This older message thread in the Raff Forum has been archived. Just click on the icon to email the writer direct. To see all the archived messages return to the Message archive.

Unfortunately it is not possible to add further messages to this archived threads. Instead, just start a new thread in the current Raff Forums.

Posted by	Message
John Boyer   27/9/2003	Subject: Invecticon! (or, Raff as a standard of poor composition.) Message: Browsing Nicolas Slonimsky's "Lexicon of Musical Invective" (New York: Coleman-Ross, 1965), I came across several references to Raff (often linked to that other "R" composer, Rubinstein). For those who don't know it, Slonimsky's book, subtitled "Critical Assaults on Composers Since Beethoven's Time", is a delightful collection of damning invective hurled at the greatest composers of the 19th and 20th Centuries. The main entries, of course, are reserved for mainstream composers, but Raff appears four times in reference to others: 1. From the Boston "Gazette", 24 January 1878: "How [Brahms's First Symphony] ever came to be honored with the title of 'The Tenth Symphony' is a mystery to us...This noisy, ungraceful, confusing and unattractive example of dry pedantry before the masterpieces of Schubert, Schumann, Mendelssohn, Gade, or even the reckless and over-fluent Raff! Absurd!" (p. 68) - Yikes! Our guy gets a very backhanded complement there, now doesn't he? "Even" Raff is better, that's how bad Brahms is! ---------- 2. Here's Tchaikovsky's famous diary entry for 9 October 1886, which is also quoted elsewhere on this site: "I played over the music of that scoundrel Brahms. What a giftless bastard! It annoys me that this self-inflated mediocrity is hailed as a genius. Why, in comparison with him, Raff is a giant, not to speak of Rubinstein, who is after all a live and important human being, while Brahms is chaotic and absolutely empty dried-up stuff." (p. 73) - Hmm. Not much better. Still another backhanded complement. Raff is a giant, but only when compared to a giftless bastard and self-inflated mediocrity. Tchaikovksy, by the way, later met Brahms and found him quite charming. They got on quite well, but neither developed a taste for the other's music. ---------- 3. From the Boston "Journal", 25 October 1875: "Taken as whole, [Tchaikovksy's] Piano Concerto appears chiefly as a novelty. It will not soon supplant the massive production of Beethoven, or even the fiery compositions of Liszt, Raff, and Rubinstein." (p. 205) - Well, a little better, but the critics can't quite get away from giving Raff a slap. Sure, he's credited with being fiery, but there's that "even" again. In this case, Tchaikovsky is so off-the-wall that "even" Raff, fiery or not, is better. ---------- 4. From a letter to the editor of the "Musical Standard", London, December 1868: "Herr Wagner, a noisy and empty pretender, with a host of satellites, such as Brahms, Raff, Bruch, Liszt (perhaps the very worst composer who ever existed), could no more achieve an oratorio like Pierson's 'Jerusalem' than they could write a tragedy like 'Hamlet'." (p. 232) - Now this is really weird. He groups together Wagner, Brahms, Raff, Bruch, and Liszt as mutual satellites, five composers who have little more in common than they were all alive at the same time. Sure, one can group Wagner-Liszt on one side, Brahms-Bruch on the other, with Raff in between...but certainly not all together. And who the hell is Pierson? Knowing the 19th Century English taste for excruciatingly boring and tasteless oratorios, one can only shudder to imagine what "Jerusalem" sounded like. ---------- Curious how none of the critics give Raff any unqualified praise, because even Rubinstein, whom I'm sure we'd all agree is a much lesser composer than Raff, gets just that on at least two occasions: A. From the New York "Post", 1 November 1886: "Brahms's Second Symphony was listened to attentively but did not arouse any enthusiasm. What work of Brahms ever did? [...] The greater part of the symphony was antiquated before it was written. Why not play instead Rubinstein's 'Dramatic Symphony', which is shamefully neglected here, and any one movement of which contains more evidence of genius than all of Brahms's symphonies put together...?" (p. 74) - Rubinstein's "Dramatic Symphony" ain't no work of genius. Lordy, it's so bad that even I, a diehard Rubinstein admirer, can't stomach it, not one movement. So much for the New York "Post". ---------- B. From the Brooklyn "Daily Eagle", 29 February 1896: "The 'Pathetique Symphony' of Tchaikovsky was the heavy number on the bill. It is difficult to be sentimental on the bass drum. But through all the clash and riot of brass and percussive instruments, there are high ideals. Had Tchaikovsky lived longer, he might have become the equal of Rubinstein as a melodist and formalist." (p. 210) - Hard to believe that Rubinstein's four-to-a-bar melodies, awkward transitions, and hopelessly meandering developments are something that Tchaikovsky might have grown into. Good thing he died when he did. But then perhaps the critic is being sarcastic not only in his general tone, but with the reference to Rubinstein too. Anyway, there you have it: how our guy stood in relation to other "bad" composers of the 19th Century!
Mark Thomas   27/9/2003	RE: Invecticon! (or, Raff as a standard of poor composition.) IP: Logged Message: Bravo, John! I haven't chuckled so much for some time. What an entertaining post. Just to engage in some academic pedantry, the Pierson of the "Jerusalem" in the London 1868 quote is Henry Hugo Pierson (1815-1873) who, would you believe it, rates as big an entry in New Grove as Raff (or Rubinstein). An English ex-pat who settled in Germany and wrote 100+ works of which most are songs. There are a few Overtures (Macbeth, Maid of Orleans etc.), Incidental Music to Faust, four Operas and quite a bit of choral music. The Oratorio Jerusalem dates from 1852 and is his op.100. Groves describes his larger works as being of "great interest... he set up the ideal of unfettered originality. His melodies, his forms, his harmonies are quite as unpredictable as those of Berlioz". It goes on to praise his songs in particular as "remarkable" and concludes that he was too individual a voice to make any headway outside Germany (eh?) and that his individual style of composition tended to exhaust the listener! There's a recording of his "Romeo & Juliet" Overture on a Hyperion collection of overtures from other English romantics such as Sullivan (his fine Macbeth), MacFarren (the Chevy Chase which Wagner conducted), Corder (who he?) and so on. I have the CD but I can't say that I remember anything about Pierson's overture. I was clearly impervious to his individuality when I listened - or exhausted by it! Renewed apologies for this musico-historical pendant to a great post.
