# The Russian Avant-Garde and other followers of Scriabin



## Dedrater (Mar 2, 2009)

Is anyone else familiar with this music? What do you think about it? Notable composers include Scriabin himself, Leo Ornstein, Sorabji, and Henry Cowell.










I took to these pieces immediately upon hearing them. The terror, strength, and overall force inherent in them was like a necessary jolt straight through the modern ethos -- a cold shower for the figurative drunkard. To my ears, it was an important decrying of the fatalism of the early 20th century. Bartok, Ravel, Schoenberg, Stravisnky -- in contrast their music seemed like bland kitsch composed as a masturbatory experiment. Conversely, Cowell was actually using atonality in an exciting and stirring way.

Not that it's terribly relevant, but Cowell and Ornstein were often associated with Futurism, a movement obsessed with incessant industrialization and technicization. Its proponets were renowned for their pride in the automobile, crowded urban environments, and other diseased nonsense; perhaps this loosely points to why some of their compositions, while not strictly Futurist, sound so machine-like in their assault.

It's fun to listen to from time to time, but I'll take Satie's Gymnopedies instead.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Dedrater said:


> masturbatory experiment


I like Russian composers, too!


----------



## Dedrater (Mar 2, 2009)

Tapkaara said:


> I like Russian composers, too!


I'm not sure what this post is meant to convey, exactly, but I'll be constructive and note that Rachmaninoff is probably one of the ones I'm most interested in.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Dedrater said:


> Bartok, Ravel, Schoenberg, Stravisnky -- in contrast their music seemed like bland kitsch composed as a masturbatory experiment.


 Whatever you say.

Ravel, Bartok, Schoenberg (early pre-12 tone), and Stravinsky composed better music in my opinion than Scriabin, though he had his moments, I think it's rather pointless to put their music against his or to call their music "bland kitsch."

Such an absurd statement. Let's see how Bach weighs in on your assessment. I'm sure he'll happily disagree with you too.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Dedrater said:


> I'm not sure what this post is meant to convey, exactly, but I'll be constructive and note that Rachmaninoff is probably one of the ones I'm most interested in.


I, too, have conducted many masturbatory experiments to the music of Rachmaninov (or JACKmaninOFF, as I sometimes call him). Gotta avoid some of his longer works, though...I get so worn out!

I once tried an experiment with another Russian work, namely, the Nutcracker by Tchaikovsky. I can't have children now.


----------



## Dedrater (Mar 2, 2009)

Mirror Image said:


> Whatever you say.
> 
> Ravel, Bartok, Schoenberg (early pre-12 tone), and Stravinsky composed better music in my opinion than Scriabin, though he had his moments, I think it's rather pointless to put their music against his or to call their music "bland kitsch."


Out of those, I'm partial to Bartok and Ravel, but I dislike Schoenberg and Stravinsky completely. The former two aren't nearly as interesting as Romantic composers like Brahms, Liszt, Bruckner, or Dvorak, but I don't mind them from time to time.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I'm not a big fan of Scriabin, but Ornstein (who lived to 108!) and Cowell seem pretty interesting. I don't think the poster was meant to be belittling other composers like Stravinsky, Bartok or Schoenberg. It is true that the music of the Futurists was more daring, free and innovative in comparison, but it seemed to be so intense and out-there that it failed to find many listeners. No wonder, as I have read on Wikipedia, that Ornstein only found recognition very late in his long life.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Dedrater said:


> Out of those, I'm partial to Bartok and Ravel, but I dislike Schoenberg and Stravinsky completely. The former two aren't nearly as interesting as Romantic composers like Brahms, Liszt, Bruckner, or Dvorak, but I don't mind them from time to time.


I take it you never heard Schoenberg's "Verklarte Nacht (Transfigured Night)"? What do dislike about Stravinsky? You certainly have a right to your opinion, but I would be interested in hearing why you dislike early Schoenberg and Stravinsky.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Andre said:


> I'm not a big fan of Scriabin, but Ornstein (who lived to 108!) and Cowell seem pretty interesting. I don't think the poster was meant to be belittling other composers like Stravinsky, Bartok or Schoenberg. It is true that the music of the Futurists was more daring, free and innovative in comparison, but it seemed to be so intense and out-there that it failed to find many listeners. No wonder, as I have read on Wikipedia, that Ornstein only found recognition very late in his long life.


