Topic: The Classical Corner (3)

[Rae]

The  Classical Corner

A rock-free oasis where we talk about the  greatest music ever created, and more than that: we’ll talk about the performers, the orchestras, new recordings and everything else that pertains to classical music.

And besides that, there will be the occasional quiz or teaser just to keep you on your toes.  You can even start your own quiz or puzzle contest.

The sky’s the limit!

Don Reid is a retired civil servant who joined the broadcast community here at Fanshawe on January 9th, 1983, and has been the host of Reid's Records ever since.  REID'S RECORDS can be heard Sunday's from 1pm - 4pm (Eastern time) on 106.9, THE X on the FM dial or listen online! Unlike many broadcasters in the classical music field, Don has had no formal training in music. And in his opinion this has been more of an asset than a liability. Says Don; " Not being versed in the technical aspects of music has caused me to seek out other areas of interest with which to engage my listeners. So now I seek out stories and anecdotes about the lives and times of the composers or those who perform their music. I then relate it to the music in a manner which I feel will stimulate a deeper interest and understanding in the music I play for them. I like to refer to my show as a programme of classical music for those who don’t like classical music" With the advent of the internet Reid's Records has established a listener base which is literally world-wide, exemplified in responses from as far away as Taiwan, Australia and California. And as Don says; "The expressions of pleasure and satisfaction I receive from my listeners is all the reward I need for doing something that is truly a labour of love."

[Rae]

Come right in and continue your talk about Classical Music.

[So P Bubble]

Thank you Rae for this lovely new place. I love that  graphic in the heading. It has the atmosphere of a gone age.

[Marilyne]

Marking my place and looking forward to another 1,000 messages!

[Rae]

Bubble - We have Bunnie to thank for that graphic, she provided it for us to use here.

[So P Bubble]

Bunnie has always excellent taste. 

[BarbStAubrey]

We have certainly determined that music (and other stimuli) generate emotional responses ranging from great sorrow to profound joy for the listener.
 
So now I wonder, if we turn that around, do emotional responses cause a composer to write what he does?  Does he compose just because he can or does he need the emotional stimulus to continue?

 Beethoven certainly was inspired in many of his works. The Pastorale Symphony reflects his passion for nature. His Eroica was inspired by what he thought at the time he wrote it was the emancipation of the people from the shackles of tyranny. Saint-Saens on the other hand, figured that anybody who needed inspiration to compose was not much of a composer . But I think the best example of emotional involvement on a composer's part is that of Shostakovich whose 5th Symphony is a work of torment and rage caused by the deaths of his loved ones during the war and afterward.  He was not only inspired he was driven.

 So I guess the question is still unanswered.

In the meantime ponder these words by Beethoven: "Music is a higher revelation than any wisdom or philosophy. It is the wine that inspires new creations, and I am the Bacchus, who presses out this wine for men, and makes them spiritually drunk."

Bottom line we are considering the impulses towards creativity. I think as any creative activity something small or more developed strikes a chord within us that we must express and based on our bent towards a specific artistic expression and our skill we develop that chord of recognition.

I am thinking a poet or a novelist, a two or three-dimensional artist, architect as well as a composer - that chord of recognition hits an emotion within that we then peruse within the confines of the laws or composition of the particular medium and art form.

And so, where the first chord of recognition may emanate from chaos in order to share the impulse or idea it must be organized into a delivery format. In order for that format to be accepted our brain and emotions must make the connection.

I do not think the artist's goal is to understand and build the creating on our knowledge and emotional reaction as much as the artist is using the elements of the creative form by either following the existing laws or organization or pushing and creating a new organization of sound, rhythm, space that some will applaud and others will braid the artist for its avant garde approach.

Here is an article about the connections between creativity and the brain

http://www.webmd.com/brain/news/20080229/your-brain-on-creativity

[Frybabe]

marking

[Jerry]

Stimulating post Barb. Humankind has wondered about creativity probably since we discovered it. Nothing very definitive, however, has come of our efforts to nail down the mechanics of creativity. What we want to do is produce it at will, but alas, we have never succeeded in doing that--and probably never will. True, there are some generative techniques that can help stimulate ideas, but I've never heard of an artist who claimed to have used any of them successfully--or at all, for that matter.