Jack Kelso 02/10/2003	RE: Invecticon! (or, Raff as a standard of poor composition.) IP: Logged Message: Here in the public library in Heidelberg I found a rather large article in a Musiklexikon by a German critic, who said of Raff's music: "Raffs Musik drueckt nichts aus" (Raff's music expresses nothing). But that same critic also wrote this sentence: "Schubert und Brahms sind ausdrucksvoller als Schumann" (Schubert and Brahms are more expressive than Schumann). See how subjective even musicologists can be? Jack
Michael Morrison   03/10/2003	RE: Invecticon! (or, Raff as a standard of poor composition.) IP: Logged Message: Thank you all for fascinating and entertaining information. This site has quickly become my favorite, and such posts as the three above are a major reason. Thank you again. Michael
FERNANDO OLIVA   03/10/2003	RE: Invecticon! (or, Raff as a standard of poor composition.) IP: Logged Message: Yes, Michael, do not doubt: this is one of the most interesting and formative Classical Music Forum. Since I discovered this site, I have learned much and more about Raff, Romantic Period and Classical Music in general. Surely, I am the only visitor who loves Bruckner. Since the 80´s, Bruckner was in Spain a neglected composer as Raff or Reinecke today. Alas! If you could see for a moment the surprised music salesman face when I had 19 years old, and asked for Bruckner Musicassete or Vynil! In 1983 there was only one Bruckner work avaible in budget label (DG-Privilege): his 4th. "Romantic" Symphony, directed by Eugen Jochum. About Rubinstein, I am sure there are more visitors who like Rubinstein, and thinks like me that the "Piano Lion" would deserve go back to the repertoire. If the miracle was possible with Bruckner, today ofted played in Barcelona, Why not for Raff? Sincerely, Fernando.
Jack Kelso   07/10/2003	RE: Invecticon! (or, Raff as a standard of poor composition.) IP: Logged Message: No, Fernando, you're not the only one here who loves Bruckner's music. I regard Bruckner and Schumann as the most "original" symphony composers after Beethoven. Now the reason Raff probably won't ever attain the praise and position that the once-ignored Bruckner currently holds is because Raff never strove for such emotional heights and outbursts that the Austrian was capable of attaining. The many positive qualities of Raff's symphonic output indicate (to me, at least!) that Raff would have been more artistically successful had he written...(are you ready for this..?!)...BALLETS! The marvelous turn of phrase, the light themes, the clever rhythmic nuances, the ability to be a bit humorous, even trivial, when the situation requires it---all of these belong to the repertoire of the successful ballet-composer; Delibes and Tschaikowsky possessed these qualities as well, the latter a few more. Raff is never as dramatic as Beethoven or Wagner, never as lyrical as Schubert or Tschaikowsky, never as heavy as Schumann or Bruckner (or Brahms). BUT...he's more fluid, more facile if you will, than any of them! He's stronger in rhythm than Mendelssohn, etc., etc. I enjoy Raff's last four symphonies (his "Seasons") more than Glazounov's ballet of the same title. Jack
Mark Thomas   07/10/2003	RE: Invecticon! (or, Raff as a standard of poor composition.) IP: Logged Message: Aargh! A Raff ballet? Is nothing sacred? :-) Actually, I believe that a few years ago in the US someone either suggested or actually produced a ballet for which some of Raff's ghostly/spooky/spectral symphonic movements were empoloyed as the music. I believe they were the "scherzos" from the Symphonies Nos.8-10. Were any ballets written by German romantics of Raff's era?
John Boyer   07/10/2003	RE: Invecticon! (or, Raff as a standard of poor composition.) IP: Logged Message: Q: Were any ballets written by German romantics of Raff's era? A: Yes, by Wagner! I refer to the Venusberg music for the Paris version of "Tannhauser". Ok, so it's not a full length ballet, but it qualifies. Now what I really want to hear is a ballet by Bruckner. Just imagine it...and shudder! :)
Jack Kelso 08/10/2003	RE: Invecticon! (or, Raff as a standard of poor composition.) IP: Logged Message: Yes, "Tannhaeuser"...but also "Dance of the Apprentices" from "Die Meistersinger"--Wagner's only Waltz! After Gluck, the Germans didn't contribute heavily to ballet. There's Beethoven's "Prometheus", a few ballet numbers in operas by Albert Lortzing and Friedrich von Flotow. In other words, Raff could have had the stage practically all to himself! He surely had the talent to have produced a dozen top-flight ballets. Hmm--but then..we probably wouldn't have the symphonies. Jack
FERNANDO OLIVA   08/10/2003	RE: Invecticon! (or, Raff as a standard of poor composition.) IP: Logged Message: Dear Friends: If our young people can dance and make coreographies with music repetitive, bored and not imaginative like hip-hop, Why not Bruckner Ballet? (is a joke). About German Ballet I remember Reinecke did a Ballet for his Opera "King Manfred. Cheers, Fernando