May Day Symphony

[Mambo]

Happy May Day!
Of those pieces that can be linked to a certain day of the year, one has to be Shostakovich's Symphony No. 3, op. 20, written in 1929
and subtitled " The First of May". It is often mentioned with his Second symphony, but the similarity is mainly with the choral endings in both.
The Second was more for the experimentalists; the Third is more
for the proletariat and is more pleasing and ingratiating musically
on the ears.
It has been called a symphonic divertimento, with hardly no thematic
development, and Shostakovich works with a wide variety of
melodic ideas, foreshadowing the Fourth Symphony.
The Third is a collection of mostly fast-paced episodes,
with wild effects in all instrument groups, and is always a joy to listen
to on May Day or any other day.

It was premiered 21 January 1930 in Leningrad with Alexander Gauk conducting.
The American premiere was in Philadelphia in 1932, but without
the chorus! - what were they thinking?
More surprising is that such an important work was not recorded
until 1968, with Morton Gould conducting the Royal Philharmonic
Orchestra and Chorus.
It is about 29-33 minutes duration, and here is a performance,
if you have about a half hour to spare:

[some guy]

Originally Posted by Mambo

[T]he Third... is more pleasing and ingratiating musically on the ears.

"The ears," eh?

Since when are everyone's ears the same?

The brain, the audience, the ears.... Non-categories all. Useless except for making sweeping generalizations.

[ReinerTorheit]

Originally Posted by some guy

The brain, the audience, the ears.... Non-categories all. Useless except for making sweeping generalizations.

Personally I hear music with my ears. Without them, I wouldn't hear music. Perhaps that's a sweeping generalisation? Anything to say about DSCH #3? Thought not.

[some guy]

Nice cartoon, Reiner. And apposite.

But your response was a severe case of MISSING THE POINT ENTIRELY.

Of course you listen with your ears. We all listen with our ears. But our ears are part of a system, eh? And your system is different from mine. You have different experiences and different expectations and different biases and different tastes.

There is no "the" ear. No "the" brain (as so many "scientific" studies of music assume). No "the" audience. These are all chimera whose only practical purpose seems to be to privilege certain musics as "accessible" (another non-category), thus damning the musics that are thereby defined as "inaccessible."

It's aggravating to see how much time gets taken up on a modern music forum with anti-modernist sentiments. Maybe we should have two "Modern Music" forums, one for the antis, one for the pros.

Anyway, I noticed a recent post or two of yours recently, and am glad to see you back posting. Where've you been?

[ReinerTorheit]

Originally Posted by some guy

It's aggravating to see how much time gets taken up on a modern music forum with anti-modernist sentiments.

DSCH 3 was written in the late 1920s, and will soon be coming up for its 100th birthday.

Is that still "modern" music?

[Kubalivre]

Well, it could, since modernism was a art movement of the early 20th century. It's modern, just not contemporary. It just so happens that this piece isn't modern at all, as Mambo clarified in the opening post, but "modern" does not relate cleanly to time, but to aesthetic premises. It should also be noted some guy's comment wasn't all that directed to the piece, but to the overall ambience instead.

Of course you won't see this because you've blocked me, but still.

[some guy]

Well, I saw it. And that counts for something, eh?

[Kubalivre]

If a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it, is it an autistic demonstration of the decay of art in which the audience does not, in any conceivable way, see itself reflected?

Maybe we should cut off the trees.

[Mambo]

Originally Posted by some guy

"The ears," eh?

Since when are everyone's ears the same?

The brain, the audience, the ears.... Non-categories all. Useless except for making sweeping generalizations.

Everyone's ears are the same (from the functional view)
Some "ears"/persons will like the DSCH 3rd, others will not;
then there are those undecideds who may listen to it more than
once and can't decide yet. Shall I go on?
How valuable are sweeping generalisations ?
For specialists, they can be a bore. For non-specialists, they
are like an introduction. Next someone will say schooling is useless.
I will have to guess that our B.C. members are like an audience
in general. Or is that too general? Obviously i cannot have a
one on one discussion with everyone, as much as i might like.

Now how did we get off this Third Symphony, which is quite
specific. Unless i can find a (general) group of people who would like
to analyse it in more detail...

[ReinerTorheit]

"E=Mambo;44770]
Now how did we get off this Third Symphony, which is quite
specific. Unless i can find a (general) group of people who would like
to analyse it in more detail...[/QUOTE]

"

In the USSR, and in Russia today, the 1st May is a dual holiday. It not only celebrates labour and human achievement - it was a Spring Holiday for many years earlier than that, and the 1st May Parade included both of these elements.

I hear both of them in the symphony, too. Clearly he must have had Beethoven 9 in mind for the choral finale, although the verses he sets are weak by comparison. However, they contain a warning that "as you burn the old and decrepit, you must build something new & better". It's a text that was very apposite for its time... people were growing tired of promises of a new life in the USSR - they wanted to see it actually coming about in reality.