Talk:Symphony No. 7 (Hanson)

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

Title[edit]

I'm not sure Hanson's work is given the correct title in this article. Grove lists it thus: "Sym. no.7 ‘The Sea’ (Whitman), chorus, orch, 1977". The double quotation marks above are mine; the single quotation marks are Grove's (and presumably Hanson's as well). TheScotch (talk) 16:34, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[[1]]

[[2]]

I have another CD on Citadel, which gives again this title (I can send you a scanned image, if you tell me an email address where I can write). All of them are wrong? --Mahlerite (talk) 16:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of the two links you've furnished gives this piece the title you've assigned it in this article. TheScotch (talk) 16:42, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've now changed the title of this article to that which appears on the "Howard Hanson" article page. TheScotch (talk) 17:12, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still, shouldn't the title of this article be "Symphony No. 7 (Hanson)"? That would make it consistent with other Wiki symphony articles on the whole. Jonyungk (talk) 03:23, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison with other Hanson symphonies and with Mahler's fourth symphony[edit]

Re: "Unlike the first six symphonies, where Hanson uses advanced counterpoint, the seventh is in a more romantic style, somewhat reminiscent of the finale of Mahler's fourth symphony.":

I've repaired this sentence's spelling and diction to some extent, but I can't repair its content without further information.

Unless we can say specifically how this piece is like the Mahler piece, the comparison is opinion and thus needs to be attributed. (It seems odd, by the way, to compare one entire symphony to a single movement of another symphony.)

Unless we can say specifically how the piece is more "romantic", labelling it thus is opinion also and also needs to be attributed. (Since Hanson himself subtitled his second symphony "Romantic", he would appear to be of the opinion that the second "is in a more romantic style".) Since counterpoint is a technique and Romanticism an aesthetic, there is nothing about the one that necessarily precludes the other. The author of the sentence needs to be clearer about how he's opposing counterpoint and Romanticism. Moreover, it isn't clear either what "advanced" is supposed to mean here. Is it that these pieces use a lot of counterpoint? Is it that their counterpoint is especially intricate? Is it that the counterpoint they use depends on an harmonic basis that was not historically available to, say, Bach? I can't tell. TheScotch (talk) 05:58, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I took this quotation from the liner notes of my recording of H.H. 7th symphony. Sorry I can't help more. --Mahlerite (talk) 14:26, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a verbatim quote, is it? If not, why not quote it verbatim on this discussion page, and let me see what I can do with it? (Also say who wrote the liner notes. Maybe we can attribute the opinion to him.)TheScotch (talk) 16:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late answer, I check the English wikipedia less frequently than the French one, where I write the bulk of my contributions. The quote is "Unlike symphonies 1-6, where Hansons's arch-Romantic melodies and harmonies are married to an advanced counterpoint, the 7th distills the essence of the composer's style into an artfully naïve simplicity, recaling the spirit of the Finale of Mahler's 4th, a Child's Vision of Heaven". Liner notes are by John M. Proffitt, taken from Citadel CTD 88116. --Mahlerite (talk) 21:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I notice that the quote opposes counterpoint with "naive simplicity" rather than with Romanticism, which makes a lot more sense to me. I still think "advanced" is a bad adjective to use here, but if the article is to quote Proffitt directly there's nothing I can do about that, and I don't see much point to paraphrasing. TheScotch (talk) 06:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I let this simmer a while, but now I think it's time to act. I see two choices: 1) The passage in question can be simply deleted or 2) it can be replaced with an attributed verbatim quote. Since I haven't been able to establish notability for the writer (or any other reference to him) and since liner notes are generally rather like book blurbs--close to advertisement, that is--I'm going with simple deletion. (I won't fight a further edit that chooses course 2), though.) TheScotch (talk) 02:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Material for possible use in the article[edit]

Hanson on composing his seventh symphony, as quoted by David Russell Williams in Perspectives of New Music, Vol. 20, No. 1/2 (Autumn, 1981 - Summer, 1982), pp. 12-25 : "I had wanted to write the piece all my life and when I finally got at it--I was eighty--I had no trouble. It came out just as if I were thirty or even twenty-five, and I had no inhibitions about it. I didn't work on it, I didn't go over it, I didn't redo it--whoosh--it came like that!" TheScotch (talk) 06:33, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put this quote in the article. If anyone else comes across information about this work he's debating whether to add, he can leave it here for now. A print review (no amazon.com, etc., please) would be great, especially a contemporary (contemporaneous with the piece) one. TheScotch (talk) 16:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious[edit]

The article says "Fittingly, the "Interlochen Theme" from Hanson's Second Symphony is briefly quoted at the beginning of the fourth movement" but Symphony No. 7 only has three movements. This statement should be corrected. 69.131.93.242 (talk) 04:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK never mind. I removed it. 128.105.14.80 (talk) 20:06, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]