What is this Opus Clavicembalisticum?

[iumonito]

Dear forumites, please forgive me for bumping this thread up, but it made for magical reading for me, and since we have had a bit of a controversy on KSS recently, I thought it would be appropriate to bring it up to put things in perspective.

[Ruro]

Dear forumites, please forgive me for bumping this thread up, but it made for magical reading for me, and since we have had a bit of a controversy on KSS recently, I thought it would be appropriate to bring it up to put things in perspective.

 If I had one piece of Blackrock and 150% mage skill, I would cast WITHOUT A DOUBT my only "Apocalypse" spell on you... and I hope you enjoy it, because it will be the LAST thing you ever endure! Mwahaha!

[ahinton]

It's available on eMule.

We're in the process of having it removed from that source as well, since this infringes copyright.

It will nevertheless remain available from us direct, as it always has been.

Best,

Alistair

[prometheus]

It's not technically possible to remove it 'from emule'.

[iumonito]

I am so very cluless.  I don't even know what you are talking about re emule.  What I wanted to bring up were the sections where Mr. Powell and others converse about the preparation of his performances of OC and some other Sorabji works.

[ahinton]

It's not technically possible to remove it 'from emule'.

Not "technically", no - at least in the sense that it is possible simply to go online and do that (just as well, really, otherwise anyone could do anything); we do realise that. There are other ways within that organisation, however, as we have found. We are in contact with them and they inform us that they can verify sources of material, provided that the enquirer can first vouch for the right to make such an enquiry.

What a sorry business - but an evidently necessary one, for all that...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I am so very cluless.  I don't even know what you are talking about re emule.  What I wanted to bring up were the sections where Mr. Powell and others converse about the preparation of his performances of OC and some other Sorabji works.

I'm not sure where or what you mean here, in tems of the specific sources to which you refer, but do please clarify and we will try to help.

If you want more information about this work, please do not hesitate to contact us on
sorabji-archive@lineone.net
and we will do all that we can.

Best,

Alistair

[iumonito]

Alistair, no specific needs at the moment; I am savoring the upcoming arrival of my score and then I am sure I will have many a question.  What I was saying was that stuff like this was good to keep in mind when we are talking about KSS:

About preparation of OC
I learnt the piece for my first performance of it over a period of about five months, although I composed and performed other concerts during this period as well. The piece, as some of you may know, is in 12 movements, so I learnt them in groups of three or four. There are four fugues, so I learnt one of those at a time, two variation groups, some cadenza passages, a chorale prelude, moto perpetuo movements, so there was enough variety to keep  me going over that period.

I studied the technical and musical aspects of the piece simultaneously: so aspects of phrasing would be addressed by appropiate fingering, tone production etc -- just as one would study any other piece.

The aspect of stamina did not -- and continues to not -- worry me, since if one is practising for eight hours a day prior to performance, then playing for just four on the day of the concert does actually come as something of a relief. I 'tested' myself by learning, during the previous year (2002), Sorabji's 2 and a quarter hour 4th Sonata (1929); since this proved to produce no extreme fatigue, I thought it would probably safe to move on to OC.

About the merits of the work
OC is a very tightly organised piece of music, based loosely on the form of Busoni's Fantasia contrappuntistica. All the themes employed are interrelated, and are treated in wide variety of forms. Although some of the very long movements -- such as the Fuga tertia -- are less scintillating on a moment-to-moment basis than the explosive Fantasia and Cadenza I, even the longer movements, when played suitably, do possess a sense of inner momentum and coherence that is characteristic of Sorabji's most succesful work. Like or hate it, Sorabji's style -- in terms of harmony, melody and texture -- is particularly difficult to mistake for anyone else's, and the strength of his individuality is surely a merit in itself. I have also been impressed by the emotional breadth of the work in the pianistic sense: Sorabji seems equally at home producing a passage of pianissimo crotchets, as he is creating one of fulminating virtuosity: both extremes are able to find their place within the broader expressive gamut of the work with surprising validity.

Of course, there are some aspects of Sorabji's writing that are not entirely to my taste, but then I suppose there are very few composers indeed all of whose works I could claim to admire absolutely. What I do find admirable in a broader sense about Sorabji is his understanding of the sonorities of the piano, treating it in turns as a vast resounding chamber, or quasi organo in chorale-prelude passage, or in filigree fireworks that can -- when rendered sympathetically -- leave the hair on the back of one's neck stand on end. Lastly, for the moment, I would add that the sincerity of Sorabji's aesthetical stance impresses me: he had no need to write any of his mature works -- he never pursued a 'career' as a composer -- so he wrote as he did simply because it seemed to him the natural thing to do, and when one learns of his own tastes -- in music, literature, decorative arts etc -- the naturalness of his own writing will actually become far more evident than they otherwise might from a cursory glance.

By the way, none of the people whom I know who knew Sorabji have ever mentioned any mental illness (even though they do speak of him quite candidly). The extract from the Sonata of 1917 that appears on the website is of Sorabji's first ever piano composition: it is an immature work and not really indicative of his style.

Best wishes
Jonathan

[thalbergmad]

Not "technically", no - at least in the sense that it is possible simply to to go online and do that (just as well, really, otherwise anyone could do anything); we do realise that. There are other ways within that organisation, however, as we have found. We are in contact with them and they inform us that they can verify sources of material, provided that the enquirer can first vouch for the right to make such an enquiry.

What a sorry business - but an evidently necessary one, for all that...

Best,

Alistair

I can partially understand why you want to do that, but in my case, i downloaded a single movement, decided i wanted to hear the rest and went out and bought it. If it was not for e mule, i would never have spent the money. I use it as a sort of try before you buy service.

As i am sure you are aware, the OC is available via several other sources, so i do feel that you may have a continual battle on your hands.

Regards

Thal

[ahinton]

I can partially understand why you want to do that, but in my case, i downloaded a single movement, decided i wanted to hear the rest and went out and bought it. If it was not for e mule, i would never have spent the money. I use it as a sort of try before you buy service.

As i am sure you are aware, the OC is available via several other sources, so i do feel that you may have a continual battle on your hands.

Regards

Thal

I know I do! Unfortunately, however, not all of those sources are the corrected copy and, fortunately, most people do still come and buy it if they want it. We've always been pleased to supply the odd short samples of things free - or at the very least for mailing costs only - to people who might end up being interested to have the entire work concerned. We were, for example, happy for Fredrik Ullén to include on his website samples of the 100 Transcendental Studies as similar kinds of appetite whetters to what you're writing about.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

It's available on eMule.

On reflection, I wonder if I misunderstood your meaning here. Were you saying that a recording or a score was available on emule? If the former, which recording is it?

Best,

Alistair

[stevie]

the score and recordings are available, in sections and complete

2 madge recs are on it, and ogdon rec in sections

i listened to them and im glad i didnt buy it now, hoorah for e-mule! 

[prometheus]

Everything is on services like those.

[ahinton]

Everything is on services like those.

I don't know about "everything"! Nothing's there unless it's put there by someone. We're working on the scores aspect. The recordings matter is up to the record companies, if they're interested.

Best,

Alistair

[prometheus]

I don't mean everything of Sorabji. I mean everything in general. Every movie, every tv series, every album, every book, every software program etc.

[ahinton]

I don't mean everything of Sorabji. I mean everything in general. Every movie, every tv series, every album, every book, every software program etc.

No, I know you don't. Nevertheless, whatever may be there is only present because someone put it there - it wouldn't get there by itself! In any case, there's an awful lot of Sorabji that's NOT there!

Best,

Alistair

[alzado]

Why did this Ludwig guy put out so many posts in this thread with the only content being one hyphen?

I see that late in the thread he finally does utter something.

Is he typical of the people who enjoy playing Opus Cabellum?  Or whatever?

[JCarey]

Why did this Ludwig guy put out so many posts in this thread with the only content being one hyphen?

He seems like a strange individual, doesn't he? You should try sending him a PM. He might be able to explain why he did that.

I see that late in the thread he finally does utter something.

Aha, so he does!

Is he typical of the people who enjoy playing Opus Cabellum?  Or whatever?

I suppose he might be, though I don't believe that there is necessarily a Sorabjian stereotype that would cause one to point somebody out on the street and say, "Hey, I bet that person likes Sorabji!" Then again, I may be mistaken.

This Ludwig Van Rachabji fellow seems to be somewhat insane - I wouldn't bother with him any more.

[ahinton]

I don't believe that there is necessarily a Sorabjian stereotype that would cause one to point somebody out on the street and say, "Hey, I bet that person likes Sorabji!" Then again, I may be mistaken.

Then again, you might not. Er - let's try that one again. Then again, you most definitely are not!

Sorabji himself (and I write from direct experience) had very little idea as to who would warm to his music; OK, so it's very easy to say that he just didn't care (and that might not be entirely wrong), but the point is that, right from early performances, the music had the capability of exciting a wide variety of people (even if a relatively small number of them), by no means all of whom were professional musicians. When he realised just how well his music could get across, I think he was somewhat astonished. We composers can learn from this that we have no idea who will care about our music - and that this fact can be deeply disappointing as easily as it can be positively surprising (or even both at the same time!)...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

This Ludwig Van Rachabji fellow seems to be somewhat insane - I wouldn't bother with him any more.

Tis indeed a thin line that seperates genius from madness.

[ahinton]

Tis indeed a thin line that seperates genius from madness.

'Twas ever thus, no doubt. On which side thereof do you see yourself? (no, please don't bother to waste your time in answering that, for it wasn't meant to be a serious question; contrary to the apparent belief of some people hereabouts, I do actually possess a sense of humour, even if certain such people can't or don't want to find it in themselves to approve of it)...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

You have indeed a sense of humour Alistair.

I staill await your post on the piece of music that must not be mentioned, written by the composer that must not be mentioned, played by the pianist that must not be mentioned.

[g_s_223]

And don't forget not to mention the sexual orientation that must not be mentioned.

[ahinton]

You have indeed a sense of humour Alistair.

I certainly hope so. I do try to maintain one. I'm quite sure you can deduce at least a few reasons why that can be not so much a mere good idea but a dire necessity around these parts.

I staill await your post on the piece of music that must not be mentioned, written by the composer that must not be mentioned, played by the pianist that must not be mentioned.

Thank you for your kind invitation. At the risk of sounding ungracious (which I have no wish to do), it is nevertheless clear that accepting it will require careful prior consideration (see below).

And don't forget not to mention the sexual orientation that must not be mentioned.

Was your double negative here deliberate or accidental? If the latter, then I must ask you whose? - the composer's? - the pianist's? - that of the piece? - mine? (since I am being invited to write about the piece that mustn't be mentioned) - any combination or even all of the above?

Between you, you have set me what may be an insuperable problem; I'm sure you can imagine just what a feat of unprecedented virtuosity it would be to write about a piece that can't be mentioned by a composer who can't be named played by a pianist who can't be identified, let alone to mention the sexual orientation of something / someone that you can't mention in the first place - although perhaps I should not even have mentioned that fact.

It occurs to me, however, that I should nevertheless warn you both (and anyone else interested) that a proliferation of all this cloak-and-dagger stuff about not mentioning a certain composer or one of his pieces or Tony Blair's one-time chief of staff could easily degenerate into something not dissimilar to all that legendary old "composer that banned himself" rubbish that used to circulate around a certain unnameable composer a generation and more ago...

Best,

(see "signature" below - let's not have too much mentioning of names here...)

[alzado]

Thank you JCarey for some trenchant comments on the Ludwig person. 

Of course, the topic was the plethora of responses by Ludwig having just one hyphen as the only content of the post.

On another occasion, he plans to make his case in a very definitive manner, but where the cut-and-paste material should go, the board's monitor has put a message ----
"[Removed]"

Perhaps the hyphens are all that remains of devastating arguments of Ludwig's that had to be expunged -- for what unknown reason -- by the board's monitor.

Is it true that the OC has never been performed all the way through since it was written?

As I understand it, the "Symphonia Antarctica" of Ralph Vaughan Williams has only been performed twice in the many decades since it was written.  Has to do with the truly enormous orchestra required, plus bizarre additions such as wind machines.

For a piece that takes 22 hours to play, would a tuner rush in after each movement to touch up the unisons?   

When would the performer go to the bathroom?

Would the pianist have to wear one of those bus-driver devices to eliminate the need for a pee-pee break?

Well, I'm burned out.  Carry on, all.

[prometheus]

Chess players sometimes play games that last more than 6 hours. So mentally a performance of such a lenght isn't that unusual.

Of course chess players can take breaks in their available time. So it isn't that good an analogy. Plus chess players have to think a lot harder.

[ahinton]

Is it true that the OC has never been performed all the way through since it was written?

