Classical Music Forum banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,894 Posts
Without knowing what works by Shostakovich Craft knew or the depth to which he knew them it's impossible for me to be sure he was just, as I suspect, emitting smoke from an alternative orifice. But it is certain that Craft was taking the group-think academic line of his time. All music history books of that era downplayed the significance of Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Myaskovsky, Weinberg, Rachmaninoff, et alia. Those opinions aren't wearing well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,894 Posts
There is speculation that he wanted to dabble in 12 tone music but didn't believe the communist authorities would allow/support it. Other than that what Craft says is his opinion, not fact.
Speculation he wanted to? He actually wrote some. Do you know the late quartets?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,894 Posts
I asure you that it is not baseless, and that is not an atack on Craft at all, just placing an ostensibly purely musical statement into an overarching political context, that, in my view, determined the very substance of the statement.
Your repeated assurances are not a substitute for evidence. And after accusing a number of unnamed people of ignorance, you know what this looks like, right? It looks like you don't have the goods and are backing out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madiel

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,894 Posts
Oh dear..........Looks like there are more self-appointed prosecutors here than in Shostakovich's USSR. I am not doing this again. Wait for the goodies.
You're the prosecutor. You made an accusation about the basis of Craft's opinion on the music of Shostakovich. We're the jury waiting for some sort of evidence. The problem is, prosecutors usually do their research before making accusations. You didn't. Instead you got the venue changed on the premise that it's a hot political topic. It isn't. It's just biography.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madiel and Heck148

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,894 Posts
Edward, do not take too much upon yourself. "You" are certainly not a jury, not by a long chalk. The very idea is hilarious. And it was not an accusation, juist a fair and dispassionate description of objective facts. Got to you, did not it?
What bothers me is people who present BS claims as "objective facts" and then won't admit their mistake when they're called out. Instead of just admitting that you made a claim you can't support you instead got this uncontroversial thread switched to a forum with less traffic on a bogus claim of impending political controversy. Where's the controversy? If you had any evidence for your claims you would have presented it.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top