#thomas larcher | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

skgway · 3 years

Text

1823 July, Fri. 18

7 55/60

12 50/60

1/2 hour in the stable (look after the horses, giving Hotspur oat-cake) and just walked a little down the lane to see that the hay-makers were at work – At breakfast at 9 1/2 from 10 to 11 10/60, sauntered with my aunt into the Allan-car to see the hay-makers there – And weeded the quick-wood hedge planted there in the winter – Making dye and blacking for the gig after M– [Mariana]’s receipt –

At 11 40/60 took George in the gig, and drove the black mare outside Skircoat moor – In returning called at Mr. Wiglesworth’s and brought back Baines’s Yorkshire Directory etc. 2 volumes which Mr. W– [Wigglesworth] yesterday promised to lend us –

Got home at 1 10/60 – Went into the hayfield (the Pearson Ing) with my aunt and did not come in till 1 3/4 – Curled my hair, had it pinched ready for evening – Note from Miss Pickford, a line or 2 to say her nephew Sir Joseph Radcliffe was come to Savile hill, and she could not walk with me this afternoon – We were to have met at Whitley’s at 4 1/4 – Sent the servant back with my compliments no answer required –

Mean to write her a little note relative to her question when she last drank tea here about the funeral rites of the Scythians – Looking over Larcher’s notes on the subject; turned according to his reference, to libro iv. capitulo 1. Ælian – Hustled over Plutarch’s lives at the name Theodosus; but of course could not find what I wanted, not having Plutarch’s libro αὐταρϰῪϛ Ὑ ϰακία etc. An vitiositas ad infelicitatiene sufficiat vide Ælian as above, and Larcher volume iii. page 491 –

Wrote the last 9 lines of today, dressed and went down to dinner at 4 55/60. At 5 3/4 down the old bank to Well-head, got there at 6 by the church – Only the family – Mr. and Mrs. W– [Waterhouse] and their 3 oldest daughters – Speaking of parliamentary elections said there was no subject on which I felt more warmly – Wished for another contested election, and that we might be able to bring in 2 ministerial members –

Mr. Wortley we all observed was likely to have a seat with the pews – When should we get in his place – Lord Harewood had not a son fit for it – We did not know whom to mention – But so far from 2 blue members Mr. W– [Wortley] feared we should not have one – I maintained Mr. Lascelles had lost his contested election thro’ want of better management and the rascality of his York attorney, not Woolley, who kept letters (respecting votes) in his pocket unopened till it was too late for them to be of use –

But the other party always outwitted us – We were always too late, or too supine – Coupled Mr. W– [Wortley] on his good judgement in not voting at all at the election of a law – Against to the navigation company – He said it was neither forgotten nor forgiven by some of the party (of course) Mr. and Mrs. James Stansfield) who said Mr. W– [Wortley] acted thus on account of religion – and “the election was lost for righteousness sake” – (Mr. James S– [Stansfield] is a unitarian) – This led me to remark that Mr. W– [Wortley]’s vote could not have gained the election: as it was 2 gents voted who had no votes; and, to say nothing of this, my uncle as chairman would have had the casting vote, and thus must have given the election to Mr. James Norris –

I then observed pretty severely upon the means the Messieurs Rawson and Briggs had taken in favour of Mr. James S– [Stansfield] their instigating Mrs. Christopher Saltmarshe’s note to me (of Tuesday 27 May 1823) begging me to use my influence with my uncle “that in case” (to use Mrs. S– [Saltmarshe]’s own written words) “Mr. L– [Lascelle] had promised has vote to Mr. N– [Norris] and at the same time, did not feel interest in his obtaining the appointment: but had given his vote, as many do – to the first applicant and not from wishing him to succeed. And if it would not be taking too great a liberty to ask such a favour – that he would have the goodness not to present himself, at all, at the election but preserve a neutrality” –

I observed that a note to ask me to ask my uncle to break his word if given, was an insult; that, if almost any one else had ventured to do such a thing to me, I should never have spoken to them again, but then I excused Emma; it must be her ignorance – Her yielding to her brother Mr. Stansfield Rawson; I knew, I felt assured, she did not mean an insult; she had even so excused herself and so apologized in her note that I would not take any serious notice of it, but, being out when the note arrived, I had never written any answer to it but merely called, and turned it off in joke – Adding that they little thought how much I was the last person in the world to whom such a note could be addressed with impunity, and that, so far from influencing my uncle as they wished, I had done just the contrary; –

For, in fact, my uncle’s vote was not promised – He was at liberty to stay at home if he chose he had made no promises, he had merely said to Mr. N– [Norris]’s oldest brother when he called, that he “thought he should not be his enemy” – But I told my uncle the easiest way would be to say at once, he had promised his vote – And if it was possible that he should be determined to go to vote for Mr. N– [Norris]. Thus, said I, they absolutely defeated their own ends –