I'm assuming that this and your other questions below aren't meant to be taken seriously in the context in which you have written them and that you probably know rather more than they suggest you do, but just in case this is not the case, the answer to this one is "no" and those to the others are as below.

As I understand it, the "Symphonia Antarctica" of Ralph Vaughan Williams has only been performed twice in the many decades since it was written.  Has to do with the truly enormous orchestra required, plus bizarre additions such as wind machines.

You don't understand much, then, about the piece, its performance history, its scoring or even the ease of availability of wind machines; some might even suggest that there are quite a few of those right here on this forum, indeed. I do believe that it has to date had very few performances in Antarctica itself, however - due not so much to an absence of wind machines as a shortage of penguins to conduct it...

For a piece that takes 22 hours to play, would a tuner rush in after each movement to touch up the unisons?

Presuming you to mean a solo piano piece of that unprecedented duration, I think that we should all have to wait for one such to be written and performed at least once in order to come up with any meaningful answer there, don't you? Perhaps, while we wait, you might like to speculate as to whether a tuner would rush in to touch up the pianist...

When would the performer go to the bathroom?

Well, after he/she had finished any given stint of uninterrupted playing, of course (and see below); playing such a piece in a bathroom might possibly provide a suitable alternative, especially as certain concert halls already have those kinds of acoustic.

Would the pianist have to wear one of those bus-driver devices to eliminate the need for a pee-pee break?

You mean what's commonly called a "leg-bag"? Well, I've never yet seen a pianist wearing one of those during a public performance, but then the longest I've ever observed a pianist performing on a stage uninterruptedly was the 2½ hours or so that the pianist that mustn't be mentioned (see above, if you need to) took to play parts 1 & 2 of the work that similarly mustn't be mentioned in London in 2003 - a duration which can presumably be otherwise planned for in advance by any pianist, provided that he/she does not suffer from certain kinds of renal condition...

Well, I'm burned out.

What? - just by the effort it took you to write that? Amazing! I don't think you'd have the stamina to play "that" piece, then...

Carry on, all.

I have little doubt that we will.

Best,

Alistair

[iumonito]

BTW, you can make a solid argument that Erik Satie's Vexations, depending on tempo and accuracy of counting to 840, should take about 24 hours to play.  In the proper state of mind and body, such feat is nothing for a spiritual person like so many in India, Tibet and the like.

You just need to be one with it.

I am sorry I resurrected this thread, as obviously there is no interest in a high-level discussion of the work, its performances and what lies ahead.  Alistair, special apologies to you, who seem to have been summoned for defending against and clarifying so many useless comments by others here.  I think you are doing a fine job and Sorabji's legacy is the better off for it.  Thanks.

[ahinton]

BTW, you can make a solid argument that Erik Satie's Vexations, depending on tempo and accuracy of counting to 840, should take about 24 hours to play.  In the proper state of mind and body, such feat is nothing for a spiritual person like so many in India, Tibet and the like.

While agreeing with you, I suppose there may be an argument for saying that the performer's kidney considerations remain to be addressed in some practical way...

I am sorry I resurrected this thread, as obviously there is no interest in a high-level discussion of the work, its performances and what lies ahead.

No need for any such apology on my account - or, indeed, to quite a few (though, of course, by no means all) other forum members who may well be interested in such things.

Alistair, special apologies to you, who seem to have been summoned for defending against and clarifying so many useless comments by others here.  I think you are doing a fine job and Sorabji's legacy is the better off for it.  Thanks.

And thank you for those kind words. The best thing of all is that, whatever comments anyone may make or omit to make at any time and in any place, Sorabji's legacy remains intact and people are getting increased opportunities to familiarise themselves with it, both in printed and aural form; the encouragement of this is indeed what we're here to try to do, but we remain indebted, of course, to those excellent editors, scholars and performers without whose sterling efforts this music would have touched almost no hearts at all.

Best,

Alistair

[ryguillian]

Opus clavicembalisticum died of complications resulting from AIDS back in ‘88.

—Sydney, Australia

[ahinton]

Opus clavicembalisticum died of complications resulting from AIDS back in ‘88.

—Sydney, Australia

Really? Do you have evidence for that? It sounded very much alive when I heard John Ogdon perform it in London, both in July and in November of that year...

