201.我们为什么喜爱柴可夫斯基Tchaikovsky?

Reader86

Why do we love Tchaikovsky? A music scholar counts the ways

October 04, 2021 Kyle MacMillan 5 min read

Even though many of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky’s beloved masterpieces like Swan Lake, Romeo and Juliet and the 1812 Overture are regularly heard in concert halls, an argument can be made that the 19th-century Russian composer’s works remain in some ways underappreciated. Indeed, Philip Ross Bullock, author of the 2016 biography, Piotr Tchaikovsky, argues that the composer’s popularity has actually worked against him.

“He is undervalued but perhaps overexposed in some ways,” said Bullock, a professor of Russian literature and music at Oxford University’s Wadham College. “His very popularity, these warhorses, the First Piano Concerto, the Pathetique Symphony [which the CSO will perform Oct. 7-9], become so familiar that people stop hearing them in original ways.”

A member of the academic advisory board of the International Tchaikovsky Society, Bullock offers other reasons for the under-assessment of the composer. For starters, Tchaikovsky (1840-1893) was once subject to what the scholar called a “moral squeamishness” — a distancing by certain academics and others because of his homosexuality and now-outdated notions of how his private life affected his music. “I think that’s not been true for a long time, academically speaking,” Bullock said. “We’ve learned to rehear him.”

Second, Tchaikovsky was a more modern composer than some might think. Mahler was another composer who was discounted for decades after his death in 1911, and then starting in the 1950s and ’60s with the efforts of Leonard Bernstein and others, he began to be seen as a modern master. “Mahler conducted Tchaikovsky at the Vienna Opera House and at the Met when he came to the United States,” Bullock said. “Mahler learned to be Mahler by listening to what Tchaikovsky did to symphonic form.” In his Sixth Symphony, for example, Tchaikovsky broke from tradition and put the movements in the “wrong” order, much as Mahler did in his Ninth Symphony.

“But we always forget to put Tchaikovsky in that place in music history as someone who took us from the 19th century,” he said, “and then ushered in the symphonic practices of Mahler, of Elgar, in many ways, of Shostakovich in the Russian tradition and Sibelius in the Finnish tradition.”

Finally, Tchaikovsky was his own worst enemy. He was self-deprecating about his abilities as a composer. “It’s all rubbish,” Bullock said. “He was a brilliant symphonist.” But the self-criticism, often taken out of context, has affected the way critics view his work.

Among the qualities that have made Tchaikovsky’s music so memorable is his gift for melody. Notable examples can be found across his output, especially what Bullock called his “extraordinary lyrical outpourings” in many of his slow movements, such as that in the Symphony No. 5. The composer wrote 10 operas and more than 100 art songs, and the expressive qualities heard in those pieces often carry over to his instrumental works, as indicated by such markings as “cantabile,” “cantando” or “espressivo.”

Bullock also praised Tchaikovsky’s “winning way” with titles, programs (a preconceived theme or narrative) and particularly, hints of programs, where the composer deliberately withheld details from the audience. “So he engages our capacity as a listener to imagine,” he said. Romeo and Juliet and Francesca da Rimini (an 1876 ode to the famed story from Dante’s Divine Comedy) clearly have narratives, but Tchaikovsky’s programmatic intent for the Fifth and Sixth symphonies remains unclear, despite scholars’ eager efforts to uncover it. “What’s fascinating is the way that Tchaikovsky can use that hint of a story, hint of a personality, to make us do the work, to fill in the gaps and to imagine while we’re listening.”

Although Tchaikovsky’s music is overtly romantic in many ways, he had strong ties to the Classical era, and his favorite composer was Mozart. “When he got to see the original score of Don Giovanni, he was completely transfixed by the connection he had to the 18th century,” Bullock said. Tchaikovsky’s opera The Queen of Spades contains an intermezzo borrowed from a Mozart piano concerto, and the Orchestral Suite No. 4 (Mozartiana) is an arrangement of four works by the composer’s hero. “I think his interest in these classical forms of the 18th century, and his interest in charm, delight, order, proportion — all these things we think of with the 18th century — is often misunderstood because we tend to see him through a romantic, 19th-century prism.”

