# Bad reviews and composers' comebacks



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Sometimes composers are demolished by bad reviews. Tchaikovsky was said to be deeply depressed by Hanslick's review of his Violin Concerto and could recite it, bitterly and verbatim, for the rest of his life.

Other composers are made of sterner stuff. Do you know of any snappy comebacks to bad reviews? Here's one. Beethoven was enraged at a bad review of Wellington's Victory written in 1825. He scrawled this across the review:

"O du elender Schuft! Was ich scheisse, ist besser als du je gedacht!"

Google Translate will handle it just fine (I won't, not here). There ought to be a T-shirt for this... :lol:


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

I of course would highlight Varese's struggles...

When first played Hyperprism, was said to ahve brought the audience to blows and the music violently attacked. A conversative WIG composer, Charles Martin Loeffler and known lame *** said: "It would be the negation of all the centuries of musical progress if I were to call this music. . . . Nevertheless . . . this piece roused in me a sort of subconscious racial memory, something elemental that happened before the beginning of recorded time. It affected me as only music of the past has affected me." 

Varese also struck issues with Octandre. The critic of the New York Post said, "If Varèse's composition was the worst offender, there were others which ran it a close race for hideousness and insanity – songs by Carl Ruggles, Anton von Webern, and Alban Berg." Not such bad company! Intégrales was described as bellowings and shrieks from a zoo, the din of passing trains, the hammering of a drunken woodpecker, a thunderbolt striking a tinplate factory". 

With, Amériques in 1926, and Arcana in 1927, one critic wrote: ". . . indescribable turmoil. Some men wildly waved their arms and one was seen to raise both hands high above his head with both thumbs turned down, the death sign of the Roman amphitheater. . . ." 

This just strengthened him and sent him onward.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

With today being *Max Reger's* birthday, we should honor him further with one of his quotes.

"I'm sitting in the smallest room in my house. I have your review before me. Soon it will be behind me."


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Thank you Vaneyes! My only known snappy comebacks are now exhausted. Hope others have some more! Maybe what the composer SHOULD have said?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Upon hearing the first movement of Mahler's Symphony No. 2 played by the composer on the piano, and after uncovering his ears, Hans von Bülow, a noted Wagnerian, said to his friend: "If what I have just heard is music, then I no longer understand anything about music!"

Mahler was devastated, and La Grange makes a good deal out of the fact that he wasn't able to complete the Symphony until after Bülow's death, whereupon the funeral provided the text he chose for the finale.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

*@ Eddie*, I think Varese's general condemnation of ultra conservatism is famous and apt here to add to what you wrote about him: "An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs."

I may dig up some quotes later. Van's one re REger is a classic.

But the greatest comeback is success and endurance. Quite a number of composers whose music is now admired was subjected to various slings and arrows of critics who are now forgotten (or remembered only for their errors of judgement - but thats hindsight for ya!)...


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

What about poor old Rachmaninoff, he certainly had a few run ins like- composer César Cui who likened one of his pieces to a" depiction of the ten plagues of Egypt" 

and Leo Tolstoy - with my favorite quote of Rachy "Is such music needed by anyone? I must tell you how I dislike it all. Beethoven is nonsense, Pushkin and Lermontov also".


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> What about poor old Rachmaninoff, he certainly had a few run ins like- composer César Cui who likened one of his pieces to a" depiction of the ten plagues of Egypt"


I think that's the first symphony. I'll retrieve the quote from our good old friend, Wiki.

"If there were a conservatory in Hell, and if one of its talented students were to compose a programme symphony based on the story of the Ten Plagues of Egypt, and if he were to compose a symphony like Mr. Rachmaninoff's, then he would have fulfilled his task brilliantly and would delight the inhabitants of Hell. To us this music leaves an evil impression with its broken rhythms, obscurity and vagueness of form, meaningless repetition of the same short tricks, the nasal sound of the orchestra, the strained crash of the brass, and above all its sickly perverse harmonization and quasi-melodic outlines, the complete absence of simplicity and naturalness, the complete absence of themes." - Cesar Cui


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

The famous anecdote about how *Tchaikovsky played his freshly composed first piano concerto to Nikolai Rubinstein* and the latter said it was rubbish is now the stuff of legend. A big chunk of Tchaikovsky's memory of it is on wikipedia here

Tchaikovsky describes Rubinstein's reaction as this:

_...Then a torrent poured from Nikolay Grigoryevich's mouth, gentle at first, then more and more growing into the sound of a Jupiter Tonana. It turned out that my concerto was worthless and unplayable; passages were so fragmented, so clumsy, so badly written that they were beyond rescue; the work itself was bad, vulgar; in places I had stolen from other composers; only two or three pages were worth preserving; the rest must be thrown away or completely rewritten.