Best,

Alistair

[alzado]

Quote from: iumonito on February 07, 2006, 04:47:49 PM

BTW, you can make a solid argument that Erik Satie's Vexations, depending on tempo and accuracy of counting to 840, should take about 24 hours to play.  In the proper state of mind and body, such feat is nothing for a spiritual person like so many in India, Tibet and the like.

While agreeing with you, I suppose there may be an argument for saying that the performer's kidney considerations remain to be addressed in some practical way...

Must the pianist soil himself in order to manifest the "last full measure of devotion" to the musical work?

[ahinton]

While agreeing with you, I suppose there may be an argument for saying that the performer's kidney considerations remain to be addressed in some practical way...

Must the pianist soil himself in order to manifest the "last full measure of devotion" to the musical work?

In this particular "vexatious" context I cannot say for certain; the large-scale keyboard works of Sorabji, however, demand an absolute maximum attendance before the instrument of some 3½ hours at any single stretch (and even this is quite exceptional in his output), so I must desist from displaying overmuch interest in trying to offer intelligent answers to this question in terms of the extent to which it may be pertinent to the kind of music for which we are responsible...

Best,

Alistair

[alzado]

Alistair writes:

the large-scale keyboard works of Sorabji, however, demand an absolute maximum attendance before the instrument of some 3½ hours at any single stretch (and even this is quite exceptional in his output), so I must desist from displaying overmuch interest in trying to offer intelligent answers to this question in terms of the extent to which it may be pertinent to the kind of music for which we are responsible...

We regret our levity on some occasions during this discourse, and will eschew any additional allusions to what Shakespeare termed "country matters."

At risk of expressing an untoward interest, I hope to find and play some recordings of  Sorabji's works.  Our community library has a vast resource of music CD's and will doubtless hold some examples of this most intriguing composer.

Are you certain you have not overstated the frequency of musical performance of Vaughan-Williams's Symphonia Antarctica? 

I was under the impression it was rarely played due to the extreme demands of the musical resources.  Also, doesn't it require Sir John Guilgud to do the narrative segments?

Who trained the penguins in the inaugural performance, which I believe was in the 1930's? 

When the narrator describes the great leviathan that sports in the deep, are real whales required?


Alzado

[ahinton]

Are you certain you have not overstated the frequency of musical performance of Vaughan-Williams's Symphonia Antarctica?

Yes - if for no betteer reason that my response about this gave no information at all about its frequency of performance; it is very difficult for an overstatement to occur when no statement at all has been made.  Vaughan Williams is not hyphenated, by the way.

I was under the impression it was rarely played due to the extreme demands of the musical resources.  Also, doesn't it require Sir John Guilgud to do the narrative segments?

Then allow me to correct all of these impressions. Whilst far from being the composer's most performed work, its performances are not as rare as you seem to believe. The musical resources are also not extreme. Nor does it require the service of that great actor whose name was Sir John Gielgud - which fact is fortunate, since Sir John died several years ago.

Who trained the penguins in the inaugural performance, which I believe was in the 1930's?

Sorabji did - as in ask a silly question and you get a silly answer.

When the narrator describes the great leviathan that sports in the deep, are real whales required?

My first thoughts here were that you may be confusing this work with And God Created Great Whales, or The Whale, neither of which were composed - or even for that matter known - by Vaughan Williams but written respectively by Hovhaness and Tavener; however, for the best answer to this question, why not consult a score, or a recording, or both?

Now I think it's time for me to ask you a question. Apart from the small fact that Sorabji had considerable respect for Vaughan Williams, what's all this got to do with the subject of the present thread, which - as you may have noticed - is Sorabji's Opus Clavicembalisticum?

Best,

Alistair

[notturno]

How did  the O.C. get it's name, or rather why?  What exactly does it mean? I imagine that the clavicem is from clavis: key.  With the same root for clavichord.  Though it could be from the feminine noun, clave: a club.  Balisticum might be from ballista, a medieval siege engine, though it also had the meaning of a musical dance.  So we have throwing keys, throwing clubs, a siege engine for throwing keys, a siege engine for throwing pianos, musical dance of keys/clubs.  All of the above.

I'd had Latin in college, but that was awhile ago and the declensions have slipped from memory.  Also I suspect it's a neologism from Sorabji, so KSS's intended meaning may be different from what the Latin would seem to indicate.

Anyway, just curious.  Though I'm interested in Sorabji's meaning, other interpretations are welcome.

