A Lark Ascending

Very true! When I look back I'm amazed by how limited my horizons were by what happened to appear in the shops. I alays felt as if I was being unreasonable trying to order something out of the way (if I knew about it via a magazine). I often met 'sorry, can't be found' responses. We may be at the end of the hard disc bounty - but if the download world is handled imaginatively the next era could be even more plentiful. Well, financial constraints will still be there. And time to listen will be even more at a premium. MG Plenty doesn't mean you have to purchase or listen to everything.

Very true! When I look back I'm amazed by how limited my horizons were by what happened to appear in the shops. I alays felt as if I was being unreasonable trying to order something out of the way (if I knew about it via a magazine). I often met 'sorry, can't be found' responses. We may be at the end of the hard disc bounty - but if the download world is handled imaginatively the next era could be even more plentiful.

I think you're spot on. I started listening to jazz in the mid-70s and a whole swathe of recordings just weren't available - either that or you had to know where to find them. I recall ordering 'A Love Supreme' in 1978 (here in the UK) and waiting about four weeks for it to arrive from some distant place! Most of the 60s Miles Davis catalogue could only be bought on import. Another interesting question is emerging here. How jazz sounds differently to those who were listening before rock and who never took to rock; and then to those of us (I'm on old 1955'er too) who heard rock first and then migrated. Like papsrus, with me most of jazz history prior to the 70s is a case of going back to something previous; it must sound quite different if you actually heard, say, the Blakey records of the 50s as they came out. To say nothing of hearing Basie or Ellington records!

Interesting observation. I think when you are young and you get keen on music you feel almost obliged to go to the edge and beyond. Part of it is natural curiosity, part of it is a result of being constantly told that the peculiar stuff is what really counts! And then there's the ghosts of those who ridiculed Tristan, Debussy's Prelude de l'Apres Midi or The Rite of Spring. You don't want to be one of those! I still want to hear new things and take chances quite often; but I no longer hang around if it's not clicking. I tried a lot of the more atonal 20thC classical music in the 1980s but just got no emotional payback. So I don't spend much time beyond the Berg/Messiaen zones. Similarly, the completely free in jazz rarely makes a big impact. So I only send out the odd foraging party in that direction. In the end I have to be moved by the music. If that doesn't happen (and I'd stress that it is more likely to be faulty radar on my part rather than anything deficient in the music) then it really doesn't matter how important, innovative etc it is. I'll leave it to others to enjoy.

Great pictures, 7/4. I don't remember snow like that for over a decade! Grey here - 11 degrees C. Five days ago it was -8 when I left for work!

Despite saying I was going to wait a while I've ended up hunting down the Private Collection discs. All but two have proved easy to get hold of inexpensively. Delightful music, mainly re-explorations of well known/earlier compositions. But this one (volume 5) is especially valuable: Two lengthy suites - 'The Degas Suite and 'The River'. I have a classical recording of the later and recall hearing a concert performance some years back at the Royal Festival Hall. Excellent. Thanks for the recommendations earlier in the thread.

Ooooh, look! It is the North. And they've already started stacking them: You can see the new owners trying to find disc 2 of Bitches Brew.

Hope it's the Republic. 1 million albums, 1.5 million singles and 300,000 CDs would leave room for nothing else in the North!

I can't recall - might have been 'The Lark Ascending'. I'll have a look tonight...got to dash now. Edit: Just had a look - it was 'The Lark'. They go on to get excited about 'Five Variants on Dives and Lazurus', 'Norfolk Rhapsody No.1', 'In the Fen Country', the symphonies and the 'Serenade to Music'.

Bev, a few months ago I was given a promo by ECM of a Scandinavian folksinger named Sinikka Langeland. The album is called Starflowers. I didn't review it because I didn't think anyone here would be interested. It's the only Scandinavian folk music I have ever heard, so I don't know how to compare it to others of that genre. I enjoy it because it is unique in my collection. I can't say that I understand it, or that it's up your alley, but you might like it too. Not a name I know, GA. But then, I've only scratched the surface. There are three very cheap compilations on Northside records (a US company that lisences Scandinavian folk and organises tours) that give a wonderful overview of this music. I had them recommended to me about five years ago on a board and was knocked sideways by them. Ended up changing my holiday plans and going to Sweden! They are called Nordic Roots 1, 2 and 3 and can be found at the foot of this page: http://www.noside.com/ At $5 each they are ideal for anyone wanting to try something quite different from their normal listening. Brilliant driving music! ************** I suspect having wide tastes is more the norm than the exception, once you get out of adolescence (where strict loyalty to a genre is part of securing an identity). I've rarely encountered hostility on the four boards I've known when rabbiting about music beyond jazz. The 'This is a jazz board, only talk jazz' comment is not all that common. Certainly, the people who programme music in UK arts centres realised this some time ago. I recall reading somewhere how in the 90s there was a realisation that the people turning up for a World concert were often there for a Jazz or Classical. Increasingly marketing is directed that way - if I go to a concert somewhere and end up on a mailing list I end up being sent details of music across the board.