Being innovative, free, and daring doesn't make something good music. Ornstein's music isn't appealing nor is Cowell's to me. I'm not into experimental for it's own sake. I like melody, harmony, rhythm, and structure.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Mirror Image said:


> Being innovative, free, and daring doesn't make something good music. Ornstein's music isn't appealing nor is Cowell's to me. I'm not into experimental for it's own sake. I like melody, harmony, rhythm, and structure.


I'm different, I like music that breaks those rules. This is why I like Varese so much. I think he took what Stravinsky started in the _Rite of Spring _several steps further. Indeed, compared to Varese's _Arcana_ or _Ameriques_, Stravinsky's _Rite_ does sound tame...

Sounds like Ornstein & Cowell did similar things, although I haven't been exposed to their music yet...


----------



## Dedrater (Mar 2, 2009)

Mirror Image said:


> I take it you never heard Schoenberg's "Verklarte Nacht (Transfigured Night)"? What do dislike about Stravinsky? You certainly have a right to your opinion, but I would be interested in hearing why you dislike early Schoenberg and Stravinsky.


I don't spend a lot of time digging through the catalogue of a composer if what I read about his general disposition, along with a work or two of his that I've listened to, don't impact me in a considerable way. Stravinsky's music, from what I've listened to, lacks the mainstay qualities that enable music to offer itself as a medium of communication and change.

I will listen to your recommendation.



Mirror Image said:


> Being innovative, free, and daring doesn't make something good music. Ornstein's music isn't appealing nor is Cowell's to me. I'm not into experimental for it's own sake. I like melody, harmony, rhythm, and structure.


I think that experimenting from time to time is healthy, but there needs to be a cogent motive for doing so. Experimentation shouldn't be used as a means to destroying the fundaments of music that are essential for it to have any coherent power.

Why do you like Schoenberg's atonal music if you believe this?


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Dedrater said:


> I don't spend a lot of time digging through the catalogue of a composer if what I read about his general disposition, along with a work or two of his that I've listened to, don't impact me in a considerable way. Stravinsky's music, from what I've listened to, lacks the mainstay qualities that enable music to offer itself as a medium of communication and change.
> 
> I will listen to your recommendation.
> 
> ...


I don't think you've heard enough Stravinsky to come to that conclusion. I would be very interesting hearing what you've heard and what recordings you've heard. It doesn't bother me that you don't like him, but what I am concerned about is the fact that I, too, have said I don't like a composer and end up loving their work. Some composers take more time than others.

Anyway, I NEVER stated that I liked Schoenberg's atonal music. If you scroll up I said I like his pre-12 tone music.

"Verklarte Nacht" is such a mesmerizing piece that I whole-heartedly believe that if this piece of music doesn't touch you, then I'm not sure what will.

This is the recording of "Verklarte Nacht" that you need to hear with Karajan and the Berlin Philharmonic:


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Dedrater said:


> Why do you like Schoenberg's atonal music if you believe this?


As he says, Mirror Image doesn't like Schoenberg's atonal music, he only likes _Verklarte Nacht_. He doesn't like atonal music at all. Me, on the other hand, I don't mind Schoenberg, but I actually prefer Berg and Henze. They had a less technical, and more emotional take on atonalism, I think...


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Andre said:


> As he says, Mirror Image doesn't like Schoenberg's atonal music, he only likes _Verklarte Nacht_. He doesn't like atonal music at all. Me, on the other hand, I don't mind Schoenberg, but I actually prefer Berg and Henze. They had a less technical, and more emotional take on atonalism, I think...


Don't forget about "Pelleas und Melisande" and his orchestration of Brahms' "Piano Quartet No. 1." I like those too. 

Andre, what do you like about atonal music? I mean it has no tonal center, so it makes it very difficult to listen to for me. I don't mind music that pushes the limits of tonality occasionally in a piece like some of Mahler's music, Langgaard's music, among others.


----------



## Bach (Jun 2, 2008)

Mirror Image said:


> Such an absurd statement. Let's see how Bach weighs in on your assessment. I'm sure he'll happily disagree with you too.


Yes, I agree with Mirror. I'm not sure how one can criticise anything for being 'masturbatory' in light of Scriabin's oeuvre..


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Bach said:


> Yes, I agree with Mirror. I'm not sure how one can criticise anything for being 'masturbatory' in light of Scriabin's oeuvre..


I knew you would agree with me about this.


----------

