scelsi: was he a fraud?
Andrea Riderelli
I was not able to follow this thread.
So, please, if someone took trace of it, that is pleased to post
me this track.
Thank you in advance,
Andrea.
--
a.rid...@mclink.it
mc9...@mclink.it
Vance Maverick
> Because my Internet Provider interrupted his services for a while,
> I was not able to follow this thread.
> So, please, if someone took trace of it, that is pleased to post
> me this track.
Here's what I could find on our server -- some pieces appear to be
missing. I hope you will respond.
Vance
----------------
From: Francis Cox <fc...@octave.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Scelsi: was he a fraud?
Date: 9 May 1995 23:40:37 +0100
I have recently been in correspondence with an Italian gentleman who has
strong doubts over the authenticity of the works of Giacinto Scelsi, the
reclusive composer. My correspondent does not have direct USENET posting
facilities (though can read posts) so has agreed to me posting his mail to
me. Here is his response to my last email (my questions after >):
======= BEGIN QUOTE =======
Briefly,
> * When did you know Scelsi?
I do not remember exactly, anyway I think it was in 1984-1985
ca. at my composition teacher's home (Vieri Tosatti).
> * What was the nature of your relationship with him?
I started a discussion about music with him, but I realized very
soon that 'real' music knowledges were quite 'off-topics' for
Scelsi.
> * Name some specific works which he did not write.
It is a very long list. In fact, he did not write about any music!
> * For these works, can you show that he did not write them?
Maybe I could tell you WHO wrote them.
> * Are you prepared to state publicly who wrote these works?
Yes, sure!
> * Are there any other people or documentary evidence, e.g. handwriting,
> which can back up your claims?
Yes, there should be, if someone did not hide or destroy the 'body
of evidence'...
> * Please reconfirm whether you permit posting of email correspondence
> to r.m.c.
If you want it, I permit.
So, just to summarize some things:
Giacinto Scelsi was a rich man with a wide culture; otherwise,
he was not able to convert it to practice. In 1947 he met the
Italian composer Vieri Tosatti so Scelsi asked him to teach music
just to spent time (rich men' things...). Tosatti started to teach
something when he discovered that Scelsi was not able to learn
nothing: no music theory, no piano skill, nothing... There were
some 'sketches' of 'music' (e.g. some 'drops' on paper) or some
dodecaphonic 'series' that someone else wrote for him (Roman Vlad
wrote them for some explanations about Schoenberg's theory). As
I said, in 1947 Tosatti started the 'collaboration' and wrote
e.g. entirely 'Quattro pezzi su una nota sola' (Four pieces on
a single note) that began a 'great' succes in Italy. Most of Scelsi
compositions
started in this way: he presented a sheet with some drops or some
designes (like a kind of sun, a triangle etc.), then asked Tosatti:
"What do you think, Vieri, about a violin concerto?" and so on.
Please, note that ALL composers known, at that time, the TRUTH!
It happened that conductor Roger Desormiere met, in the '50s,
the composer Goffredo Petrassi. Desormiere said: "Mister Petrassi,
Italy has a great composer; his name is Giacinto Scelsi. His
composition 'Le Naissance du Verb' has just won the S.I.M.C. [Contemporary
Music International Society] Price!" Petrassi, which knew the
truth about Scelsi, asked Tosatti to reveal what kind of fraud
Scelsi was hiding and it was a discrete scandal in the musical
entourage. Scelsi simply surrounded the Italian S.I.M.C. selection,
and sent 'his' score directly to General S.I.M.C..
Tosatti wrote a lot of music for Scelsi up to 1973, when he passed
the job to an his pupil Riccardo Filippini when started the so-called
'monodic period' (pieces for a single instrument like cello).
Tosatti returned to write one only piece for Scelsi, who prayed
him with a very hard insistence, in 1978 ca., when wrote Anahit
that was 'inspired' by some other idiot designes.
Concluding, some years ago - anyway, after Scelsi's death - re-exploded
the 'Scelsi Affaire' and other composers talked about it, so there
exists documentation about this 'bullshit' (I beg your pardon
for this word, but - believe me - I do not know other word to
explain not only this case but also the 'meta-pseudo-musicology'
with which it was handled). This is a testification of how it
is possibly to mystify anything (contemporary music, first of
all!).
Hope this help.
Andrea.
- -
a.rid...@mclink.it
mc9...@mclink.it
========== END QUOTE ===================
Anyone with more input on the matter is most welcome to comment here or
directly to Andrea. I suspect this is rather difficult to prove one
way or the other. Was Scelsi a hoax? Is Andrea a hoax? Is this post a hoax?
Am I a hoax? Over to you.
