I've been in the middle of finishing David Schiff's wonderful book, The Ellington Century; rereading Albert Murray's great book, Stomping The Blues; reading Rifftide: The Life and Opinions of Papa Jo Jones; and being 100 pages into Jens Malte Fischer's recent biography, Gustav Mahler - I'll tell my reader(s) whether it's wonderful, great or whatever later. I've also been listening to great balls of Mahler - especially his songs - and Duke Ellington. These great composer-musicians provide clues for understanding each other's compositional techniques - the use of woodwinds and brass, for example.
I'm not a big fan of symphonic music. But what I find compelling about Mahler's music and his use of large symphonic forces is that one can hear the orchestral parts set out with utter clarity - Mahler's bassoon and clarinets and Ellington's clarinets and trombone. Thus Mahler makes the hugh orchestras required for his music sound like a small ensemble, while Ellington makes his sixteen or so musicians sound quite grand indeed. (These words bring to mind Charles Rosen's essay, "The Irrelevance of Serious Music" in his Critical Entertainments: Music Old and New.)
Part 2 of my previous post next time, unless. . . .