... There he repeated that my concerto was impossible, pointed out many places where it would have to be completely revised, and said that if within a limited time I reworked the concerto according to his demands, then he would do me the honor of playing my thing at his concert._

To which Tchaikovsky replied:

_"I shall not alter a single note," I answered, "I shall publish the work exactly as it is!" This I did._

& as I said, success & endurance is the best comeback. The work was successful upon its initial performances & has been firmly in the repertoire ever since. Rubinstein changed his mind and ended up playing it! Incidentally Tchaikovsky did make some alterations, but they where minor and of a technical nature.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Another one is Hanslick, the Brahmsian critic, who found joy digging into poor old Bruckner. Bruckner's greatest success was with his 7th symphony. At its premiere in Liepzig, the ovation lasted 15 minutes and one critic said it was the finest symphony since Beethoven's ones. It subsequently had well received performances across Europe and was even performed in the UK and USA, which was an unusual thing with such music back then. Nevertheless, Hanslick applied the sledgehammer saying the work “contains ingenious inspirations, interesting and even pleasant details – but in between the lightnings there are interminable stretches of darkness, leaden boredom, and feverish over-excitement.” Maybe he could have said the same about his poster boy Brahms' piano concertos which similarly streched the genre to its limit, but of course Hanslick could not be so impartial, double standards was his standard.

Hugo Wolf did a reposte to Hanslick saying that all of Brahms symphonies, with the serenades thrown in for good measure, where not worth as much as the single cymbal clash in the slow movement of Bruckner's 7th. The symbolism of that, in terms of the movement being written upon the death of and seen as a memorial to Wagner, would not have escaped the Hanslick clique. Wolf fell out with Brahms due to this, who before supported his works.

But the overall effect of Hanslick on Bruckner was negative. Bruckner's comeback was to come later, closer to our time. Posterity though (& hindsight that your opponents are unbalanced and talking ****) does not comfort you when you are depressed and feel worthless. So Bruckner's comeback if any would have been mixed. When one of his supporters, the Emperor of Austria Franz Joseph I asked Bruckner how he could be of assistance to him, he replied "do something about that Hanslick." How sad.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I like this quote by *Samuel Barber, *given all the flack he often got for not being experimental enough and writing in a retrograde style. I think its a good response, and basically any composer can say it, its a credo that amounts to 'stick to your guns.'

"I'm not a self-conscious composer. It is said that I have no style at all, but that doesn't matter. I just go on doing, as they say, my thing. I believe this takes a certain courage." 

(Sourced from the notes of one of my Barber cds!)...


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

Hanslick was definitely the biggest *** of the 19th century.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Mahlerian said:


> Upon hearing the first movement of Mahler's Symphony No. 2 played by the composer on the piano, and after uncovering his ears, Hans von Bülow, a noted Wagnerian, said to his friend: "If what I have just heard is music, then I no longer understand anything about music!"
> 
> Mahler was devastated, and La Grange makes a good deal out of the fact that he wasn't able to complete the Symphony until after Bülow's death, whereupon the funeral provided the text he chose for the finale.


I can imagine Mahler as he walked away from the grave: cheers mate! You helped me with it after all! :tiphat:


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Ravel's early career was filled with a lot of harsh criticisms of his music, it was labelled as many things from superficial, to laborious and pedantic, to "not real but a 'portrait'", to an all out failure. But his later career was marked by a lot more critical success. Austrian pianist Paul Wittgenstein's (who commissioned the Piano Concerto for the left-hand) over-all response to this Piano Concerto was fairly typical, being initially underwhelmed with the work he later stated: “Only much later, after I’d studied the concerto for months, did I become fascinated by it and realized what a great work it was."

Later in Ravel's career when the critics began to show him favor he stated the following: “Didn’t I represent to the critics for a long time the most perfect example of insensitivity and lack of emotion?... And the successes they have given me in the past few years are just as unimportant.”


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

I suppose it counts as a criticism but when the Emperor Josef heard Don Giovanni, he is supposed to have said "this was no food for the teeth of the Viennese."

When Mozart heard this, he replied: "Let them have time to chew upon it..."


