Today's Guardian reports the attempted suicide bombings at UK airports under the headline ' A plot to commit murder on an unimaginable scale' . Any attempt to take human life is abhorrent, and thank heavens the alleged plot was foiled. But let us not forget that killing on an unimaginable scale by aircraft is not the monopoly of any one ideoology. ' As German fuel supplies dwindled in the autumn of 1944 and into the final months of the war, aircraft were grounded, tanks halted, training for replacement pilots could not be maintained, and most of the new and highly effective Messerschmitt 262 jet-fighter aircraft (photo above), of which over 1,200 had been produced by the end of 1944 and which might have considerably prolonged the war, had neither fuel to fly nor trained pilots to fly them. The ME 262s were anyway extremely fuel-hungry aircraft, and those that went into action had to be towed to their end of their runways to conserve fuel, cows were used to do the towin...
Comments
There is a world of difference between transcriptions and truncations, and I listened a lot to Bernstein's LP of the Mitropoulos transcription of Op 131 when it was first released in 1979. (The Opp 131 and 135 are now coupled on one CD).
But have to confess I listened to Bernstein's transcription again a few months ago and didn't get beyond the first few minutes.
But it is a fascinating curiosity, and worth listening out for. (Morning on 3 is available on 'listen again')
And yet ...
"...sounded horribly like film music..."
Seems to me that this is where your "noses" metaphor falls flat - the noses are still easily recognizable as a part of the whole, and to my ears, the same thing is true of the Beethoven.
"...which is presumably what the BBC producer intended."
A fascinating comment, and I'm really curious why you presume this.
"...the market driven BBC will say the audience ratings justified it,"
Am I supposed to conclude that "market driven" is an unqualified negative?
"Some time ago the BBC Radio 3 dropped its policy of only playing complete works,..."
Being from the colonies, I can't really comment. However, you make an absolute statement. Does this policy really apply to all programming, or only to some?
'the alert and receptive listener, who is willing to make an effort to select his programming in advance and then meet the performer half-way by giving his whole attention to what is being broadcast'.
Times change, but BBC Radio 3 now expects very little effort from the listener (such as listening to a whole Beethoven Quartet). Instead the schedules are dominated by compromises in the increasingly frenetic fight for listeners with 'populist' Classis FM.
In my recent postabout Arvo Pärt's Passio I wrote how Pärt determined the duration of the silences between the sections determined by the number of syllables in the final word of the preceeding sentence.
Pärt's Passio is a through-composed work, not a succession of movements separated by silences. In my view a Beethoven Quartet, such as the Op 131, is exactly the same.
I can see no reason for the BBC to have programmed a single movement. It was not a time constraint. As mentioned in my comment above, the same programme is tomorrow broadcasting the orchestrated Op 135 which lasts 32 minutes. The Op 132 lasts 38 minutes.
I'm not trying to defend any "dumbing down" initiatives, but I do recognize that trying to play to my own particular tastes would be a fast way to drive down any live or remote audience. Not all compromises are inherently evil, but I'm really not close enough to this particular example to judge ...
Van Beethoven?
Van? Not Von. Why?
Because his ancestors (parents, grandparents)were from Mechelen.They emigrated to Bonn.
Still .. great organ linked musicians over there.