Tchaikovsky's Birthday Puzzle

[shostakovich]

Beethoven born just past midnight? Pish-tosh. If you look up Tchaikovsky's birthdate, you will likely find May 7, 1840 (Brahms's 7th birthday). Yet neither Tchaikovsky, his mother, father, nor anyone who knew them thought so. How come?<P>Elsewhere there was a suggestion of starting a Tchaikovsky topic. How better to do it than with a quiz (sorry,the teacher in me can't resist)? And don't forget there is still a choreographer multiple challenge under "Mystery Personages". If anyone knows about choreographers, or knows anyone who knows about choreographers, the WHO IZZY part is not tough. The last question might provide some "prurient interest". NOW, will you guys give it a shot? Good luck.<BR>Shos

[Peter]

Something to do with a different position of the International Date Line, Shos?

[John]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by shostakovich:<BR><B>... If you look up Tchaikovsky's birthdate, you will likely find May 7, 1840 (Brahms's 7th birthday). Yet neither Tchaikovsky, his mother, father, nor anyone who knew them thought so. How come?.... </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Shos:<P>I think it had to do with the fact that Russia was still using the "old style" calendar (Julian dates) until 1918, when they embraced the "new style" calendar (Gregorian dates). So, depending on which calendar you looked at, he was either born on April 25 or May 7. Did I get it?<P>John

[shostakovich]

Yes, John, you got it. It's ironic that it took a revolution that put down religion to adopt a Christian (Gregorian) calendar. I have been gone for a bit, and I'd like to generate some interest in the first composer I fell in love with. <P>Let's start with "What OBSCURE Tchaikovsky work do you think we would all enjoy?" My own candidate is his 7th Symphony. It actually is by Tchaikovsky, but is a patch job by another composer. Yet, it is thoroughly enjoyable (for any Tchaikovsky fan).<BR>In 1962 "Tchaikovsky's 7th" made its recording debut on Columbia Records with Ormandy and the Philadelphia. It turned out to be a "reconstruction" by Semyon Bogatyriev. PT actually did begin a 7th. <P>Tchaikovsky, himself, wrote to a friend on May 20, 1892, "I have begun to compose a symphony but it doesn't go as smoothly as I might wish. I'm afraid that this is the beginning of the end, that is that I've written myself out." Faced with the orchestration of something that didn't satisfy him, he abandoned the symphony on Dec 16 (that long shadow of Beethoven?). For some reason he was willing to convert it to a concerto. The first movement was completed, and appears now as his 3rd cto. The 2nd and 3rd were later "completed" by Taneiev as "Andante for Piano and Orch" and "Finale for Piano and Orch". About 1950 Bogatyriev began reconstructing. He used Tchaikovsky's 1st mvmt with parts of the concerto to fill in unfinished portions. For the 2nd and 4th movements he used Tchaikovsky's sketches with Taneiev's "completions". The 3rd movement was lost, so he went to an alternative Scherzo from Op 72 (piano pieces). <P>So the planned 7th Sym, as finally realized, is actually the work of 3 men, but we owe it to Bogatyriev that it exists as a symphony. Reading about it, you would think searching it out would not prove rewarding. It also explains it's obscurity in spite of a splashy Ormandy-Phila-Columbia entry into recordings. I rank the finished work on a par with Tchaikovsky's 1st 3 syms in terms of listening pleasure. ENJOY (if you can find)!!<BR>Shos

[John]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by shostakovich:<BR><B>... I have been gone for a bit....</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Shos:<P>Welcome back! I thought it was uncharacteristic of you to sit silently on the sidelines. Interesting tidbit regarding Tchaikovsky. I will certainly look for this piece.<P>I'd like to get another test from you -- I find it both fun and educational. Peter, Michael - what do you say?<P>John<P><BR>

[BenG]

Shos, I thought I knew a LOT about Tchaikovsky, but I've never heard anything about a '7th' symphony. I will look for it. <P>As for his 'obscure; works...I would suggest listening to his 'Voyevode,' a symphonic ballad. Opus 78. It's not a long work, but it seems to sum up a lot about his style. Gloomy resignation, beautiful melody, a passionate longing for impossible resolutions and the abruptness of tragic fate. It's a gem, even though it was not well-received in its time. My personal fav (though perhaps not as obscure) is 'Francesca da Rimini.' It's far, far superior to the more popular 'Romeo and Juliet.' And now that I think of it--he DID write a '7th' symphony, but it was never assigned a numeral. It's his 'Manfred' Symphony...another wonderful, if overly long and wandering work.<P>By the way, I think his second piano concerto is great to listen to...but it unfortunately got eclipsed by the overwhelming popularity of his first. I think I read somewhere that T. was working on a third piano concerto that perhaps was finished by someone else--similar to the 7th symphony scenario....but my memory is hazy now.<P>-Ben

[shostakovich]