Igor Stravinsky, who turned to neo-classical music in the 1920s, was fascinated by Tchaikovsky. “It’s maybe that we have evolved a performing tradition that emphasizes the heart-on-sleeve romanticism of Tchaikovsky’s work," Bullock said, "but sometimes we mishear or misunderstand or are not shown the works that would allow us to hear this very different side of him.”

A version of this article was originally published on Sounds and Stories, the predecessor site of Experience CSO.

The former classical music critic of the Denver Post, Kyle MacMillan is a Chicago-based arts journalist.

https://cso.org/experience/artic ... hough%20Tchaikovsky,his%20favorite%20composer%20was%20Mozart.

Reader86

Beethoven V Tchaikovsky
No, Beethoven’s 9th Symphony piece is not harder to pin down. As I was listening to B, I thought there was predictability in the instability in that I could expect grand noises and then softer notes after I heard this sort of pattern after a few times. To be fair, it helped that there were visual cues so that I could see and almost anticipate a lower sound. But also because of that, I recognized that kind of pattern and knew what to expect. I liked Beethoven’s piece because of how grand it made me feel and took me to many swirls of musical pitches. Funny enough, however, my first time listening to it for this assignment, I fell asleep. I guess it relaxed me.

However, Tchaikovsky’s Swan Lake was more unexpected in my opinion. I was completely surprised at 1:30 exactly, what perfect timing. I mean that came out of nowhere. What was that? The music was relaxing and familiar but then this large hit. It becomes so faced paced all of a sudden. It incites fear in me because the music that succeeds the sudden high pitch is reminiscent of scary movies.  As for what it means, I think that this might be a story of escaping or running away because it is fast-paced. I imagine a dancer creeping slowly as to not disturb anyone (because of the calm beginning part) but then has to run really quickly for whatever reason (perhaps stepping on a branch)and we see her speed. I loved both pieces. I will say that I do not know technical music terminology or music theory. Therefore, I am unable to make sophisticated comments on musical aspects to note. I thought and felt this even as we were discussing our movies and music.


What to Listen For in Music- Blog Post 5
Typically, I don’t really listen to classical music unless it’s the only music available to me. Reading Copeland describe the sensous and expressive planes makes me think about my involvement in music, and I listen to a lot of music. I feel myself connecting to music on both of these planes, depending on my mood and the music itself.

Beethoven and Tchaikovsky work in the same genre yet are two completely different musicians, to me. I think that Beethoven isn’t harder to pin down in what it means but it is rather less ambiguous than Tchaikosky. His music does have some unpredictable tunes and melodies that rather flow very excitedly, rather than smoothly. However, his music is as I interpret it to be, it is just pushed in a direction according to the song’s melody.

Tchaikovsky’s music isn’t more predictable but his music does flow more smoothly that Beethoven’s perhaps. The mood generally stays pushing the listener in the same direction through his music, without too many leaps of changing tone, like Beethoven. Both musicians are great, they are just very different in producing music. Through the tone of the played notes, the musicians can change the emotional feeling their music elicits, which is how I think these two artists mainly differ. I personally like Tchaikovsky more than Beethoven because his music is smoother and elicits a different reaction from me than from Beethoven.

Beethoven & Tchaikovsky
When I listened to Beethoven I noticed that it was like the instruments or at least the people playing them, were having a conversation. One would play a rhythm and the other would respond. They all compliment each other. It felt as if there was a conflict that needed to be resolved. This piece would constantly change from speedy and loud to slow, soft and quiet. There was also a lot of anticipation going on because of these changes. At times it would be simple and then get complex very fast, on the screen it looked very messy but I knew it had to have been composed very intricately and was coordinated even if it didn’t appear that way.



