A Lark Ascending

I'm sure it is. Problem is mine...I generally have to work at English choral music of that era. Even Holst and RVW sound a bit stodgy to my ears in that area (although the RVW pieces on the set you mention have a nice lightness of touch; I especially like the 5 Mystical Songs, Flos Campi and the Mass in G Minor; Holst's 'Hymn of Jesus is a marvel whereas his later Choral Symphony and Choral Fantasia have yet to fully grab me [I think it might be the high poetry of these things as much as anything else that alienates me]). One of the reasons I like Britten is that his choral music seems (to my ears again) to be so much more translucent. I'll have another crack at 'Intimations' - might get the more recent Hyperion version which couples it with Dies Natalis which I do like. Someone else from that era you might like who wrote a lot of choral music is Herbert Howells. Very influenced by RVW: And this is an absolutely gorgeous choral disc from that same time period: The Bliss piece is a real favourite. Sorry. I'm a bit obsessed with that era. ****************************** Early morning music:

My mistake. He did play alto as well. 7 reeds on the stands. There were storming alto duels but also tunes working off contrasting reeds.

An extra cinema visit this week: Meant to see this before Xmas but life got in the way. Thought I'd have to wait until DVD release but stumbled on it playing in the big Sheffield Dorchester Hotel multiplex. More expensive than where I usually go but they seem to have enough screens to show films well after their usual runs. I thought this was excellent. Right up my street, having taught the Cold War to A Level students for 15 years (hope the ones I left behind have seen it). Well acted, tense, good story-line. A bit sentimental - Hanks as the embodiment of true American values when faced with the marginally dodgy judiciary and CIA!!!! James Ellroy it ain't. Brought home why Deutschland '83 is disappointing. Different league.

No. 4. Only getting to know Pettersson but I'm immediately struck by a similarity with Nielsen; and also Robert Simpson (who was Nielsen influenced himself). Rewarding music.

They brought the whole wardrobe. Gilad on tenor, soprano (Alan paid him the compliment of being the only musician he knows who can play it in tune [and later, described him as a great musician and an all-round force for good...there's a pal!]) and bass clarinet; Alan on alto, baritone and clarinet. They're both playing Sheffield in the next few months (separately) so I hope to get to see them again soon (though my dance card is already pretty packed).

Alan, Gilad and The Lowest Common Denominator (Nottingham Jazzsteps at the Bonnington Theatre, Arnold) Alan Barnes (saxophones); Gilad Atzmon (saxophones); Frank Harrison (piano); Yaron Stavi (bass); Asaf Sirkis (drums) Tremendous evening of straight ahead jazz - bop, hard bop veering into more Coltrane-y territory. Band got stuck on the M1 and arrived through the side door in winter coats, weighed down by instruments to an already packed house. 15 minutes to get organised and they were onstage and blazing. So many high points but special mention for the extended version of 'Alone Together' (or 'The Joint Mortgage Song' as Barnes quipped) - Atzmon's Coltranesque tenor solo brought the house down so Barnes simply followed with a cool, quiet baritone solo totally different in texture. The band were clearly pleased...Barnes asked why they bothered writing arrangements when something more informal came off so well. Also a great Basie blues as an encore. All done with just 15 minutes to set up and a 20 minute break...pure professionalism. As to be expected with two great comedians, high humour throughout. Endless quips about the last time Atzmon was booked in Nottingham when Gedling Borough Council cancelled the concert at the last moment because of protests about Atzmon's political stance. All done with humour and good grace rather than rancour. When I walked in they'd sold all but six seats, the best audience I've seen at the Bonnington (might have been the block booking by MI5).

One I've never really made sense of. One of those gargantuan choral pieces we Brits were so fond of in the 19th and early 20thC. Have to give it another go (I think I have the same recording in its initial CD transfer).