Said I had merely laughed to Emma, saying her note was far too late – She ought to have written a week before – I mentioned too, to the W– [Waterhouse]s having drank tea at Lightcliffe some time before this, and that what Mr. P– [Priestley] said had put me a little on my guard, for he, Mr. P– [Priestley], was anxious not to have Mr. N– [Norris] elected, but tho’ I did not then agree with him (knew nothing of Mr. N– [Norris]’s alleged setting himself up – Being too meddling – Too blabbing – Likely to injure the navigation – Concerns by too much influence, his older brother being clerk to the company) yet I had merely laughed and said Bless me, we must think of all this –

We have all been gulled into thinking Mr. N– [Norris] a very proper person and said if we had a hundred votes we should give him them all – But I would tell my uncle what he (Mr. P– [Priestley]) said, and we must think of it – Determined then to advise my uncle to give Mr. N– [Norris] his vote, tho’ it was quite unnecessary to tell the P– [Priestley]s this –

It appeared that Mr. and Mrs. W– [Waterhouse] had gone to the Saltmarshes about 1/4 hour after Mrs. Saltmarshe had sent the note – They condemned it at the time, so did Mrs. Rawson of Stony-Royde; and Mr. Saltmarshe declared, if he had been at home, Emma should not have sent it – But said I, the matter did not rest here; for afterwards there came a note (I believed in Mr. Stansfield R– [Rawson]’s hand-writing) written in the names of the bank-firm to my uncle himself, making the same request Emma had done; and still, not satisfied with this, Mr. Briggs, bringing with him Mr. William Priestley (of Lightcliffe) had after this called on my uncle; and Mr. B– [Briggs] had the effrontery or ignorance to make the same proposal to my uncle of staying at home – Of breaking his word if given –

I believed my uncle was a little agitated (he looked so when he returned to us in the breakfast room) that any man should make him such a proposal – But he calculated on the ignorance of the person – Knew he could not mean to insult him – Kept his temper, and calmly said – “He could not do it – He must be consistent with himself” – Mr. W[illiam] P[riestley] knew too well what he was about to say a word of such a thing – He said nothing but simply that he thought if his uncle had been alive (the late John Walker Esquire of Crownest) he would have given his vote to Mr. Stansfield –

Both Mr. & Mrs. W– [Waterhouse] quite agreed in the justice of my remarks – Mr. W– [Waterhouse] quite surprised that Mr. Stansfield R– [Rawson] – Should have written such a note – He never knew of this near of Mr. Briggs’s calling – He knew they had done this to a Mr. Crossley (at or near Rochdale) whom they had persuaded to stay away, after he promised to give Mr. N– [Norris] his vote; – He knew they had tried to persuade Mr. Thomas Dyson of Willow-edge to do the same; but he had never thought they would make such an attempt with my uncle – Broadly insinuated, he did not think they durst – It was an insult to a gentleman –

The subject turned for a minute or 2 to Mrs. Empson – Mrs. Waterhouse had heard something I had said of her (Mrs. W– [Waterhouse]) and she had “long meant to give me a wipe” – I saw Mr. W– [Waterhouse] was a check upon her – He did not wish her to name it – At last I succeeded in learning that I “was very cool”, but I had said “I never saw Mrs. Empson so like Mrs. Waterhouse” that is as she (Mrs. E– [Empson]) was when she was telling her mind – I replied I had no recollection of making such a speech: it was very unlike me to do so: nor did I believe I had made it – But I perhaps I might

Mrs. W– [Waterhouse] must be aware the similitude might be good in 2 points – I had seen Mrs. W– [Waterhouse] out of temper and she had once behaved to me in a very unintelligible way: but I had forgotten or rather overlooked it, and it was very unlike me to revert to it in such a many –

If I had said it at all, it must have been merely to my uncle and aunt at home; but certainly if I really had said it elsewhere it was in confidence to Mrs. Rawson of Stony Royde or more probably to Mrs. Saltmarshe (which however I did not could not believe to be the case unless one of them should assert it); and I should know better how to say things in confidence in future –

However; I begged Mrs. W– [Waterhouse] to understand that said or unsaid I was very happy to make her any and every apology in my power, laughing and adding I knew her to be really good at heart – I would not quarrel with her – She was now a privileged person, and might say what she liked – As for Mrs. E– [Empson] “Love rashly formed too often ends in hate”, and I dared say she how hated me as much as she had ever done the contrary – “No! No! You are mistaken she does not do that” – “Then”, said I, “I have done her unjustice but it is too late now to say anything about it – It is a dead cut between us – I may speak to her at other places or how I did so in York – But here perhaps I may take no notice of her at all” –

Mrs. W– [Waterhouse] and I parted very good friends and I came away at 8 55/60 – Mr. W– [Waterhouse] set off to walk a part of the way home with me, came all the way, I persuaded him to come in to see my uncle and aunt, and he sat with us till 10 55/60 – As we walked along, I asked if he did not think this business of the Greenups a rascally thing: of course, he did not like to say yes, at once but certainly did not contradict it, quite the contrary –

