Talk:Symphony No. 1 (Elgar)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles

References and additional material[edit]

Anyone mind if I overhaul this article, referencing from W H Reed's and Michael Kennedy's books about Elgar and elsewhere? I don't want to tread on anyone's toes. I'll start in a few days' time unless anyone objects. - Tim riley (talk) 18:32, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now finished. - Tim riley (talk) 14:37, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shostakovich[edit]

"Shostakovich stated that, in his opinion, it was one of the greatest symphonies of the 20th century". I cannot find a source for this. Anybody able to supply? - Tim riley (talk) 07:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's about time somebody pointed out that the bass of the cyclical "motto" theme in the introduction to the first movement is just as much a thematic source as the the treble line - it supplies much of the thematic material for the finale, for instance.TEN YEARS LATER , (almost), it was obviously not "about time". The'subsidiary theme' in the first movement in the finale introduction is EXACTLY this bass, which is extensively used in the finale. There's a lot of analysis left to do before we realise just how good this symphony is.

 Delahays (talk) 12:14, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hasn't this analysis already been done? I'm sure I remember reading in the sleeve notes (many years ago) of one recording that the whole symphony could be regarded as a set of variations on the bass line of the opening theme. (There were about 20 in total?) I was hoping to refresh my memory by reading this article, but... nothing. Did I imagine it? Unfortunately I have limited internet access right now, and probably can't spare the time to look into it. 86.188.237.122 (talk) 14:47, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The thing that sticks in most people's minds after reading any attempt to analyse the work is that the initial theme of the second movement becomes, note for note, the initial theme of the slow movement. Almost inevitably this creates the impression that this identity is a singular device of Elgar's without any wider relationship to the composition as a whole. But aren't its first four notes a transposed retrograde inversion of the D minor arpeggio phrase which starts the Allegro of I? And doesn't that phrase itself bear some relationship to the so-called motto theme expounded in the introduction?81.153.21.77 (talk) 13:44, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]