Altos Trio: Manchester Mid-day Concert 29th September

Beethoven Piano Trio in G Major Opus 1 No 2

Shostokovich Piano Trio No2 in E minor

The Altos challenged themselves and the audience and succeeded in making a great concert. I sat back as the Beethoven opened expecting a classical work with a touch of a twenty-three year old's rebellion and was landed in a much more harmonically venturesome work. It was privately commissioned and published after the performance as Opus 1 with two other trios. I was prepared for the Shostokovich, an elegy for a dead friend, which turned into an scream for the victims of the Nazi concentration camps by the inclusion of Jewish themes in the finale's mad mechanical dance taken from Jewish themes,. The nature of the camps apparently first became widely known in the USSR during its composition.

Halle: Mark Elder: Angelica Kirchschlager (mezzo) Thursday 30th September 2010

Mahler Totenfeier

Mahler Six Songs from Des Knaben Wunderhorn

Prokofiev Symphony No 5

Totenfier is in fact the first movement of Mahler's Second Symphony set aside in 1891 but titled and intended as a symphonic poem. He took up the composing the symphony in 1893 and revised this work to make it the first movement after composing movements 2-4. He then revised this work for the first movement but actually played it (revised) under its title before the completed Symphony . The whole trajectory suggests listeners can see the Symphony both as a a whole and separately in its parts. Perhaps by now in this first year of Mahler celebrations we has had enough, though the performance was exciting.

I have my doubts about grandstanding the Des Knaben Wonderhorn settings. These are 'folk' poems and maybe account should be taken of the composers instruction to performers of the 'heavenly' fifth movement of the fourth symphony.. 'keep in simple'. Or maybe it's ironical. This aside, I enjoyed Ms Kirchschlager performance though would have preferred if she has not rearranged the order via a note slipped into the programme.

Prokoviev's 5th (1944) was of pre celebration of the victory to come in 1945. I will 'listen again' to this. However I notice that as with all Soviet music the response to it calls for the listener to plug in a certain mind set. Halle fans had three on offer. They could bring various levels of 'musical' understanding from just enjoy 'the tunes' to giving full analytical attention, score in hand), or they could have regard to the 'meaning' For this they were offered a 'Cold War' framing by David Nice, the guy who wrote the programme notes. Alternatively they could try an insight to Prokoviev the person though his diaries as explained in the pre concert talk by Antony Philips, the translator of the composers diaries. They could do all three of course but with difficulty to keep them in the head altogether at once

I will be wiser after my rehearing I doubt.

RNCM  Monday Lunchtime Concert October 1st 2010

Jiaqi Lee: Piano: Ravel Le Tombeau de Coperin

Ivy Mak mezzo: Brahms Vier Enrste Gesange Opus 124

Ms Lee gave an exciting account of the Ravel, in the spirit of 1920's neoclassicism, particularly in the final movement.

Ms Mak captured Brahms rage against the dying day from Ecclesiates in his final work but perhaps did not quite capture the spirit of faith hope and love in the forth song from Corinthinians 13 13. The problem was Luther's I think since love was not the final word in his translation unlike the AV..

The BP Portrait Award 2009 at the National Portrait Gallery: 18th June-20th September 2009

The Exhibition shows fifty six of the 1900 entries, including the three shortlisted for the £25,000 prize. Many of the works, as one might expect from such a filtered selection, were technically accomplished. Almost all of then worked in a realistic mode. In many cases the sitters were friends or family members. The intention of most artists was to convey an understanding, and affection for the subject. This was true I think of the 'celebratory' portraits as well. There were a few examples of 'type' or 'icon' portrait of business or public servants. These also I suspect would claim some insight into the character of the sitter.

But I doubt if a portrait can really convey to the viewer 'character' except by reference to some conventional ways of presenting 'character traits'. People don't wear there personalities on their sleeves. There are some examples on the Exhibition website which enable the question “How do you know what this person is like?” to be attempted.

A more interesting version of the question is to ask 'What will they be like?'. The winner, Peter Monkman has painted his daughter, Anna, at the age of twelve. The title, Changeling2 refers to the transformations as a child matures. We catch glimpse of several futures for Anna as a women enfolded into the image made by Monkman. If the viewer can make it work, these are relatively convincing in aging the image, but the person?

So many attempts at character studies actually makes the show dull stroll.

This is another of the recent exhibitions were visitors would be better to save their admissions money and purchase the catalogue. The show attempts to take present an interpretation of the facts of Henry's reign linked to a selection of documents and some visual material. The documents really add very little to the interpretation presented on caption cards below eye level. The trouble is that the interpretation is really at year 6 level with more complicated words, as any GCSE student would notice.

At the start, that the claims for Henry not only as a ruler but as an intellectual (who we learn belatedly hated writing) are well made. And his competence and interest in sports are assessed (keen on jousting but not really championship quality, but tennis is not discussed.). His cultivation of a brilliant court is touched upon. But the issues of government and foreign policy are are 'illustrated'. Later they were to prove a serious difficulty when the succession problem became acute.

The role of Worsley his leading counselor in the second decade of the reign in making some sense out of Henry's European ambitions is hardly developed. In part, his troubles from 1527 onward over the succession are confused in the show by their complexity as he moves to deal with the crisis. His predilection for intelligent and sexy women from the neo-protestant faction at court did not help. The crisis of course ended with the help of a new minister Thomas Cromwell who constructed a new constitution for Henry of Church and State. The fall of the new Queen again is not explained.... court factions who know how to prey on the King were involved. Late in the exhibition on of the players in the faction fights grimly looks back over the show. None of these struggles for the King's ear are on view.

Henry supports (presumably though this is contentious,) a move to a more protestant position in religion at the same time as financial panic lead his government to seize the smaller monasteries. The fright of The Pilgrimage of Grace, a true 'peoples' revolt, drives him into the arms of the pro-catholics factions and at the same time he seize the rest of the monasteries. This at least the the show explains. The new Bible in English is chained.

The show again hardly explains why the last ten years are spent building fortifications to prevent invasion and investing in military preparedness, or the effects on the government machine as it moved to a militarised state with Henry buffeted by faction still in control and more heads chopped

There is a case for Henry and indeed for an exhibition and supporting material which manages to make the complexities of early modern government clear. This is not it. Some make claim that Shakespeare and Middleton made a start on this. The show is limted by it sources. The evidence is not in the British Museum but elsewhere.