# Camille Saint-Saëns Symphony 3 (Organ)



## Mecc (Jul 2, 2018)

Dear All,

First of all thank you for you always so helpful comments.

Regarding Camille Saint-Saëns Symphony No. 3 in C Minor (Organ Symphony).

Could you please help me understand this symphony better from all senses since it is quite a beautiful one.

Some examples of what I am looking to learn are: themes, musical motifs, interesting history of the piece, structure, inspiration for the piece etc. Anything related is welcome.

I also welcome any books, links, videos and any other material which you find relevant and can help me understand this symphony better.

Thanking you in anticipation,

Regards,

Mecc


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Google it; look up analytical bios of Saint-Saens; listen to it repeatedly, watch "Babe"; all the things a normal person would do if he had to write it up for class.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

MarkW said:


> . . .watch "Babe".


ROFL! I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything when I read that.


----------



## Mecc (Jul 2, 2018)

MarkW said:


> Google it


@MarkW. If only you were Sherlock Holmes...

I'm asking for the things that I would miss when Googling it like a book about it or anything you might have learnt about it throughout the years.


----------



## Mecc (Jul 2, 2018)

manxfeeder said:


> rofl! I'm glad i wasn't drinking anything when i read that.


lol ?????? Me too. Lmao


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I'm afraid anything I would have learned over the years would have been from reading liner notes because I haven't personally found him interesting enough to study more intensely. But that's just me. Your mileage might vary.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

MarkW said:


> Google it; look up analytical bios of Saint-Saens; listen to it repeatedly, watch "Babe"; all the things a normal person would do if he had to write it up for class.


It is also used in LA Story.

I suppose the thing to do is to understand Saint-Saens career as a composer and view the symphony in the light of that. To me he was an ultra-conservative who occasionally - and more often for it to have been mere chance - hit the target. I do find some of his music dreary.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

I can't say I find anything of Saint-Saens "dreary". He was a consummate professional. Everything he wrote is perfectly judged - flawless in technique and execution. He always seemed to understand when to stop - nothing over stays its welcome. Great tunesmith, brilliant orchestrator and knew how to harmonize better than most anyone. His chamber music is exquisite. So why isn't he better known? Why is so much of his output consigned to the dust bin? Was it is conservatism? That probably had something to do with it. Maybe his goal of writing music that is so beautiful made it impossible for him to break new ground and become revolutionary. Whenever I play his early symphonies I regret that they are totally absent from concerts - they're wonderful! The concertos are the same ones over and over. Thankfully he wrote Danse Macabre and the Organ Symphony - masterworks which have secure places in the repertoire. Saint-Saens is also hampered by being French. In the English speaking world we tend to ignore those French composers of the late 19th c. Far and few between are biographies and performances of not only Saint-Saens, but also Franck, Massenet, Dukas, Chausson and others. There's some great music that would sure be a nice relief from the constant repetition of the Austrian/German repertoire.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

The 3rd symphony is imo one of Saint-Saens' most dreary works. Apparently he liked a really big organ. One work that always seems incredibly overblown and static (other than the organ symphony with its crashing and utterly banal finale) is the introduction and rondo capriccioso for concertante violin. I should like it better because it isn't a horrible piece really, but it seems so much less than the sum of its parts. Saint-Saens was a genius in many respects; some of his chamber music is really top notch (although not equal to Faure) but somehow to my ears and eyes Saint-Saens mainly squandered his gifts. I believe that was Wagner's view also.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

The Danse Macabre also always seems a tad Looney Tunes rather than the real thing


----------



## Anankasmo (Jun 23, 2017)

For me S-S is actually the composer who wrote the most organically and none of his works are imo static. Static would be Mahler or Brahms...... Also conservatism is always held against S-S but people tend to forget that he got around 85 years old. In his youth he was considered quite avantgarde 
But i think no one can expect a 80 year old man to be still enthusiastic about modern musical development. Cut him some slack will you?

Now regarding the Organ symphony:
Some cool links
[URL="https://www.theguardian.com/music/tomserviceblog/2014/feb/25/symphony-guide-saint-saens-organ-tom-service"]https://www.theguardian.com/music/tomserviceblog/2014/feb/25/symphony-guide-saint-saens-organ-tom-service
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Organ-Symphony
http://cincinnatisymphony.org/program-notes/15-16/saint-sa%C3%ABns-organ-symphony/

Imo a really great symphony and the absolute milestone in French symphonic literature!!!


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Eusebius12 said:


> The 3rd symphony is imo one of Saint-Saens' most dreary works. Apparently he liked a really big organ.


That's just a rumour. ;-)


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

mbhaub said:


> I can't say I find anything of Saint-Saens "dreary". He was a consummate professional. Everything he wrote is perfectly judged - flawless in technique and execution. He always seemed to understand when to stop - nothing over stays its welcome. Great tunesmith, brilliant orchestrator and knew how to harmonize better than most anyone. His chamber music is exquisite. So why isn't he better known? Why is so much of his output consigned to the dust bin? Was it is conservatism? That probably had something to do with it. Maybe his goal of writing music that is so beautiful made it impossible for him to break new ground and become revolutionary. Whenever I play his early symphonies I regret that they are totally absent from concerts - they're wonderful! The concertos are the same ones over and over. Thankfully he wrote Danse Macabre and the Organ Symphony - masterworks which have secure places in the repertoire. Saint-Saens is also hampered by being French. In the English speaking world we tend to ignore those French composers of the late 19th c. Far and few between are biographies and performances of not only Saint-Saens, but also Franck, Massenet, Dukas, Chausson and others. There's some great music that would sure be a nice relief from the constant repetition of the Austrian/German repertoire.


It is not a musical form of racism that makes me find much Saint-Saens dreary and without much in the way of inspiration. And as I said he hit the target quite often, too. But, when I compare him with others of perhaps similar stature I do find him less interesting. Compare his mature music to Dvorak's, for example. Dvorak can let his hair down, he can be really wild and his music is _*packed *_with invention. It took Dvorak a long time to get there but he did. To me Saint-Saens never fully realised his early promise.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Mmm well actually from his own words he rather liked smaller organs, but I won't elaborate. Let's say his predilections wouldn't be tolerated as much today. Unless he happened to be the musical director of a powerful opera house.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Faure evolved more though, Saint-Saense seemed to revert to a pre-Brahmsian academicism.


----------

