ABOUT SHOSTAKOVICH AND MAHLER

[denison rosario]

Comment on Shostakovitch: As Mahler belongs to the tradition of the century XIX, they consider Shostakovitch the better sinfonista of the century XX; I like the concerts and the Russian master's quartets a lot (I have 8 Cd's of him); I consider its good mood in the concerts and its ethereal orientalism in the quartets, of good taste; I agree that was a daring to write 15 symphonies and that the popular Tenth are beautiful and balanced, though he seems to write in 10 pages that he could have written in 1 page and also the American symphonies and the one of Hanns Eisler should be listened. <BR>I find important before knowing Mahler the music lover to hear them mass and symphonies of Bruckner, other genius many excluded times!

[shostakovich]

Hi Denison. I'm not keen on chamber music, but will make an exception in (the real) Shostakovich's quartets. Can you recommend one that stands out among the others? I have #2 & #4. They don't draw me into them. Maybe I haven't listened to them enough.<P>Your comment on 10 pages where one will do reminded me of the 7th symphony. It was written during the siege of Leningrad, and the pages were smuggled out to the "west" for first performance. A number of American conductors were trying to get the premiere. It went to Toscanini who performed it over radio on July 19, 1942. The first movement contains a march that goes 13 minutes (in my recording) with changes only in instrumentation and dynamics (shades of Bolero). According to his son, Peter, Bela Bartok was in the listening audience. He was so disgusted with the symphony that he parodied the march in his Concerto for Orchestra ending with the "razzberry" (a sound made by sticking the tongue out and blowing).<BR>Shos

[Brahmsian]

Shotstakovich I think was a very talented musician but went down the wrong path when it came to symphony writing. The true symphonic master of the time was Sibelius. A symphony is best when traditional forms and structure is used, with your own style integrated. Shotstakovich was better then some but not even close to Brahms or Sibelius.

[shostakovich]

Hi Brahmsian. I enjoy Brahms, Sibelius, and Shostakovich. Sibelius was free to be himself, and as it turns out, he forged a path that no one else had trod (unlike Brahms, who stayed strictly on the beaten path of the other 2 Bs). Shostakovich was not free to be himself. He was under the thumb of Soviet (read Stalin's) taste. That he was able to manage some wonderful music (as no one else did) under Soviet dictates is a 20th C miracle. Sibelius and Shostakovich both had a great amount of government support, and they both justified that support. I'm listening to some film music of Shostakovich at the moment. He wrote scores for over 30 films, by the way. <BR>Shos

[shostakovich]

Oops! Can't forget Prokofiev. He made his mark outside of Russia. He returned to his homeland expecting a hero's welcome. He got stomped on and forced to write some drivel, as was Shostakovich. Yet, he also managed some wonderful music in spite of (or maybe because of) the Soviet censors. <P>The other big "Russian" name is Stravinsky, but ALL his major work was done outside of Russia.<BR>Shos<P>By the way, Brahmsian, what do you think of Sibelius's 7th symphony, which is a long way from a standard symphony?

[denison rosario]

really perhaps the fort of Shost is the concert!!! What do of Bruckner find?

[Brahmsian]

Personally, I believe attaching the name symphony to his seventh was a mistake. It was orignally entiltled differently then it ended up. but to make myselft clear, even though sibelius was better then mahler or brukcner he is not even close to Brahms or Beethoven.

[shostakovich]

Hi Brahmsian. You are right. It was originally titled Symphonic Fantasia. I suspect he was pressured to call it a symphony. He was certainly pressured to write an 8th, and a variety of stories have come out about an 8th, from "never started it" to "finished it". No trace of it exists as far as anyone knows.<P>Hi Denison. Shostakovich's concertos? Humor on the piano, deadly serious for strings. Humor in ballets, pomp in films, parody in both. As for Bruckner, it seems he followed the same likeable formula from beginning to end (although the last is unfinished). The last 3 are towering.<BR>Shos