Why is it that Anton Rubinstein got and gets a lot of criticism? In his days he was laughed at, called a dimwit, an idiot, conservative (c' est du Rubinstein), was humiliated by The Mighty Handful, a group of amateurs including Balakirev, the man who refused to attend the celebration of Rubinstein's 60th birthday.
Is it (semi) academic wisdom to regard a lot of Rubinstein's output as poor, or handicapped with a lack of thematic development, despite the fact that quite a lot of his music is tuneful? I don't know, at least I don't understand. I am not a musicologist, a poor piano player, but a rather critical listener. Listening carefully to the majority of Rubinstein's music, whether it is orchestral, chamber, or solo piano, I can only hear beautiful, interesting and well-crafted music with rich, powerful thematic developments and tone colours, enough depth, and besides that, for the greater part most memorable. Am I right or wrong or somewhere in the middle? It is very well possible that my adoration is due to a lack of musical knowledge, but on the other hand I simply love to listen to everything Rubinstein has written, although he had his weaker moments (like so many other fine composers). And after all, it's the melody that counts.
Yesterday afternoon I spent a most civilized couple of hours by listening to Rubinstein's Piano Sonata No. 3, followed by his wonderful Dramatic Symphony and Piano Concerto No. 4 (to me the most beautiful unsung PC), finished by his sparkling Octet op. 9. And while I'm writing this topic, I listen to his utterly romantic, appealing Violin Concerto.
The Dramatic Symphony is 'wonderful'? Nope - not for me: an awful lot of huffing and puffing and turgid development. I've returned to it on a number of occasions and find it frustrating and hard work to listen to every time. Rubinstein's problem is that he doesn't know when to stop...
Mind you, we could do with a recording by an absolutely first-class orchestra and conductor (specifically, without the tuning problems in the performance on Russian Disc and with rather more vim than that on MP/Naxos.)
I think you have put your finger on Rubinstein's problem. He didn't know when to stop. I enjoy his music enormously, and, at its best it is prodigal of melody and just sweeps you along, but so often it simply outstays its welcome - which is such a pity. (The Concert Etudes are a case in point: some of them just go on and on and on, with material that can't stand that sort of repetition, so that one begins to feel one is being beaten about the head with a blunt instrument!) Not that this is true of everything he wrote, of course - but it is an underlying fault.
Having said what I have about the 4th Symphony, I am happy to confirm how much I enjoy PCs 3 (my personal favourite) and 4, the VC, and Syms 2 and 6. But I do think that Rubinstein often goes on for too long and that his output is very uneven; and yet I also acknowledge that he was an important figure in Russia. Certainly Tchaikovsky thought so...
Let's not forget the cello concertos (the second of which I value enormously) and PC 5. The last is one of his more successful 'long' works, one in which he was actually able to sustain an extended form without being overly repetitive. The development of the ideas in this work is also quite accomplished.
Interesting that Rubinstein has managed to sustain so much interest and debate here.
Yes, like you Jim, I find the Piano Concerto No.5 a really powerful piece which doesn't outstay its welcome. The first movement in particular has a granite-like solidity to those mighty chords. A grand, grand conception. I've "rediscovered" the attractions of the first two concertos in the last week, but would rate No.3 as the most satisfying after No.5. I've never shared everyone else's enthusiasm for No.4, but I know that's my loss. Amongst the symphonies Nos.2 and 6 work best, but I can see what people find so attractive about No.5, even though I don't think it a very well put together piece. The Quintet for Piano & Winds, Octet and the first three Piano Trios are great fun. The Piano Sonatas make for a good listen...
The list of Rubinstein works I enjoy goes on. There's no doubt that he was an eminent musical educator, one of the two greatest pianists of his time and a composer of often enjoyable music but I just don't think that he's a great composer.
Quote from: Mark Thomas on Sunday 22 August 2010, 16:01
but I just don't think that he's a great composer.
Quite, Mark. Unlike Raff...
I think that his output is erratic, but I consider him a second-string composer with a handful of truly great works which should establish him firmly in the repertory - certainly by more than the paltry few by which he is barely known.
There are some pieces by Rubunstein that I enjoy, others that I do not. I can make the same comment about a great many unsungs.
It must be remembered that a lot of the criticism of Rubinstein in Russia was politically motivated, including the condemnation issuing from Cui and the Mighty Handful and their admirers. To an extent, those criticisms have propagated down through the years, or at least influenced the way critics listen to Rubinstein.
