Saturday, 2 March 2013

Suk, Shostakovich, Sainsbury and Richard III


I’ve just borrowed Joseph Suk’s symphony “Asrael”  from the library, and it was much more of a success that the Henze. It’s also about death – it’s a “funeral symphony” written after the early death of Suk’s wife and the death of her father Anton Dvorak, Suk’s teacher as well as father-in-law. It’s tremendous – full of grief and foreboding, and with very little in the way of comfort or redemption. I would absolutely love to hear it at a concert. There’s no doubt that the textures of music are much clearer live than on even the best recording. Probably one concentrates better in the concert hall, too. But I don’t want my own copy of Asrael. I think it’s like Dido’s lament “When I am Laid in Earth”,  which is so harrowing that one can only listen to it maybe once a year at maximum.

Speaking of foreboding, I watched a BBC masterworks programme on Shostakovich’s 5th Symphony. It was conducted by Gergiev who claimed that certain passages were indicative of happy memories and were Shostakovich smiling. This left me gazing at the TV with my mouth open – I don’t set myself up as an expert against Gergiev, but this isn’t right. While I was feeling troubled (Gergiev knows much more than me about music but nevertheless I’m sure he’s wrong)  the programme wheeled on Maxim Shostakovich who was quite definite that there is no laughter – the “pretty” violin solo, he thought, was more like a little innocent girl whose face is stamped on by a boot. Exactly as I thought, and Shostakovich junior ought to know.

It’s quite funny, because when I was teaching I regarded it as vital to teach my students to be critical of scientific studies and to look hard for flaws in the methods used and the conclusions drawn. “Just because the researchers  are higher status than you lot doesn’t mean they get it right all the time. Tell me, what’s wrong with this study? Tell me other reasons why they might have got these results.”
And yet, here I am thinking that Gergiev must be right because he’s Gergiev. Well, he’s not. So there.

On impulse I borrowed Lionel Sainsbury's violin concerto from the wonderful Nottingham Central Library. I had no idea what to expect and knew next to nothing about Sainsbury. I still don't know much - not even whether he's related to the supermarkets and the National Gallery - but he was born in 1958, has won various prizes and seems to be involved with the Three Choirs Festival. But the violin concerto is unashamedly romantic and quite conventional, and I did enjoy it. I'll look for more of Sainsbury's music. It's a bit old fashioned, I suppose, more like, say, Barber, than like Part, never mind Berg, but then I can't stand Berg. Also, after a while, it doesn't matter one bit whether music, or probably anything else, is actually up to contemporary ideas. Bach was old fashioned in his day.

It's been half term, too, so we had a trip to the "Looking for Richard" exhibition in Leicester. There were stacks of people and the exhibition wasn't sufficiently geared up for large numbers, so although the information was very interesting, I can't honestly say it was a success.  The way Richard's body was treated made me think of that ghastly film they kept showing on TV of the capture of Colonel Gaddaffi. (As an aside, does not Assad see that film and think of ending up like that?)

As the grandsons get older we have more and more interesting conversations, which is lovely, but there are downsides - I'd just given them a yogurt to eat each, when number one grandson said "What's the date , Granny?" I was too slow to realise why he wanted to know, so I told him the truth, and he then announced that the yogurts were four days out of date. Needless to say, I told him to eat it, it wouldn't kill him. And he did, and it didn't. 




No comments:

Post a Comment