War Poems of Wilfred Owen (Paperback)

*****
An excellent edition of an outstanding poet

31 Oct 2008

This review is intended to serve two different audiences: in the first part I'll talk about Owen's poetry, and why, if you've not done so before, you should, must and absolutely have to spend some time getting to grips with his writing; and in the second part I'll deal with the ins and outs of this particular edition of his verse (there being a great many available on the market.)

So, why be so insistent that you read Owen? Well, he was in many ways the most talented poet writing in English in the First World War, and his poems go furthest to communicate the experience of the men who fought in the trenches to readers almost a century away from the battles he saw. His most famous poems, such as "Anthem for Doomed Youth" and "Dulce et decorum est" are lyrical, elegant pieces of poetry that present intensely moving images of what Owen himself described as "the pity of war", and no-one will ever forget the image of the young man who was a second too slow to put his gas mask on. These poems are his most traditional, owing a clear debt to Keats and Shelley, and it seems as though in them he is writing the final verses of the great Victorian century of poetry. Yet there is much more to his writing: some of his poetry shows the early shoots of modernism, for example in the more allusive (and elusive) "Strange Meeting" and "Insensibilty", in which Owen seems to be looking forward, using language and techniques not unlike those of Eliot and Pound. For me, though, the poem which has moved me every time I have read it for over 15 years is "Futility", a tender and beautiful lament for a young man killed just before dawn. It is true that 90 years have passed since Owen died, but his poetry remains for us the defining account of the Great War.

So to the second part of this review. Owen is back on the A-level syllabus, and many readers will want to know if this book will help them in their studies. And the short answer is, yes. John Stallworthy is an excellent editor: honest and open about the choices he has made, and uncricitical in his provision of a great variety of alternative views and interpretations. His notes, which follow every poem, are wonderfully generous (citing whole other poems where necessary), and each poem is given a brief account of the circumstances in which it was produced. His introduction is excellent, describing Owen's life and literary influences (an understanding of which is essential if you are to really get to grips with his work), and giving readings of some of his more famous works. In all, I could not wish for a better edition of his war poetry: early and incomplete works are also provided, and the feeling one gets is of first rate scholarship.

I will be honest that for some time I had an ambivalent relationship with Owen's work, beeing too much distracted by the apparent simplicity of his more famous work, and not appreciating the remarkable creative process, and in particular his engagement with the poetic tradition, that lies behind his work. Using this edition has restored my enjoyment, and I am hugely greatful for it. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

Stanford:Choral and Organ Works

****
Flawed, but wonderful nonetheless
3rd November, 2008

Stanford in C. There are few phrases so evocative for any musician who has spent any period of time performing English church music. The words are redolent with faded Victorian pomp, a little like those glass cases full of stuffed birds, or a large, overstuffed armchair. The phrases move along in their steady four-four rhythm, with a gently plodding bass-line below, and occasional moments where the basses get a rest, and the top voices drift away on a melody that would rather like to be limpid, but had a little too much for lunch. But, despite all this, and it is so easy to mock Stanford, I love his music. His evening service in C maybe a little full of hubris, but his service in G is charming, and the three latin motets are genuinely well written. And for those reasons alone, you should buy this disc, and have a jolly good enjoyable listen to it, perhaps with a glass of sherry, and a leg of mutton to wash it all down.

But that's not quite the full picture. The choir of St John's College, Cambridge, are a very fine group indeed, and their series of English choral music for Naxos has been a very welcome addition to the catalogue. Much of their singing is excellent: Christopher Robinson trains the boys to sing with incision and great intonation, and out of the ranks of the young, male choral scholars have come some of the finest singers of this current generation (there are one or two present on this disc, for good measure.) They can be thrilling, and they can be blended, but I can't help feeling the performances are not very well balanced. For example, in the middle of "For Lo, I Raise Up", there is a beautiful passage of very sensitive writing, but Robinson forces the crescendo of the line almost beyond breaking point, and any sense of mood is gone for good. And what's more, there are some really quite unpleasant noises that come out of the speakers when one listens attentively: the trebles can be harsh (and dominated by Oliver LePage-Dean, who is - admittedly - excellent, but it makes for tiring listening), and the alto line in the early bars of the C major Magnificat seems to have been replaced by enthusiastic chickens. One can only hope they were free range. My suspicion is that the budget nature of the recording has something to do with this, and that takes which otherwise should not have been put onto the CD were included for the lack of any alternatives. In any case, I don't think this singing represents John's at their best.