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Ravel (& Debussy) indeed came up against the might of the French music establishment. Saint-Saens in particular hated Debussy's music especially, and Massenet also thought that they where taking French music down the wrong path. Of course how easily these older guys forgot how their generations (eg. Saint-Saens, Chausson, Bizet, Franck, etc.) where decades before that accused of being too Germanic and being under the spell of dangerous progressives like Wagner and Liszt. & a generation before them, Berlioz was for a long time shunned by the French music establishment (eg. I don't think the likes of Cherubini had much time for Hector's music?).

The idea that the young Ravel and Debussy where seen as dangerous radicals is wierd to me, considering how their music is not seen as anything near that now (well, maybe some things are by some, like Debussy's Jeux, but I think thats atypical). Of course, later in life, they became establishment, so again success and recognition by a wide spectrum of listeners and fellow musicians etc. is the sweetest revenge.

I particularly remember how Ravel's string quartet, premiered in the early years of the 20th century, raised eyebrows of conservatives big time. They said it was unmusical and in particular the first movement did not stick strictly enough to sonata form, the 'Assez vif' (scherzo type) movement was too choppy and fragmented (here Ravel divides the string quartet into two duets, a bit like Elliott Carter was to do half a century later) and also how the slow movement was too vague in tonality. Now, and even within Ravel's lifetime I would imagine, its firmly in the repertoire, virtually every string quartet plays it.

But here are a couple of comebacks to Saint-Saens and Massenet's put down by the two young lions:

"I have a horror of sentimentality, and I cannot forget that its name is Saint-Saëns." - Debussy.

""Saint-Saëns announces to the avid crowd that during the war he has composed [various pieces] . . . but if he had been servicing howitzers, his music might have been better." - Ravel on Saint Saens during World War I, as Camille was retreating into the world of what Ravel saw as rehash/pastiche of old music, literally the music of the last century. I think what added to Ravel's animosity is he was an ambulance driver during the war, so doing his duty for France, while Camille wasn't (but of course he was a senior).

But I'd be here all day quoting Debussy's put downs of other composers. He was certainly up front and frank. I can't remember, but I read classic put downs of Faure and Wagner, but a pithy one is him saying Greig's music is like iced bon-bons.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Debussy could have done worse than quote J. F. Runciman's comment from 1896:

"It is one's duty to hate with all possible fervor the empty and ugly in art; and I hate Saint-Saëns the composer with a hate that is perfect."


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Debussy could have done worse than quote J. F. Runciman's comment from 1896:
> 
> "It is one's duty to hate with all possible fervor the empty and ugly in art; and I hate Saint-Saëns the composer with a hate that is perfect."


That is really chilling.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Sid James said:


> The idea that the young Ravel and Debussy where seen as dangerous radicals is wierd to me, considering how their music is not seen as anything near that now (well, maybe some things are by some, like Debussy's Jeux, but I think thats atypical). Of course, later in life, they became establishment, so again success and recognition by a wide spectrum of listeners and fellow musicians etc. is the sweetest revenge.


I think it only seems weird because people have a hard time understanding how different the music was from everything that had preceded it. It threw all kinds of rules of harmony and voice leading out the window, all at once. Conservatives like Nicholai Medtner opined about how ugly it sounded because it was alien to their experience of what music was.

Who were the ones, among composers, who supported Debussy? Ravel (despite the separate factions that formed around them), Stravinsky, Webern, Mahler, Dukas, Roussel, and Messiaen. Ives criticized his music for being overly feminine (very few things didn't seem overly feminine to Ives), but took a few tips from it anyway. In America, Debussy had a huge influence on certain strains of Jazz, which also riled some musical conservatives.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

"Brass, lots of brass, incredibly much brass! Even more brass, nothing but brass!--that was the first movement....None the less, the fourth movement is positively the last [a reference to the changed order of the inner movements], and with it Mahler's symphony ends, for all symphonies must end sometime, even if they are as endlessly long as Mahler's Sixth, entitled 'tragic'. And now, heedless of the shrieks of rage of the Mahlerites, a loud, clear, and energetic protest must be made against the corruption of healthy musical sense and taste by performances of this kind in the city where Beethoven, Schubert, Mozart, and Haydn lived and produced their most sublime works....Theater people used to maintain that Mahler was a fine symphonist. Knowledgeable music lovers can now prove that he is not a good symphonist....His melodic invention is minimal, his contrapuntal and thematic elaboration is nil, and many things which look imposing on his scores produce no effect because you don't hear them. The harps with their gissandos and the thrice-divided violas labour in vain to be heard during the assault of the gigantic army of brass, and the insistent and continuous ringing of cow and sheep bells cannot conceal the hopeless emptiness of the Sixth Symphony." - Heinrich Reinhardt


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Mahlerian said:


> I think it only seems weird because people have a hard time understanding how different the music was from everything that had preceded it. It threw all kinds of rules of harmony and voice leading out the window, all at once. Conservatives like Nicholai Medtner opined about how ugly it sounded because it was alien to their experience of what music was....


