Stravinsky Symphony in E flat

[Alan Howe]

I've been playing and re-playing Dorati's magnificent recording over recent days - and I've come to a heretical thought, i.e - Stravinsky's work is usually spoken of in the context of, say, Glazunov or Rimsky-Korsakov, and yet as a symphony I'm inclined to say it's better than any work in that genre written by either of his predecessors. It's not up to Tchaikovsky's standard, but, my goodness, what a fine piece it is. No wonder Dorati - great conductor that he was - thought it was worth devoting so much care and attention to it.

Is this heresy? Do shoot me down in flames...

[Mark Thomas]

It's certainly better than any of Rimsky-Korsakov's attempts. I'm not sure that I'd say it was better than the best of Glazunov's symphonies - Nos.4, 5 and 6 are such strong and individual works. Of course, Glazunov can sound very humdrum in the wrong hands...

[Alan Howe]

I think the Stravinsky's more memorable overall than any symphony by Glazunov: No.6 has a brilliant first movement, but the rest is at a much lower level of inspiration.

Told you I was being heretical...

[eschiss1]

I'll have to listen to the Stravinsky again, but as to Glazunov I've generally preferred no.3 (except maybe for the slow movement) to no.6; at the very least no.3 sticks strongly in the mind from the opening...

[Alan Howe]

I think Dorati's magnificent performance has a lot to do with my revised opinion of the piece.

[Alan Howe]

Here's a very interesting book which features an analysis of Stravinsky's Symphony in E flat - and its multiple pilferings!!
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_ZUkDQAAQBAJ&pg=PA172

[Christopher]

Not really! Do you know the 1st Violin Concerto (1917)?>>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywTNhMrR9vk
...or his lush Autumnal Sketch (1910, rev.1915, 1934)>>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-NpadKhXHM

Thanks for these recommendations Alan, I will give them an attentive (re-)listening to.

[Christopher]

It's certainly better than any of Rimsky-Korsakov's attempts. I'm not sure that I'd say it was better than the best of Glazunov's symphonies - Nos.4, 5 and 6 are such strong and individual works. Of course, Glazunov can sound very humdrum in the wrong hands...

I must have only ever heard him in humdrum hands...feel free to suggest the right hands Mark (in another thread I guess!)

[Alan Howe]

In a word: Serebrier.

[Mark Thomas]

Absolutely.

[eschiss1]

This listener seems to recall RK's 3rd symphony (in at least one of its two versions) being rather good and tries to beware excessive certitude

[Ilja]

Although I have a high opinion of the Stravinsky symphony, it is (in my opinion) not a flawless work; the endless repetition of the main theme in the first movement, in particular, does get on my nerves after a while. Still, I enjoy the whole work more than I do most of Rimsky or Glazunov – which is not a verdict on musical quality, of course.

By the way, if you don't like Dorati's take, Pletnev (DG) offers a very different version. The fact that the piece stays together in two such contrasting approaches must mean something, I think.

Edit: thinking a bit more about it, perhaps my opinion of the piece isn't that high. This still feels like a beginner's work, stylistically somewhat unbalanced and very backward-looking. If one were to compare it to the first symphony of his contemporary Nikolai Miaskovsky, composed around the same time (and a graduation piece as well), there really is no contest in my view. In the Miaskovsky we hear someone clearing an artistic path for himself, trying and succeeding in finding his own voice. Stravinsky of course did the same, but not here. (and yes, I realize I'm being a bit of a hypocrite in light of the motto I've used for the past years)

[eschiss1]

To be fair, does the first, unrevised version of the Myaskovsky exist anymore? (I am a great Myaskovsky fan, but like Stravinsky, he revised his graduation piece- in this case 13 years later rather than 6 (1908 rev. 1921 rather than 1905-7 rev. 1913) - and in Stravinsky's case substantial comparison seems to be still possible based at least on manuscripts (as a couple of us have noted) whether or not the 1905-7 version is still performable/performed/recorded. (Have the two versions both been published? Are published scores clear on which version is being published, as with those later works by the composer that underwent revisions?)