Music that inspired Bukowski? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter hrjorgan
- Start date
I would say that he did not prefer modern classical music. Bukfan posted most of the names that come to mind. Of those he listed, only three lived into the 20th century: Gustav Mahler lived from 1860-1911, Jean Sibelius lived from 1865-1957, and Dmitri Shostakovich lived from 1906-1975, but I wouldn't consider any of them to have been a composer of modern classical (which I would define as starting in the early 20th century with the Second Viennese School as well as the likes of Stravinsky, but the definition is not simply temporal; there are stylistic aspects as well). But, I realize you probably weren't asking for a music history lesson.
Put another way, Bukfan answered your question in the post above. :wb:
Put another way, Bukfan answered your question in the post above. :wb:
Black Swan
Abord the Yorikke!
And Bruckner, Strauss, Ravel, Dvorak and Tchaikovsky to add to the list...
Johan I, Johan II, or Richard? :rollfool:
Black Swan
Abord the Yorikke!
That would be Richard, my precious PS. :)
I am reading:
Richard Strauss
is a colourful rush of craft and feeling,
he's like a loaf of french bread
cut the long way
and then loaded with all the ingredients.
it's just
right.
I am reading:
Richard Strauss
is a colourful rush of craft and feeling,
he's like a loaf of french bread
cut the long way
and then loaded with all the ingredients.
it's just
right.
Yes, the Johans were much more aligned to the First Viennese School and, of course, waltzes (I don't listen to much of them, so perhaps they could count to 4, I'm not sure). So add Richard Strauss (1864-1949), Maurice Ravel (1875-1937), and Antonin Dvorak (1841-1904, so barely) to the list of those composers mentioned here that lived into the 20th century. Still, all of them are, in my mind, much closer to the 19th century stylistically than they are to modern classical (not to hammer the point too hard, no).
Last edited:
Black Swan
Abord the Yorikke!
Don't tell me that Martin changed the radio station too!!!
Thanks for the info about the music choices of Bukowski. I am just finishing a book called Twentieth Century Music by H. H. Stuckenschmidt and it covers Mahler and Richard Strauss as. being about the last composers before the rejection of tonality. It is a very good guide to the cultural currents and trends in Modern music and from the list of composers I can see where Bukowski was at. Thanks.
That's a hard line to draw, and certainly there are plenty of composers who were composing well after the 1910s and 1920s that did not "reject" tonality. Jean Sibelius, Ralph Vaughan Williams, Sergey Rachmaninov, Gustav Holst, Edward Elgar, Maurice Ravel, Sergey Prokofiev, Viktor Ullmann, Aaron Copeland, Aram Khachaturian, Dmitri Shostakovich, Samuel Barber, and Benjamin Britten all immediately jump to mind. Then look at someone such as Alfred Schnittke: an atonal passage followed by a melodic and, dare I say it, diatonic passage.
Russell Harrison discusses Bukowski's references to music in Against The American Dream. Harrison talks about their use as a literary device, though.
Someone once mentioned (can't remember who) that Bukowski's musical references in his novels were sometimes anachronistic. That is, he talks about listening to Mahler on the radio during a time when Mahler would not have been played on the radio.
Someone once mentioned (can't remember who) that Bukowski's musical references in his novels were sometimes anachronistic. That is, he talks about listening to Mahler on the radio during a time when Mahler would not have been played on the radio.
Gary Eisenberg
RIP
In addition to Mahler, Buk often mentioned Brahms. Apropos of Purple Stickpin's comment, above: You mention Viktor Ullmann in there. Happens to be one of my favorites. And I think Buk would have liked his music, had he been exposed to it. Back in those days, there wasn't much available. Not that there is a huge amount available today. In any event - there is a complete performance of "The Kaiser of Atlantis" here:
Finally, let me say that in many cases, it's not a matter of "rejecting" tonality, but, rather, STRETCHING tonality. And that was already happening with Wagner, Reger, et al. Not to mention, of course, that "dissonant" string quartet of Mozart. Just sayin.
Finally, let me say that in many cases, it's not a matter of "rejecting" tonality, but, rather, STRETCHING tonality. And that was already happening with Wagner, Reger, et al. Not to mention, of course, that "dissonant" string quartet of Mozart. Just sayin.
mjp
Founding member
What time period would that be? Do classical stations have top 40 or hot 100 artists?
It was pretty much already happening after the Baroque period, perhaps with Bach and Handel being the most well-known and progressive at that time that didn't really stretch tonality much. I was only quoting and responding, not trying to state some sort of hard and fast cut-off. Which is my overall point. These days, we still have use of Baroque, the Romanticists, the Atonalists, and many others who mix the genres, as well as some other genres that the record stores haven't made up a category for - mainly because there aren't many record stores left.
