The Radio 3 Boards Forum from myforum365.com
05:49:08, 03-12-2008 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Whilst we happily welcome all genuine applications to our forum, there may be times when we need to suspend registration temporarily, for example when suffering attacks of spam.
 If you want to join us but find that the temporary suspension has been activated, please try again later.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
  Print  
Author Topic: The Passions of Vaughan Williams  (Read 2148 times)
offbeat
****
Posts: 270



« Reply #30 on: 21:11:07, 18-05-2008 »

As if desperate to sugar the pill of serious music with sex, quoted from stanley stewart

Thanks for that review Stanley - seems it will be an interesting documentary and maybe different from Tony Palmers film but i really get annoyed when they say 'serious music' - i think its phrases like that which put off potential listeners and though of course some music is serious but music goes through every emotion under the sun and serious is only one small part of it. Anyway wonder how downmarket the bbc will go to hook in more viewers- will be fascinating to find out !!
Logged
Descombes
**
Gender: Male
Posts: 74



« Reply #31 on: 19:13:27, 20-05-2008 »

As a supplement to the reviews already supplied by Stanley for the VW film on Friday, here are some extracts from the Observer's preview. It does not sound promising:

The consequent triangular relationship that lasted, apparently sanctioned by Adeline, until the latter's death, is intriguing stuff, though treated here with the kind of decorum you would expect from BBC4. There are oddly conflicting hints, though: one friend claims that Ursula told her, of VW, that there 'was nothing from the waist down", while another assures us that Ursula confided to him that their sex life continued until the day he died (at the age of 85).

Do we really want to know this? And, bearing in mind recent discussions about the depths BBC4 will stoop to in order to get an audience, what does The Observer mean by "the kind of decorum you would expect from BBC4"?
« Last Edit: 19:23:00, 20-05-2008 by Descombes » Logged
Descombes
**
Gender: Male
Posts: 74



« Reply #32 on: 19:32:42, 20-05-2008 »

On the one hand, it's another John Bridcutt piece (he's already ventured into a not unrelated field with Britten's Children) but the ground for much of what I understand to be one of the main thrusts of the piece was covered in the Tony Palmer film too: the very different effect that the relationships with the two wives had upon his creative output: the safety-valve release for the dedication of his caring during long decline of the first even being cited as a major inspiration for the vehemence of the 4th symphony by some commentators, whilst the dedication of the younger second and the possibility of passion long denied by the frailty of the first suggested as a possible reason for the quantity and quality of his output in the final years of his life.   
Bridcutt's film about Britten's Children was excellent and the book was even better. But surely there is a distinction between this and the relationships of VW. Britten's contact with the children involved in his performances was a subject shrouded in mystery and innuendo. Bridcutt made a responsible and unsensational attempt to discover the truth, using verbal evidence from those involved. The ladies in VW's life cannot be as significant in the development of his music. What's more, few of his female contemporaries can still be living and we are talking about a generation which did not make a habit of discussing such matters.
I fear that Friday's film may be full of unnecessary and distasteful speculation!
Logged
Stanley Stewart
*****
Posts: 1090


Well...it was 1935


« Reply #33 on: 20:24:48, 20-05-2008 »

 Thank you for the Observer review and your comments, Descombes.

 I've seen the Ken Russell 1985 South Bank Show and Tony Palmer's recent documentary several times during the past week; both attractive.

I'm now at the stage of clearing my mind so that I can watch John Birdcut's programme using a clean sheet.     I adopted this stance many years ago after seeing a succession of Shakespearean productions and using a mistaken tendency to say Gielgud did this, or Scofield did that.    Of course, basic information is already programmed in my mind but, essentially, I'm engaging in a new experience.     I'm being told a story.   What is the intention?   I can then use the Stanislavskian (no relation!) theory; a basic codification of ideas, so that 'who', 'what' 'where' and 'when' follow in quick succession.  In due course, after deliberation, I can tick all the relevant boxes.

My only caveat is secondary but important.   What influence have the media studies mafia at the BBC used on the production?     The programme's title is a bit ambiguous and has there been pressure to 'remember we need to attract new audiences' during the development process?   The usual direction for dumbing down; the lowest common denominator.    I feel uneasy about such an insiduous practice and will be glad to be proved wrong.  I don't think that Huw Wheldon or Humphrey Burton would have tolerated any such interference in their heyday.
Logged
Descombes
**
Gender: Male
Posts: 74



« Reply #34 on: 21:09:15, 20-05-2008 »

Seeing Stanley's reference to the Ken Russell film reminded me that I have not reported back on the DVD  which he recently sent me. (I hope you have received my email on the subject, Stanley.)

I thought the Ken Russell film was excellent, possibly more enjoyable than Tony Palmer's, mainly because of its original approach and its uncanny combination of music and images. I certainly had not seen it before, which is surprising since I normally watch out for that sort of thing.  I found that parts of the Tony Palmer film were predictable; it was possible to guess what was coming next. You could never say that about Ken! I loved the choice of images for the music, the involvement of the film crew (after the filming of a scene, the crew might be seen discussing the bits Ursula got wrong or being served drinks) and, of course, the huge part that Ursula played in the film. What a star she was! Some of those images of her were unforgettable: dancing with Ken (and then moving straight on to punks or whatever they were called at the time), wandering across all those different locations, sitting smoking in the cinema. Absolutely wonderful.

It was striking to see a much younger Ursula than the one in the Palmer film (but only 14 years earlier) and even more strikingly, a much more sprightly Lady Barbirolli than the very frail old lady in the recent film.

