Showing posts with label Details Details Details. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Details Details Details. Show all posts

11/4/09

Details, people. Details.

Question: What do music critics value above all else?

I'm going to guess...the music.

No, no, journalistic integrity.

Perhaps, the service they provide to the community and their readers. ...

figure answer: "The...all....ighty....ollar...... Hahahah..I get it!"
-----------------------------------------------

Nat Bauer, of the Rockford Register Star, reviews the Cypress String Quartet, but more importantly has reminded me of a valuable lesson -- look deeper, and ask yourself what's missing.

Before we get to the review in question, let's start with some practice.

What's Missing?




How'd you do?

Great. Your skills have been honed and now, onto the review.

Quartet embraces classic, contemporary works

I'm glad to hear this, because those classic works are just too infrequently played and unfairly maligned. If musicians would just program these works, and give audiences the chance to get to know this music, the gifts of Georg Christoph Wagenseil and Josef Mysliveček wouldn't be lost on this generation.

So, what old, forgotten works in need of a good hug were on the concert?

Kleotzel [the cellist] introduced the first work, Mendelssohn-Bartholdy’s “Siring [sic] Quartet in A Minor, Op. 13,” also known as the “Ist es Wahr?” (“Is it True?”)

"also known as"...really? Not subtitled or inscribed...but, aka? ...I just hate when our vocabulary gives out on us.

But really, all of those would have been wrong. The piece is not subtitled "Ist es Wahr?", but instead borrows a three-note motive from a song of the same name that the composer had written a few months earlier. Small details, I know, but if you're going to mention them, accuracy helps.

And if you're into fun facts, why fail to mention that this three-note motive is eerily similar to one used in a Beethoven string quartet. String Quartet No. ...? Ooh, which one? I know I'll think of it, if you just give me a minute.

Oh well, I'm sure it'll come to me. Let's move on. What else is on the concert?

Ward [one of the violinists] introduced the next work, “Lento Assai,” which was commissioned for the quartet by Kevin Puts and premiered in February at the Library of Congress in Washington.

Details would help here too. Kevin Puts is the composer, not the commissioner. It helps when sentences make sense.

Anyways, moving on...

Borrowing some ideas from Beethoven,...

Really, like what?

...the work very slowly emerges with a pianissimo D-flat major chord,...

Oh, well, why even point out something this obvious. I mean a D-flat major chord, that just screams Beethoven. It's just like his famous D-flat major symphony, and all those D-flat major string quartets and piano sonatas.

...slowly builds to a haunting melody by first violin, expands into a more contemporary melody and harmony, then returns to conclude with the soft, subtle and almost seductive texture that began the work.


I've always enjoyed music that builds before it expands so much more than when it expands first and then builds.

Which, reminds me...what was that Beethoven quartet again?

The final work of the evening was Beethoven’s “String Quartet in F Major, Op. 135,”...

Ahh! Damn it! You beat me to it. But, that's the one.

So, this is excellent. Both pieces on the same concert -- explain to us, Mr. Bauer, how the Beethoven utilizes three-note motives and then was likely a source of inspiration for the Mendelssohn....


...which was written shortly before his death. Filner [the violist] explained that it poses two thoughts in musical motif format: “Muss es seine?” (“Must it be?”) and “Es muss seine!” (“It Must Be!”)


Okay. Yes, but what of the connection to the Mendelssohn? You hinted at it...now finish us off by explaining the similarity of the motives, and how they use similar rhythms which were derived from three word, existential questions.

To this day, 184 years later, the reason for and answer remains a mystery.

Umm...what? First, grammatically speaking, you need an object in that sentence. I assume you're referencing the quotes, so you could write, "...the reason for the quotes and their answer..." and so forth. Although, it still suffers from a lack of clarity.

Also, remains implies a singular object....
i.e. It remains...
They remain...
...so in this case we have two objects being referenced (the reason and the answer). Therefore, the sentence should read, "the reason for and answer remain a mystery."

