Letter 1791 - Revision history

Tony: "termsy" to "terms" / "suffer" to "suffers" due to context

2024-11-26T16:05:50Z

"termsy" to "terms" / "suffer" to "suffers" due to context

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:05, 26 November 2024
Line 26:		Line 26:
	\|Translated text={{right\|''[[Kamenka]]''<br/>21 June}}		\|Translated text={{right\|''[[Kamenka]]''<br/>21 June}}
	{{centre\|Dear friend!}}		{{centre\|Dear friend!}}
	I've received [[Bortnyansky]]'s works, looked through them and begun the editing, which turned out to be quite painstaking and tedious, in general because the majority of [[Bortnyansky]]'s creations are commonplace trifles. Why do you need to publish his complete collection? Allow me to recommend that you abandon this plan, and instead adopt the following: "''to publish a collection of selected works by [[Bortnyansky]]''". This will be far better for your pocket, and wiser in every respect. Don't forget that a good 7/10, or at least 3/5, of the whole collection will comprise ''concertos'', i.e. the dullest set of commonplaces and vulgarities, performed never and nowhere in churches, or exceptionally once a year they might make it into the programme of some spiritual concert. So far as I'm aware, the number of [[Bortnyansky]]'s works actually in demand and that are sung all over the place comprise a very small number. Supposing you were to publish these, along with, let's say, 2 or 3 of the best concertos, and then you will produce something that is actually needed, and I guarantee you that my editorship will wring out everything from [[Bortnyansky]] that is suitable, and discard everything that is unsuitable and has no future whatsoever. ''A complete collection''? These are very bold words, but in the present instance they sound strange, because they refer to a person with little talent and who wrote a whole heap of all sorts of rubbish, amongst which a dozen decent things sparkle like oases in the desert. I've even begun to waver over whether to lend my name to an edition that I cannot sympathise with. I'm now writing spiritual music which is an attempt (let's say a very modest one) to counter the notorious established styles of [[Bortnyansky]] and ''tutti quanti'', while now at the same time suddenly beseeching the public with a proposition that contains everything that I'm repudiating in my own works. Perhaps we could view this in more simple ~~termsy~~, i.e. I am a musician earning a living by my own efforts, and consequently there is nothing reprehensible in the fact that, for subsistence's sake, I am editing every abomination which my publisher decides to publish — but my pride still ~~suffer~~ from all this.		I've received [[Bortnyansky]]'s works, looked through them and begun the editing, which turned out to be quite painstaking and tedious, in general because the majority of [[Bortnyansky]]'s creations are commonplace trifles. Why do you need to publish his complete collection? Allow me to recommend that you abandon this plan and instead adopt the following: "''to publish a collection of selected works by [[Bortnyansky]]''". This will be far better for your pocket, and wiser in every respect. Don't forget that a good 7/10, or at least 3/5, of the whole collection will comprise ''concertos'', i.e. the dullest set of commonplaces and vulgarities, performed never and nowhere in churches, or exceptionally once a year they might make it into the programme of some spiritual concert. So far as I'm aware, the number of [[Bortnyansky]]'s works actually in demand and that are sung all over the place comprise a very small number. Supposing you were to publish these, along with, let's say, 2 or 3 of the best concertos, and then you will produce something that is actually needed, and I guarantee you that my editorship will wring out everything from [[Bortnyansky]] that is suitable, and discard everything that is unsuitable and has no future whatsoever. ''A complete collection''? These are very bold words, but in the present instance they sound strange, because they refer to a person with little talent and who wrote a whole heap of all sorts of rubbish, amongst which a dozen decent things sparkle like oases in the desert. I've even begun to waver over whether to lend my name to an edition that I cannot sympathise with. I'm now writing spiritual music, which is an attempt (let's say a very modest one) to counter the notorious established styles of [[Bortnyansky]] and ''tutti quanti'', while now at the same time suddenly beseeching the public with a proposition that contains everything that I'm repudiating in my own works. Perhaps we could view this in more simple terms, i.e. I am a musician earning a living by my own efforts, and consequently there is nothing reprehensible in the fact that, for subsistence's sake, I am editing every abomination which my publisher decides to publish — but my pride still suffers from all this.

	Think it over and write the answer!		Think it over and write the answer!

Brett: 1 revision imported

2022-07-12T12:20:03Z

1 revision imported

← Older revision	Revision as of 14:20, 12 July 2022
(No difference)