He said no attorney in the town would have done for them for Mr. James Norris has unless it was a young man, and had a character to lose – But he had gone thro’ a great deal – He had been kicked out of the room, and buffeted about, and abused – Ashewed, very worthy man (a creditor of the G– [Greenups]) had said to Mr. W– [Waterhouse] that they ought to be very much obliged to Mr. N– [Norris] they ought to make him a very handsome present, but perhaps he had done himself more harm than any good the G– [Greenups] could do him –

I said, had my uncle known all this before the election, he would have staid at home – For he had too much the feeling of a gentleman and the principle of an honest man to countenance, or appear to countenance such conduct in any one – I thought the G– [Greenups] would make £20,000 by this business – Mr. W– [Waterhouse] thought they would make half thin debt – That if they owe as was said fifty-thousand pounds according to Mr. W– [Waterhouse] they will clear £25,000 – I thought such things ought not not to be overlooked – such people ought not to be noticed – Mr. W– [Waterhouse] agreed; but, said he, “these things get over, and in a few years are forgotten” –

Sat up talking to my uncle and aunt till 11 50/60. Spiriting up my uncle about the pride of the family about Shibden etc. Having Pontey or Mickle improving the place which I always take every opportunity of urging and I think I shall succeed at last –

After coming upstairs began thinking of a contested election and a plan for bringing two blue members. Thought of writing anonymous from Bradford (but to be dire[c]ted to me here) to ask the chancellor of the exchequer whom we should choose if Wortley is made a peer. Began building castles about the result of my success, the notoriety it would gain me, an introduction at court perhaps, a barony etc. etc.

A glass of hot red wine neguss taken with Mr W[aterhouse] (I never take any) heated me. I thought of myself how slight the partition between sanity and not. The blood seemed in my head. I was not likely to sleep. I tried to compose myself by thinking [of] that almighty being who had created me. I had already said my prayers fervently and on getting into bed began repeating the lord’s prayer aloud again and again for ten minutes till the tears trickled down my face and at a little after it struck one fell asleep –

No rain today except a slight shower about 2 o’clock which could not do much harm to the hay – Yet a dull day – No sun – No drought – Yet got in nine loads – Very soft, and damp, too much so I fear –

#anne lister #anne lister code breaker #shibden hall 1823

1 note · View note

uniartcollective · 4 years

Text

Imari Karanja for Mixte

‘No Photos’

Publication: Mixte Magazine March 2020 Photography: Thomas Cooksey Fashion Editor/Stylist: Franck Benhamou Hair: Olivier Lebrun Makeup: Yann Boussand Larcher Set Design: Sylvain Cabouat

#imari karanja #editorial #mixte magazine #mixte #beauty editorial #black girl magic #black girl makeup #photography #magazine #fashion #fashion industry #style #protective styles

21 notes · View notes

pamphletstoinspire · 5 years

Photo

Entertaining God: The 16th Sunday of Ordinary Time

This Sunday, as we continue to accompany Jesus on his fateful journey to Jerusalem in the Gospel of Luke, we are confronted with a pair of Readings in which human beings host a meal for God: Abraham for the LORD in the First Reading; Martha and Mary for Jesus in the Gospel. But is it really possible for us to “do God a favor” by giving him a nice meal? We are going to discover that, while God graciously accepts our services, it’s really about what God does for us, not what we can do for him.

1. The First Reading is Gn 18:1-10a:

The LORD appeared to Abraham by the terebinth of Mamre, as he sat in the entrance of his tent, while the day was growing hot. Looking up, Abraham saw three men standing nearby. When he saw them, he ran from the entrance of the tent to greet them; and bowing to the ground, he said: “Sir, if I may ask you this favor, please do not go on past your servant. Let some water be brought, that you may bathe your feet, and then rest yourselves under the tree. Now that you have come this close to your servant, let me bring you a little food, that you may refresh yourselves; and afterward you may go on your way.” The men replied, “Very well, do as you have said.”

Abraham hastened into the tent and told Sarah, “Quick, three measures of fine flour! Knead it and make rolls.” He ran to the herd, picked out a tender, choice steer, and gave it to a servant, who quickly prepared it. Then Abraham got some curds and milk, as well as the steer that had been prepared, and set these before the three men; and he waited on them under the tree while they ate.

They asked Abraham, “Where is your wife Sarah?” He replied, “There in the tent.” One of them said, “I will surely return to you about this time next year, and Sarah will then have a son.”

This very beautiful and mysterious narrative has always suggested a mystical appearance of the Holy Trinity in the Christian tradition, and countless icons have taken their inspiration from it.

Certainly there is an intriguing interplay of one and three in the text. The text says, “The LORD appeared to Abraham,” in the singular; but three men show up. When Abraham greets the men in Hebrew, he begins by addressing them in the second person singular (“you”) and then switches to second person plural (“y’all”). So are they one or three? Yes!

The context of this meal is important. In the immediately preceding textual unit (Genesis 17) God had re-made his covenant with Abraham (first made in Genesis 15), introducing some revised terms, such as circumcision as the mark of the covenant. God also incorporates the promise of kingship as a term of the covenant, and specifies that the son of Sarah—Abraham’s first-and-should-have-been-only wife—will be the heir of the covenant. Now, in our present chapter, the LORD shows up to have a meal with Abraham.

Meals are important covenant rituals. Covenants form unrelated persons into family members. Families eat together. It is a sign of communion and relationship. Having formed a covenant with Abraham, the LORD now appears to share a family meal with him. In this meal, Abraham is eager to serve the LORD and feed “them” well. He wants to be a good host. But this meal is not about what Abraham can do for the LORD. Do we really think these three angelic visitors needed material food? Instead, this meal is about what the LORD can do for Abraham: provide him a son and heir, in fulfillment of his covenant promises.

2. The Responsorial Psalm is Ps 15:2-3, 3-4, 5:

R. (1a) He who does justice will live in the presence of the Lord.

One who walks blamelessly and does justice; who thinks the truth in his heart and slanders not with his tongue.

R. He who does justice will live in the presence of the Lord.

Who harms not his fellow man, nor takes up a reproach against his neighbor; by whom the reprobate is despised, while he honors those who fear the LORD.

R. He who does justice will live in the presence of the Lord.

Who lends not his money at usury and accepts no bribe against the innocent. One who does these things shall never be disturbed.

R. He who does justice will live in the presence of the Lord.

Since the First Reading and Gospel are both about sharing intimate communion with God (in fact, sharing a meal with God), the Psalm reminds us of what sort of persons we need to be to have this privilege of “living in the presence of the LORD.” To live in the presence of the LORD requires that we do justice, think the truth, refrain from slander, from harm, and criticism of others, from usury and bribes. It requires that we encourage those who honor the LORD and refrain from honoring atheists and those who mock faith in God (“the reprobate”).

These “rules” are not meant as a restraint on our lifestyle, but as a path to happiness. Can the man truly be happy who commits injustice to others; believes in falsehoods; slanders, harms, and criticizes those around him; charges unfair interest and takes bribes; who mocks and humiliates those who worship God, and encourages blasphemers and atheists? Can that person be joyful and content? Even if he is successful for a while in avoiding retaliation from all those he has harmed, I submit that man cannot be happy because he cannot have interior peace. The practice of evil is its own punishment, even apart from the negative consequences it inevitably provokes.

3. The Second Reading is Col 1:24-28:

Brothers and sisters: Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church, of which I am a minister in accordance with God’s stewardship given to me to bring to completion for you the word of God, the mystery hidden from ages and from generations past. But now it has been manifested to his holy ones, to whom God chose to make known the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; it is Christ in you, the hope for glory. It is he whom we proclaim, admonishing everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone perfect in Christ.

At this time in the Lectionary cycle, we are reading semi-continuously through the Epistle to the Colossians. Today’s reading is profound, but we will focus on just one striking statement by St. Paul: “I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ.”

In an essay on the topic of faith and works, Dr. Michael Barber quotes St. Thomas Aquinas on this passage of Colossians:

[This could be misinterpreted as teaching] that the passion of Christ was not sufficient for our redemption, and that the sufferings of the saints were added to complete it …. But this is heretical, because the blood of Christ is sufficient to redeem many worlds…. Rather, we should understand that Christ and the Church are one mystical person, whose head is Christ, and show body is all the just, for every just person is a member of this head: “individually members” (1 Cor. 12:27)…. We could say that Paul was completing the sufferings that were lacking in his own flesh. For what was lacking was that, just as Christ had suffered in his own body, so he should also suffer in Paul, his member, and in similar ways in others. [Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on Colossians (trans. F. R. Larcher; Naples: Sapientia, 2006)].

This is one of the places in Scripture that teach us the doctrine of redemptive suffering, that as Christians we will and indeed must suffer in this life, but our sufferings are participations in the suffering of Jesus, and as such have value in God’s eyes and advance the salvation of the whole world.

The truth of redemptive suffering is lost in Christian groups that teach “salvation by faith alone” understood as a path to heaven that involves believing, but not necessarily a transformation of one’s thought and behavior, much less the endurance of suffering for Christ’s sake. This was the kind of Christianity I was partially raised in. Thankfully, however, on a practical level there was a greater recognition for the need to transform behavior than there was on a theoretical level. Sometimes one’s religion can be better than one’s theology.

