You do realise what this means, don't you?

Ollie, where he should have had

'had had "had had 'had', had had 'had had'. 'Had had' had had", had had "had had 'had' had had 'had had'. 'Had had' had had". Had "had had 'had' had had 'had had'. 'Had had' had had" had',

had had

'had had "had had 'had', had had 'had had'. 'Had had' had had" had had "had had 'had' had had 'had had'. 'Had had' had had". Had "had had 'had' had had 'had had'. 'Had had' had had" had'.

Had

'had had "had had 'had', had had 'had had'. 'Had had' had had" had had "had had 'had' had had 'had had'. 'Had had' had had". Had "had had 'had' had had 'had had'. 'Had had' had had" had'

had a chance of escaping time_is_now's eagle eye, Ollie would not have been compelled by forces beyond his control to post this drivel.

Righty-ho. Shostakovich anyone?

Please stop! I don't know why all that makes me laugh so much but it does, and it's starting to hurt. We've all been had!


Ok, I'm heading here...

How about:

Wright, you've written 'right' wrong. Now Wright, write 'right' right right away!

Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovich Shostakovichly Shostakovich Shostakoviches Shostakoviching Shostakovich!

Shostakovich!

Topic please!

With the offer a full refund if you are at all dissatisfied with the explanation given

I think more musicological tracts should be produced on that basis.  "Locate the Second Subject in the Eroica Symphony - Or Your Money Back!".  "Find the hidden meaning of the enharmonic modulations in BORIS GODUNOV, or receive a full sung apology from the author dressed in the costume of the Simpleton".

Buoyed by the response to our previous essay in the direction of real-time symptomatic analysis (thank you, Mr Tovey) and we admit just a little weary of the repetitive nature of certain recent posts to this thread (including, we must admit, our own), we plunge back into the turbulent waters of Sjostakovitsj's Eighth Symphony for the education and enlightenment of many but in particular of ourselves.

We are listening as before to the fine efforts of Kirill Kondrachine at the helm of the Moscow Philharmonic Orchestra as recently refurbished by those fine Asiatic Artisans at the Aulos Wax Cylinder and Graphophone Company.

We notice that the second movement again opens with a rather arresting clangour from the strings. This time it is answered high in the winds. We have the feeling of having heard something like it before and a quick look at the score confirms our suspicions: just as in the first movement a figure in the bass employing a descending auxiliary note is answered by a chromatic ascent! Indeed the two are combined into a single line given out in octaves by the strings but this transparent stratagem is certainly not going to fool observant musicians such as we. We note that the harmony in the upper winds remains static as the string line rises: clearly some tension is being set up here.

And it is indeed the arrival of the theme proper after some sixteen seconds which releases it, the winds and strings exchanging a rather pithy fragment involving another lower auxiliary (or 'neighbour') tone followed by a descending fifth. There are many chromatic sideslips in the harmony - clearly what he was setting up in the beginning of the movement. Things do get rather worked up but we suspect there is more to come.

Just as in the first movement the second main thematic area (at bar 67, 1'36") is introduced by an ascent in the flutes, and accompanied by a rhythmic repeated chord in the strings. (One wonders if this might be deliberate? It is certainly an appealing coincidence even if not.) It is entrusted to the piccolo - again we have these chromaticisms in a clever little motive in which the piccolo moves between a descending chromatic line on the offbeats and an ascending line on the beats themselves. A nice touch. The bassoon and the controfagotto (do note the correct Italian spelling - it's just as easy to get right) join in in counterpoint and the line is passed to the E flat clarinet. The trumpets join in too (must be dashed difficult for them but they have clearly practised for all they're worth) - this is really very clever and completely natural-sounding counterpoint, not unlike that Mahler chap and similarly grotesque what with all these juxtapositions of extreme register.

Oh what a clever transition! Sjostakovitsj cunningly introduces paired quavers into the rhythmic palette, the bass line sticks on a repeated fifth doh-soh (and important part of the thematic reservoir, we remember) and the chromatic lines which have been there all along arrive in the trumpets in the shape of the introductory material from the beginning of the movement. Now he has returned to the opening material as it was although a few extra chromatic tricks stop us getting too complacent. And another quick slip sideways - into the music of the piccolo solo but in the full strings, then in the full orchestra. This is all very cleverly done - not just a tune with its accompaniment but we note that the occasional quick bursts of semi-quavers are common to melody and repeated chord alike and always arrive on unexpected beats. So there's not just lots of polyphony when the accompaniment is elaborate, as in the opening material - even when the accompaniment is just a single note it contributes in the same way as the melody to the continuing rhythmic life of the piece. Very propulsive indeed, as is the way the melodies flow into each other right up until the kettle-drums give us the opening neighbour-note motif to finish things off. Certainly a bagatelle compared with the opening movement but really very finely crafted and coherent as well as tremendously exciting.

We think we shall have to listen to it again in case there is something we have missed. Quite likely. There really is rather a lot going on. All those lines moving by semitones just when you least expect them.

There is, but it's in Tagalog, and by strict injunction of PG's publishers may not be (a) translated (b) surtitled (c) quoted on websites in any form without their express permission.  In fact even mentioning its existence is already an infringement of Mr Glass's intellectual property rights.