ultimately subjective factors - feelings and the like. But there is a crucial difference. Aesthetic judgments, including ones about music, at least lay claim to being objective ones capable of rational justification and defence. When I say, for example, the symphonies of Brahms form some of the finest symphonies that have ever been composed I'm not just expressing a personal preference based on my subjective feelings (as I am in the aubergine case). I am making what purports to be a kind of universal judgment that ought to be agreed upon by any other rationally minded person capable of exercising their faculty of hearing. If someone tells me Brahms is mere piffle I'm going to tell them they're quite horribly wrong.

The function of what we might call musical analysis is precisely to enable us to find good grounds for our musical tastes or opinions, to seek justifications for them, defend them, and help to improve or make better our opinions. No need to do that with aubergines: whether you like the things or not is entirely up to you. And that is why Alan Howe is absolutely right in his well tempered contribution.

The value for me of this site is threefold: first, it often alerts me to new recordings, broadcasts, or happenings that I might not otherwise know about; second, it frequently puts my way composers or works that I either did not know about or else have overlooked. For those reasons alone the site is worth its weight in gold. But third, and perhaps most important, with good contributions I have available to me someone else's grounds or reasons for their musical judgments, and reflecting on them I am often both a much wiser man and one with an improved capacity for listening to music and deriving pleasure from it.

Alan also noted that if opinions were entirely subjective then there would actually be no point to the site at all. Absolutely true: we might as well go down the pub and listen to fellas belch, for belching presumably reflects an entirely subjective viewpoint.

And if anyone has made it to the end I lay down the gauntlet. I notice later this month Northern Flowers will release a disc of a symphony by Alexander Mosolov. I defy any rational person to convince me that this is little but an infernal racket devoid of real musical substance or interest!

Peter