Will, interesting! If you consider the circumstances of the creation of this piece, you may well be right. Only I find sensuousness and erotic longing rather in the cantilena and in the wonderful dialogue between flutes, woodwinds and the strings. The trumpet lines I find a tad to selfassertive to be truly erotic. Its not surprising, that they go under in that fantastic finale, which to me is orgastic and purely sexual (rather more female than of the of male sort, if you know what I mean. )Thanks for reminding me Will, of this fascinating music. I have it on a Phillips LP with Eliahu Inbal and (grin) his Frankforters.
Pragmatist, I have the d minor (with the two Oistrakhs) resounding in my head. How very right you are. Also about the Mozart. I find your idea about the two part inventions most intreaging. I'll go and listen to them right now. Never thought of it that way, seems obvious though. And yes, the Nocturnes, thought of them, when I started this thread.
Thankyou p. Wonderful! Detlof
Pragmatist, I'm back now. That was a stroke of genius. I dug out a 1960 version on DG with Ralph Kirkpatrick, wished I would have found the one with Wanda Landowska. The scope of attraction, repulsion, of approaching and drifting away from each other, of rhythmic union and the tension, when each part drifts syncopatically apart only to intertwine again was indeed EROS in its truest sense. In fact, it reminded me of the language of the Alchemists, who were still flourishing when Bach was at Koethen and who desribed what they percieved in their retorts and ovens in a beautiful erotic language. Thanks p. You've opened doors and made my evening!
Pragmatist, I have the d minor (with the two Oistrakhs) resounding in my head. How very right you are. Also about the Mozart. I find your idea about the two part inventions most intreaging. I'll go and listen to them right now. Never thought of it that way, seems obvious though. And yes, the Nocturnes, thought of them, when I started this thread.
Thankyou p. Wonderful! Detlof
Pragmatist, I'm back now. That was a stroke of genius. I dug out a 1960 version on DG with Ralph Kirkpatrick, wished I would have found the one with Wanda Landowska. The scope of attraction, repulsion, of approaching and drifting away from each other, of rhythmic union and the tension, when each part drifts syncopatically apart only to intertwine again was indeed EROS in its truest sense. In fact, it reminded me of the language of the Alchemists, who were still flourishing when Bach was at Koethen and who desribed what they percieved in their retorts and ovens in a beautiful erotic language. Thanks p. You've opened doors and made my evening!