Comments on: Anticipation

By: longtimelistener

longtimelistener — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 03:58:59 +0000

I don’t think describing “Esther” as atonal is proof of Sarah Palinesque ignorance. The Schoenberg influence is pretty well documented. Funny how people fly off the handle at the littlest things.

From the NY Times “Weisgall’s musical language is steeped in that of the Second Viennese School, he does not use 12-tone methods strictly. The score is rich with aching chromatic harmonies in the manner of Berg. In crucial moments Weisgall allows sturdy tonality to soften the spiky edges of his voice.”

From Wiki: The opera remained post-modernist, with strong Second Viennese School influence, although not entirely atonal.

More from Wiki: following Schoenberg’s own evolution, a totally-chromatic expressionism without firm tonal centre (often referred to as atonality) and later still Schoenberg’s serial twelve-tone technique…

Lighten up Alto.

By: m. p. arazza

m. p. arazza — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:35:24 +0000

I don’t know if one can rightly knock a work for drawing on, or even for being composed in (even if that’s the case), a supposedly outdated style, as if it were a hairdo or something. But even JJ’s review seemed to do this, or at least to suggest it: “even those Purim goodies, hamantaschen, wouldn’t make ‘Esther’ palatable. It’s written in a 12-tone style that was old hat when the opera premiered 16 years ago…” I found the score most listenable — Alto’s “elegant” seems a good word to describe it. Any idea if there’s any way of accessing Loomis’ Musical America review(s) without giving them credit card info?

By: Alto

Alto — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 02:35:20 +0000

Well … yes. And, again like your Alaskan model that I have with perhaps a little exaggeration teamed you with, you again ignore even any consideration of facts or argument and simply go for the meaningless sound-bite.

By: squirrel

squirrel — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 21:46:49 +0000

I’m bowing out of this discussion. Are you 4 real??

By: Alto

Alto — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 17:17:09 +0000

Alto did NOT use the meaningless term “reverse Philistine”‘; that was Squirrel.

Squirrel then sets up a straw-man concerning some imagined knee-jerk defense of atonalism — something I never even mentioned. The opera ESTHER is not, in any case, atonal but has clear tonal centers at, at least, crucial points. It’s treatment of the orchestra dramatically is clearly derived from Puccini. It is certainly not “serial” — as Squirrel, in what I again contend is a Palin-like reliance on slogans, half-truths, and falsehoods, keeps asserting. This is what I mean by ignorance. Throwing around uncomprehended jargon to make immoderate attacks on accomplished artistry is … what? I’m afraid Squirrel has after all provided the right appropriately Biblical metaphor. It’s Philistinism, and it pervades too much of our national life at the moment to sit quietly when it parades itself where serious operatic ventures are at stake.

By: mrmyster

mrmyster — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 16:48:48 +0000

Alto, would you elaborate on “reverse Philistine?” It’s a fascinating term, and in fact I think I know some of them; we may have one or two in Santa Fe. Further explanation would be appreciated! Thank you.

By: Indiana Loiterer III

Indiana Loiterer III — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 16:34:42 +0000

We do treat tonal operas that way these days.

By: squirrel

squirrel — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 16:33:08 +0000

afterthought – should we treat tonal operas this way?

“Don’t like Thomas??? You just don’t UNDERSTAND harmony!”

By: squirrel

squirrel — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 16:14:53 +0000

well aren’t you clever.

see, this is exactly the kind of reverse-philistine attitude that concerns me. I get the impression that some (including alto) would defend ESTHER to the death because it is atonal, and then call anyone who doesn’t like it “ignorant”. Ridiculous. and sorry, Sarah Palin-like? wtf, as the kids say.

By: Alto

Alto — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 14:19:31 +0000

“The premiere of Hugo Weisgall’s 1993 Esther at New York City Opera occupied my mind for several days …”

“Several days” must be an understatement, since the premiere was in 1993.

And why you would want to reiterate, above, your markedly ignorant description of this eloquent and elegant music is a mystery. A critic like George Loomis in MUSICAL AMERICA, who actually was able to *hear* the work and was not disposed to dismiss it with silly, cheap slogans, puts your Sarah Palin-like put-down of the piece to shame.

By: Buster

Buster — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 09:00:58 +0000

Wow! Herlitzius did this with Sinopli in Vienna long time ago, I am amazed she still has this killer in her repertoire. How was she?

By: kashania

kashania — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:36:27 +0000

I love it when the lights go up at the end. Spooky!

Tonal or not, it seems to me the work need only be true to its own materials, and be effective.

Wise words!