Cyril Rootham(1875-1938): A Catalogue of the Orchestral and Choral Music

[Dundonnell]

CYRIL ROOTHAM: A CATALOGUE OF THE ORCHESTRAL AND CHORAL MUSIC

1900:   "Four Impressions(Killarney)": miniatures for violin and small orchestra
1903-05:Dramatic Cantata "Andromeda" for soprano, contralto, baritone and orchestra
1908:   "Coronach" for baritone/bass, chorus and orchestra
1909:    "The Lady of Shalott" for mezzo-soprano, chorus and orchestra: 33 minutes  *
1910:     Rhapsody "A Passerby" for orchestra
1911:   "The Stolen Child" for chorus and orchestra: 6 minutes  + (EMI cd)
1912:     Rhapsody "Pan" for orchestra
1915:   "For the Fallen" for chorus and orchestra: 18 minutes  + (EMI cd)
1920:   Processional for the Chancellor's Music
             Miniature Suite for orchestra or piano and strings: 10 minutes  + (EMI and Hyperion cds)
1921-22: "Brown Earth" for chorus and orchestra
1922:   Rhapsody on an Old English Tune 'Lazarus' for double string orchestra: 11 minutes  *
1927-28:Ode on The Morning of Christ's Nativity for soprano, tenor, bass, chorus and orchestra: 42 minutes  *
1929-30:St. John's Suite for small orchestra
1931:   "Psalm of Adonis" for small orchestra: 8 minutes  + (EMI cd)
1932:   Symphony No.1: 31 minutes  + (Lyrita cd)
1936:   "City in the West" for chorus and orchestra: 10 minutes  + (EMI cd)
1936-38:Symphony No.2 "Revelation" for chorus and orchestra: 38 minutes  *

Although this list does not differ substantially to the list published in the Wikipedia article on Rootham it does correct a number of mistakes in dating certain works. The corrections are based on the Rootham Papers at St.John's College, Cambridge.

[albion]

Thanks for this, Colin.

I have a proof copy of Andromeda: it is a very accomplished and highly attractive score - sadly, it is unlikely to be high on anybody's lists for revival ...

[eschiss1]

Hrm. Sym 2 in D- according to Papers of Cyril Bradley Rootham, indeed, begun November 1936, finished January 14th 1938.

[Jimfin]

Always a terribly enjoyable composer, who seems to be sadly known mainly for his tiff with Elgar over 'For the Fallen'. What is it about composers who fell foul of Elgar? Stanford seems to have suffered for years being criticised in Elgar biographies and dismissed by people who'd never heard the music.

[Mark Thomas]

Contrary to the popular image of Elgar as a bluff, avuncular, kindly figure, from what I've read he seems to have had a very thin skin, took offence easily and was a master at nursing a grudge. Ending up as "top composer" of the era, with many enthusiasts and adulatory biographers, presumably also resulted in those with whom he'd fallen out being assumed to have been on the wrong side of any argument.

[Jimfin]

Quite. For example, in the case of the Stanford incident, in the last century there have been maybe two major biographies of Stanford and about thirty of Elgar (a complete guess, sorry). The Elgar biographies all give the impression that Stanford offended Elgar within a few months of them meeting, and that they never really got on, whereas according to Jeremy Dibble's biography of Stanford, the two were good friends for something like eight years, and the Stanfords came to stay with the Elgars. And it is also no excuse for dismissing Stanford's music. Stanford was, admittedly, quite good at falling out with people, even Parry had enough of him in the end, but who cares? I doubt I'd have liked Wagner or Brahms much as people, but I'm happy to listen to them.

[JimL]

Brahms was my kind of people!  He just happened to have lived in very thin-skinned times.

[Dundonnell]

With respect, gentlemen, should this discussion not be continued elsewhere

[Mark Thomas]

Quite right, sorry for causing the digresssion...