--
Francis Cox ............. fc...@octave.demon.co.uk
----------------
From: gta...@msn.fullfeed.com (Gregory Taylor)
Subject: Re: Scelsi: was he a fraud?
Date: 10 May 1995 09:04:20 -0500
Francis' Italian correspondent writes:
>Giacinto Scelsi was a rich man with a wide culture; otherwise,
>he was not able to convert it to practice. In 1947 he met the
>Italian composer Vieri Tosatti so Scelsi asked him to teach music
>just to spent time (rich men' things...).
Well, this part ought to be easy. Is there any Scelsi which predates '47?
I could be wrong, but doesn't his first string quartet come earlier than
that, or are we arguing that the Italian correspondent's teachers wrote
all of Scelsi's *later* [post-collapse] work? The Dutch version of the
brouhaha that I'm aware of is that Scelsi had someone *transcribe* the
later works from improvisations. There's certainly enough bile in the original
description here (along with some proper revisionist hints of "destroyed
evidence") to make me suspicious, but I'll entertain any other convergent
evidence.
But whoever *did* write the stuff put together some pretty wonderful work.
--
Viols/claw beneath our fences/at the elevation/of sound to pure/unsanctity, the
moment/of simultaneity:/airplanes seeming to collide and not colliding, the crow
alighting/in the manner of a seabird, the carbomb a more than momentary poppy.
[Donald Revell "The Children"] Gregory Taylor, Heurikon Corporation/Madison, WI
-----------------
From: mave...@cs.berkeley.edu (Vance Maverick)
Subject: Re: Scelsi: was he a fraud?
Date: 10 May 1995 20:16:09 GMT
In article <800058...@octave.demon.co.uk> Francis Cox <fc...@octave.demon.co.uk> writes:
> I have recently been in correspondence with an Italian gentleman who has
> strong doubts over the authenticity of the works of Giacinto Scelsi, the
> reclusive composer.
I first heard this, also from an Italian composer, in 1989. My
response now, like Gregory's, is "So why have I never heard any other
music resembling the stuff under Scelsi's name"? Who cares who wrote
it -- whether we accept the official version, which has Scelsi
collaborating with various composers and performers, or this purely
negative version. Has e.g. Tosatti written anything comparable in
quality to the Quattro Pezzi? If not, it sounds like Scelsi made a
real musical contribution -- whatever the mechanism.
Vance
----------------
From: no...@tkyvax.phys.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Subject: Re: Scelsi: was he a fraud?
Date: 10 May 1995 17:45:05 GMT
Hi, this is Y.Nonomura. I am a fan of Scelsi's music.
In article <800058...@octave.demon.co.uk>,
Francis Cox <fc...@octave.demon.co.uk> writes:
> I have recently been in correspondence with an Italian gentleman
> who has strong doubts over the authenticity of the works of Gi
> acinto Scelsi, the reclusive composer. My correspond
It is a famous thing that Tosatti DIRECTLY wrote Scelsi's notes
after 1944 (SQ#1) or 1947 (Le Naissance du Verb). However,
I think he still had something to do with "his" works.
The reasons are the following:
1. He at least wrote some Sonatas for piano by himself, and
styles of these works look like "his" later compositions.
2. Tosatti himself wrote some compositions with his own name,
but they are known to be traditional and dull.
As long as I know, Scelsi "composed" his works as follows:
1. Scelsi makes improvisations on a microtone-organ and records them.
2. Tosatti listens to these tapes and arranges them to compositions.
3. Scelsi checks these notes and revises them.
In fact, similar things often happen on other composers. For example,
Stockhausen. Some of his representative works were written by his
assistants---"Gruppen" by C.Cardew, "Mixture" by M.Shinohara.
Anyway, all of these things are nothig to do with the value of
"Scelsi-brand" compositions. I still think they are jewels of
this century. If you have already heard some of "his" works,
I cannot believe why you can use such a word as "bullshit".
--
Y.Nonomura
---------------
From: gta...@shell1.msn.fullfeed.com (Gregory Taylor)
Subject: Re: Scelsi: was he a fraud?
Date: 11 May 1995 02:09:37 GMT
Francis Cox has an email acquaintance who writes:
>Giacinto Scelsi was a rich man with a wide culture; otherwise,
>he was not able to convert it to practice. In 1947 he met the
>Italian composer Vieri Tosatti so Scelsi asked him to teach music
>just to spent time (rich men' things...). Tosatti started to teach
>something when he discovered that Scelsi was not able to learn
>nothing: no music theory, no piano skill, nothing... There were
>some 'sketches' of 'music' (e.g. some 'drops' on paper) or some
>dodecaphonic 'series' that someone else wrote for him (Roman Vlad
>wrote them for some explanations about Schoenberg's theory).
