# Prokofiev on Bartok and vice-versa



## hecube (Oct 28, 2015)

I'm curious to see if two of my favorite composers have left written opinions on each other's works or general opinions about themselves.

I've been searching for the last few days but haven't found anything yet.

Anyone?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Since both Bartok and Prokofiev are particular favorites of mine, I emailed Harlow Robinson that very same question some years ago--is there any record of what these two contemporaries thought of one another? Robinson replied that he knew of no interaction, correspondence, opinion whatsoever on either side--it is as if they lived in separate universes. I would surely like to know--both men were fierce pianists, outspokenly opinionated, making their own musical paths in the shadows of Stravinsky and Schoenberg--and doing so very successfully in my view.


----------



## hecube (Oct 28, 2015)

Considering that Bartok was aware of what Schoenberg was doing (wanting to teach a lesson about atonality), I find it odd that two composers who are alike (in my mind) in term of musical language, if not by their means on achieving their musical language, would not have interacted at some level.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

It is strange that there is no record of interaction or of opinion. We know that Prokofiev was very free with opinions on his peers, to the extent that he thought he had peers. He famously wrote that Stravinsky's Firebird had almost no music in it, and what little there was, was warmed-over Rimsky-Korsakov's _Sadko_. He also opined that Ravel was "the only composer in France who knows what he is doing". Perhaps he made an exception for Poulenc, as they often played bridge.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Strange magic, I believe Prokofiev also admired the music of Roussel .


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

I'd imagine that Prokofiev much admired Bartók and with good reason. I doubt the latter cared much for Prokofiev, though. Why would he?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Morimur said:


> I'd imagine that Prokofiev much admired Bartók and with good reason. I doubt the latter cared much for Prokofiev, though. Why would he?


But what are the facts?


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Morimur said:


> I'd imagine that Prokofiev much admired Bartók and with good reason. I doubt the latter cared much for Prokofiev, though. Why would he?


Hypothetically? Because Prokofiev made some of the most important contributions to the piano repertoire in the 20thc and Bartok was a pianist. Because he had a thoroughly original voice and it is likely Bartok was smart enough to value this. Because he wrote excellent works in every genre of instrumental and vocal music.


----------



## Epilogue (Sep 20, 2015)

Good thing it wasn't just a haphazardly original voice!


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Epilogue said:


> Good thing it wasn't just a haphazardly original voice!


If you have something substantive to say about Prokofiev's style, and you are able to back it up, why not just do so rather than resorting to backhanded sarcasm? There are at least three contributors on this thread who, I suspect, know his music well. You could count on immediate feedback. Or, better yet, you could contribute something to the actual subject of the thread!

hecube: I know of no record of comment by either composer on the other. But then my main source on Prokofiev is the Robinson and Strange Magic clearly has that covered.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

I would appreciate Morimur's input on the opinions that Prokofiev and Bartok might have had about one another, in the absence of any record of their relationship or contact. M clearly put it out there as a teaser, and, like a fish, I rise to the bait.....

Again, what are the facts?


----------



## Epilogue (Sep 20, 2015)

EdwardBast said:


> If you have something substantive to say about Prokofiev's style, and you are able to back it up, why not just do so rather than resorting to backhanded sarcasm?


Now why would you think I was being sarcastic?



EdwardBast said:


> Or, better yet, you could contribute something to the actual subject of the thread!


You mean like you aren't?


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Epilogue said:


> Now why would you think I was being sarcastic?


Because I have extraordinary powers of perception. You have responded exactly as I expected.



Epilogue said:


> You mean like you aren't?


I did, confirming Strange Magic's conclusion based on Prokofiev's biography by Harlow Robinson.


----------



## Epilogue (Sep 20, 2015)

EdwardBast said:


> You have responded exactly as I expected.


The lack of a contraction makes it extra convincing!


----------