Voyevode is obscure and worthwhile for sure. The turbulent beginning I like a lot. The "gloomy resignation" seems a let-down. I think he also wrote an opera, The Voyevode. Francesca and Manfred are among my favorites in Tchaikovsky. <P>Now for some heresy. I agree with Nicholas Rubinstein about the first concerto. It's awful. That is only this person's (and Rubinstein's) view. It conflicts with many other opinions certainly. After the wonderful 3-minute introduction it's a complete disappointment. The main theme of the first movement (called the "Blind Beggar Theme" I believe) is awkward and unloveable (a rare situation when I dislike a Russian tune). The second movement is OK for a student (which Tchaikovsky was), but unmemorable when viewed in the perspective of all that would follow in his life. The 3rd movement is also awkward, and saved (in my opinion) only by the demand of bravura playing. It's spectacular playing that saves mediocre music here. "Unplayable" is what Rubinstein called it. And that was about the nicest thing he said.<P>The Violin Concerto, also pronounced "unplayable", also maintains its popularity due primarily to the bravura playing. The concerto is also more successful regarding tunes. Somehow it falls short of great music to me. Its popularity is undeniable, and my feeling that it is substandard Tchaikovsky may be a minority opinion. <P>Now let me go on to talk about all Tchaikovsky works in the form of soloist and orchestra. I believe this combination was Tchaikovsky's weakest. He was wonderful with orchestra, voices, and piano solo. Why was his soloist-with-orchestra work so relatively unsatisfactory (with me)? I don't know. It's just my take on the music. Some of you will remember I'm the guy who has trouble believing Schubert was good enough to write the Unfinished.<P>I actually enjoy the violin concerto, but not the piano concerto. His other works in the form of soloist-and-orch that I've heard are the other 2 piano concertos and the Concert Fantasy for P&O. All substandard Tchaikovsky. The Serenade Melancolique for V&O, now that I think of it, is not bad. Maybe I have to revise to saying it's only his P&O music that is substandard Tchaikovsky (to me). That means the 3 concertos and the Concert Fantasy. <BR> <BR>Well, getting this out to you has helped me. I can now redeem the violin concerto in my own mind. It was difficult to like it and call it trash. V&O YES, P&O NO!! Well, that only leaves the Rococo Variations for cello & orch that I know of. I've always felt that was good as music, but it leaves me cold, so I remain ambivalent about it. At least my discomfort on Tchaikovsky has been reduced to one work. <P>Are there any other heretics or missionaries who would like to talk Tchaikovsky? The topic heading is really for his music, and not my ideas about it. I just feel better having gotten the above out of my system.<BR>Shos

[BenG]

I also must admit to having misgivings about his first piano concerto. The opening portal device is magical. I do like the work, but I can see your point. Wading through some of it can be tiresome. Parts of that skipping...organ grinder-like melody seems coarse and unappealing. I like his 2nd piano concerto much better. It seems technically better even if some people think it isn't as emotionally engaging. They say Tchaikovsky had an extraordinary flair for the instrument and it shows.<P>I DO think his Violin Concerto is a masterpiece even though one critic of the time (it may have been Haszlick) thought it was music that stinks to the ears. I've never grown tired of it. But to me, the BEST violin concerto of the 19th century was penned by Brahms. I also think he was better than Tchaikovsky at integrating instruments into a coherent whole.<P>Surprisingly, I've heard there was a long period where Tchaikovsky's suites were more popular than his symphonies. I like some of his suites, but they can't compare with his masterpieces.<P>--Ben G (not to be confused with Ben F)

[BenG]

Another 'obscure' Tchaikovsky piece to consider: His Piano Trio Op. 50. There he does a very nice job of combining the P with the V.

[Peter]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by John:<BR><B> Shos:<BR>Welcome back! I thought it was uncharacteristic of you to sit silently on the sidelines. Interesting tidbit regarding Tchaikovsky. I will certainly look for this piece.<BR>I'd like to get another test from you -- I find it both fun and educational. Peter, Michael - what do you say?<BR>John<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I agree, John. Shos obviously puts a lot of work into presenting his mysteries (I wouldn`t know where to begin if I were setting them), & I think it`s a bit of a shame that more posters don`t at least try & join in the fun of solving them.<P>This reminds me: Whatever happened to Flowerboy (Brandon), our resident conductor? And Lliam, my fellow Englishman? Are you still with us, chaps?

[shostakovich]

Glad you asked about Lliam and Brandon, Peter. I miss them, too. I'm not sure when I'll get back to quizzes. In the meantime I'd love to see some. Riddler was doing some on Nicole's board. Ethan's about Beethoven being rapped 3 time didn't seem serious to me, either. It turned out a good story.<P>Hi BenG (not to ---). I may not be fair to the 2nd concerto. My recording is a dull clunker. I find no particular fault in the music. Maybe a great performance would wake me up. At the moment I like the 3rd best, but they are all still in the bummer box for me. The suites are sugar and spice, very pleasant. I can't understand why they would be competition for the symphonies, though. I like the piano trio, too. My aversion to chamber music does not extend to Tchaikovsky. I enjoy (with 4 exceptions) everything of his that I've heard.<BR>Shos