Ed Zubrow <[log in to unmask]> writes:

>A quotation by Hans Keller in the liner notes to one of the Arnold
>Symphonies suggests a possible explanation: "Arnold's profundity usually
>manages itself in pseudo-shallowness--which is his historical inversion of
>pseudo-depth.

I love it!  Buried in Keller's wit there's a profound observation, which
applies equally to Arnold's symphonic master, Mahler - especially in his
scherzo movements.

The problem for both composers is that pseudo-shallowness of symphonic
argument is so convincingly clothed in a musical poverty which is as
problematic as it is double-edged.  Their witty, formal games only spring
to life for a few, historically informed listeners; and they account for
the relatively large numbers who are still non-plussed by the scherzoid
aspects of Mahler - let alone Arnold.  We cannot feel sure if this musical
poverty is feigned, or real.  That's what makes, say, Arnold's 9th Symphony
so disconcerting.

I think there's a whole PhD to be written on "Symphonic Irony", with Mahler
and Arnold as notable exemplars.  You'd also want Binge's Saturday
Symphony, Dvorak's 8th, Sibelius 4th, Nielsen's 6th and most of
Shostakovich in there.

Christopher Webber,  Blackheath, London,  UK.
http://www.nashwan.demon.co.uk/zarzuela.htm
"ZARZUELA!"