Ken Russell was (is!) such a talented film-maker. I certainly felt that his concise 55 minutes said more than the rather sprawling Palmer film, good as that was.

I certainly recommend the Ken film to anyone who gets the chance to see it. Many thanks  to Stanley for giving me the opportunity!
Logged
Descombes
**
Gender: Male
Posts: 74



« Reply #35 on: 21:14:48, 20-05-2008 »

I have just noticed that Stanley refers to the 1985 South Bank Show. Is that the date of the Ken film?  The DVD cover says 1994! 

1985 seems more likely.
Logged
Stanley Stewart
*****
Posts: 1090


Well...it was 1935


« Reply #36 on: 22:14:56, 20-05-2008 »

  Yes, Descombes, the SBS/Ken Russell RVW was 1985.      A scribbled notation on the faded video spine misled me.  However, I got Russell's biography 'A British Picture' off the shelves.   It was published in 1989 and, in the chapter A Year At The Opera, he talks about a few years earlier than the publication year when he returned from Hollywood; devotes five pages to his meeting with Ursula VW and their close relationship during the subsequent filming.  He also appeared in the film  and she took naturally to the camera (more than he did, I thought) and, as you say, the camaraderie between them and the crew gave a spontaneity to the action.   

I got your acknowledgement of the DVD, thanks, but not the feedback after viewing so I'm glad this wasn't overlooked by default.    Smiley
Logged
Descombes
**
Gender: Male
Posts: 74



« Reply #37 on: 23:06:55, 20-05-2008 »

Sorry, Stanley. Emails seem less reliable than the Royal Mail. I have just re-send last night's message.
Logged
Aitch
**
Gender: Male
Posts: 52



« Reply #38 on: 09:22:00, 24-05-2008 »

Well, The P of VW was broadcast last night (and is repeated tonight in case any of you missed it), and no comments from anyone?  Huh

Was it that good/bad?

Seems to be getting quite good 'reviews' at t'other place.
Logged
Mary Chambers
*****
Gender: Female
Posts: 2589



« Reply #39 on: 09:50:34, 24-05-2008 »

I posted over at TOP. I had mixed feelings - I was actually quite bored a lot of the time, and irritated, as I've said there, by the determination of commentators, including Bridcut, to interpret the works of composers with reference to their love-life, when that simply may not be the case at all. What was valuable, I felt, was the questioning of the "cow-pat" view of RVW (though I  admit much of his music sounds quite cow-pat-ish to me). I thought the Schola Cantorum's singing of Full Fathom Five was absolutely exquisite.
Logged
Descombes
**
Gender: Male
Posts: 74



« Reply #40 on: 10:53:28, 24-05-2008 »

I've recorded it and hope to watch it over the weekend. The Guardian had a mostly positive review, but I'm really waiting to hear Stanley Stewart's verdict: something of an authority on VW and also on documentary making, I think!
« Last Edit: 10:55:42, 24-05-2008 by Descombes » Logged
George Garnett
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3855



« Reply #41 on: 10:54:43, 24-05-2008 »

I thought it was OK and certainly streets ahead of most things on the telly. It did have the air though, far more than his Britten's Children programme I thought, of cutting and fitting the material he had to support a pre-determined agenda/thesis or whatever it is. I also felt bullied a bit into accepting specific reductive 'meanings' of individual works by visual images underlining the claim but I suppose that's par for the course for any television essay of this sort. The trouble is it now just prompts a natural resistance, reasonable or not: "Oh no you can't make me think it's about the trenches just because you're showing me some; I know your tricks. It's about cows, badgers and F major after all". And, as so often, I was dying to hear longer uninterrupted extracts from the interviews with those who knew Vaughan Williams, rather than little snippets chosen to illustrate a point in Bridcut's commentary.

So, plenty of caveats, but it still stood out as something worth watching amid so much that isn't. And I learnt a lot I didn't know before.  
« Last Edit: 11:00:01, 24-05-2008 by George Garnett » Logged
BobbyZ
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 992



« Reply #42 on: 12:19:06, 24-05-2008 »

I was going to post my reactions to this but George's post has made them redundant since I agree with all that he has said !
Logged

Dreams, schemes and themes
offbeat
****
Posts: 270



« Reply #43 on: 22:54:05, 24-05-2008 »

I enjoyed it more than i thought i would ! I suppose knowing more of his personal life is interesting and makes me think of maybe what inspired some of his compositions particularly the romantic and sensual stuff!! Most of the people interviewed were very interesting particularly Ursula of course - a great love story! The american whose name i cant remember made me laugh as he treated every snippet of information as a huge confessional joke !
Logged
pim_derks
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1518



« Reply #44 on: 11:49:09, 25-05-2008 »

I had no intention to slag off No 6 at all.  I called it a WW2 symphony on the basis of what I heard on the recent BAL, which quoted Malcolm Sergeant saying it was inspired by the death in an air raid of one of the first Carribbean singers in a night club in central London.

"The Sixth Symphony (1944-47) indeed proved that the Fifth was no concluding benediction to his career. Once more the gritty dissonance of the Fourth Symphony is present in the fast movements, but there is also an extraordinary Epilogue, pianissimo and veiled throughout, which some critics after the premiere (conducted by Boult in 1948) suggested, was a portrait of a world laid waste through an atomic holocaust. Vaughan Williams testily commented: "I suppose it never occurs to these people that a man might just want to write a piece of music."

Andrew Burn, liner notes for the Complete Symphonies of Ralph Vaughan Williams conducted by Sir Adrian Boult, EMI (2000).
Logged

"People hate anything well made. It gives them a guilty conscience." John Betjeman
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
  Print  
 
Jump to: