Great video, but I do have to point out a mistake in the description. The third movement of the piece is a variation of "Des Antonius von Padua Fischpredigt" while the fourth movement is a setting of "Urlicht". They are both from Des Knaben Wunderhorn, but the names are just mismatched.
Can anyone tell me how this program note, posted on 9/5/17, for the Mahler 2nd, with wht is purported to be the BSO's performance dimly in the background, refers to a performance by the BSO (under Nelsons on October 25-26) that has yet to take place? I understand the various and sundry "miracles of technology" but I hugely doubt this can happen(at least in this universe). DUMBfounding!
No. Both those would have been rational (even if mistaken) conclusions. But Mahler was looking for emotional confirmation, not critical analysis. Mahler would have had to recognize that von Bulow's response was a statement about him (von B.), not Mahler or his music.
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.15 (3/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IVwR87OH0_A/mqdefault.jpg)
Loved this! Going to hear this work tonight ❤
Great video, but I do have to point out a mistake in the description. The third movement of the piece is a variation of "Des Antonius von Padua Fischpredigt" while the fourth movement is a setting of "Urlicht". They are both from Des Knaben Wunderhorn, but the names are just mismatched.
Can anyone tell me how this program note, posted on 9/5/17, for the Mahler 2nd, with wht is purported to be the BSO's performance dimly in the background, refers to a performance by the BSO (under Nelsons on October 25-26) that has yet to take place? I understand the various and sundry "miracles of technology" but I hugely doubt this can happen(at least in this universe). DUMBfounding!
It is precisely as you describe it. The "miracles of technology"
did it occur to Gustav that HVB was just being sarcastic? Or emphasising that he was out of touch now?
No. Both those would have been rational (even if mistaken) conclusions. But Mahler was looking for emotional confirmation, not critical analysis. Mahler would have had to recognize that von Bulow's response was a statement about him (von B.), not Mahler or his music.