# Britten Sinfonia da Requiem meaning?



## vamptillready (Nov 7, 2013)

What is this piece really about?
We know that Britten was a pacifist, but what do we think each movement is actually showing? And to that avail, where does the dedication for his parents come into the piece?


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

vamptillready said:


> What is this piece really about?
> We know that Britten was a pacifist, but what do we think each movement is actually showing? And to that avail, where does the dedication for his parents come into the piece?


It is a title only, not the title of a novel with a storyline within the pages after the title.

Most music, even those pieces with a slightly evocative title, is not directly about anything literal, and most music (western classical, without sung or spoken texts) does not tell any sort of story.

The movements are not 'showing' us anything specific.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Irving Kolodin has covered this subject.
The requiem was written for the reconsecration of the new Coventry Cathedral, the original had been destroyed by German bombing.
Britten used the Mass for the Dead and added the words of Wilfred Owen the famous poet killed in WW I.
What Britten communicated in his work was an overriding sense of compassion for human misery,this was not acquired late in life
nor restricted to passive expression.

You will note that the original soloists were to be from England,Russia and Germany.
Britten's aim was to persuade us that war is the enemy and that there are no victors--only victims.
As to the dedication to his parents---what is strange about that ?


----------



## vamptillready (Nov 7, 2013)

Britten was a homosexual pacifist and then writes a requiem, how can this only be a title?


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

vamptillready said:


> Britten was a homosexual pacifist and then writes a war requiem, how can this only be a title?


Dude, classical music's LGBT pacifists are probably legion. Besides the usual C20 suspects (apart from Britten lets have Ravel, Barber, Poulenc, Copland, Britten, Henze, Szymanowski, Tippett, Bernstein, Maxwell Davies, Cowell, Cage) let's add Tchaikovsky (obviously), Lully, Schubert, Saint-Saens, Corelli, Handel and quite probably Beethoven (now there'll be some tantrums about that for sure). I bet some of those were pacifist - especially the C20 chaps. Now think of all the titles these and others gave pieces

PetrB and Moody probably give you a good steer as to the significance of the title but if you're looking at Britten's attitude to attraction and war as heavy signifiers you may get diminishing returns. Just enjoy the music


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

vamptillready said:


> Britten was a homosexual pacifist and then writes a war requiem, how can this only be a title?


I think that a pacifist would certainly write a requiem.
Have you a worry about homosexuals ?
I've done my best,but apparently it's not good enough for you.
I suggest you go ahead and do your own investigation,surprised you hadn't actually.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Iwas typing up my post when yours must have appeared dgee.


----------



## vamptillready (Nov 7, 2013)

I totally agree that pacifists obviously write about war and all aspects of it. My question was what is Britten trying to address with this piece? The first mov is an oppressive one, and the third is lighter. However, what on earth is the second all about? He is not writing it for the sake of writing, why is it this piece which is titled something that he is strongly against the one that he chooses to dedicate to his parents?


----------



## SuperTonic (Jun 3, 2010)

It seems that there may be some confusion about what piece we are discussing. The Sinfonia da Requiem that is referenced in the thread title is not the same as the War Requiem, which is the work I believe that moody was referring to in his first post of the thread.

The Sinfonia da Requiem was written just prior to the outbreak of WW2 in what was supposed to be a fulfillment of a commission for the Japanese government to celebrate a significant anniversary of the foundation of the Japanese empire. However, the Japanese were insulted by the Latin title of the work suggesting a Catholic ritual and the sombre mood of the music and refused to accept it. Some have suggested that Britten was deliberately trying to insult the Japanese in response to the war that Japan had been fighting in China. In reality, Britten had already begun to work on the piece which was originally intended as a memorial to his parents, when he received the contract for the commission. The contract only gave him six weeks to fulfill the commission, which was not enough time for him to start a new work that would have been more appropriate for the occasion. So he chose to use the Sinfonia which was mostly complete at the time he received the contract. Britten claims that he went to the Japanese consulate and told them the nature of the work and was told at that time that it would be acceptable. It was months later that he was told that the work was found to be unacceptable and would not be premiered as part of the celebration in Japan.
The work was premiered in New York City in 1941 instead.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

SuperTonic said:


> It seems that there may be some confusion about what piece we are discussing. The Sinfonia da Requiem that is referenced in the thread title is not the same as the War Requiem, which is the work I believe that moody was referring to in his first post of the thread.
> 
> The Sinfonia da Requiem was written just prior to the outbreak of WW2 in what was supposed to be a fulfillment of a commission for the Japanese government to celebrate a significant anniversary of the foundation of the Japanese empire. However, the Japanese were insulted by the Latin title of the work suggesting a Catholic ritual and the sombre mood of the music and refused to accept it. Some have suggested that Britten was deliberately trying to insult the Japanese in response to the war that Japan had been fighting in China. In reality, Britten had already begun to work on the piece which was originally intended as a memorial to his parents, when he received the contract for the commission. The contract only gave him six weeks to fulfill the commission, which was not enough time for him to start a new work that would have been more appropriate for the occasion. So he chose to use the Sinfonia which was mostly complete at the time he received the contract. Britten claims that he went to the Japanese consulate and told them the nature of the work and was told at that time that it would be acceptable. It was months later that he was told that the work was found to be unacceptable and would not be premiered as part of the celebration in Japan.
> The work was premiered in New York City in 1941 instead.


You are correct. The _Sinfonia da Requiem_ and _War Requiem_ are separate works. The OP is about the _Sinfonia da Requiem_.


----------