The theology of redemptive suffering spoke powerfully to my wife and I, especially to my wife, who has had more than the “usual” share of suffering in life. It was part of what led to her conversion to the Christian faith. The famous Austrain psychiatrist Viktor Frankl, a survivor of the Holocaust and the Nazi death camps, argues in his rightly famous book Man’s Search for Meaning that almost any suffering can be endured by the human psyche provided the human sufferer sees meaning in it. I think Frankl is right, so far as it goes, but what is lacking in his book and his counseling method, called logotherapy, is that he does not provide a metaphysical reason to believe that there is meaning in life. He would help his patients invent their own meaning, but this is unsatisfying, because finite creatures cannot make a meaningless world meaningful by an act of their will—its just an exercise in imagination, and we know it. What Frankl and logotherapy needs is the Christian faith. The Christian faith is the best framework for psychiatric health in world civilization, because the the cross provides the way to find meaning in any situation of suffering. If God can bring the salvation of the world out of the worst evil in human history—the shameful torture and execution of the only perfectly innocent human being ever to live—than surely he is able to bring good out of the lesser sufferings we face. The Christian faith asserts and provides evidence to believe that there is a God who has a purpose to this creation—a good purpose, capable of incorporating even the tragedies that we witness into a larger goal of making human beings suitable to dwell forever in the presence of furnace of God’s love, i.e. heaven.

4. The Gospel is Lk 10:38-42:

Jesus entered a village where a woman whose name was Martha welcomed him. She had a sister named Mary who sat beside the Lord at his feet listening to him speak. Martha, burdened with much serving, came to him and said, “Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me by myself to do the serving? Tell her to help me.” The Lord said to her in reply, “Martha, Martha, you are anxious and worried about many things. There is need of only one thing. Mary has chosen the better part and it will not be taken from her.”

In this part of Luke, Jesus has begun his “death march” to Jerusalem, where he will celebrate the great familial meal par excellence that will form the New Covenant. On his way, he stops in the home of Mary and Martha to share a meal with them.

Like Abraham, Martha and Mary have the opportunity to host God at a meal in their home.

Martha and Mary have different attitudes toward Jesus in their home. Mary is concerned about what Jesus can give to her, and sits soaking up his teaching. Martha is concerned with what she can do for Jesus, and is busy about serving the food.

But does a man who can multiply loaves to feed 5,000 really need someone to bring him food?

Martha is not ill-intentioned, and Jesus treats her gently. “Martha, Martha …” — the repetition of her name is a sign of affection and love. He understands her mindset and knows that her desire to serve is ultimately also an expression of love for him, even if misguided.

“You are worried about many things, but there is need of only one thing.”

What is the “one thing”? Some suggest Martha was serving an elaborate meal and Jesus is suggesting a single dish would have sufficed. Perhaps that is true. But Scripture has layers of meaning. On a deeper level, the “one thing” that is necessary is communion with God. Finally, this is the only thing that matters, and it is all we will do and enjoy in eternity.

Martha’s great business causes her to lose communion with Jesus. So busy serving, she is not spending any time with him.

There is a pleasing illustration of Martha’s attitude in an excellent German film marketed in the US under the title “Mostly Martha.” The lead character — not accidentally named Martha — is a German cook obsessed with perfection, who has forgotten that food and eating are ultimately forms of communion with other persons, an expression of love and fellowship. In the course of the film — and through much pain — she learns to open herself to a communion of love with her young niece and a fellow chef who becomes her husband. She comes to understand meals not simply as a chance for her to display artistic and scientific prowess, but as opportunity for the communion of persons. The whole movie is very much applicable to the themes of this Sunday’s Readings.

But back to the Gospel reading: Martha’s problem is that she is too concerned about what she can do for Jesus, when it is really about what Jesus can do for her.

Mary seems to understand this, as she sits at Jesus’ feet. About Mary, we can apply a pleasing interpretation of an important Old Testament text. After the Sinai Covenant was solemnized in Exod 24:1-8, the leaders of Israel went up on Mt. Sinai, and they shared a meal with God: “They beheld God, and ate and drank” (Ex 24:11). Some ancient Rabbis took this to mean, “They looked at God and in this way they ate and drank.” In other words, the Beatific Vision was their sustenance. We can apply this verse to Mary: while Martha tries to prepare a physical meal, Mary beholds Jesus and that is sustenance enough for her. We can meditate on this concept in Eucharistic Adoration.

This Sunday, we hear these words proclaimed at the Mass, our own covenant meal with God present. Yet we need to remember, the Mass is not something we do for God, nor is it a meal we host for God. The Mass is something God does for us; He is the host of the meal.

We don’t do God a favor by showing up for Church on Sunday and throwing something into the plate. This does nothing for God. It does not enhance his dignity or add anything to his power or glory.

God does us a favor by hosting a meal for us every Sunday in which he offers Himself to us as food, in the most intimate act of communion with Himself imaginable.

Mass is not about what we do for God, but about what God does for us. At this Sunday’s Mass, let’s pray more intensely for God to work in our hearts, to forgive our sin and transform the way we think and act, that we can become like the man of Psalm 15 who is suitable to dwell in God’s presence; or like Mary, who understood the “one thing” necessary and was willing to say “No” to distractions and demands in order to soak in the presence and teaching of Jesus.

