# Which Stravinsky style do you find most interesting.



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Much praise has been given to his folkloristic period to the detriment of his later music for different reasons.

This thread asks whether you have a different take on such a varied oeuvre.


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

An Stravinsky example for each style would be helpful.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Personally, I listen the most to his Russian-influenced/Rimsky-sounding orchestral music. I appreciate the Neo-Classical pieces, but that style doesn't immediately grab me, as well as the later serial music. In other words, it takes effort from me to get to where I understand them. But still, I have favorites from all of his creative periods.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

What is Neo-Medieval / Renaissance Stravinsky?


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Aries said:


> An Stravinsky example for each style would be helpful.


Trying to find works unequivocally all in one of his styles:

Russian Romantic - Symphony in E-flat major

Impressionistic - The Rite of Spring

Neoclassical - Symphony in C

Neo-Baroque - Symphony of Psalms: movement 2

Neo-Renaissance - Mass

Neo-Medieval - Cantata

Serial - Requiem Canticles

Eclectic - Agon


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I find the distinctions/choices confusing. 
To my understanding there are at most around 4-5 periods at most:

1 "Early" (Rimsky influenced, like the first symphony)
2 "Impressionist" Firebird (I'd lump this together with early because even taken together they have so few important pieces)
3 "Russian/barbaric": Le Sacre, Petrouchka, Les Noces etc.
4 "Neo classical/baroque": basically end of WW 1 until the end of WW 2
5 "serial/late": from the early 1950s or so 

My favorites are mostly from 4 + Le Sacre and Petrouchka and maybe Agon from late. Wikipedia lumps 1-3 together as "Russian"


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Kreisler jr said:


> To my understanding there are at most around *4-5 periods* at most


That is why the thread references *styles *and not periods. Though arguably "Eclectic" is not a specific style, in a way most of his pieces are eclectic.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Anyway, my order of preference follows the amount of detail or complexity so I picked Impressionistic, 2nd place goes to Neobaroque and 3rd to Serial.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

The Rite of Spring is not "impressionistic" if Debussy is a paradigm for that dubious label.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Works of the "impressionistic" style are filled with elaborate melodic lines, exotic scales and polychords.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Rite is about as far from Impressionism as anything can be. It is a unique, astonishing work that even Stravinsky never replicated. Although I prefer his early work, it's not a style so much as genre that I like most: his ballets. They're wonderful all the way from Firebird through to The Fairy's Kiss and so on. His music went awry when he hooked up with Robert Craft, who led the master down the hole into the world of serialism.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> Trying to find works unequivocally all in one of his styles:
> 
> Russian Romantic - Symphony in E-flat major
> 
> ...


Based on this, my vote went for Impressionistic.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> Trying to find works unequivocally all in one of his styles:
> 
> Russian Romantic - Symphony in E-flat major
> 
> ...


I recognise the first two and Serial. But I would never divide up Neoclassical, Neo-Baroque, Neo-Renaissance and Neo-Medieval - they are all Neoclassical, a style that covered most of Stravinsky's mature career and contains most of his masterpieces. I think it is a mistake to think of Stravinsky's Neoclassicism as linked only to the Classical period. Even the Serial works are recognisably Neoclassical as well.

I voted Neoclassical but it is disadvantaged by all the divisions. I think I would have preferred not to vote.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Did not vote because just about all of his music has merit.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

mbhaub said:


> His music went awry when he hooked up with Robert Craft, who led the master down the hole into the world of serialism.


Dante put all the interesting people in hell because they were prior to christianity. You are putting the interesting people in a hole because they were posterior to tonality.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

"Le Sacre" is not an Impressionistic work....
I'd group it with the Russian works - Firebird, Petrushka, Les Noces....

I like all of his periods - the Russian was the most immediately appealing to me, but I've grown to appreciate his entire oeuvre over the years....


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I find all of his work interesting, but some of it is not really to my tastes, for example the Rite, the Symphony of Psalms, Symphonies of Winds, and his serial works. Similar to Takemitsu I find Stravinsky sometimes gravitates towards dissonances I find unappealing, and those works are less to my tastes. 

I think the Rite is heavily influenced by impressionistic harmonic language but does not retain the over all feel of impressionism. 

Lately I've been really enjoying listening to the following works:

3 Pieces for String Quartet
Concertino for String Quatrtet
Double Canon for String Quartet
Dumbarton Oaks Concerto
Danses concertantes
Concerto in D
Etudes for orchestra
The Firebird


----------



## 59540 (May 16, 2021)

I think Stravinsky always had something interesting to say, but those first 3 great ballets were hard acts to follow.


----------



## Prodromides (Mar 18, 2012)

Serial for my bowl, please.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

The Rite of Spring wins, in my view.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

This poll doesn't make whole lot of sense. What would've been better if his stylistic periods were divided up: Russian Period, Neoclassical Period and Late Period. This would be a lot better than trying to pigeonhole one of the great chameleons of classical music. Anyway, I can't vote in this poll, because I love Stravinsky from *all* periods.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Neo Romanza said:


> What would've been better if his stylistic periods were divided up: Russian Period, Neoclassical Period and Late Period.


Nope. It would have been conventional and boring. I wanted to show the variety within the "Neoclassical Period" specially. Perhaps I should have divided the "Impressionistic" one simmilarly.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> Nope. It would have been conventional and boring. I wanted to show the variety within the "Neoclassical Period" specially. Perhaps I should have divided the "Impressionistic" one simmilarly.


Ah, yep. My suggestion would've been much better and a shame you feel the need to have such a silly poll in the first-place. Pigeonholing Stravinsky is never a smart thing to do.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> Nope. It would have been conventional and boring. I wanted to show the variety within the "Neoclassical Period" specially. Perhaps I should have divided the "Impressionistic" one simmilarly.


Maybe you should have dropped the poll idea, then. Showing the variety within the Neoclassical period didn't need any voting.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

Stravinsky produced compelling works in every period—all of them essential, in my opinion.


----------



## FrankinUsa (Aug 3, 2021)

Ok…this is my take. I don’t care about the “different” periods in Stravinsky’s oeuvre. I take each piece he wrote and just listen,think about it., will like it or not at my present moment. Things may change in future. However,I think 98% of people interested in classical music do need to experience some Stravinsky and then. An decide if they like,dislike,or interested with future explanation


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

As with that of Paul Hindemith I'm probably more interested in Stravinsky's music from c. 1918-late 1920s when he formulated and then consolidated his new approach but I'm generally happy with his whole output from _The Firebird_ onwards. The handful of works prior to _The Firebird_ don't particularly float my boat - they are ok to listen to once in a blue moon and while I appreciate the role they played in Stravinsky's development I don't find them sufficiently distinctive.


----------