So I checked. The first of Scelsi's string quartets is dated 1944. This
would seem to present a problem for the account presented here, to say nothing
of the fact that the style itself is sufficiently different in its
construction as to make the "some drops on paper" part seem problematic
as well.
--
Viols/claw beneath our fences/at the elevation/of sound to pure/unsanctity, the
moment/of simultaneity:/airplanes seeming to collide and not colliding, the crow
alighting/in the manner of a seabird, the carbomb a more than momentary poppy.
[Donald Revell "The Children"] Gregory Taylor, Heurikon Corporation/Madison, WI
-------------------
From: <NE...@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject: Re: Scelsi: was he a fraud?
Date: Sat, 13 May 1995 21:05:12 EDT
It seems to me that the argument about consistency of style is a rather
strong one. Either Scelsi wrote all his own music OR one other person did,
and at least the simplest explanation is the first. After all, the same
comment applies to all the various theories about who wrote Shakespeare's
plays and sonnets ! On the other hand, when an early work of a composer
differs somewhat in style from his later music, this produces speculation
that "maybe" he didn't write it after all - one example is the Bach d-minor
Toccata and Fugue, but if Bach didn't write it, the composer had to be
someone of equal stature ! Perhaps there is a better chance when a composer
has a very limited published output in a fairly long lifetime. One example is
Boris de Schlozer, a conservatory teacher in Russia whose entire output
consists of two well-known Etudes. Josef Lhevinne told one of his pupils that
these were really written by Moriz Moszkowski, who gave them to de Schlozer in
payment of a gambling debt when he ran out of cash !! This story may not be
true either, but at least it has plausibility. Neil McKelvie
-----------------------
From: cl...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (clovis lark)
Subject: Re: Scelsi: was he a fraud?
Date: 11 May 95 17:43:49 GMT
In <3os3ff$j...@mtha.usc.edu> tab...@mtha.usc.edu (Mario Taboada) writes:
>Vance Maverick says, of Giacinto Scelsi's music:
><<I first heard this, also from an Italian composer, in 1989. My
>response now, like Gregory's, is "So why have I never heard any other
>music resembling the stuff under Scelsi's name"? Who cares who wrote
>it -- whether we accept the official version, which has Scelsi
>collaborating with various composers and performers, or this purely
>negative version. Has e.g. Tosatti written anything comparable in
>quality to the Quattro Pezzi? If not, it sounds like Scelsi made a
>real musical contribution -- whatever the mechanism.>>
> Perhaps I am old-fashioned, but the authorship of a work
>(be it musical or otherwise) *is* important. We do not yet live in
>a "world collective" where the identity of the author is immaterial.
Mario: can we be so sure? Reception for Mozart's Wind Sinfonia Concertante
has differed when the work was attributed to others. However, the quality
of an artwork changes not, no matter to whom the attribution. For example,
we know the creator of the Moses statue in Roma (Michaelangelo) but not the
creator of the Mosaics of Ravenna. Does this diminish the latter's quality?
Does it become greater if we can attach someones name to it. Many times,
we are driving hither and yon and we hear something on the radio which gives
us that special jolt and we say, who's that by? But we've already taken note
and it matters little that we know the composer to have recognized art. We
ask for the name to find more works or to get that satisfaction that it was
so and so.
>These works seem to be *at least* collaborations, in which case they
>should have multiple names attached to them. If Scelsi didn't know
>enough music to compose by himself, the omission of his "helpers"
>is close to fraudulent.
Did Rafael put the names of his studio on his works?
>I am not even going to touch on the status of a composer who not only
>could not learn the basics of his craft but did not possess any special
>ability on an instrument. I don't know of anybody who is called a
>"composer" and lacks basic proficiency both in theory and practice
>of music - actually, only Cage comes even close, and Cage apparently
>knew *some* theory (enough to talk extensively to Boulez, at least).
Cage knew a lot. He studied with Schoenberg and has interesting recollections
of counterpoint classes. That he chose a certain path was not accomplished
without a solid practical background.
>I don't think one can dismiss the accusations so easily - and these
>accusations have been made by people who seem to have nothing to gain
>by making them. This said, it would be nice to hear from somebody
>who was close to Scelsi in order to gain some perspective.
>I don't remember a case like this in the history of music. Have there
>been others?
Of course! That wonderful 18th c. practice of commissioning a composition
to be written anonymously so that you can pass it off as your own. Mozart's
Requiem is the best example. And that hoax would have worked had Mozart not
died and others gotten in on the act. Hey, there's one good reason to thank
Suessmayer for his efforts.