I know Debussy was seen as an _enfant terrible_ at the Conservatoire. Asking things like 'why must dissonant chords always be resolved?' and 'why was this, that or the other procedure forbidden?' to some of his professors got him in hot water. He did win the Prix de Rome, but on the third attempt (& once he got to Rome, I think he hated it, but hearing Palestrina's music at the Vatican was a turning point). Interestingly it is Ernest Giraud, one of the friends (and arranger) to Bizet, who was his most sympathetic professor at the Conservatoire.

A fellow student in those days, Maurice Emmanuel, remembered how Debussy was seen as a "dangerous fanatic" by the staff of the Paris Conservatoire.

But I think the generation of Debussy and Ravel, while they where initially rebellious, they welcomed success when it did come. I think its really somewhat later that success with a wider audience and across the classical music industry (eg. outside the world of academe) came to be seen as something unhealthy to crave for or want, or risk becoming a 'sell out.' (I see this as an ideological position basically).

So the _enfant terrible_ image was over at some stage. The young Prokofiev was another one of those, of course, his decision to play his own piano concerto at his graduation performance caused a minor scandal and there's the famous anecdote of Glazunov walking out on the _Scythian Suite._ Cheekily, Prokofiev had deliberately invited him along, knowing the most likely result would be exactly that! He had a sense of humour for sure. & maybe given the topic of this thread, exactly that was Prokofiev's "comeback" to Glazunov, making him sit through all that clanging and banging of that work! Another memorable thing that happened on the night was that the timpanist was having such a good time with it, he broke through the drumskin!


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

I think Berlioz is worth mentioning. The snobbish French establishment and culture did not understand his music and what it was saying. This great composer was truly ahead of his time. Incidentally, he was largely unknown until Sir Colin Davis exposed his greatness and genius by the 1960s.

Glazunov is quite the opposite, sort of. He achieved greatness from the start and the peak of his fame occurred in 1905-1907 with the premiere of his Violin Concerto and the doctorate honors he received at both Cambridge and Oxford. But by the turbulent years of the 1910s and the modernism that swept the West by the 1920s, Glazunov became to be seen as old-fashion (bad reviews by fashion thinking critics) and the popularity of his music declined markedly. His resurgence was slow (and yet still his music for the most part remains underperformed). 

Berwald may be another example.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I'm starting to like Hanslick more and more; Runciman, too.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Mahlerian said:


> "Brass, lots of brass, incredibly much brass! Even more brass, nothing but brass!--that was the first movement....None the less, the fourth movement is positively the last [a reference to the changed order of the inner movements], and with it Mahler's symphony ends, for all symphonies must end sometime, even if they are as endlessly long as Mahler's Sixth, entitled 'tragic'. And now, heedless of the shrieks of rage of the Mahlerites, a loud, clear, and energetic protest must be made against the corruption of healthy musical sense and taste by performances of this kind in the city where Beethoven, Schubert, Mozart, and Haydn lived and produced their most sublime works....Theater people used to maintain that Mahler was a fine symphonist. Knowledgeable music lovers can now prove that he is not a good symphonist....His melodic invention is minimal, his contrapuntal and thematic elaboration is nil, and many things which look imposing on his scores produce no effect because you don't hear them. The harps with their gissandos and the thrice-divided violas labour in vain to be heard during the assault of the gigantic army of brass, and the insistent and continuous ringing of cow and sheep bells cannot conceal the hopeless emptiness of the Sixth Symphony." - Heinrich Reinhardt


LOL. From a contemporary viewpoint, this reads as if it was a review written by a deaf person


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Sid James said:


> I"'d be here all day quoting Debussy's put downs of other composers. He was certainly up front and frank. I can't remember, but ...a pithy one is him saying Greig's music is like iced bon-bons.