From: www.pamphletstoinspire.com

#entertaining God - 16th Sunday of Ordinary Time

1 note · View note

nyphil · 5 years

Photo

🔉First Listen: The Orchestra rehearses for the US Premiere of Thomas Larcher’s Symphony No. 2, “Kenotaph” under the baton of Semyon Bychov. Larcher’s “Kenotaph” offers a musical response to the immigration crisis in 2015 with refugees attempting to escape across the Mediterranean Sea to Europe in overcrowded and makeshift boats. This excerpt is from the third movement, Scherzo, molto allegro. #nyphil #nyphilharmonic #orchestra #rehearsal #newmusic (at New York Philharmonic) https://www.instagram.com/p/BwpoVL_hMZx/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=phl7zk3z2baw

#nyphil #nyphilharmonic #orchestra #rehearsal #newmusic

3 notes · View notes

casabotelho · 6 years

Photo

Sensual. Forever. Balanced. - www.casabotelho.com Art work credit Thomas Zanon-Larcher - #casabotelho #madeinbritain #masculineglamour #homedecor #bespoke #styleinspiration #interiorstyle #interiorstyling #decor #interiors #interiordesigner #designer #designs #furniture #interiordesign #interiordesigner #homedecor #decoration #decoracaodeinteriores #decor #interiordecor #inspo #decorlovers #interior123 (at Augustus Brandt) https://www.instagram.com/p/BpHmFErBBvs/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=ss6wwr4d4zgx

8 notes · View notes

henry33tan · 3 years

Text

Leeds Piano Competition 2021, and a look back!

I remember Leeds 1972 when my classmate from High School, Murray Perahia entered and prevailed as the First Place winner. “Murray” as he was known at the NYC HS of Performing Arts-“P.A.” (aka the FAME school) was rightly recognized as a teen phenom! I, for one, would gather with other piano majors, around an old, rather beat up grand where Murray was rehearsing a Mendelssohn Piano Trio with violinist, Diana Halperin (another big talent) and cellist, Marsha Heller. Naturally, the music-making was divine, as Perahia drew listeners into his singing tone, phrase-loving cosmos. (This was after school hours in a musty practice room.)

Even when P.A. orchestra conductor, Julius Grossman asked Murray to play the figured bass of a Corelli Concerto Grosso, ears became pinned to what the young student drew out of the piano that pulled members of the ensemble into collaborative harmony.

Who cannot forget Murray at the podium for a Conducting exam waving his fluid baton in an impassioned late Haydn Symphony reading. (As a Second Violin section member, I felt a surge of excitement that rose to new heights and dwarfed past rehearsals under our regular music director!)

Perahia, as would be expected, took Leeds by storm 8 years later at the urging of his mentor Mieczysław Horszowski. The 25 year old pianist from the Bronx, had largely been playing Chamber music at Marlboro and well beyond, partnering with Rudolf Serkin, Casals, and the Budapest String Quartet (a natural route for him), until he was jettisoned into the solo spotlight by his Leeds victory!

Fast forward to Leeds 2021 where so many competitions now abound in a crush for attention. Pianists from all over the over the world amass first, second, and third place medals, wondering how many they can collect before they solidify a career.

It’s a rat race to the top that’s often beyond reach since there’s always another contest on the horizon that trumps the last! (Given this testy, high-wire, environment, one worries about competition fatigue or burnout!) For pure relief, players hypnotize themselves into a non-competitive bubble, allowing the music to envelop them from start to finish without nerves eating them up alive!

For Leeds 2021 entrants, there’s a demanding Contemporary composition performance requirement that’s layered in with Solo piano repertoire and Chamber Music specifications. Here’s the list of Contemporary works to choose from.

Pierre Boulez1st Sonata10′Luciano BerioSequenza11′Brett DeanHommage a Brahms3 pieces – 8’György LigetiSelection of Etudesup to approx. 10’György KurtágSelection of Játékokup to approx. 10’Thomas LarcherNoodivihik10′Thomas AdesThree Mazurkas9′George Benjamin

Mandatory Chamber Music performances draw on defined works by Dvorak, Brahms, Beethoven among others.

This year, during the Semi-Final round I heard cello and violin sonatas, along with a well known Dvorak Quintet and Brahms Piano Quartet, etc.

Murray Perahia in this posted video for Leeds (as one of its patrons) emphasizes how the Chamber Music component is so intrinsic to the competition and a valued feature.

youtube

Were he, however to choose from the list of contemporary SOLO works at the 2021 Leeds website, his enthusiasm might wane.

In media interviews over decades, Perahia often referred to his career-embracing “Classical programming” of Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Chopin, Schumann, Mendelssohn, and Brahms. He resisted critics such as New York Times Arts Editor, Anthony Tommasini who faulted him for omitting serial-based, atonal repertoire on his programs. (See my embedded blog about this repertoire issue that resonates into the present as Competitions insist on Contemporary music exposure.)

When a NY Times music critic and reader clash over a piano recital

Murray responded to his detractor that he “did not understand” many of the Contemporary works urged upon him, though perhaps he might feel differently at this juncture of his life. (Somehow Leeds 2021 officials overlooked Perahia’s recorded comments about the “classically-based” repertoire that he underscored as being a pivotal dimension of Leeds.) Oops! Did anyone check the total footage before it was amplified at the Competition’s website?

