Classical Music Forum banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,047 Posts
I don't think Craft ruined Stravinsky by encouraging him to embrace serialism. No, Stravinsky's late works are among his best, IMO. Stravinsky never wrote a work in which his unique style came shining through, and this is abundantly true for his late serial works. In his treatment of rhythm, and his method of using the tone row to create melodies and harmonies not unlike his previous works, I can easily tell his work from any other serial music.

Craft was a fine conductor and I am grateful for his championing the work of Stravinsky, Schoenberg, and modernism in general.

But he was wrong about Shostakovich.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,047 Posts
As I explain above, this is not what happened. Stravinsky embraced it on his own volition.
My post was not a response to yours; I was reacting to comments I'd seen by others.

How is it wrong to state an opinion? In the quoted statement, what is factual is all true, and the rest, which is most of the quote, is simply opinion.
I was stating my opinion that Robert Craft was wrong about Shostakovich. Why do you have a problem with that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,047 Posts
Although I am of course aware of the political forces which affected Shostakovich (all Soviet composers) - when I listen to the music that knowledge is the last thing I am thinking about. Even for the works which have something in the title, "1905", "To October", "Leningrad", etc., I ignore those subtitles and approach the music without any window dressing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,047 Posts
Same here...Shostakovich's works don't really need the political/patriotic context ..the music speaks well for itself.
The thing about a political context is that eventually it fades. The work must stand on its own devoid of context if there is any lasting merit and universality. Shostakovich's work has proven to be of much studier stuff than Stalinism.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top