depthcharge99 (September 1, 2008 at 7:27 pm)

He talked about left-wing principles and turned around and kissed the Queen's ass like a miserable wretch, and took advantage of the royal cluelessness about music to foist the shittiest, dirty music on the nation. He wanted to be the Queen. He was just too much of a phony, hypocritical egomaniacal piece of trash to admit it to anyone. He knew it though. That's why he was a miserable human being.

depthcharge99 (September 1, 2008 at 7:25 pm)

The best music that Britten ever wrote was the Sarabande from the stupid "Simple(ton) Symphony". Why was it the best? Because it was an unacknowledged and straightforward crib of Albinoni. Britten only cared about writing the same gay pervert tunes over and over again for the hideous Pears to sing over and over again. Either that or noisy percussion shit with thick, stinky scoring in the bass. Occasionally a fruity harp or piano glissando. He was a wretched fraud.

depthcharge99 (September 1, 2008 at 7:22 pm)

Peter Pears couldn't sing worth a shit, and paid no care to any of Britten's music as long as it wasn't a) gay pornography or b) tailor made by his monster for his thin little tenor voice. All Britten's "dramatic" work is one big perversion, constantly fixated on the idea of purity versus filthy sexual pig. The purity was lip service. Britten was the worst kind of pervert, and wanted only to write the same pathetic music for little boys, over and over again.

depthcharge99 (September 1, 2008 at 7:19 pm)

Know why every Britten book has carefully worded quotes from a small, select group of people? These were the ones that were duped by him, but realized too late to save face. Do you think the "War Requiem" is good music? It is a tawdry piece of homosexual pornography posing as a "pacifist" work, and Britten would admit as much when he was brandied up. Pacifism? Britten didn't know what it meant. He was a music technician and nothing more; no music, no brain. Idiot. Coward. Fraud.

depthcharge99 (September 1, 2008 at 7:16 pm)

Here are his enablers: Peter Pears, who was an evil man and perfect for Britten; Myfawny Piper, a clueless proto-hippie; The Duncans, who knew the truth, but did nothing; George Harewood, who liked to think he was musical and was proud of his "connection", and let Britten use him for his royal connections, like a dirty tampon; Donald Mitchell, outright liar and the onetime Britten Foundations official whitewasher; the Daily Mail, which was bought off by Britten in the most obvious way.

depthcharge99 (September 1, 2008 at 7:12 pm)

Not so much gays. If they were just gay, that would be fine. They were really and truly the most depraved, self-congratulating, hypocritical, pieces of musical shit that Britain ever produced. You know all these stories that have come out lately about how "Ben never touched a child" and "he wasn't a practicing pedophile, just a complex man!" and nonsense of this type? They were VERY CAREFUL about who they asked, I'll tell you that. Ask EVERYONE, not just his toadies and his worshippers.

lecomptedelalune (August 22, 2008 at 9:23 pm)

gays

mckools (August 9, 2008 at 9:48 pm)

I'm doing this for a Workshop, hope I can pronounce the words correctly!

ftumschk (June 29, 2008 at 2:13 pm)

Pears had a pretty solid technique - indeed, he worked very hard on perfecting it during his early years. The proof is evident in the fact that he enjoyed such a long career, maintaining for a large part of it a remarkable consistency of range and tone. His timbre might not have been to everyone's taste, but his dedication and artistry were beyond question.

wthepoo (June 26, 2008 at 8:35 pm)

Yes, that's right. It's almost flawlessly pronounced and articulated and very pleasing (much better even than in the great Decca-Winterreise).