Rhapsody

Part of my desire for wanting to spend more time thinking, listening to, and reading about music this month is because I think that music is a weak spot in my education. I took an independent study course in college on Romantic music to try and address this, and learned how to follow a score, listen to a symphony, and explore the relationships between musicians and other artists of their age. However, I have not since then kept up the exercise very well of sitting down and listening to a piece of music exclusively and trying hard to understand it without any other distractions or diversions. 

So far this month, although it has been disjointed, I have really enjoyed getting the chance to do this more, and I hope to do it at least once a month. We'll see how that goes! 

So Rhapsody. 

I didn't know what rhapsody actually meant, and after Mahler's Lied/symphony, I thought it may be important to know why Gershwin called it a Rhapsody.

Here is Merriam-Webster's definition:

1  a portion of an epic poem adapted for recitation

2

archaic : a miscellaneous collection

3

(1) : a highly emotional utterance (2) : a highly emotional literary work (3) : effusively rapturous or extravagant discourse

4

: a musical composition of irregular form having an improvisatory character

I have to admit while everyone else was totally enthusing after the final notes of the Rhapsody had faded, I was sitting in some confusion. I think hearing the full concert in which the Rhapsody was played  was extremely helpful. Listening to the "crudest" forms of jazz, and their development out of the dance halls to a more sophisticated engagement with a looser form--rather than just songs helped to prepare me for the striking Rhapsody. 

However the Rhapsody sounded to me just as Jack mentioned--like a battle. It sounded really disjointed to me--here a symphonic sweep, truncated, with a twang of a banjo competing. And while altogether fascinating to really be experiencing what the musicians and culture was at that very moment in history--whether jazz would become mainstream, or at the very least, how it would affect the mainstream... I found myself agreeing with the reviewer--and wondering what Gershwin would have come up with had he developed his style more. 

It really seemed to me like Gershwin was saying to the audience, "Here we are: at the cross-roads. What's next?!"

I found it to be altogether stimulating, and fascinating academically, but I really doubt that I would find myself leaning over to put the Rhapsody in Blue on to just jam to. To me, the above definition seems entirely appropriate for what we heard--a miscellaneous, effusively rapturous and extravagant discourse of irregular form, having an improvisatory character. 

P.S. I would love to hear Margaret's discussion of what she saw as the relationship between Whistler's painting and the Rhapsody now that we have heard it. wink wink.