Richard Pennycuick wrote:

>Try as I will, I can't get into late Copland.  I know there are those who
>love it, who regard it as the real Copland.  So when I read Bill's post,
>I went back to the first Copland LP I ever bought, Antal Dorati's fabulous
>old mono version of the 3rd symphony.  I've just listened to it and, a few
>clicks and pops aside, it still sounds great.  I don't think it's just
>nostalgia that makes me rate it above the other versions I have, including
>two of Copland's and Bernstein's.  It just has an extra edge and more
>excitement.  Pity Mercury didn't reissue it on CD.

Late Copland took me awhile...but now I can listen to Connotations and
Inscape with all of the joy I found in the Variations.

As for the 3rd Symphony, the Dorati remains a favorite. I also have a
wonderful tape of Tilson Thomas doing it with the Boston SO. Another
favorite is a broadcast with Szell and the NY Phil.

>At the heart of this question is that Copland probably more than any other
>composer is thought to have mortgaged the "American" sound.  ...

For me, Gershwin is Rachmaninov and Rubin Goldmark meet jazz. For me,
Copland is Stravinsky and Beethoven (and Rubin Goldmark) meet all things
American.

It seems to me that Copland's jazz was more rough than Gershwin's.
Gershwin's jazz was more for the society set and therefore more readily
acceptable.

I find Ives, Harris, and Schuman to have more of a naturalness about their
exploration of things American. On the other hand, I could not imagine
Copland's music being written by a European, however, I could imagine much
of Gershwin's concert music written by a European. I should also probably
add that I find just about all of the above to be wonderful.

Karl