Similarly Tchaikovsky changes from speedy and loud to slow, soft and quiet but not as often as Beethoven would. There was anticipation and buildup but the piece as a whole was made very differently from that of Beethoven’s. Tchaikovsky made it like a one sided conversation where as Beethoven had made it like a dramatic and heated conversation. At the very beginning it only felt negative, I was reminded of sadness, regretfulness, guiltiness and many other words that aren’t very positive but it changed after the first 4 or so minutes to hopeful, happy and energetic.


I would say the meaning behind Beethoven’s piece was to convey an argument and a struggle between two entities while Tchaikovsky’s was more of listening to one explain themselves. It makes no sense but like art music has no real definition or meaning because it all depends on the beholder or listener.


Blog Post 5
I’ve never really listened to classic music often, but when I did I either hated it or loved it. I couldn’t identify why I loved one piece while the other was boring to me, when everyone else thought they sound the same. Different composers evoked different feelings in me, based on how they used sound. Swan Lake vs Symphony 9 are great examples of  the way in which each composer utilizes sound in their own unique way. That sound also influences the story or rule of  piece.  A rule takes the place of a story in music and in swan lake it is easy to see that rule. The music’s rule can be identified very easily. Swan lake has a purpose that most listeners can guess. Even the title of the piece helps the listeners assume what is going on, while Beethoven’s Symphony 9 has a title that does not help in the process of finding a meaning to his music. The title adds more to the unpredictability of his music, because although he has other symphony’s, each is very different than the other and the listener is just thrown in and not told what to expect.  When I first heard it, I can imagine a ballet show going on. The plot of the ballet show is always the same, no matter how many times I reheard it or skipped around. However, Beethoven’s Symphony 9 made me think of something new every time. At first I thought it was like a conversation between two people and more and more people joined and it got louder. Then after a four hour nap and coming back to this post, it reminded me of the music that used to play in Tom and Jerry all the time when they were chasing each other. It is a song that depending on what is happening to you at the time or what emotion you are feeling, you can make up a story or meaning that goes along with the music.

https://eportfolios.macaulay.cun ... kovsky-v-beethoven/

Reader86

Blog Post 5-BECAUSE I HAVE IMAGINATION!!!
Before I get into Tchaikovsky or Beethoven, I would just like to address something Copland said in his reading. It’s just a short rant, don’t worry, it won’t be too long.

Anyways, on pages 12 and 13 of Copland’s reading, he describes people that look for meaning and relation as simply minded. He says those that connect the least with it understand it the most because music is suppose to be ambiguous.  Here’s where I get angry: MUSIC IS LOOKED AT DIFFERENTLY AND FELT DIFFERENTLY BY EVERY SINGLE PERSON! So, by Copland’s narrow minded theory, if I look for meaning and relate to it in some way, it is either wrong or just diminishes the meaning of the piece as a whole. Some people need meaning to find new emotional connections, create a new story, and to just get away. There is nothing wrong with that, and these people should be thought of as anything but simply minded. I am one of these people that find even more enjoyment in music when I find these new meanings, and my mind can absolutely run wild with new ideas, as if I am listening to a brand new song that was made especially for me. Why? BECAUSE I HAVE IMAGINATION!!! Imagination is a beautiful thing, so let’s use it to our advantage, because using it for anything but only simplifies what is a beautiful and complex world of music.

Now, back to Beethoven, he does seem all over the place, as shown by all those damn colors. I half expected to get a seizure after seeing that. Colors jumping up and down, left and right, popping out of nowhere, it was insane! It kind of reminded me of when I have a million ideas for a project, and I try to fit them all in instead of going for one idea (it never works). That’s what happens. A bunch of paint splattering onto the canvas trying to get as many colors and movements as possible without even remembering what you were going for in the first place (like me writing this post). Tchaikovsky, on the other hand, reminded me of a love story between a prince and a princess that weren’t supposed to be together (like Romeo and Juliet), and they sneak away at night to Swan Lake, where they drift into happiness. I looked this up and I was really close, as it was a prince and a princess, but the princess is actually a swan that turns into a princess (I like my idea better). This invites (not begs) the question: which is more enjoyable?

Reader86

Typical of people who let brain decide the other senses.