George Antheil * Symphony Nr.1 "Zingareska" * Symphony Nr.6 "After Delacroix" * Achipelago-Rhumba Radio-Sinfonie-Orchester Frankfurt/Hugh Wolff CPO 999604-2 [DDD] TT: 62:35 Summary for the busy executive: What is the bad boys road more? sad or beautiful? George Antheil really wanted to conquer the world. As many young men with too much testosterone knew, to conquer the world means to get eternal life; to by showered with glory and be mentioned in the history books, and it is just necessary to ba able to stand life and even oneself. Now Herostratos solved this problem in his own way: he is mentioned in the history, and will be remembered as long as the Greek culture is remembered, likely. His deed was so horrifying - he destroyed what the Greeks consenced was the foremost of beauty: the temple of Artemis in Halikarnassos. The fire was lit on and the Greeks had to give him fame, neither them wanted or not. Now many would argue and agree that Herstratos got a very special notoriousness labelled after him, that he cheated, and therefore only can be said to have got an A- as mark. To get the A without minus is of course the main target, like Alexander of Machedon, Julius Kaisar, of Napoleon. But one doesn't need to conquer the world so concrete. The art historians of 16th century of Italy were concerned that the genial Leon Battista Alberti, whom today is most known for his architectural buildings which still are left, some cathedrals perticulary...but in his time was regarded the sharpest mind since Arkimedes and the most honorable polyhistor since Aristoteles, should have the bronze medal, and finer than him - on silver - should come nobody, to mark the greatness of Leonardo from Vinci, who was honoured with the golden lion. There is respect with the mark A. Of course Mozart and Beethoven didn't lead any Napoleonic armies on the battle field; their soldiers were the notes, their battlefield a sheet of paper with black stripes on, their musquets had the shape of trombones, their cannons were the strike on the big drum, and their field marschall was named "General Bass". To conquer the world Antheil travelled in Shuttletraffic between New York, London, Paris, Berlin and Hollywood, from the traditionalist manners to jazz, to the uttermost modernism in Ballet Mechanique. A child prodigy he took his first piano and violin lessons at age six. The Liszt pupil Constantin von Sternberg gave him more advanced pianolessons, which gave him a phenomeonal technique, and thereto his profound knowledge of theory. He took at 19 lessons from nobody lesser than Ernest Bloch, but had to quit due to lack of funds. But Antheil entered peoples life as "A Stormwind an April Morning" as August Strindberg says it. Four years later, Mary Louise Bok, the founder of the Curtis Institute, was impressed enough by his talents to send him an monthly gift of 150 dollars, to keep him floating. Antheil, who was of German/Polish origin headed for Europe. The journey took the way over London where he amazed the Wigmore Halls audience with playing Chopin like Strawinsky, and most important of all: Strawinsky like Antheil. A bad boy was born. In Berlin he met the conductor Rudolph Schulz-Dornburg - or Mr. Schluz von Dornberg as Antheil said. Apparently names wasnt his stong side. In his early youth he also had problems with a certain Mr. Dombrowski... - R.S-D premiered his first symphony and Antheil described the premiere with enthusiasm, but also slightly frightened. Antheil writes how the conductor lifted his baton and sunk it, the orchestra struck, the first accord was taken on....and it sounded exactly like he had thought when he wrote it with his pen. But he also found weaknesses in the structural work with the form, that he wasn't aware of when he wrote it. "The performance is naturally the ultimate test" he remarks in his memoires. But this self criticism is common in composers, and is in my opinion the most dangerous circumstance that can prevent them from writing music or good music. Antheil, who loved Tjajkovskijs music could have heard him murmble the same thing at the premiere of his 5th symphony, had he been present at that occasion. For now Atheil shouldn't stay long in Berlin. The year was the tumultuous one of 1923 and Germanys economy went down in hyperinflation. Antheil quickly decided Berlin was only the start of his career, and he went to Paris, to have his money still in value, and with the hope to meet Igor Strawinsky, who was his great idol. In Paris he made friends with Ernst Hemmingway, James Joyce, Pablo Picasso, and other prominent avant-guardists. He composed pianosonatas after mechanical schemes, and when he performed them at Theatre de Champs-Elysees, he made a scandal comparable to the one the choreography of "Le Sacre du Printemps" caused (this was 04.10.1923). He became more and more famous, seemingly with every jazzinspired ultrastrawinski pianorecital he gave. He could have had a good life here, but he still had too much