Reply #18: Definitely Jupiter, the Bringer of Jollity

[MikeH]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A-LNkuqq6g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nz0b4STz1lo

The first link above has a little bit of information; however I like the performance in the second link better.

Jupiter is definitely the highlight of the suite for me.

I like the peacefulness of Venus, the Bringer of Peace. I particularly like it as a relief after the heavy Mars, the Bringer of War.

I think my second favorite planet is Mercury, the Winged Messenger. I like having this particular movement, with its light and flighty nature, right before Jupiter, which I consider to be the highlight of the suite.

I particularly love the lilting melody in the middle of the Jupiter movement; I consider it to be the highlight of the movement and the highlight of the whole suite. I am almost sad when the melody is over in the movement.

After Jupiter I personally consider what follows in the suite to be anticlimactic. I particularly do not really enjoy the gloomy Saturn, the Bringer of Old Age, right after Jupiter.

Back in 1979, before the advent of CD's, I had a vinyl 12" disk of Holst's The Planets which was played at 45 RPM. The disk had Mars, Venus, Mercury, and Jupiter. Given how I feel about the rest of the suite, that seemed complete to me. It was something of a novelty seeing a 12" record which was played at 45 RPM. I remember the stereo turntable record changer I had at the time assumed that a record played at 45 RPM was 7", so after the record changer had let the record through, I had to turn it off and turn it on again and manually move the needle to the start of the record.

I remember that I was just a little bit disappointed when I learned that Holst's suite was about the astrological signs rather than the astronomical bodies. However I do have to note in particular that the peaceful Venus depicted in Holst's suite is totally different than the actual planet which is very hot (900 degrees F) and with a thick and toxic atmosphere, and clouds probably containing sulfuric acid.

Holst wrote his suite before Pluto was discovered, so his suite does not contain Pluto, which I see has been added by somebody else, which is nice. It has since been determined by the International Astronomical Union that Pluto is not really a planet, so Holst's suite as it was originally written is complete in itself.

I personally don't quite understand the emotional attachment that some people have to Pluto being a planet. For instance who, other than professional astronomers, have actually seen Pluto. I think Pluto is at least 1000 times dimmer than can be seen with the naked eye, and I don't think it can be seen through any telescopes that amateur observers of the sky would have.

I think Uranus and Neptune can be seen through small telescopes or binoculars (if one knows where to look), though I have never seen either of them myself.