We export all our potholes to the Republic of Ireland. I once lost three hubcaps on a two week holiday there!

I think this was my first Getz record and it's still a favourite. With Joanne Brackeen on both electric and acoustic piano. 4 sides of long, stretched out playing. Great versions of 'Lush Life' and 'Infant Eyes'. Edit: Sorry! Just noticed this got mentioned in the last couple of posts!

I have a feeling it's gone. Neither Crazy Jazz nor Amazon.co.uk has mention of it. Given the shoestring nature of Ogun I can't see it resurfacing as a CD in the near future. Worth keeping and eye out for second hand. It's a great set.

Do you have 'Sleeping Policemen' in the US? Used here to calm traffic in built up areas, especially where an estate lies between two major roads and its side-rods become short-cuts.

I've always been a butterfly - there are things in different musical genres that are totally distinct. There is absolutely nothing of the feel, rhythm, sound-world etc of English folk music in jazz so I have to go to English folk music some times. And in the last five or so years Scandinavian folk music has thrown up a whole new world. And more recently, Brazilian. Classical music, various rock musics, blues, country, bluegrass are all important to me - some I just skim across, others I soak myself in. And then there are the places I pop into - like African music - without really feeling totally at home there. So like others, I never get tired of jazz - partly because I have plenty to refresh my palette elsewhere; partly because there's so much new jazz, so much old jazz that I'm quite unfamiliar with. And so much jazz I am familiar with but which still has layers that I've hardly even begun to access. It's amazing how you can listen to someone like Ellington for 30 years, yet still get a sudden desire to re-explore and then almost hear it all again anew (big thanks to Papsrus there - his enthusiasm about discovering Ellington just sent me back on a journey of rediscovery over the last month or so). I count myself lucky to have been fired by music through the much ridiculed rock music of the early 70s. There was so much ambition (often reaching well beyond actual ability) from those musicians to reach out to other musics that I think they brought a whole decade of listeners along with them. Most of my musical interests today were ignited then (country, Scandinavian folk and Brazilian being the major exceptions). No, not tired of jazz or anything else for that matter.

I don't understand exactly how it works but it has considerable power. Most annoyingly, in order to satisfy QCA the exam boards have to write their specifications in jargon. Decoding exactly what they want us to do can be irritating. OFSTED tell us we should share marking procedures with students - good advice. But I always have to translate them into English first. Even then they often don't make much sense, being intended to impress QCA with the boards' 'intellectual rigour' rather than demonstrate to teachers and students exactly how they can attain the standards they are being assessed by.

Finzi is very much a minaturist. There are a few bigger pieces - a clarinet and cello concerto, some choral works - but he's best known for his songs and song cycles. He's someone I like rather than love - he seems to operate in a more limited range than people like Walton or RVW. I've recently read Diana McVeagh's biography of him and didn't warm to him as a person. She quotes his letters at length and he comes across as someone who feels a duty not to be too easily impressed. Quite critical of the music of others, easily wounded when his own music was criticised. My favourite Finzi disc is this one: Far from his best known works and too 'pastoral' for some tastes, but I never tire of it. [isn't Banks' great! Like going back in time to the days when you bought records in general music shops. I actually bought the CD above there last Easter to replace a well worn LP copy.]

Yes, I actually thought you meant something like that...I wasn't really getting upset! The National Curriculum is set by the government through QCA - however, it is now a set of broad skills and topic areas, giving considerable room to shape. GCSE and A Level syllabi have to be approved by QCA - there are a set of standards that all syllabi have to meet to be approved; but each exam board is free to shape its syllabus within that framework. There's plenty of choice.

They certainly don't do history teaching like they used to do. My first history teacher was phenomenal - and graphic. Images of 'snotty nosed anglo-saxon kids huddled around fires in storm-blasted huts whilst outside the Conqueror's men went on the rampage harrying the North'. Those images remain with me vividly ! Those early lessons took history from the time of the Sumerians and Ur through to the Middle Ages in great and glorious detail. Do they do that now? No. I recall doing the same and remember none of the detail! I do recall going outside to try to build an Anglo-Saxon hut. This was in Singapore!!!!! A colleague of mine did his lesson on Victorian crime last week dressed up as a 19thC policeman. I have a feeling his classes will remember the images of his lessons as vividly as you remember yours.

It's nothing special to me, MG. It's how the National Curriculum and exam syllabi are set up. A great deal of thought has gone into this since the 70s. Though I'd imagine that there have always been teachers who have worked this way - I had very good history teaching in the late 60s/early 70s and my memory is of the teachers trying to encourage us to find ways to reach balanced judgements on historical issues. However, look at the Daily Mail every few months and you'll find a strong body of opinion that dismisses what we do, demanding a return to the 'proper' learning of 'proper' facts. Like who Nelson and Wellington were, Britain's great achievements etc.

