Ian Foster wrote:
>I possess at least one recording of every Vaughan Williams symphony, except
>No 8. Could anyone suggest a suitable version of this work, which I've
>never heard - not even on the radio?
The first one I ever heard was by "Glorious John" as V.W. called Sir John
Barbirolli. More recently, I really enjoyed Slatkin, even though I am not
sure that I would turn to him for earlier symphonies. Be warned, No. 8 is
a kind of Concerto for Orchestra, quite far from Nos. 3 - 6. But it is
enjoyable and does bear the VW touch, with a mix of wit and bitterness
typical of his late years.
>What amazes me about the Vaughan Williams Symphonies is their range. The
>celebrated middle group of Nos 3, 4, 5 & 6 can be put into two distinct
>camps, i.e. the pastoral and the war-like, but other symphonies belong
>in neither set (e.g. No 1 or No 7). Most of the symphonies work for me,
>despite this astonishing range.
Indeed, and isn't it a charcetristic of genuinely great symphonists? This
is no place to build a theory, but building a universe which is complete
in its own peculiar way, encompassing a wide range without ever losing
one's true personality -- and this can apply to Sibelius as well as Mahler.
Well, lists of "best symphonists" have no end, but discovering a new one
in this category is a rare and most rewarding experience. IMHO, Tubin and
Pettersson belong to it, maybe paradoxically, as well as Kenins,
Balakauskas... Oh well, maybe I should start a list...
>The one I've never got on with is No 2 (The 'London'). Perhaps I don't
>possess a good recording and it may well be that I ought to purchase the
>Handley disc on EMI Eminence coupling No 2 with No 8!
No. 2 by Boult -- even if the symphony as a whole is not my favourite,
Boult's slow movement is unforgettable.
>Has Haitink recorded No 8 yet? (I don't think so, but I may have missed
>it).
Not that I know (one of my friends, who has been part of the previous
recordings, would probably have told me).
Best wishes,
Thanh-Tam Le
[log in to unmask]
|
