[78-L] Bruckner and Sibelius

[DAVID BURNHAM]

To hell with Bruckner and he can take Sibelius with him (except for anything 
that came in under 8 minutes, and that includes Finlandia..beyond that, they 
were both jerkoffs and you may quote me).

dl


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I probably won't quote you and I certainly won't agree with you!  While he's not the first symphonist I will turn to when I want to hear a symphony, my wife and I just finished watching a Blu-Ray of Abbado conducting Bruckner's 5th Symphony and it's hard to imagine a more inspired performance;  I find similar rewards in the 3rd, 4th, 7th, 8th or 9th Symphonies, (and I mention those only because I'm not as familiar with the rest of them).  The Bruckner Symphonies aren't the easiest ones to listen to, because they are very deep and involved, and usually quite long.  But for this very reason they can stand repeated hearings better than the more popular symphonies.  I realize that Toscanini's opinion of Bruckner was similar to dl's;  I think he opined that Bruckner's scores might just as appropriately be rolled up and hung in your local washroom to be put to a very unmusical use.

Sibelius, on the other hand, is one of the first symphonists I will turn to.  My favourite is the 3rd, but I often when I'm on a long drive, I'll listen to all seven, one after the other and thoroughly enjoy them, (likewise the Prokofiev Symphonies).  En Saga, (which is longer than 8 minutes), is one of my favourite tone poems but once again, I can't think of one Sibelius score which I find tedious.  Even "Kulervo", which Sibelius himself wasn't very fond of, I find quite enjoyable, my only complaint being that the 2nd movement always becomes an "ear-worm" which I find difficult to shake.

db