I'm not sure where you get that idea from. A central part of the study of history from at least 11 onwards is the critical study of source material to detect bias and assess reliability. The study of historical interpretation lies at the heart of everything we do in secondary school. My 12 year olds will, for example, study the 'Bonnie Prince Charlie' story to evaluate two competing interpretations - was he a glorious hero or a selfish fool. My 13 year olds have just been looking at the Great Depression to decide if 'The Hungry Thirties' is actually an accurate picture of all of Britain at the time - exploring the way that myths can actually obsure the complexities of what really happened. I'm currently preparing 17-18 year olds for a paper on the Cold War where demonstrating an understanding of conflicting interpretations of the Cold War and supporting that understanding with source references is vital for success. In what way does that sanitise, falsify or indoctrinate? I'd have hoped it was teaching the sort of critical thinking that we need in young people! Quite disappointed to be told I'm teaching a bunch of lies and propaganda.

Most kids have little choice - and will soon have no choice - about some sort of post-16 education or training. It's after 18 that they become deterred (as they once did at 16...or 15...or 14 (depending on the school leaving age at the time)). I'm sure you saw this last week: BBC News: Debt fears 'deter poor students' That wasn't actually what I said...at least it wasn't what I intended to say. Intellectual pursuits are not more suitable for middle class kids any more than practical mechanics are more innately suitable for working class kids. But the cultural context that is likely to prepare a kid to become inquisitive about literature, theatre, non-popular music etc is much more likely to exist in a middle and upper class family. Schools have been attempting to address that for decades - to try and provide some of that cultural context in order to give kids of all backgrounds the opportunity to choose from the full range of possibilities (and that equally means allowing middle class kids to follow an enthusiasm for car maintenance). If I didn't believe that I'd have upped sticks thirty years ago and found a leafy suburb somewhere to teach history in, where I wouldn't have to work so hard to try and provide the sort of cultural background that's needed before you really start to understand the history; the sort of cultural background my nephew was already acquiring from parents who travelled with him to out of the way places, explained what was being seen, took him to the opera and ballet at 5 etc, etc i.e. middle class parents. Allen initially present the idea that it was a middle class idea that things had to be 'relevant', 'good for you' to be worthwhile: All I'm saying is that his ideal: is just as middle class. It is not an outlook I meet very often amongst working class parents who are more concerned with their children getting a start in life that will afford them the financial security that they have generally lacked. The school I work in is still quite old fashioned in a way - every child has to study a humanities subject, a language and a creative arts subject to GCSE. We have always had battles with parents who don't see why their kids should do music or drama or art when they could be doing something 'useful' like another science (their words, not mine). We continue to stick to our guns. But we are swimming against the national tide.

Most working class kids find the thought of education beyond the compulsory school leaving age pretty frightening. There's little family tradition of higher education, paid work (if it can be found) brings immediate financial reward, and the prospect of student debt is alarming. So if they do go on, they generally want something that they feel can give them a secure future (of course there are individuals who always break out of that - I work with a colleague from a mining community who went to Oxford to do history (did well, loathed the academic atmosphere, loved the football!) and has one of the most incisive brains I know; but he would be the first to tell you how a-typical he was of his year, most of whom left school at the first opportunity). Middle class kids - like my nephew - have been raised in the expectation of going on to further education, nourished in an environment where learning in all its forms is valued and experienced with parents and their friends and have the ultimate fallback of parents bailing them out if the debt becomes overwhelming. So the 'intellectual life' comes inside their radar as a possibility. This may not be as we want it to be, it may not be as it should be. And schools go out of their way to broaden horizons as far as possible within the constraints placed on them by league tables, funding streams favouring practical courses etc. But it's what actually happens. Walk into any state school on Post-16 sign up days and see the queues at maths, science, ICT, business studies, health and social care and the like (we now have courses in motor vehicle maintainance and construction that fill up immediately). There's no compulsion from the school to move that way - these children are making a free choice, based on what they and their parents see as having the greatest opportunity. If schools in Britain have been guilty of anything in the last 50+ years it has been of trying to steer pupils through a curriculum model that places academic learning as the be all and end all, with more vocational learning as second best. That is being righted at present, though with a danger that it will tilt too far the other way. The real challenge will be to attain some sort of balance. It's also worth noting that the drive towards vocational learning in the state system is not reflected as strongly in the private school sector where studying Latin and Greek 'for their own sake' remains quite normal. Now who sends their children into private education?

That IS a middle class view - only the middle (and upper) classes can afford the luxury of having their sons and daughters studying things just because they are fascinating. The kids I teach history to - in a former mining area with more than its fair share of social problems - demand to know what the point is of the history they study. Personally, I'd agree with you - my historical interests are not shaped by utilitarian reasons. But studying things for their own sake will not wash in a world where a thousand and one things are demanding a place on the curriculum. You have to prove your practical relevance or you are gone. There are many schools in England where only a handful of students study history beyond 14.

Ah, I understand! Sorry if I misrepresented you, Larry. Having never been part of any subscription audience, it's not an area I know at all.