testosterone. Antheil was a Richard Wagner with money. His wife had to read endless variations on "If I only had dollars...", and she more than once pointed a warning finger to him. With dollars he did not only wanted money per se, but also the fame of the New World. He composed a piece for Piano, Pianola, Percuassion and a "airplane-rattle", with which he should tamen the world. Ballet Mechanique had its permiere in Carnige Hall, but became a great flop. Much thanks to the reason that the arrangers insisted on having a real airplane-motor on the stage, which literally blew the orchestra and the audience away. When his Pianoconcerto flopped in the same wave, he seemed to have gotten a little tamed. He dabbled with other thighs for some years - among them he wrote kitsch for a lovemagazine ("Boy advices Girl"), agiatated about the World War II, and invented a remote-control torpedo, of all strange things. Clearly he was multitalented. He moved to Hollywood, got a filmmusic contract which endured him 2 months of work with income for the rest of the year, and had his Symphony Nr.4 published by Boosey & Hawkes. From that day he was financically independent. he wrote operas, symphonies, a violinconcerto, and in 1947 he was, according to a survey, the after Gershwin, Copland and Barber, the most frequent played American composer. Nevertheless he might have felt frustration in his later years. His production declined and he died from heart failure relatively young (At age 58). To me Antheil is a sort of a mystery. By all means he was one of the most talented Americans who ever set notes on paper, but ouch what a messy man! Nobody has started composing the same pianoconcerto as many times as him. Linda Withesitt had a helluva of work sorting out his Violinsonatas. His symphonies include 2 unnumbered, so that 4th numberlabelled symphony is actually his nr.5, and his nr.7 (fragment) is actually nr.9. When I listen to his symphonies I can hear remisences of Strawinsky, Sjostakovitj, Tjajkovskij, Beethoven and Bruckner in a helluva mixture. The booklet adds hints of remiscences to Weber opera, Prokofijevs 5th, and the song "John Brown" in the 6th symphony. One might think that the title "Zingareska" are suggesting the as traditionally seen roaming life of Gypsies as an allegory for Atheil himslef roaming the genres and styles. The most damned thing is just that he does it damned well! I am no particualry hot fan of Ballet Mechanique and its derivatives, but these symphonies are wonderful. The critics hunted down the public success of Antheils first symphony. Antheil, in his charming autobiograhy "The Bad Boy in Music" (of 1945, which I hope you take time to read as it is very entertaining and informative meanwhile) he explains the continious bad criticism that he wasn't good enough for the snobs with detesting atonality and dodecaphony and yet not formal enough, but that doesn't help when Krenek has success at about the same time with his 2nd symphony which is neither atonal nor dodecaphonic, and goes and develops in a formal or traditional pattern. One strike from the critic was that his symphonic works in particular are "loose" symphonically. I think this can be a circumscription; the developing in Antheils symphonies might be a little tricky to get at first, but I think they are good enough to work. I think it is rather on a more philosophical level Antheil gets problems. In his letters he continiously complained that "Americas commersialism threatens to engulf me" etc, and the themes he choose in his symphonies: Communist warhorse melodies and tunes, and the title suggesting DeLaCroix French Revolutionary Freedom Painting, makes a more than dubious flirtmessage to "American Commersialism". Especially as his technique is so much Media-Age-Copy-'n-Paste - a product of American Commersialism - as it can get. Rautavaara and Schnittke has no chance in comparision. He stands as a forerunner for the Media Age composers, and his has pasted his sometimes even Beethovenian bits with the outermost secure and understanding for technique and craftmanship. Boy did he like to conquer America, he ended up tamed in Hollywood, honoured, but probably not the way he wanted. Frankfurts Radios Symphony Orchestra under Hugh Wolff playes with joy and great secure throughout, and the result is a very fresh fruit. Particualry the "Archipelago"-Rhumba, which is a perfect pendang to Gershwins "Cuban Ouverute" (and thereby a bit different and more coherent in style than the smphonies) is a good example for the busy executive. Especially the brass plays with a dancing jazzy style, with great secure, seemingly well used to play music of more modern kind than 19th century, and the strings have a warm solid sound, which makes very good in this music. Although the Kuchar set on Naxos wins in price, I would conclude that this performance is so fine that it is well worth the extra money. Sound is fine too, rich and clear. Mats Norrman [log in to unmask]