I would suggest that we also consider rather carefully the role of the listener, viewer, or reader in defining creative works. We are all fully aware that each of us brings a different perspective to a work of art or a text and that locating the creative part of a work solely in the so-called creator denies the reality of the significant part of the creative process that the observer contributes. And I think this collaboration is terribly important in understanding art and creativity. The whole enterprise is a process, or maybe one could even call it a system, since there must be more than one contributor. Human minds seem not to work well in isolation; it takes two or more brains working together as a system to produce a work of art, the initiator of the process and the separate receptor brain to complete it.

[Rammel]

X

[Radioman]

I can't believe we are now starting the third chapter of Classical Corner. That is a tribute to all of you who have contributed so much to make it such an enjoyable spot where we indulge in feasts of reason and thoughtful exchanges. 

Starting a new page causes me to lose the train of thought a bit, so I just want to address some of the comments in chapter 2 and carry on from there.

judianna you raised the issue of Susan Boyle.  Like you I was moved to tears as she performed.  But in this case it was not the performance, but rather, the performer who stirred us.  If she were to have spoken Julliete's words about the stars   from Shakespeare's R & J I don't think we would have been any less moved.   But like you Bubble I was disappointed she did not win. 

EloiseDee  you made an excellent point when you stated that a composer would strive to create create a masterpiece whether driven by inspiration or the need  just to make a living.  A good example is Beethoven's Concecration Of The House, a commissioned work to commemorate the opening of a concert hall. And I don't have the ear to discern the difference between a work of his that was written for money and one that was deeply inspired.

ChyaI relate very closely to your experience.

BarbStAubrey your comments and the link you posted certainly expand the area of discussion.  I'm inclined to go along with your suggestion that impulse plays an important part in the creation of any artistic form.  I cannot imagine a composer or poet or artist suddenly declaring "I'm going to create a masterpiece!"  So then, what stirs the impulse?  I suggest it's the outward stimulation that Beethoven and Shostakovich experienced in the works I mentioned in chapter two.  In the world of art it is written that Picasso painted Guernica in mood of sorrow and rage caused by the tragedy of that horrible attack.

Jerry it's nice to have you join us and to start off with such a cogent analysis of the subject matter.  The 'generative techniques' to which you refer I don't think would do much to get the creative juices going. It's something I place in the category of a 'pep talk;'  it would wear off in a short while.  I am in total accord with your assertion  " that each of us brings a different perspective to a work of art or a text."  A good example of that was brought out in an interview with Oliver Sacks, the author an host of the Nova tv show.  He was asked if it were possible for Hitler and Gandhi to enjoy the same piece of music, and the answer was yes.   That's because each of those persons could apply their own perceptions of what the music signified.
And the beat goes on.   

[PatH]

Don, you said earlier:

"But I think the best example of emotional involvement on a composer's part is that of Shostakovich whose 5th Symphony is a work of torment and rage caused by the deaths of his loved ones during the war and afterward.  He was not only inspired he was driven."

The same thing comes out in his piano trio # 2, op 67 (1944).  I think it was dedicated to his best friend, who had died, but it's also a more general raging of grief.  The last movement, based on Jewish themes, is absolutely hair-raising, and can totally reduce you to tears.  That's if you get a good performance.  If you don't, it's just nice.  I have a recording by the Borodin Trio that does it justice.

[Radioman]

PatH thanks for the heads-up. I have put that on my wish list for my next order

[BarbStAubrey]

OK I am conflicted - there are times when there is an emotion that must be expressed or at least it starts a train of creativity that may not describe the emotion but the emotion is the starting point - but then I am thinking of the creativity that is used as if with the wave of a hand when a need arises - a quick decoration to top off a holiday table or a stage scene at the last minute when something is missing or the words that are said to respond during an unexpected event - the creativity at seems almost a flourish that comes from some inner unknown source and is expressed without thought.

Not the creativity of a grand score or masterpiece however sometimes the created flourish is a building block that leads in time to a grand score or masterpiece.

I am also thinking of the commissioned works - the buildings created by architects, the music written to satisfy the King's birthday celebration, the art that is commissioned to fit nicely on the ceiling or within a prescribed space in the park. I am imagining an emotional hook has to be found but I'm not satisfied that is the answer - could it be that the end product is created because of knowing well how to manipulate the elements of the art form?

