You are here:   Classical Music > The Light And The Dark

Malcolm Arnold: A distasteful man who made brilliant music (photo: Chandos)

Sir Malcolm Arnold died in 2006, and so is nearing the end, one hopes, of the apparently compulsory decade-long period of neglect that is supposed to follow on from the demise of composers, but especially British ones. Jumping the gun — and commendably so — is the classical label Chandos, which has just released a bargain-priced boxed set of all of Arnold’s nine symphonies, each of them a fine recording either by the late Richard Hickox and the London Symphony Orchestra, or Rumon Gamba with the BBC Philharmonic. One can sit quite happily and play all nine from beginning to end, covering a period in Arnold’s compositional life from the early 1950s to 1986 when, like Beethoven and Schubert, having written his ninth he chose to stop. Mind you, so raddled by alcohol and its attendant psychological afflictions was Arnold by the time he finished the rather dark, complex and introspective Ninth Symphony that there was never going to be another. The last 20 years of his life, as anyone who has seen Tony Palmer’s stunning and deeply troubling film about the composer, Toward The Unknown Region, knows, were years of sad, humiliating decline, perhaps the worse for being so largely self-inflicted.

Arnold’s Wikipedia entry begins by describing him as a composer of “light music”, which is a little like focusing on Ian Fleming as the writer of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. The nine symphonies show how very serious a composer Arnold was — the lighter stuff, mainly his atmospheric and highly successful film music — being written to pay the bills. Posthumously, Arnold has suffered from two obstacles that seem to prevent his being taken seriously. The first is that he specialised in the banal and jolly, and therefore anything he wrote with pretensions to being serious or more developed must be treated with immense suspicion, and probably cannot be very good. The second is that he was for much of his working life a pretty revolting man, a drunk, a womaniser, and utterly vile to almost everyone with whom he came into contact. Given his long decline there can be few in the musical world today who had first-hand experiences of the tantrums, the abuse, the sheer unreliability and the exhibitionism, so perhaps it is time to give him another chance.

A further reason why Arnold is felt to be unworthy of great respect is that he seemed to find writing music so incredibly easy. He was not merely prolific but had a knack of turning out music that was immediately accessible and memorable and yet which had a distinctive voice; he was not above using, for amusement purposes, the musical cliché, but sadly few of those who listened to him managed to get the joke. Arnold was easily branded as conservative, and therefore pointless, by generations of critics from the 1950s to the present day, because he chose to ignore the nostrums of modern, atonal, music with its radical forms. When one listens to a piece of music by Arnold — whether a symphony, a movement from a symphony, or any one of his countless other shorter works — one recognises at once why it begins where it does, ends where it does, and why it has what it has between those two points.

View Full Article

Post your comment

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.