Okay, now I'm getting sidetracked...let's try this again.


To this day, 184 years later, the reason for and answer remains a mystery. The music surrounding them, however, is classic Beethoven and has gained upper status in classical repertoire.

Mr. Bauer...praising the music is all well and good, although, I'm not sure what "upper status" means exactly, but you're missing the obvious. You're so close...you could have just made the connection between the Mendelssohn and the Beethoven and tied the whole concert (and review) together into nice, neat little package. But sadly, no.

First of all, not to be picky or anything, but the Beethoven was written in October 1826, making it pretty much exactly 183 years old. You're within a reasonable margin of error, but two seconds of research or editing would have prevented that mistake.

And, "the reason for and answer remains a mystery". Well, the quotes may have unknown origins (I'm not a German scholar, but I'd probably guess some literary source, while others have suggested they were inspired by an exchange between Beethoven and a friend regarding the payment of money), but this isn't like trying to unify relativity and quantum theory. These quotes do have some explanation -- musically speaking, Beethoven utilizes the implied rhythm of those two phrases (as though set for voice) to create his two rhythmic motives.

"Must it be?" = long, short, long
and
"It must be!" = short, long, long

...also, (and I hate to write so lengthily on this) why not mention that these motives are for the fourth movement, also known as "Der schwer gefaßte Entschluß" (or The Difficult Resolution), and not the entire work? It's kind of confusing, because it seems like you're implying that these motives are present in the first movement, and that's just wrong.

Remember, details help. Details are our friend.

The opening begins grave and poses the “Muss es seine?” motif, quickly followed by the playful and energetic allegretto. The scherzo has brilliance and a unique 50-measure robust repetitive rhythmic figure in the lower voices with first violin playing a melody like a country fiddler.

Do you see how this is confusing? You wrote about the fourth movement first (but I think you think it's the first movement), and then the second movement, which you fail to introduce as such.

Remember: Details, good. Confusion, bad. If confusing prose were an ice cream flavor, it'd be pralines and dick.

And, again with the clarity issues, "a unique 50-measure robust repetitive rhythmic figure," makes it sound like the figure that was repeated was 50 measures long. Frankly, I can think of several different ways to interpret that phrase. Your thought could so much more easily expressed if you had written something like:

...a unique 50-measure passage in the lower voices prominently featuring a robust rhythmic figure.

Or any variation of that, yes?

The third movement was very soft with a simple chorale like melody in four variations, the final movement culminating with a very definitive musical “It must be!”

figure shirt: Your article being the cognitive culmination of "It must be user error."

Okay, so you're not so much deliberately misleading us, as much as I think you're a bit confused. The first movement doesn't feature those motives. It's just in the final movement. So, the final movement is also the very definitive musical "Must it be?" as well.

figure confusing article:
"Must it be?"
"It must be!"

-----------------------------------------
Amongst all the confusing sentences, really the most confounding issue is why you failed to understand the connection between the Mendelssohn and Beethoven string quartets. You linked the Puts to Beethoven (which you hadn't even introduced as having being on the concert yet) and fail to give tangible evidence of the association, but not the Mendelssohn, which actually has a credible, if not direct connect to Beethoven himself, and specifically the Beethoven string quartet being performed on the concert?

Seriously...I had to do way too much research just to understand all of the misleading statements in your article. I know you're a busy guy...so, I wonder if the perhaps the newspaper could hire someone to help review the factual parts...but who?

7/3/09

Details

I found this article interesting from a number of perspectives. First, the reviewer has a theater background, and later branched into opera (and thusly music criticism), and I think that this comes out in his writing. Second, it comes from the normally unimpeachable Guardian UK, and is quite brief. Third, the names of iconic pieces are...iconic.

Also, the Northern Sinfonia is in Newcastle, UK.


Figure 1: Figure 1 is unrelated, yet delicious.