I think of that ad on PBS of the composer at the piano who is stumped and birds land on the 5 telephone wires strung outside his window as if notes and he plays what he sees developing the theme that was impromptus created by birds landing on telephone wires - a chance encounter with nature - certainly no emotional pull that led to creativity.

Maybe creativity is a response - we respond to various stimulation's with what we know. Some of us know the elements of visual arts and how to express ourselves within those elements just as others of us know the elements of sound and how to express ourselves within those elements. We know the elements so well our response seems instinctive.

[AuenOldie]

The same thing comes out in his piano trio # 2, op 67 (1944).  I think it was dedicated to his best friend, who had died, but it's also a more general raging of grief.  The last movement, based on Jewish themes, is absolutely hair-raising, and can totally reduce you to tears. 

Shostkovich's piano trio # 2, op 67 (4th mov)

Have a great Independence Day holiday weekend, y'all!

[AuenOldie]

             

Independence Day Composer Quiz



He was the first American composer to write for symphony orchestra.

[Frybabe]

When I think of first American composers, I think of Aaron Copland and Charles Ives. Those are the two I was first exposed to. However, your pix indicates someone of the 18th century.

I will keep thinking

AO, if this is an immigrant then maybe it is Anthony Philip Heinrich? I don't think I have heard any of his stuff.

[Radioman]

I usually play one of his works around the Christmas season

[EloiseDee]

My brother who started painting after his retirement painted thousands of pieces, sold so many he can't count, threw away several and he is now paralyzed on his left side, he told me he expects to continue painting until he dies. Like Bubble said, an artist is driven by his art regardless if it sells or not.

I always enjoy watching the movie The Agony and the Ecstasy about the life and work of Michaelangelo who was commissioned by Pope ?? to paint the Sixtine Chapel. Michaelangelo was not well paid for his work, quit once or twice and didn't paint according to the fashion of the time and was highly criticized, yet he painted the most enduring masterpieces of all times.

A genius is born that way and there are several who were never recognized during their lifetime. All the opportunities for recognition have to fall into the right place at the right moment with the right moral and financial support.

How many artistic genius are there today I wonder? I don't recognize them as such perhaps because I don't understand modern art, but I am sure some modern artists will become very well known, who are they?

[AuenOldie]

Yes, it is Anthony Philip Heinrich. He produced a body of work unlike anything being written in Europe at the time. Some of the titles of his opuses include: The Dawning of Music in Kentucky, or the Pleasures of Harmony in the Solitudes of Nature; and The Columbiad, or Migration of American Wild Passenger Pigeons. Heinrich was successful in his European tours (the tours being necessary because of a lack of competent orchestras in the United States in the period before the Civil War), but he died neglected, and in the poverty from which he had fled Bohemia.

[Radioman]

PatH I just had the opportunity to listen to that Piano trio posted by AO (Thank you). It is everything you said it was.    Perhaps this quotation by Shostakovich will put the work into perspective:  "...Jewish folk music has made a most powerful impression on me. I never tire of delighting in it. It’s multifaceted. It can appear to be happy while it is tragic. It’s almost always laughter through tears. This quality of Jewish folk music is close to my ideas of what music should be. There should always be two layers in music. Jews were tormented for so long that they learned to hide their despair. They express despair in dance music."

Barbara this ties in with your statement that "creativity is a response."  That would explain the outpouring of feeling in this particular work.  But also, from the listener's point of view, understanding the context in which the music was written can stimulate the emotions as well.

EloiseDee I am fascinated by your account about your brother.  The fact that he has sold so many indicates they have a quality that is truly inspired,  and,  as with our composers we ask, from whence does this inspiration come?   If we apply the logic that it is a "respone" then we must ask, a response to what.  It is a circle with no beginning and no end.

AO I would have to challenge the answer to your quiz on a technicality. I checked the sources in my library and I can't find any evidence that  Anthony Philip Heinrich became an American citizen. I then checked the Wikipedia entry to see if they noted it, and then saw that picture they display is different from the one you posted. (That may be irrelevant because I never knew what he looked like anyway.)

