Can Someone Convince Me Bruckner is Awesome?
Whenever I go back home to the shining old jewel in the Atlantic that is the UK, I’m always accosted by huge groups of people who are completely in love with bloody Bruckner. For some reason my sparents (this is my very cunning word to describe one half of my remarried parents, kinda like step-parents, but you know, portmanteaued) are completely embedded in groups of Bruckner fanatics.
I’ll admit I don’t really know that much of old Anton, but from what I can tell he goes on… and on… and on and bloody on (or should that be: ant on. Oh my what a comedic genius I am tonight) . He’s like a more romantic Shostakovich with absolutely no focus or schedule. He seems to like stretching one or two pretty decent ideas over about ten times too much music.
Now, I’m sure there are some Bruckner fanatics out there who can set me straight and make me totally fall in love with him, so, errr, what pieces would you suggest? Either that, or tell me to completely give up on him as a lost cause for my tastes.
May 16th, 2007 at 5:47 am
Bruckner is certainly not a composer for the impatient. But to hear him at his most purposeful, the Symphony #9 is as good a choice as any. Perhaps better, from your point of view, since he died before finishing the finale so there are only three movements. “Awesome” is definitely the word for this music.
Also, there’s a superb introduction to the Ninth in BBC Radio 3’s “Discovering Music” series. It’s at http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdmbruckner9.ram.
May 18th, 2007 at 2:28 am
“Flatulent” is the word I apply to Bruckner.
OK - “awesome” might apply but my attention wanders.
But then, I don’t get Mahler either. I think it’s because my attention goes from the baroque then a landing on Beethoven, particularly the string quartets, and then on to Shostakovich and the 20th century.