Brett at 11:25, 14 February 2021

2021-02-14T11:25:20Z

New page

{{letterhead
|Date=21 June/3 July 1881
|To=[[Pyotr Jurgenson]]
|Place=[[Kamenka]]
|Language=Russian
|Autograph=[[Klin]] (Russia): {{RUS-KLč}} (a{{sup|3}}, No. 2340)
|Publication={{bib|1901/24|Жизнь Петра Ильича Чайковского ; том 2}} (1901), p. 474–475 (abridged)<br/>{{bib|1938/40|П. И. Чайковский. Переписка с П. И. Юргенсоном ; том 1}} (1938), p. 196–197<br/>{{bib|1966/44|П. И. Чайковский. Полное собрание сочинений ; том X}} (1966), p. 149–150
}}
==Text and Translation==
{{Lettertext
|Language=Russian
|Translator=Brett Langston
|Original text={{right|''Каменка''<br/>21 июня}}
{{centre|Милый друг!}}
Я получил сочин[ения] Бортнянского, просмотрел их и начал редактирование, которое оказалось работой довольно кропотливой и скучной главнейшим образом потому, что большая часть творений Бортнянского суть весьма пошлая пустяковина. К чему нужно тебе издавать его полное собрание? Позволь тебе посоветовать отбросить этот план и вместо него принять следующий: «''издать сборник избранных соч[инений] Бортн[янского]''». Это будет гораздо лучше для твоего кармана и во всех отношениях умнее. Не забудь, что добрые 7/10 или, по крайней мере, 3/5 полного собрания составят ''концерты'', т. е. самый плоский набор общих мест и пошлостей, никогда и нигде в церквах не исполняемых и лишь раз в год попадающих в виде исключения на программу какого-нибудь духовного концерта. Те из соч[инений] Бортнянского, в которых действительно есть потребность и которые везде поются, составляют очень небольшое число пиэс наперечёт мне известных. Положим, что ты издашь их, а также, положим, 2–3 самых лучших концерта, и тогда получится вещь действительно нужная, и я ручаюсь тебе за то, что моя редакция выжмет из Бортнянского все годное и отбросит все негодное и не имеющее никакой будущности. ''Полное собрание''? Это очень громкое слово, но оно в настоящем случае звучит странно, ибо относится к человеку с маленьким талантом и написавшему ворох всякой дряни, среди которой, как оазисы в пустыне, мелькает десяток порядочных вещей. Я даже стал колебаться: давать ли мне своё имя для такого издания, которому не могу сочувствовать. Я пишу теперь духовно-музыкальное сочинение, которое есть попытка (положим, очень скромная) бороться с установленным Бортнянским и ''tutti quanti'' дурным стилем, и вдруг в то же время лезу к публике с предложением всего того, что собственным сочинением отрицаю. Положим, что на это можно смотреть проще, т. е. я музыкант, живущий своими трудами, и, следовательно, нет ничего предосудительного в том, что ради до бытия средств к жизни редактирую всякую гадость, которую мой издатель вздумает издать, — но моя гордость всё-таки от этого страдает.

Подумай и напиши ответ!

Я послал Соф[ье] Ив[ановне] 500 р[ублей]. Рыдая, простился я с этими пятью Катьками.

Потрудись разрешить мне один денежный вопрос: все ли, что получено тобой и Ос[ипом] Ив[ановичем] за обе мои оперы, отдано Третьякову или часть осталась у тебя в счёт моего долга? Я очень бы хотел привести в ясность свои дела. Обидно, что, получая так много, я вечно сижу без денег и вечно парализована моя свобода. Хороша свобода! О многом ещё хотел тебе сказать, да боюсь, что письмо не дойдёт. Я вообще почему-то Poste restante не доверяю.

Обнимаю тебя. Нат[алье] Ник[олаевне] кланяйся.
{{right|Твой П . Чайковский}}

|Translated text={{right|''[[Kamenka]]''<br/>21 June}}
{{centre|Dear friend!}}
I've received [[Bortnyansky]]'s works, looked through them and begun the editing, which turned out to be quite painstaking and tedious, in general because the majority of [[Bortnyansky]]'s creations are commonplace trifles. Why do you need to publish his complete collection? Allow me to recommend that you abandon this plan, and instead adopt the following: "''to publish a collection of selected works by [[Bortnyansky]]''". This will be far better for your pocket, and wiser in every respect. Don't forget that a good 7/10, or at least 3/5, of the whole collection will comprise ''concertos'', i.e. the dullest set of commonplaces and vulgarities, performed never and nowhere in churches, or exceptionally once a year they might make it into the programme of some spiritual concert. So far as I'm aware, the number of [[Bortnyansky]]'s works actually in demand and that are sung all over the place comprise a very small number. Supposing you were to publish these, along with, let's say, 2 or 3 of the best concertos, and then you will produce something that is actually needed, and I guarantee you that my editorship will wring out everything from [[Bortnyansky]] that is suitable, and discard everything that is unsuitable and has no future whatsoever. ''A complete collection''? These are very bold words, but in the present instance they sound strange, because they refer to a person with little talent and who wrote a whole heap of all sorts of rubbish, amongst which a dozen decent things sparkle like oases in the desert. I've even begun to waver over whether to lend my name to an edition that I cannot sympathise with. I'm now writing spiritual music which is an attempt (let's say a very modest one) to counter the notorious established styles of [[Bortnyansky]] and ''tutti quanti'', while now at the same time suddenly beseeching the public with a proposition that contains everything that I'm repudiating in my own works. Perhaps we could view this in more simple termsy, i.e. I am a musician earning a living by my own efforts, and consequently there is nothing reprehensible in the fact that, for subsistence's sake, I am editing every abomination which my publisher decides to publish — but my pride still suffer from all this.

Think it over and write the answer!

I've sent [[Sofya Ivanovna]] the 500 rubles. I wept as I bade farewell to these five Katkas.

Kindly resolve one financial question for me: has everything that you and [[Osip Ivanovich]] received for both my operas been given to [[Pavel Tretyakov|Tretyakov]], or did you keep some of it on account of my debt? I should very much like to clarify my affairs. It's exasperating that, although in receipt of so much, I always find myself stuck without money, and my freedom is perpetually paralysed. Freedom is good! I have a lot more to tell you, but I'm worried the letter won't reach you. For some reason I have a general mistrust of Poste restante.

I embrace you. Regards to Natalya Nikolayevna.
{{right|Yours P. Tchaikovsky}}
}}