 I submit for consideration that the more accurate answer would be William Henry Fry, born in Philadelphia, who is the first native-born American to write for a symphony orchestra. As an aside, he was also the first native-born American to compose a grand opera.

[AuenOldie]

AO I would have to challenge the answer to your quiz on a technicality. I checked the sources in my library and I can't find any evidence that  Anthony Philip Heinrich became an American citizen.

I submit for consideration that the more accurate answer would be William Henry Fry, born in Philadelphia, who is the first native-born American to write for a symphony orchestra. As an aside, he was also the first native-born American to compose a grand opera.

Did you find any evidence that he did not become an American citizen?

The Wikipedia article states that Heinrich was the first immigrant American composer, was born in Bohemia, and was the first significant American composer to write for symphony orchestra. It makes no mention of his citizenship status either.

Perhaps the authors felt that William Henry Fry was an insignificant composer.

[Radioman]

There a many prominent people in music whose biographies indicate they were foreign-born and became  American citizens.  This is a vital piece of historical information.    I would assume that no mention of such an act would serve to indicate that the subject did not receive American citizenship. Inconclusive perhaps, but sufficient to make a reasonable assumption that Heinrich was one who fell into the latter category.
 Here are just a few that come to mind who became citizens of the U.S.A. Sergei Rachmaninoff, Victor Herbert, Eugene Ormandy, Kurt Weil, Percy Grainger.

And just to point out another slightly misleading clue, your quiz said "He was the first American composer to write for symphony orchestra." You did not say  immigrant American composer.

As for the higher significance of one over the other,  I would suggest that as composers they are equally insignificant in the overall big picture; although Fry's contribution to the American fabric was far greater when you take into account his major activities as a journalist.

[AuenOldie]

And just to point out another slightly misleading clue, your quiz said "He was the first American composer to write for symphony orchestra." You did not say  immigrant American composer.

Don't shoot the messenger. I got his name from the Wikipedia American Classical Music tome, which says that "Heinrich was the first American composer to write for symphony orchestra."

[EloiseDee]

My brother kept his first picture by number he painted about 40 years ago and he shows it to his students when they get discouraged about their painting. He tells them that when you paint 4 to 6 hours a day every day for decades you automatically become good at it. Great artists don't create art just for fun it's their oxygen and nothing can come in the way.

from whence does this inspiration come?

I believe that artists don't think of it as inspiration as much as it is a need for expression that gives them the urge to create. It is the language of their soul like a poem or an essay.

Forsythe Saga starting, that too is a work of art.

[Chya]

EloiseDee... The Forsythe Saga...Ah! Memories of that program done on Public Television so many years ago..As each episode ended, I could hardly wait for the next one to be broadcast..It was black and white and in my opinion, no succeeding versions either in movies or in color, came any where near that original production

[Frybabe]

Here is an interesting bit about William Henry Fry. Seems he eventually became a music critic and was a great advocate for American composers to "find their own voice" without European influence.

http://www.library.upenn.edu/collections/rbm/keffer/fry.html

[Radioman]

EloiseDee do you watch the  Forsythe Saga in French?  I was looking for it here but I didn't see it in any of the listings.

 I agree Chya, it was a remarkable series.

Frybabe I'm surprised that William Henry Fry has not made a bigger mark on American musical history.  His three 'firsts', ---two of which I mentioned above, the third being he was the first American music critic--- and his 'America first' policy would seem to warrant a higher standing than what he has attained.

[Gumtree]

He tells them that when you paint 4 to 6 hours a day every day for decades you automatically become good at it. Great artists don't create art just for fun it's their oxygen and nothing can come in the way.

I believe that artists don't think of it as inspiration as much as it is a need for expression that gives them the urge to create. It is the language of their soul like a poem or an essay.

Eloise: How beautifully you put it. Even though I paint constantly I could not have expressed the feeling so cogently.
Certainly every artist has a need for expression and an urge to create but it is the 4 - 6 hours of hard grind each and every day that gets the results.

[So P Bubble]

Unless you have a surge of...something and then it flows out almost effortless and in one big expression of creation.  It does not happen often, but when it does it is pure joy. Often cannot be repeated. It surprises even  oneself. one  has a feeling of satisfied completion.