But here's the thing: why are we consigning Stanford to the dusty recesses of Choral Evensong when he has so much more to offer? Performed with organ his music is, it is true, a bit flat-footed, but that's not the way he wanted it to be heard. His music was written for a large choir with an orchestra, and he wrote for orchestra with real skill, and there is some thrilling orchestration to be found (I recently experienced the Evening Service in A to the accompaniment of a full orchestra, and the effect was a revelation: suddenly Stanford's talent became clear to me.) So, should any passing record producers stumble across my review, here's my challenge to you: do a disc of Stanford using the chorus and orchestra of La Scala. I think it would sound bloody great.

Hamlet (Norton Critical Editions) (Paperback)

****
Very useful, but caution is advised
11 Nov 2008

There are a great many editions of Hamlet available at the moment, and, as it is a play that is never far from the syllabuses of A-level boards and university English departments, there are a great many people who need a copy of the text that they can trust, and which will give them the level of support they need to get the most out of this text. The Norton Critical Edition of "Hamlet" will, of course, be of great service to some people, but many readers will be better off elsewhere. In short (as I've realised this review is getting rather long), if you're studying the play for AS level, then this is probably not the best book for you: try the Cambridge School Shakespeare instead, and add the York notes for extra depth and background information. If you're at A2 or university, then the more detailed text of the Oxford (my preference) or Arden editions will be of greater use. So, that rather begs the question, who is this book good for?

To answer that, let's look at what the book actually does. Norton Critical Editions receive their name from the selection of critical material which they provide in the form of extended appendices to the main text. In this case, there is a very useful section on "Intellectual Contexts", which includes contemporary writings on such topics as Melancholy, ghosts, and also gives excerpts from Montaigne's "Apology", which bears striking similarities to Hamlet's speech early in Act 2 on "what a piece of work is man." In terms of enriching one's appreciation of the terms of reference in which Shakespeare's plays were understood, these texts are invaluable, but their provision seems arbitrary: no justification is given for their selection, and there is no direct evidence that Shakespeare read any of them (even the Montaigne essay is the subject of debate amongst critics as to whether or not Shakespeare had read it, or whether it was itself simply part of a wider discussion at the time about human nature). Moreover, there are countless more omissions than there can be inclusions - there is no Greek mythology, no Garden of Eden, no early English tragedy against which to judge the play-within-a-play - so one is left feeling a little adrift, especially if your knowledge of the period is not very strong.

The "critical" part of this edition comes in the form of a very generous selection of essays and responses to the play, including some early criticism (although it would have been nice to have some contemporary writing on drama too), going back to the early 18th century, and with a liberal selection of big names, including Hazlitt, Goethe, Coleridge, Wilson Knight, Eliot, Lawrence and Lewis. These have been well edited to leave only the apposite passages, and in many cases are an absolute delight to read. Lawrence's comment that Hamlet seems "a creeping, unclean thing" is well worth remembering in the light of Goethe's pure "soul unfit", and Bradley's essay on the play is excellent (it's a spirited defence of Claudius).

This is a very attractive package, and it is for the critical material that I can award the book four stars, but there are some significant drawbacks. Firstly, the text of the play itself is nothing more than a cleaned up version of the first quarto, with no indication as to where the Folio (or any other texts) vary from it. Moreover, the editing of the text is niggardly in its provision of supporting notes and explanations, which means that it really is only of use if you have another, fuller version of the play (like the Oxford edition) to hand. Lastly, there is no introduction, so the editorial principles cannot be set out, leaving us rather in the dark as to what choices were made, and what the rationale was behind those choices.

In the end, we are left with a really useful book that is not really very useful, as you'll always need other texts to hand to get the most out of it. If you're planning on doing serious work on the play, then yes, I can recommend it, and, if someone else is paying for your books, then it's a fantastic addition to your shelf, but for other readers, I can't quite see how it all fits together.