Donald Satz wrote:

>Some offerings - he sent me a list of six recordings, nothing but Vivaldi
>and Tchaikovsky.  He's so generous, and I had already told him that Vivaldi
>and Liszt were non-starters for me with Tchaikovsky not far behind.  I
>wrote him back, indicating that I had no interest in his list, but that I
>would be glad to send him any number of the fifty I offered at no cost.
>He liked that idea and has offered to pay the mailing charges.

Well we know that you don't like Mendellsohn much either.  But I would like
to focus on Thaikovsky for the moment.  I had intended to start my own
thread "What No Thaikovsky" but I'll do it here instead.

In my view Thaikovsky is one of the all time greats.  He wrote three of the
greatest ever 19c symphonies 4,5 and 6.  Karajan used to refer to 6 as his
favourite work.  Thaik's also wrote some of the greatest ever ballets, Swan
Lake and The Nutcracker.  He produced some great concertos too including
both piano works and the violin one.

Then there's the ovetures/tone poems.  Ok the 1812 is an attractive piece
of famous froth but the Romeo and Juliet is much more of a substantial
work.

I've only listed the greatest works here there are many others which one
might like to include.

But my question is why don't people here talk more about the Russians
and Thaikovsky in particular.  After all that nation carried the torch
of cultural civilisation into 20c when other nations turned to rubbish.

Is the problem with Thaikovsky that we associate him with all those poppy
works? Why should such considerations concern us? They don't appear to
affect the reputation of certain other composers.

Don all men are brothers send me a box too.  Include your unwanted romantic
stuff if you like.

Bob Draper
[log in to unmask]

 [For those wondering, Thaikovsky is Tchaikovsky's long lost Siamese
 twin.  Unlike his brother, he writes low-calorie music that Don might
 take to.  (Sorry, just couldn't resist.)  -Dave]