Fact is, there have been recordings of Rubinstein's music around for many years. He is not a new-found unsung. And if he is a second- or thrid-tier composer, he has never been completely ignored or "lost."
Quote from: Peter1953 on Sunday 22 August 2010, 09:30
It is very well possible that my adoration is due to a lack of musical knowledge.
If that is true (and i do not think it is), then I am in the same club as you Peter.
I am not a musicologist and only a third rate hack pianist, but I love Rubinstein. Obviously, i could not explain why in 13,000 words and I would not waste my time in trying to do so. I simply enjoy the music and leave the indepth explanations of lack of thematic development to the experts.
I once almost crippled myself on the "Staccato" Etude. Is there anyone here who can play this???
Thal
Hi Thal,
I bought the music for the "Staccato" Etude a few weeks ago with the intention of trying to learn it. I tried, put it on one side and left it alone! The Valse Caprice in E flat, that's a different kettle of fish altoghther in that I can make a half decent stab at it!
Might go back to the etude, now you mention it...
Good luck. I too put it to one side.
About 5 years ago ;D
Thal
Just as an aside: I don't think it takes an expert musicologist to understand that a 66-minute symphony, such as Rubinstein's 4th, must be able to justify its length. Unfortunately R4 cannot. However, this doesn't mean that one cannot enjoy this composer. We just have to be realistic about his ultimate position in the pantheon.
Raff is certainly, IMHO, a superior composer to Rubinstein, though, as I've said, I do enjoy a lot of his music. As to the Staccato Etude, good luck, Jim. As well as being immensely difficult, it's one of those pieces which goes on and on and on... without really getting anywhere. A pianist needs a lot of stamina to get through it - and so, alas, does the audience!
Quote from: Gareth Vaughan on Sunday 22 August 2010, 21:22As to the Staccato Etude, good luck, Jim. As well as being immensely difficult, it's one of those pieces which goes on and on and on... without really getting anywhere. A pianist needs a lot of stamina to get through it - and so, alas, does the audience!
I don't know whether you were aiming your comment to Jonathan or Thal, but I'd love to take a stab at the Staccato Etude. If, that is, you (or anybody else here) would care to send me a piano! ;)
Well the audience would need a lot of stamina if it were me playing, since at the moment it would probably take me about 30 minutes.
Indeed, a piano is essential, but a pneumatic drill would help as well.
All this Rubinstein talk has given me the urge to play badly some more of his compositions. I am off to destroy the Yankee Doodle variations.
Thal
Now that the conversation has moved to Rubinstein in general (as opposed to just the 5th symphony,) I feel justified in quoting a little G. B. Shaw for your reading pleasure. Enjoy, David
20 December 1893
...Mention of the London Symphony Concerts reminds me that I said nothing at the time about the last one, at which Mr. Henschel revived Rubinstein's Ramsgate Symphony, sometimes described as The Ocean.
In judging this work it should be borne in mind that Rubinstein is a Russian, and that in no country in Europe is it possible to keep so far away from the ocean as in Russia. Also that Rubinstein's rating as a composer is not high. He is only oceanic in respect of not being fresh, and of being drenchingly copious. His songs, duets, and pianoforte pieces are sincerely sentimental and sometimes pretty, though they are all compiled from the works of greater composers; but an ocean symphony-no, thank you.
If I cannot have Wagner's sea music, I can content myself with Mendelssohn's Hebrides, or even Grieg's scrap of storm music in Peer Gynt, or, if no better may be, with Strauss' North Sea waltz played in the true Strauss manner. I only draw the line at Rubinstein's attempt to stuff out the chords of C and G major with musical chaff to something like the bigness of the round pond in Kensington Gardens. It is no use: the thing, oceanically considered, is a failure. Leave the ocean out of the question, and you have a bustling and passable third-hand Schubert symphony. Mr Henschel mercifully cut two movements out of it; and when he proceeds to cut out the other four my enjoyment of the work will be complete. By way of putting Rubinstein entirely out of countenance, his work was prefaced by Weber's Ocean, thou mighty monster, sung by Mrs. Eaton, a lady of formidable physical powers, which she used with due discetion and artistic feeling...
Quote from: Amphissa on Sunday 22 August 2010, 16:56
Fact is, there have been recordings of Rubinstein's music around for many years. He is not a new-found unsung. And if he is a second- or thrid-tier composer, he has never been completely ignored or "lost."