This is from a review of a concert Grieg conducted in Paris (III.1903.)
... and it is, Parisian typical style, a slam with yet a double edge:

"...the charming and bizarre sensation of eating a pink bon-bon stuffed with snow."

So, Grieg is PINK SUGAR! I'm sure that too, was not nearly manly enough for Charles Ives


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

hpowders said:


> I'm starting to like Hanslick more and more; Runciman, too.


Hanslick was brilliant. And funny. Strangely enough, he was a supporter of Wagner early on. I think he really like The Flying Dutchman, for example. His review of Tristan and Isolde is hilarious. He spends most of it criticizing the libretto for its puerile symbolism (light and dark, life and death, blah blah) and its desperate need of an editor.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

EdwardBast said:


> Hanslick was brilliant. And funny. Strangely enough, he was a supporter of Wagner early on. I think he really like The Flying Dutchman, for example. His review of Tristan and Isolde is hilarious. He spends most of it criticizing the libretto for its puerile symbolism (light and dark, life and death, blah blah) and its desperate need of an editor.


One more fella I'd like to have lunch with. A nice long lunch!


----------



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

Perhaps Shostakovich did it best without the need for words - after being rubbished in Pravda he then used his Symphony No. 5 to turn the tables on the criticism with a subtlety that very few - if any - at the time could fathom.

I like this one by Bizet, though:

"My symphony went very well: first movement: a round of applause, then hisses, then a catcall. Andante: a round of applause. Finale: applause, three times repeated, hisses, three or four catcalls. In short, a success".


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

elgars ghost said:


> Perhaps Shostakovich did it best without the need for words - after being rubbished in Pravda he then used his Symphony No. 5 to turn the tables on the criticism with a subtlety that very few - if any - at the time could fathom.
> 
> I like this one by Bizet, though:
> 
> "My symphony went very well: first movement: a round of applause, then hisses, then a catcall. Andante: a round of applause. Finale: applause, three times repeated, hisses, three or four catcalls. In short, a success".


Is "turn the tables" quite what old Dima did? Didn't he more suck it up and internalise the whole thing with codes and subliminal stuff? The Shos fanboys will correct me no doubt, but wouldn't it have been interesting if he'd managed to slip out despite the serious personal danger he and his family were probably in (more than just nasty words in Pravda!) and soaked up some more stuff from the world (including technique)? He might have been as good as Prokofiev ;-)

The Bizet Symphony in C is ghastly - it must have gone EXTREMELY well for there to have been applause (aren't I being a cad?)


----------



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

dgee said:


> Is "turn the tables" quite what old Dima did? Didn't he more suck it up and internalise the whole thing with codes and subliminal stuff? The Shos fanboys will correct me no doubt, but wouldn't it have been interesting if he'd managed to slip out despite the serious personal danger he and his family were probably in (more than just nasty words in Pravda!) and soaked up some more stuff from the world (including technique)? He might have been as good as Prokofiev ;-)
> 
> The Bizet Symphony in C is ghastly - it must have gone EXTREMELY well for there to have been applause (aren't I being a cad?)


Well, this was all Shostakovich could do, I suppose - as you know, any dissent of a confrontational nature would probably have been disastrous. It is interesting to muse upon how the music may have turned out had DSCH fled the Soviet Union, but the uncertain times that he lived through made for some great art of a specific nature - as if he felt he had to carry some kind of burden and compose music that one day might reveal much more about his own situation and that of his country than it possibly could at the time. The fact that he was compelled to encrypt certain works with hidden agendas and suchlike is catnip to some of us Shosters fanboys just as much as it was essential for him in order to keep body and soul together.

'...might have been as good as Prokofiev' - I am NOT going to rise to that one! :lol:


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

Shostakovich fans owe a big debt to Stalin. Otherwise he might have been the dreadful composer of The Nose and similar. Remember Boulez saying "no better than Honegger"? And as a Honegger fan I take exception to this!

I'll desist now...


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

dgee said:


> The Bizet Symphony in C is ghastly - it must have gone EXTREMELY well for there to have been applause (aren't I being a cad?)


Are you saying that because so many like it and you don't?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

The Bizet Symphony in C is fine for an occasional listen. Just doesn't have a lot of staying power with me. 
It's "pleasant"; nothing more.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

It does what it's meant to do from what I can tell, it may not be really profound but I don't always want that kind of music. And it's famous despite coming from a composer mainly known for opera.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

And even then, Bizet was a one hit opera guy. Pearl Fishers isn't loved the way Carmen is.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Though he was ill for a fair amount of his maturity at least and died in his mid-30s, with Carmen being the last thing he composed. So with better circumstances and health it's quite possible he could have done more.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

starry said:


> Though he was ill for a fair amount of his maturity at least and died in his mid-30s, with Carmen being the last thing he composed. So with better circumstances and health it's quite possible he could have done more.