About the Leeds 2021 Jury. There are NINE members of which 4 are Pianists! (and only two women!)

Dame Imogen Cooper (UK) Chair of the Jury. (Pianist)

Adam Gatehouse (UK) Artistic Director / Juror. (Conductor)

Inon Barnatan (Israel/ USA) Juror. (Pianist)

Adrian Brendel (UK) Juror. (Cellist)

Silke Avenhaus (Germany) Juror. (Pianist/Chamber Musician/Arranger)

Gaetan Le Divelec (France) Juror. (Oboist)

Ryan Wigglesworth (UK) Juror. (Composer/Conductor)

Ludovic Morlot (France/ USA) Juror. (Conductor)

Steven Osborne (UK) Juror (Pianist)

By contrast the 1972 Leeds Competition had 11 judges, Chaired by the late Fanny Waterman, pianist. From having watched the 1972 Leeds Documentary on You Tube, I ingested the sagacious words of jurors, Ingrid Haebler, Raymond Leppard, Nikita Magaloff, and Waterman. Notice the appearance on the panel of Nadia Boulanger as well. (There were 4 women on the Jury.)

In 1972, when female pianist contenders including Uchida, obtained considerable recognition–though not passing into the Finals where 3 males prevailed, 2021 LEEDS eliminated NOTABLY gifted Semi-Finalists, Elizaveta Kliuchereva–Russia, age 22 and Yuzhang Li–China, age 22 from the Finals leaving FIVE MALES in the culminating Concerto round. These choices revealed a glaring gender disparity!

To make matters worse, Leeds instituted an Audience Favorite limitation, allowing only a voting selection among the FIVE FINALISTS. (This is highly unusual. Most respected Competitions give an option to pick from ALL entrants through a progression of Rounds) Such tight Leeds imposed control is likewise manifest in the Concerto portion of the Finals where Jurors select two piano Concertos for each player, barring contenders any autonomy. One might question the way these pairs of concertos of different length are assigned. Officials justify it as an attempt to adjudge what each entrant needs to play in order to further expand the jurors’ understanding of individual abilities. (This is atypical in the competitive arena.)

Leeds principles also assert in the main, that they want to avoid redundant performances of the same concerto in their assignments, though repetition of repertoire including concerti is par for the course at renowned Competitions such as the Tchaikovsky, Van Cliburn, and Chopin (in Poland) among others.

Leeds 2021 definitely has a different face this year that’s caused a bit of an uproar among its followers around the world. Surely, it should respond in accordance with public opinion and make appropriate adjustments. In the meantime, some ardent piano lovers who tuned into 2021 Leeds from day one, are bidding it farewell until there’s more gender equality and an opportunity to voice their choice of a FAVORITE pianist without restriction.

***

LEEDS 2021, Competition Website

https://leedspiano.medici.tv/en/about/the-leeds/

from Arioso7's Blog (Shirley Kirsten) https://arioso7.wordpress.com/2021/09/16/leeds-piano-competition-2021-and-a-look-back/

0 notes

contemporaryclassicalfan · 3 years

Text

Thomas Larcher voices fatal mountain climb in Third Symphony

In 2020, the world premiere of Thomas Larcher‘s Third Symphony fell through due to corona. The subtitle A Line Above the Sky refers to British mountaineer Tom Ballard, who fatally crashed in 2019. It wasn’t until February 2021 that the Symphony actually sounded for the first time, in Brno; on 25 September the belated Dutch premiere will be presented by the Netherlands Radio Philharmonic…

View On WordPress

#Karina Canellakis #NTRZaterdagmatinee #Radio Filharmonisch Orkest #Thomas Larcher #Tom Ballard

0 notes

czechrepublicinthenews · 3 years

Link

0 notes

viscommolly · 4 years

Photo

Turning The Season

Thomas Zanon-Larcher & Jules Wright

In the summer of 2008 Thomas Zanon-Larcher (Photographer) and Jules Wright (Director) set out to make a work which captured the ‘English Season’. It’s a time of year when the English aristocracy and upper middle-class traditionally (since The Restoration in the17th Century) go out to play at horse racing, polo, cricket, car racing, picknicking and dining – as frequently as possible on strawberries and champagne. This spectacular summer historically heralded the autumn with a return to London and presentation of debutantes to the Queen, a tradition abandoned in the fifties. For the purposes of this take on Englishness, the co-authors constructed a relationship between a young married couple, Alice who suffers from bi-polar disorder and Alex, a successful lawyer. We watch them struggle to survive within the public world imposed by their class. Turning The Season was staged as an installation at the Wapping Hydraulic Power Station, 21 November 2008 – 28 February 2009 and is the third book of a series. All work was shot on location, in public.

When thinking about perspectives I found this photography book, the red foil made me think about the female gaze and wether creating a book that used a system like this to show the male and female gaze would work successfully.