Well, Mahler died in 1911 and radio wasn't made to be commercially broadcast until the 1920s. So, Mahler wouldn't have been played on the radio before Buk was born (y'know, in case that narrows things down a bit). :eek:
Perhaps whom 5:28AM was thinking about is Wagner. As the preferred music of Der Fuhrer, his stock held little sway in the classical repertoire for many decades (only recently becoming more prevalent - by recently, in the classical world, that means ~15-20 years; in other words, it became more acceptable just a few years after Buk died). I sympathize greatly with those who suffered through the atrocities of WWII in all of its forms, and I also know that Wagner was an outspoken anti-Semite. His music is absolutely brilliant. I can separate the two, but I can understand if others cannot.
Last edited:
Gary Eisenberg
RIP
I completely agree, Mssr. Purple Stickpin. It's on a continuum. On the Wagner matter - it is actually a bit complicated. As a young angry man, he harbored bitterness after an ugly encounter with Meyerbeer. But by the time of Parisfal's premiere, he had become close friends with ORTHODOX Jewish conductor Hermann Levi, who conducted the premiere of that masterful opera - and was also Wagner's house guest. Furthermore: Most (if not ALL) of the Jewish composers during the Weimar and nazi years, were Wagnerites in every sense of the word. I'm talkin' 'bout Zemlinsky, Schoenberg, Korngold, et al. Just sayin.
Why so difficult if we have the orgastic German Charles Bukowski Society:
http://www.bukowski-gesellschaft.de/data/jahrbuch/_bjuk2005_070-087_Robert Sandarg_.pdf
http://www.bukowski-gesellschaft.de/data/jahrbuch/_bjuk2005_070-087_Robert Sandarg_.pdf
Last edited:
mjp
Founding member
You know far more about the classical repertoire than I do, and the WWII connection makes sense. But I knew who Wagner was and had heard his music before I even started listening to classical music. So that would be the 60s and 70s. If someone who isn't even interested in the genre knows the name and the music, it seems that it had to be out there in the zeitgeist (to use a word Wagner would recognize).
Wagner's music has "informally" been banned from performance in Israel since the 1930s. Many classical players and symphony organizers in the U.S., some with direct ties and more loose ties to Israel, long shared a belief in this practice, but that's not to say that his work wasn't performed anywhere or recordings weren't available. I have my Father's old boxed LP sets of Lohengrin and Tristan und Isolde right here in front of me. The records themselves are not dated, but clearly date to the late 1950s or 1960s. Lohengrin features the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra while Tristan und Isolde features Furtwangler and the Philharmonia Orchestra (London). That was recorded in 1952. The insert for one of them lists several other Wagner recordings available: The Flying Dutchman, Die Meistersinger Von Nurnberg, and Tannhauser, all performed by the Orchestra and Chorus of the Berlin State Opera.
Point being, the music was available for you to hear, but I don't see much in the way of American recordings of the material when classical music recording was near a peak in the middle portion of the 20th Century. Maybe that's because the record companies considered recordings that originated from the composer's homeland (or very near it) to somehow be more authentic, or figured the record-buying public would think that.
I guess Woody Allen summed up this issue best: "I can't listen to much Wagner. I get this insatiable urge to invade Poland."
Point being, the music was available for you to hear, but I don't see much in the way of American recordings of the material when classical music recording was near a peak in the middle portion of the 20th Century. Maybe that's because the record companies considered recordings that originated from the composer's homeland (or very near it) to somehow be more authentic, or figured the record-buying public would think that.
I guess Woody Allen summed up this issue best: "I can't listen to much Wagner. I get this insatiable urge to invade Poland."
mjp
Founding member
I'll keep what I think of that book out of the conversation except to say that everything in Against the American Dream is Harrison's opinion, which is no more valid or correct than yours or mine. That goes for every critical study, analysis or other various attempts to murder the work by dissecting it to see what makes its heart beat.
And that's just records. Radio was also a factor, and if he wrote about something he actually heard on the radio as hearing it on records, what's the difference?
No classical music lent itself to the 78 format, which is why symphonies were always released in big boxed sets of 78s. But classical music made up the bulk of 78 releases up until the 40s and 50s, so the idea that Bukowski was listening to a Mahler symphony isn't at all far fetched. Deutsche Grammophon released the first opera recording on 78s in 1908, so there were more than 35 years of classical music production before the U.S. engaged in WWII. Plenty of time for plenty of Mahler sets to be made, bought and sold second hand.
And that's just records. Radio was also a factor, and if he wrote about something he actually heard on the radio as hearing it on records, what's the difference?