Joseph

[ahinton]

How did  the O.C. get it's name, or rather why?  What exactly does it mean? I imagine that the clavicem is from clavis: key.  With the same root for clavichord.  Though it could be from the feminine noun, clave: a club.  Balisticum might be from ballista, a medieval siege engine, though it also had the meaning of a musical dance.  So we have throwing keys, throwing clubs, a siege engine for throwing keys, a siege engine for throwing pianos, musical dance of keys/clubs.  All of the above.

I'd had Latin in college, but that was awhile ago and the declensions have slipped from memory.  Also I suspect it's a neologism from Sorabji, so KSS's intended meaning may be different from what the Latin would seem to indicate.

Anyway, just curious.  Though I'm interested in Sorabji's meaning, other interpretations are welcome.

Joseph

The composer's original title for the piece was Opus Sequentiale, but he changed it to Opus Clavicembalisticum during the course of its composition. The derivation of the longer word is a Latinised genitive of "clavicembalo"; that of Opus is, of course, self-explanatory. So the title is a somewhat prosaic one.

Best,

Alistair

[notturno]

The composer's original title for the piece was Opus Sequentiale, but he changed it to Opus Clavicembalisticum during the course of its composition. The derivation of the longer word is a Latinised genitive of "clavicembalo"; that of Opus is, of course, self-explanatory. So the title is a somewhat prosaic one.

Ohh, clavicembalo, as in harpsichord. "Work of the Harpsichords?" Yes, more prosaic than throwing keys, piano flinging siege engines, etc.  I was off the mark on that one. I guess I didn't see the genitive ending: I would have expected -i or -orum.  Still I think Opus Clavicembalisticum sounds more interesting than Opus Sequentiale.  Perhaps in images it conjours by word associations.

Thank you for the clarification, Alistair, and all your efforts with the Archive. 

Joseph

[ahinton]

Ohh, clavicembalo, as in harpsichord. "Work of the Harpsichords?" Yes, more prosaic than throwing keys, piano flinging siege engines, etc.  I was off the mark on that one. I guess I didn't see the genitive ending: I would have expected -i or -orum.  Still I think Opus Clavicembalisticum sounds more interesting than Opus Sequentiale.  Perhaps in images it conjours by word associations.

Thank you for the clarification, Alistair, and all your efforts with the Archive. 

Joseph

You're more than welcome; we try to do our best...

Best,

Alistair

[pianowelsh]

If you have the score - keep it on a nice low shelf! if you drop it on yourself when replacing it on the ledge you may die of severe head injuries.  I am generally a fan of challenging works and I do not dislike this work but i do feel it is at times uneedfully long. Im sure there are others who would share my sentiment. It is however a worthy 'milestone' on sheer merit of its scale and ordasity if nothing else. It is a living legend.

[alzado]

Alistair writes--

Now I think it's time for me to ask you a question. Apart from the small fact that Sorabji had considerable respect for Vaughan Williams, what's all this got to do with the subject of the present thread, which - as you may have noticed - is Sorabji's Opus Clavicembalisticum?

Really, nothing.  However, you only cite the parts of my post that were intended to respond to your comments earlier.  Parts of my post deal directly with Sorabji's music, but you choose not to acknowledge those sentences.

At risk of diminishing your "joie de vivre," I note that you have posted a really extraordinary number of times on this thread.   I can seldom recall any thread where so many of the replies were from the same individual.

There is nothing wrong with that.  Carry on.  I just wondered if you were aware of it.

Regards--

[ahinton]

Really, nothing.  However, you only cite the parts of my post that were intended to respond to your comments earlier.  Parts of my post deal directly with Sorabji's music, but you choose not to acknowledge those sentences.

At risk of diminishing your "joie de vivre," I note that you have posted a really extraordinary number of times on this thread.   I can seldom recall any thread where so many of the replies were from the same individual.

There is nothing wrong with that.  Carry on.  I just wondered if you were aware of it.

Regards--

I responded to the off-topic items purely to draw attention to their off-topic status and to ask why there were inserted here. My joie-de-vivre remains undiminshed (especially having just been in France for almost a week). It is perhaps unsurprising that I respond quite often to questions and comments about Sorabji's music, since The Sorabji Archive is responsible for it and ought as a rule to have something useful to say...

Best,

Alistair