Well yeah and with better circumstances my Mom might have been 5 feet 8 inches tall instead of five feet 2 inches.


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

I really had no idea the Bizet Symphony had a following - I assumed it was just "brought to you by the composer of Carmen"


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

hpowders said:


> Well yeah and with better circumstances my Mom might have been 5 feet 8 inches tall instead of five feet 2 inches.


She's composed music? I don't think your reply is very relevant in any case, just flippant.



dgee said:


> I really had no idea the Bizet Symphony had a following - I assumed it was just "brought to you by the composer of Carmen"


I don't think it's about having a fanbase, in fact it's not that famous. But it is certainly likeable enough for quite a few who know it.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

dgee said:


> I really had no idea the Bizet Symphony had a following - I assumed it was just "brought to you by the composer of Carmen"


Yeah and with better circumstances, I'm sure the Bizet Symphony would have been a great masterpiece.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

But I already said, I think it's exactly what it was meant to be, he didn't want it to sound any different. I think it's very good on it's own merit, even better when you think he was 17 when he wrote it. Most people who know it do like it, in case some here don't realise that when they look at this thread lol.


----------



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

I'm not totally crazy about the Bizet symphony either but if it was universally bad then surely Thomas Beecham would have avoided recording it?


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Beecham certainly recorded imo much worse things like the Balakriev symphony. 

I don't mind if someone isn't crazy about it, people can like what they want. To say it's 'ghastly' though just sounds like it's intentionally provoking, and to compare his throat infection (possibly cancer) to their own mother's height just seems perverse.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

starry said:


> She's composed music? I don't think your reply is very relevant in any case, just flippant.
> 
> I don't think it's about having a fanbase, in fact it's not that famous. But it is certainly likeable enough for quite a few who know it.


I enjoy it very much. it's light and airy and tuneful and it makes me feel good when listening.
Everything doesn't need to be profound to be good.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Itullian said:


> I enjoy it very much. it's light and airy and tuneful and it makes me feel good when listening.
> Everything doesn't need to be profound to be good.


The last movement from what I remember has an effervescence which reminds me of some Mozart, and I think Mozart would have enjoyed hearing it.

Overall I think I prefer it to Prokofiev's first which is perhaps even better known.

And I may as well add that Balanchine was inspired to produce a good ballet using the music too.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

dgee said:


> I really had no idea the Bizet Symphony had a following - I assumed it was just "brought to you by the composer of Carmen"


It's a damned fine piece of work,have you listened ?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Bizet's Symphony in C is a fine work indeed (meaning I like it, of course!) Bizet was evidently less enthusiastic because he stuffed it in a drawer and never sought to have it performed. Evidently he thought it was too derivative of Gounod. It was discovered and performed only in the 1930s, says the often faltering Mr. Memory.


----------



## ShropshireMoose (Sep 2, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Bizet's Symphony in C is a fine work indeed (meaning I like it, of course!) Bizet was evidently less enthusiastic because he stuffed it in a drawer and never sought to have it performed. Evidently he thought it was too derivative of Gounod. It was discovered and performed only in the 1930s, says the often faltering Mr. Memory.


You're right, Weingartner conducted the first performance, Beecham made one of the finest recordings. It's superb!


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

starry said:


> The last movement from what I remember has an effervescence which reminds me of some Mozart, and I think Mozart would have enjoyed hearing it.
> 
> Overall I think I prefer it to Prokofiev's first which is perhaps even better known.
> 
> And I may as well add that Balanchine was inspired to produce a good ballet using the music too.


I agree.
And it does remind me a bit of Mozart


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

Well, such is the rich diversity of listeners!


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

starry said:


> The last movement from what I remember has an effervescence which reminds me of some Mozart, and I think Mozart would have enjoyed hearing it.
> 
> Overall I think I prefer it to Prokofiev's first which is perhaps even better known.
> 
> And I may as well add that Balanchine was inspired to produce a good ballet using the music too.


I like the Prokofiev 1st tie-in. Bizet's symphony sounds to me just as much a 'fresh take' on the Classical symphony as was Prokofiev's, just more respectful.


----------