This is true for the piano music, for Piano Concertos 3, 4, and 5 but not much else. Candide had recordings of the 2nd and 6th symphonies but that's about it. Somehow, miraculously, in the cd era suddenly there was a bounty of Rubsinstein that came out of the blue. Finally, we could here all of the symphonies, one Opera, and a huge trove of chamber music that if we knew existed, had no way to hear. I would agree that he is a second or third tier composer, and there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, he's in rather good company. There's a lot of music from 2nd and 3rd rate composers that I really enjoy, and so do a lot of other people.
I once heard a classical radio announcer toying with the audience after playing the Rubinstein 5th symphony. He said something like, "What was that we heard? Is it badly orchestrated Beethoven? Or maybe badly composed Mendelssohn?" As much as I hated what he said, I got it. Rubinstein wasn't a brilliant orchestrator in the Mighty Handful method. And his music does suffer from a heaviness. As much as I appreciated the Marco Polo effort, I do wish we could have a new cycle with better orchestras and maybe even better conductors (I nominate George Hanson of the Tucson Symphony) so that it would be possible to re-evaluate him. Lord knows what a difference a really good recording makes. The Tudor Raff set is so much better than the Marco Polo's over all that it just makes the music sound better.
I cannot play the Staccato Etude. Not in a million years. It's back to Hanon exercises for me!
Quote from: Alan Howe on Sunday 22 August 2010, 13:17
Having said what I have about the 4th Symphony, I am happy to confirm how much I enjoy PCs 3 (my personal favourite) and 4, the VC, and Syms 2 and 6. But I do think that Rubinstein often goes on for too long and that his output is very uneven; and yet I also acknowledge that he was an important figure in Russia. Certainly Tchaikovsky thought so...
I'd say Rubinstein has something for everyone. for example ppl here seem to love the symphonies 4 and 6 but i'd chose the 5th any day of the week for the Ist and IInd movement. Also love the 2nd cello concerto and the 3rd piano concerto ....I really enjoy the Ist movement which I feel is a waltz in disguise!!!(since I'm a huge Strauss buff!!!! ;D)
And while we are on the subject of Rubinstein.... I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Amazing Kamennïy-ostrov!!! (24 beautiful treasures) of which the no. 20 is surely a masterpiece worthy of standing on its own in any concert hall without any apology!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you all very much for your interesting and useful comments. It's obvious that I don't agree with everything, but I'm not going in discussion. Well, one thing. For me Symphony 4 is a beautiful, massive work, not one minute too long (however, it's not his best symphony). But I'll guess that's due to my strange taste. No, I cannot confirm that Rubinstein didn't know when to stop. In fact, I wish he never had stopped... ;)
And all the criticism he got in his days, well, I'm almost sure it was mainly Jalousie de métier.
Yes FBerwald, there are a lot of gems in his piano works. For me Joseph Banowetz is the major advocate of Rubinstein's piano music. I can only hope that one day Raff gets his Banowetz.
How many new unsung music I've learned thanks to this Forum, for me Rubinstein is still the Number One (very, very closely followed by Raff).
If Nguyen isn't Raff's Banowetz, she's damn close. Man, that's a weird sounding sentence! :D
It would seem that the amount of discussion on Rubinstein's music is in inverse proportion to the quality of most of his music...
That's probably unfair, but I think the general consensus is that he was uneven and that his besetting problem was a failure to sustain his musical arguments adequately when working on a large canvas. Of course, there were exceptions and I see no reason to object when fans of his music express affection for his music.
What I do think is that there were more gifted composers deserving of our attention writing at approximately the same time as Rubinstein...
Sorry, it wasn't meant to come across as an objection, merely an observation (and one pre-echoed by an earlier contributor).
And I agree that there are several unsung Russian composers more worthy of lengthy discussion. When (if) I get my brain into gear, I'll try and get something going by starting a new topic.
Actually, I meant composers in general - not just Russian ones.
Is there a modern recording of the Violin Concerto? I have an old reel to reel tape version that needs an update.
The 'latest' recording is by Takako Nishizaki on Marco Polo (I'm not sure about the release date but it has to be in the late 80's) re-released on Naxos. It's quite a well balanced and fine recording!!!
A five-second search in Amazon would have revealed it to you.