Symphonies of heavenly length
For the second week in a row, Paavo Jarvi has programmed a monument that, however spectacularly played, required the audience to sit for 80 to 85 minutes. Last week it was Shostakovich's Symphony No. 7, "Leningrad," and this weekend it was Mahler's Ninth.
Cristina Egbert of Milford writes that she would love go to the symphony but doesn't because, even though she studied piano for six years, attended CSO concerts growing up and listens to WGUC -- "I don't know enough to evaluate a program as to whether I'd want to see it or not."
Are you willing to sit through an 80-minute or longer symphony? And part II: If you are unfamiliar with the program, will that keep you from attending?
posted by Janelle Gelfand at 10:04 AM
3 Comments:
at 11/12/2006 01:51:00 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/12/2006 03:06:00 PM 
Janelle Gelfand said...
-
-
at 11/12/2006 05:00:00 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*I don't see how Ms. Egbert's comment relates to the question of sitting through a long work. Unless undecided people like herself take the time to do a little homework to learn how long a particular piece normally runs, they wouldn't be using it as a criterion for choosing whether to go or not anyway.
On the other hand, I don't understand how she feels unable to choose which concerts to attend. I do this by employing a variety of factors, none of which require her advanced musical training: who the conductor or guest artist may be; have I heard/seen them before; is a composer on the program one which I especially like or may be unfamilar with (and therefore, curious about); is the piece rarely performed here or, possibly, a premiere.
Sometimes the best way to decide is simply to go and be open to the experience of listening to one of the best orchestras around. How can you expect to "evaluate a program" unless you hear it? Nobody is going to be giving a test and grading it afterward, but it just might give you some good fodder for an after-concert conversation.
Dear Zuleika,
You're right; it's really two different questions. I have amended...
Length shouldn't be an issue...ESPECIALLY if the piece of music is of a quality nature (and i'm sure someone will challenge me and say what is quality, bla bla)
If I am enjoying something, i don't care how long it is, i want to hear it as it was meant to be. Whether it's a 2 minute pop song on the radio or an 80 minute symphony. If it's something i'm into, i don't want it to stop! but hey, that's just me.
I am a trained musician, but i don't think that is the deciding factor of someone being able to sit through a long piece of music.
I am not a film maker; however, I'll avidly sit through the extended versions of Lord of the Rings. I'm not an author; but i'll read whatever long novel.
Why is attention span then a problem with music? ...perhaps because their is no 'visual aspect' to it. When i am disengaged at a concert - which happens to everyone at one point in time - i people watch. That's what i love about live performance. I love to watch the musicians, the audience, their interaction, or perhaps lack of interaction.
Though i didn't give any 'solution' here to the aspect of programming long works, i hope i at least gave a different perspective.
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.
<< Home