‘Can I do you now,
Sir?’ Perhaps this expression has gone
into many books of modern quotations?
And alongside it will be 'After you,
Claude - no, After you Cecil'’ and ‘Going
down now, Sir.’
Tommy Handley last
presented ITMA (It’s That Man Again)
on 6 January 1949; three days later
he was dead. The radio show had survived
the war years with its fast, zany and
extremely funny sense of humour that
had appealed to everyone but particularly
to servicemen and women. I can remember
my father, a former Sapper, eulogising
it. In fact I lent him a BBC cassette
tape of four episodes - and it disappeared
from sight until I sorted out his effects
shortly after his death.
But what has all this
got to do with Geoffrey Bush and this
excellent Lyrita CD? Well it has all
to do with that other sometime comedian,
actor and scriptwriter Bill Shakespeare.
Remember the words from Hamlet, ‘Alas,
poor Yorick! I knew him Horatio, a fellow
of infinite jest, of most excellent
fancy.’ Of course Yorick, whose skull
Hamlet is holding, was his father's
jester.
Bush had been commissioned
to write a piece for the National Association
of Boys Clubs in memory of their late
patron who happened to be Tommy Handley.
And perhaps he was struggling to make
a connection when he thought of these
words. The parallel of Tommy Handley
and the dead jester was apposite, especially
when Hamlet’s thoughts about Yorick’s
‘flashes of merriment that was wont
to set the table on a roar.’
The Overture, Yorick
is actually a well-balanced and quite
nuanced piece. It is roughly divided
into three parts, the outer sections
‘with the customary statement, development
and recapitulation of two themes’ paints
a portrait of the hilarious side of
Tommy Handley’s nature. However, the
lovely wistful middle section is perhaps
a funeral elegy for the departed comic.
There is no doubt that Bush nods to
Prokofiev in this work – including an
allusion to Peter and the Wolf.
The first performance
was at the Albert Hall where it should
have been a huge success. But the ‘student
orchestra’, the ‘New Philharmonic’,
was hardly up to scratch. A contemporary
reviewer noted that ‘…the players were
insufficiently sure of themselves to
give Geoffrey Bush’s … overture the
sparkle it needed.’ However he recognised
the potential of this work and concluded
that Yorick is ‘a deft and ingenious
little piece which young people of all
ages could enjoy without any kind of
effort.’ TTFN!
I have not heard the
Music for Orchestra before, so
I rely on Geoffrey Bush’s own commentary
on this work for most of my information.
In 1967 the piece was commissioned for
the Shropshire Schools Symphony Orchestra;
which still appears to be going strong,
although with a new name. The composer
specifies two aims that he had in mind
for this piece. The first was to write
a work that presented a ‘fully worked
out musical argument … a miniature symphony
in fact.’ His second was to write ‘a
showpiece for orchestra which would
give solo opportunities to the leaders
of each instrumental group.’
The work is divided
into four ‘sections’ or ‘movements’
of a similar length but of totally contrasting
material. The opening ‘Prologue’ has
three themes – that work out with and
sometimes against each other. The balance
between what must have sounded quite
‘modern’ to some in the audience and
more ‘conventional’ music is quite interesting.
The dialogue between the trumpet solo
and the strings is a highlight especially
when followed by more reflective music
on strings with tuned percussion as
accompaniment which is actually quite
laid back, or even cool! The ‘scherzo’
is sheer pleasure. Complex rhythms and
Bach-like music lead to a well-balanced
but quite varied movement. Bush avoids
using the ‘traditional’ trio in his
scherzo but replaces this with two cadenzas
that are full of musically interesting
phrases. The slow movement is the heart
of the work. There is much beautiful
string writing here. The outer sections
of this ternary movement feature the
flute and the middle section calls for
the leaders of the string sections to
play as a quartet. This is very deep
music and must have been quite challenging
to a ‘youth orchestra.’ The last movement
is very short. Basically Bush draws
together everything that has happened
in the previous three. But there is
new material here too. This is an eclectic
mix of musical sounds that is entirely
effective.
I enjoyed Music
for Orchestra although I had to
listen to the work twice to get the
full benefit. It could easily be regarded
as Geoffrey Bush’s ‘Third Symphony’
– or is it really more a ‘Concerto
for Orchestra’? Whatever your view,
this is fine, well crafted music that
is challenging, moving and certainly
interesting. It does not deserve neglect.
The work had its first
performance at the Shrewsbury Festival
in March 1968 with the composer conducting.
1954 was a great year
at the Cheltenham Festival. Concert-goers
had a chance to hear a number of fine
works – although I guess most are now
forgotten. This review is not a history
of the Festival – but a ‘little list’
will not go amiss. Works included Alan
Rawsthorne's String Quartet No.2,
Peter Racine Fricker's Rapsodia Concertante,
Alun Hoddinott’s Concerto for Clarinet
and String Orchestra and Graham
Whettam’s Concerto for Viola and
Orchestra. However the two symphonies
were of considerable note. Of course
one of them is Geoffrey Bush’s First
but the other is sadly neglected today
– Stanley Bate’s Symphony No.3.
The review of this work in the Yorkshire
Post was typical – ‘the most striking
modern orchestral work we have heard
this week.’ Perhaps a recording of this
work is long overdue. But ‘Back to Bush...’
