I keep trying to tell you, Syd, that there is not - and never has been - any such thing as "absolute music" (which phrase I have emboldened in your quote above for clarity). It is, and only ever has been, relative.

If you assert otherwise, I must reciprocate your own stricture, and ask you to furnish me with some scientific proof.

Since (failing this) music remains "relative", it must surely stand to reason that whatever Edward Rothstein, Sydney Grew, or even Shostakovich himself says about "music" has to be adjudged ONLY within the terms of reference of the speaker. This may, or may not, chime with the views of another observer; but whether or not it does or does not in no way reveals anything intrinsic about the music whatsoever.

In speaking about the music of (say) Shostakovich - or indeed that of any other composer - the only thing that counts is the presence of a genuine awareness of what the composer attempted and why. Only within those terms of reference can a meaningful assessment of "success" or "failure" be adjudged.

You have not yet (in my view) even shown a proper interest in the real motives or techniques of this composer to have said anything that (while being valid to your own judgement) has any tangible or intrinsic meaning to anybody else (unless, by accident rather than design, they happen to start out with the same views as yourself).

Baz

The difference I perceive (even if ultimately only a 'relative' one) is that THIS speaker (i.e. me!) has only ever attempted to assess the music of Shostakovich in terms of what he did and why, whereas the other speaker (i.e. Member Grew) has attempted ONLY to discuss it in terms of what Shostakovich didn't do but should have done.


...and you are only asserting here that "belief", too, is only relative. If you do not (even relatively) believe that the notion of "absolute music" is a mere fiction, perhaps you could join Member Grew is providing some validating scientific proof?

Baz

I thought I did, actually:

http://r3ok.myforum365.com/index.php?topic=907.msg20318#msg20318 (edited just now to supply an all-important word 'NOT' which I'd previously missed out by accident)

While identifying myself as perhaps your unwitting principal target here, I should just like to clarify a few points:

a) Member Grew made utterly ridiculous assertions about what he thought was the poor quality of Shostakovich's orchestration - without showing any evidence of having actually studied Shostakovich's orchestration (which can only really be done properly by consulting Shostokovich's actual score, rather than relying upon the sound some recording engineer yields via a recorded performance of some ensemble);

b) Member Grew complained that he was unable to hear a break between the 4th and 5th movements - as if he presumed there "ought" to have been one: when in point of fact S's score asks specifically for NO break to be made;

c) A study of S's score has shown ME (at least) exactly how - in technical terms - some of the processes clearly audible to a listener have been delivered through his actual use of instrumental ensemble. This is not (and does not really need to be) made obvious - as a matter of pure technicality - through the sound of performance. But since disparaging remarks had been made about S's orchestral technique and management, I merely pointed out that such remarks would be better informed had their perpetrator bothered to look at a score BEFORE offering them (and few listeners would need to do this for themselves, unless they too were trying to convey that they were au fait with such details, whether or not they actually were).

Baz

Thanks, both - somehow, I suspected that was what was really meant! 

I agree about sound engineers etc - one of my composition teachers played us a recording of one of his orchestral pieces and went to great lengths to tell us that we couldn't hear such and a such a line/ chord/ instrument because of the damn' BBC engineers not through any fault of his own orchestration...

Shostakovich is of course in a more fortunate position in that we can compare a number of recordings of his symphonies to see if the orchestration really does work!!!

I don't think Shostakovich wanted to irritate listener. There is a trait is some Russian characters - melancholy streak and what you would call depresison (but to Russian soul could be normal torment). I think Shostakovich was such a soul. He was tormented from inside by his inner conflict and feelings that were increased by life under Stalin.

Here there are psychologists that tells you everything depends on your attitude and other such things that could be helpful. In Stalin's Russia life was anything but normal. Even less sensitive person would crack under pressure. People had all sorts of break downs when one's husband (who was a director of something) is lead away in the middle of the night and proclaimed the enemy of people, signed the document that he was a spy or something else of the same nature. Life under Stalin was especially difficult for sensitive highly intelligent people.

Shostakovich in my opinion expressed his inner struggles and inner stated of mind. The whole country was living in fear. Noone was safe. If one wants to relax by listening to his music, it is not possible. He describes his turmoil and turmoil of the country. Also the was was tramatic experience for the whole country.

I am very greatful of that quot Ron Dough. I knew that Khachaturian and Shostakovich were friends, but I did not have any book to prove it. I think Shostakovich may be Khachaturian teacher. They were in the same circle. Nobody says anything bad about Khachaturian, he was probably a nice person.

We do not intend to supply any further detailed analyses until several other Members have had a go. We should like to see more from Mr. Dough and Mr. Sudden, and something at least from a good many other Members.

Listening to music without a "score" and listening to music while following a "score" are activities different in nature we find. It is a matter of whither the attention and concentration thereof are directed. Nevertheless familiarity with whatever the "score" contains is to be recommended at almost every stage of the "listening experience." We do not agree however that an inspection of the "score" would have led us to alter any of the observations offered above after a first hearing of the Eighth Symphony.

Our Capitalist system with-holds "scores" from the view of ordinary people. "Scores" are kept in obscure repositories to which access is restricted. Nor are ordinary people educated in the reading of "scores"; they are told only that it is an arcane art not for the likes of them. Private persons who have somehow come into the possession of a "score" of their very own tend to treasure it and dust it down daily.

If the Member is one of those in the fortunate position of being in possession of or of having access to this "score" we and most other Members we are sure would appreciate his going to the trouble of scanning it and somehow making it available to all with an interest potential or actual. Put up a PDF we cry!