It's nearly 40 years since I read it (well, all but the last 150 odd pages which turns into an interminable philosophical treatise) so I can't talk with any precision but I'm pretty sure you're right about a lot being lost in reduction. Best to watch it as a TV drama (aimed at an audience that is unlikely to pick up the novel but would still enjoy the tale) rather than an attempt to realise all the highbrow stuff on TV. It suffers with that breathless thing about so much TV in recent times...a fear that if the action doesn't move quickly enough people will turn over. I've only ever read a couple of Dickens novels (under duress) but I generally enjoy the TV serialisations. Thinking back I recall the BBC version of 'Middlemarch' did the novel proud; I don't think this adaptation is on that level. As for getting a grip on characters, I find that all the time e.g. in Spin. Doesn't help with names that are so unfamiliar. Never saw that. I remember it being broadcast for the first time in late 1972. My parents ran away from me in my last year at school and left me with a little old lady. I was too scared to ask to watch it even though I was dying to see it (I was just at that stage of experimenting with 'improving' books!). Watching the series subsequently would probably have triggered a traumatic attack.

One of my earliest CDs - lovely music. Disc 1 - you can't beat a few Chopin Nocturnes at 10 a.m. Wonderful disc of songs and shorter instrumental pieces. I love Ives...there's never anything remotely precious about his music.

How about "What crazy longhair shit are you digging?" It is a jazz board.

Thanks, Shawn - I'll look those out. I know you're far from a snob. All I meant by saying I wasn't a film buff is that I've not spent a great deal of my life watching them. I only now have the time to indulge my primary interests and watch more films. I'm enjoying watching them.

I'm no film buff - my cinema visits have been infrequent until recently. I didn't know what to expect in the film - the only actor I knew was De Niro (hadn't even noticed he was in it). It entertained me for 2 1/2 hours. I don't ask any more of a film. I know it's different for those who study films.

There's a very honest article from 1965 here: On Boulez: ' There is no point in pretending that I understand his music but it enthrals me' http://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/jan/12/from-the-classical-archive-pierre-boulez-edinburgh-festival-1965 From the end of the article: "In any conventional meaning of the word, I do not “understand” “Pli selon pli.” On a superficial level it certainly has plenty to offer. I enjoy the graceful vocal melisma of the improvisations; and at each hearing the colours and textures that Boulez draws from a huge orchestra - in which an unconventional layout of conventional instruments is supported by a prodigious array of percussion that gives the score its characteristic palette, something between latter-day Messiaen and the Oriental gamelang orchestra - seem not only more striking and original but more subtle and precise. But I do not grasp what logic gives the work its sense of direction. At most, I perceive the force of individual sentences, and that no doubt, is why parts of it sound monotonous. Yet at moments I was spellbound, and not merely by the sound. The notes themselves commanded attention. And although in whole episodes meaning eluded me, the sum of those passages in which shape and sense loomed through the clouds left an overwhelming impression. I cannot for the life of me say why, but I am convinced that “Pli selon pli” is an important work, different in essence from the arbitrary effusions of so much advanced doodling, and crucial in the music of our time. Only the years will show whether I have dimly perceived something of importance, or whether, as one colleague bluntly asserted, I am deceiving myself."

There's a very honest article from 1965 here: On Boulez: ' There is no point in pretending that I understand his music but it enthrals me' http://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/jan/12/from-the-classical-archive-pierre-boulez-edinburgh-festival-1965 From the end of the article: "In any conventional meaning of the word, I do not “understand” “Pli selon pli.” On a superficial level it certainly has plenty to offer. I enjoy the graceful vocal melisma of the improvisations; and at each hearing the colours and textures that Boulez draws from a huge orchestra - in which an unconventional layout of conventional instruments is supported by a prodigious array of percussion that gives the score its characteristic palette, something between latter-day Messiaen and the Oriental gamelang orchestra - seem not only more striking and original but more subtle and precise. But I do not grasp what logic gives the work its sense of direction. At most, I perceive the force of individual sentences, and that no doubt, is why parts of it sound monotonous. Yet at moments I was spellbound, and not merely by the sound. The notes themselves commanded attention. And although in whole episodes meaning eluded me, the sum of those passages in which shape and sense loomed through the clouds left an overwhelming impression. I cannot for the life of me say why, but I am convinced that “Pli selon pli” is an important work, different in essence from the arbitrary effusions of so much advanced doodling, and crucial in the music of our time. Only the years will show whether I have dimly perceived something of importance, or whether, as one colleague bluntly asserted, I am deceiving myself."