0 notes

bspolink1348 · 5 years

Text

A lire en BSPO dès aujourd’hui (17/06/19)

À la une : Radicalization in Belgium and the Netherlands : critical perspectives on violence and security / edited by Nadia Fadil, Martijn de Koning, Francesco Ragazzi

Cote de rangement : HN 49 .R33 R 257544 / Domaine : Sociologie

“The concept of 'radicalization' is now used to account for all forms of violent and non-violent political Islam. Used widely within the security services and picked up by academia, the term was initially coined by the General Intelligence and Security Service of the Netherlands (AIVD) after the 9/11 and Pentagon attacks, an origin that is rarely recognised.

This book comprises contributions from leading scholars in the field of critical security studies to trace the introduction, adoption and dissemination of 'radicalization' as a concept. It is the first book to offer a critical analysis and history of the term as an 'empty signifier', that is, a word that might not necessarily refer to something existing in the real world. The diverse contributions consider how the term has circulated since its emergence in the Netherlands and Belgium, its appearance in academia, its existence among the people categorized as 'radicals' and its impact on relationships of trust between public officials and their clients. Building on the traditions of critical security studies and critical studies on terrorism, the book reaffirms the importance of a reflective approach to counter-radicalization discourse and policies. It will be essential reading for scholars of security studies, political anthropology, the study of Islam in the west and European studies.” - Quatrième de couverture

----------------------

Sciences politiques

Politique et religion au défi de la communication numérique / sous la direction de Mihaela-Alexandra Tudor, Gheorghe Clitan et Márcia Marat Grilo

Cote de rangement : BV 652 .95 P 257534

The Brussels reader : a small world city to become the capital of Europe / edited by Eric Corijn and Jessica van de Ven

Cote de rangement : DH 805 B 257551</p>

Brussel : een hoofdstad in meervoud / Jan Degadt

Cote de rangement : DH 805 D 257552

Écrits libres de Syrie : de la révolution à la guerre / sous la direction de Franck Mermier

Cote de rangement : DS 98 .6 E 257533

Rwanda, ils parlent : témoignages pour l'histoire / Laurent Larcher

Cote de rangement : DT 450 .435 L 257540

Les communistes et l'Algérie : des origines à la guerre d'indépendance, 1920-1962 / Alain Ruscio

Cote de rangement : HX 441 .5 R 257537

From Maastricht to Brexit : democracy, constitutionalism and citizenship in the EU / Richard Bellamy and Dario Castiglione

Cote de rangement : JN 30 B 257550

----------------------

Sociologie

The digital plenitude : the decline of elite culture and the rise of new media / Jay David Bolter

Cote de rangement : HM 851 B 257546

Consumer identities : agency, media and digital culture / edited by Candice D. Roberts and Myles Ethan Lascity

Cote de rangement : HM 851 C 257542

One-dimensional queer / Roderick A. Ferguson

Cote de rangement : HQ 76 .5 F 257549

Misogyny : the new activism / Gail Ukockis

Cote de rangement : HQ 1233 U 257543

The urban commons : how data and technology can rebuild our communities / Daniel T. O'Brien

Cote de rangement : HT 177 O 257547

----------------------

Anthropologie

Jean Rouch : ethnologue et cinéaste / [dossier coordonné par Luc Pecquet

Cote de rangement : GN 347 J 257539

Mana : a history of a western category / by Nicolas Meylan

Cote de rangement : GN 471 .4 M 257548

Anthropologie(s) du don / [présentation : Alain Caillé, Philippe Chanial, Jean-Frédéric de Hasque et Caroline Sappia]

Cote de rangement : GT 3040 A 257538

----------------------

Gestion

Imperfect markets and imperfect regulation : an introduction to the microeconomics and political economy of power markets / Thomas-Olivier Léautier

Cote de rangement : HD 9502 L 257545

Impostures pharmaceutiques : médicaments illicites et luttes pour l'accès à la santé / Mathieu Quet

Cote de rangement : RS 189 Q 257535

----------------------

Criminalité

The rules of security : staying safe in a risky world / Paul Martin

Cote de rangement : HV 7431 M 257541

----------------------

Arts

Esthétique de la charogne / Hicham-Stéphane Afeissa

Cote de rangement : N 8217 A 257536

----------------------

Droit

Réformes de la justice en Europe : entre politique et gestion / Cécile Vigour

Cote de rangement : KJC 3655 V 257532

----------------------

Technologies

Li-Fi : la communication à la vitesse de la lumière et l'internet des peuples / Gunter Paul

Cote de rangement : TK 5103 .2 P 257531

----------------------

Tous ces ouvrages sont exposés sur le présentoir des nouveautés de la BSPO. Ceux-ci pourront être empruntés à domicile à partir du 1er juillet 2019.

#Sociologie #SciencesPolitiques #Anthropologie #Gestion #Criminalité #Arts #Droit #Technologies

0 notes