This Symphony
No. 1 took over two years to
compose. Bush writes that it was ‘a
slow and laborious process.’ Much time
was spent writing and rewriting the
music before he felt it was complete.
Ironically he finished the work just
12 hours before the birth of his son
– so no doubt he was free to do the
chores round the house and look after
mother and child!
The First Symphony
resides in a totally different sound-world
to that of the earlier Yorick
Overture. Yet as a contemporary
reviewer remarked, ‘[It is] a sane work
that refrained from making heavy weather
with modern anxieties.’
The work opens darkly
and ominously but it is this initial
theme that provides most of the material
for the remainder of the movement. The
scoring is perhaps less ‘stark’ than
other reviewers have suggested, but
the fact remains that this is no ‘pastoral’
or ‘post romantic’ exercise. Yet there
are plenty of lovely tunes and phrases
tossed around the orchestra. In many
ways the first movement is actually
a ‘discourse on a lively theme.’
The slow movement is
the heart of the work. Written as a
kind of memorial to Constant Lambert,
Bush calls it an ‘elegiac blues’ - obviously
after the eponymous piano piece by the
older composer. After a well balanced
first section and an impressive build-up
we hear a quotation from Lambert’s great
choral work Rio Grande. This
movement is a lovely, and quite moving
tribute to a composer who was a great
pioneer amongst 20th century
composers in exploring the possibilities
of jazz and ‘modern’ dance music.
The last movement has
all the hallmarks of an Italian Comedy
– or at least so the composer tells
us. There are definite references back
to the opening bars of the symphony
– but I do not think that Bush means
the work to be cyclic. Perhaps the beauty
of this movement is the manner in which
the composer utilises the traditional
symphonic exposition of two contrasting
subjects, however at the point when
we expect the development to begin the
composer surprises us with a third theme.
Soon the work is rushing to its conclusion
and the work ends in ‘a blaze of D major.’
There is no doubt that rhythmic exhilaration
is the key to this last movement.
Contemporary reviewers
were seriously impressed by this work.
But perhaps the greatest compliment
was that this work is ‘a true and honest
representation of its composer without
any self-conscious striving for the
grandiose or for novelty for its own
sake.’ There can be nothing better said
about any composition – especially a
symphony. Furthermore I was struck by
the sheer craftsmanship of this work
– the orchestration and the balance
and the unity of this piece give it
an extremely satisfying air. This First
Symphony is not perhaps a major
twentieth century masterpiece but it
is a great work that does not deserve
the neglect it has had over the past
fifty years or so.
I must confess that
I not so sure of what to make of the
Second Symphony – The Guildford.
The history of this work is that it
was commissioned as a part of the 700th
anniversary of the granting of a Royal
Charter to the city of Guildford. It
was first performed in November 1957
by the Guildford Municipal Orchestra
with the composer on the rostrum. I
was unable to find any contemporary
reviews of this work so I am not sure
what the audience and the pundits made
of it. However it did not regularly
appear at symphonic concerts over the
years and was not broadcast until the
late nineteen-eighties.
The work is ‘officially’
in one continuous movement yet there
are clearly four defined sections. The
construction is more complex than that
of the First Symphony although
it does not really stress our musical
appreciation. Bush has stated that this
is really a festive work – which should
be listened to in that spirit. He is
concerned that perhaps too much effort
will be put into analysing the structure
and the genesis of this piece rather
than just simply enjoying it. He suggests
that the listener gets ‘caught up in
the prevailing atmosphere of jubilation.’
The work does not really
require analysis – but a few words about
each section will not be amiss. The
symphony opens with a kind of chorale
theme for the various department of
the orchestra. However it soon turns
into a fanfare suggesting the Grand
Old Duke of York or some other important
person is about to arrive - although
it may be a bit jazzy for some VIPs’
taste. Soon the music evolves into an
exciting allegro that contrasts two
excellent tunes or perhaps allows them
to enter into a dialogue with each other.
The ‘slow movement’
is quite definitely the heart of the
work. Now I am not suggesting that there
is an incipient pastoralism in this
work, but I do feel that this music
evokes something of the countryside
around Guildford. But even this reflective
music is interrupted by dramatic outbursts.
So perhaps there is a little problem
of balance in this movement? However,
there are some lovely moments in this
music
I am not quite sure
what to make of the scherzo. It is quite
obviously a cheerful and exuberant movement
with lots of ‘fun’ instrumentation,
especially for woodwind. Yet somehow
I am not convinced by it. Perhaps it
just a little too light-hearted, without
pretending to be ‘light music?’
The composer describes
the last movement as being a recapitulation
of material from the first. Yet it seems
to me that there is more energy and
perhaps even more consistency of purpose
in these last pages than in the rest
of the Symphony. This is great
stuff.
So overall an enjoyable
Symphony but one that leads me
to worry a little about the stylistic
balance – yet as Geoffrey Bush insists,
and I paraphrase, we need to sit back
and enjoy.
John France
see also review
by Colin Clarke
New Philharmonia Orchestra/Vernon Handley (Yorick);
London Philharmonic Orchestra/Vernon Handley (Music
for Orchestra); London Symphony Orchestra/Nicholas
Braithwaite (1st Symphony); Royal Philharmonic
Orchestra/Barry Wordsworth. (2nd Symphony)
for
details