Watched episode 1 of Spin (or "Les hommes de l'ombre"...a much more spooky title [Shadowmen?]) last night and enjoyed it. Another of those dastardly ambition in high places with unreliable friends series. But looks good. Also episode 2 of War and Peace the night before - proving enjoyable if not one of BBC's great recreations of lit-er-a-tuh.

Might be a good opportunity to restart a very long thread, using the new one started earlier. If the old one reappears it could be there for reference.

Hard to see the pieces - Clarinet Concerto (Peacock Tales); Liquid Marble; Violin Concerto. Accessible contemporary music.

Very enjoyable American Dream fairy tale. Just the right number of upsets along the way to maintain the tension. And the strength of the leading character wasn't compromised by some unnecessary romance.

Good singer and guitarist (and bass player). I thought her Yeats album was one of the most original jazz vocal albums in many a year. Hope the turnout is better than last time I saw her (when she did the Yates songs and some of the Cohen ones that she was then working on prior to the album). Must have been about 30 people in the audience.

North Sumatra, Indonesia: Mount Sinabung volcano spews lava and ash during an eruption seen from Tiga Pancur village in Karo http://www.theguardian.com/news/gallery/2016/jan/08/photo-highlights-of-the-day-a-japanese-light-festival-and-a-bushfire

Thought this might be of interest to some: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2016/jan/12/african-american-black-marching-bands-in-pictures

I watched episode 2 of D83 last night. Involving enough but implausible. It reminds me of a German series a year or so back where a group of friends get called up to serve on the Eastern Front in WWII as soldiers and nurses. Same sort of implausibility - they somehow kept bumping into one another in Russia; stock characters and stock situations. Like sidewinder I was utterly confused in D83 by the brief intervention of the Kung Fu film. The situations tend to be very obviously signalled - you know there's a grand romance ahead for the hero and the hippy daughter of the general.

The irony is that Bowie stands in total contrast to Cameron. The latter is still trying to convince us that we are still the same old Christian nation.

As a bit of an outsider where Bowie is concerned I've been amazed at how this has swamped the media. When Bowie was at his 70s height pop/rock music found it hard to get a look-in on BBC TV or in the British daily papers. Last night's 10 PM news was half given over to Bowie, pushing the junior doctors strike, divisions in the Labour/Tory parties, Syria etc way down the billing. The Guardian 'Culture' pages today have temporarily abandoned their blanket coverage of Amy Winehouse and Taylor Swift with endless articles about Bowie. Not a complaint...it's just really interesting how music that was once thought of as rebellious or alternative is the music that the establishment of today grew up with (even Eton Boy got in on the act pretty early....god knows how he'll cope if one of Supertramp dies). From a British perspective what is most interesting is how it shows Britain has changed - homophobia has far from disappeared (listen to any group of kids talking - 'gay' is still a term of abuse from everything from a disliked fellow student to a pen that won't work) but the distance travelled since the early 70s is phenomenal. As many reports mentioned yesterday, Bowie's androgyny (real or acted out) helped to break down those barriers. I suspect part of my aversion to Bowie in the early 70s was learnt homophobia (it took having a friend at university who spectacularly 'came out' to see things differently). There's a short but interesting remembrance here from someone you wouldn't instantly think of as pop music fan, classical pianist Stephen Hough: http://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/jan/11/stephen-hough-david-bowie-filled-my-time-as-i-wasted-my-time A long way from a world where establishment leaders and cultural maestros were associated with conducting Elgar or 'appreciating' Callas, Schwartzkopf or whoever and preferred to be seen at The Wigmore Hall rather than The Rainbow.

Had this sat on the shelf for a few years and only just got around to it. Sad little book, evocative of the early 60s, pre-swinging England.