The Northern Sinfonia began its 50th-anniversary season with...

With something cool and memorable, I hope.

a complete cycle of Beethoven symphonies,

Wow, really. Came up with that in a brainstorming session, no doubt.

and now concludes it by compressing the 20th century into a week.

Mm, mm-hm. Better than not at all, for sure, but that hundred years of stuff certainly merits less total concert time than Beethoven symphonies, which are starved for attention.

Dreams and Ceremonies,...

This title reflects the survey of 20th century music? It could easily be a festival of Romantic music. Well, shit, or Baroque music, for that matter.

Dreams and Ceremonies, which surveys the period 1906-2006, is the kind of wildly ambitious scheme at which music director Thomas Zehetmair excels.

Good, good. Although programming music that was, more or less, recently composed should hardly count as a scheme. Was jamming all of the 20th century into a week the ambitious scheme, or stretching it out to fill a week's worth of concerts?

Still, nothing seems to frighten audiences away faster than 20th-century music.

And nothing, absolutely nothing, is more awesome than taking a sentence in your three-paragraph write-up to remind people that they don't, won't, can't, and shouldn't like it. For fuck's sake, can we cut that out?

The second concert began with an apologetic plea for those present to huddle closer towards the front.

Ha ha! It's funny because they paid money to go to a concert of unlistenable avant-garde crap! Hilarious. What a bunch of maroons.

Bah. What about it, then?

A pleasing performance of Dumbarton Oaks...

Figure 2: The gardens at Dumbarton Oaks, Georgetown

A pleasing performance of Dumbarton Oaks proves Stravinsky's backward glances towards the baroque are no more intimidating than a Brandenburg Concerto;

This is a bizarre, if evocative, construction. Stravinsky's potentially intimidating (?) "glances"

Figure 3: A glance from Stravinsky. Are you intimidated? I dunno, I think I could take him.

...are tempered somehow, since...he's glancing at Bach's Brandenburgs (on which the piece was based)? Are the Brandenburg Concertos often held up as an example of non-intimidating music? Or the Baroque as a whole? This characterization confuses me. However, this performance "proves" (!) that his glances are actually quite harmless.

...the same can hardly be said for Messiaen's Quartet for the End of Time,

Figure 4: Olivier Messiaen writing down what birds say.

which is among the most harrowing experiences you can have in a concert hall.

I'd be lying if I said that the Quartet is a fancy-free, happy-go-lucky piece of fluff, but it's hardly the most gruesome stuff out there. It also seems to me that things other than music can be experienced in a concert hall.

Figure 5: Ruins of a concert hall in Weisbaden, Germany after WWII.

The original audience was the composer's fellow detainees in a German PoW camp, and the gravid tempos of the 50-minute piece almost defy the musicians to maintain a pulse.

So...it had some "pacing problems," to borrow some theater-jargon?

The highlight is the plaintive aria for unaccompanied clarinet, here breathtakingly executed by Christopher Richards.

Fine. But the best is yet to come.

John Cage's notorious 4'3"...

D'oh! I had to look twice to make sure. This is of course not correct. Which happens; it does. It's a bit of a major blunder considering the uniqueness of the title, and the piece, which is (arguably, of course) Cage's most iconic work, and possibly deserves some hyperbolic title like Most Important Piece of the Last 100 Years. Arguably. But still.

And so:

John Cage's notorious 4'3" was given additional drama by plunging the auditorium into darkness.

Probably not the first time, but a decent enough idea nonetheless.

Pianist Kate Thompson refused to be put off by an outbreak of giggles among the audience.

One would hope that's the least of things she was prepared to endure.

But though the random, ambient sound is supposed to be the point,

It is?!

...it's still reminiscent of the silent observance before football matches, where you're hoping some idiot won't spoil it before the ref blows his whistle.

Ooh, yeah...or, you know, get the name wrong.

Figure 6: Pianist David Tudor performing Cage's 4'33".