>regards,
>--
>Mario Taboada
>* Department of Mathematics * University of Southern California * Los Angeles
>e-mail: tab...@mtha.usc.edu
-------------------------
From: che...@Elroy.UH.EDU ("Bill Harrison (713)-743-2789")
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Scelsi: was he a fraud?
>> Perhaps I am old-fashioned, but the authorship of a work
>>(be it musical or otherwise) *is* important. We do not yet live in
>>a "world collective" where the identity of the author is immaterial.
>
>>I don't remember a case like this in the history of music. Have there
>>been others?
>
Well, an interesting example from the avant garde era concerns Stockhausen's
*Aus den Sieben Tagen*. This was KS's first effort at "intuitative
music," and the scores simply consist of verbal "mood instructions"...
The controversy arose as to who was responsible for a given performance
(every performance is different). Was it Stockhausen himself, or was it
the musicians doing the "improvisations," or a combination of the two?
Stockhausen very strongly felt that he himself was solely responsible
for the realizations, and the bad feelings that ensued between KS and
the performers led to the break up of the original Stockhausen Group.
Vinko Globokar felt so strongly about it that he refused to be acknowledged
as the trombonist on the DGG recording... For all that, *Aus den Sieben
Tagen* is undoubtedly a milestone in musical history.
Another poster already mentioned *Carre*, for which Cardew doesn't seem
to get his due.
A counter example is *Double Music* by Cage and Lou Harrison, which has
always been rightly regarded as a truly joint effort...
Bill
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Bill Harrison -- University of Houston, TX -- CHE...@JETSON.UH.EDU |
| Beethoven. Less boring than Brahms. -- Boulez |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
---------------------
From: mave...@cs.berkeley.edu (Vance Maverick)
Subject: Re: Scelsi: was he a fraud?
Date: 12 May 1995 22:23:02 GMT
In article <3os3ff$j...@mtha.usc.edu> tab...@mtha.usc.edu (Mario Taboada) writes:
> Perhaps I am old-fashioned, but the authorship of a work
> (be it musical or otherwise) *is* important. We do not yet live in
> a "world collective" where the identity of the author is immaterial.
Hmm. I don't care, really, who wrote the _Quattro Pezzi_. If Tosatti
had an important hand in it, by all means let's give him credit. What
baffles me, though, is the attitude of my original informant: it was
literally impossible to discuss the music with him, because of his
disgust at the story of its authorship. The music was beneath his
notice.
And don't take the posting at face value even as a description of
Scelsi's musical training -- one gets a far different story, true or
not, from the liner notes to the CDs.
Vance
---------------------------
From: Francis Cox <fc...@octave.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Scelsi: was he a fraud?
Date: 14 May 1995 13:35:18 +0100
In article <mccombtmD...@netcom.com>
mcc...@best.com "Todd Michel McComb" writes:
> Scelsi studied with pupils of Scriabin & Berg. He was also a virtuoso
> pianist. Or so people claim. Are they making it up?
The various statements that:
(a) he had no practical intrumental skill [Andrea], and
(b) he was a virtuoso pianist [Todd]
are certainly incompatible.
Thus a resolution of this question at least, if not the authorship question,
should be achievable. Typically, a virtuoso pianist has:
- one or more piano teachers
- studied at an academic institution
- passed examinations
- given private or public performances of standard repertoire before
audiences
Documented evidence for any of these would support the pro-Scelsi view,
even though Scelsi is claimed to have a very unorthodox musical training.
--
Francis Cox ............. fc...@octave.demon.co.uk
-------------------------------
From: mcc...@best.com (Todd Michel McComb)
Subject: Re: Scelsi: was he a fraud?
Date: 14 May 1995 12:30:39 -0700
In article <800452...@octave.demon.co.uk>,
Francis Cox <fc...@octave.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>The various statements that:
>(a) he had no practical intrumental skill [Andrea], and
>(b) he was a virtuoso pianist [Todd]
>are certainly incompatible.
I am only quoting Harry Halbreich (modern musicologist) for my
statement; I have no direct experience of Scelsi's piano playing.
But, as I said in the last message, since some of the greatest
musicians of our time were able to study with Scelsi and conclude
that he was a brilliant composer, there is little that could possibly
sway me -- into even considering a different position, let alone
adopting one. Or, to put it another way, Irvine Arditti has far
more credibility with me than anyone who claims differently about
Scelsi. Not to mention what my own ears tells me....
>Thus a resolution of this question at least, if not the authorship question,
>should be achievable. Typically, a virtuoso pianist has:
>- one or more piano teachers
>- studied at an academic institution
>- passed examinations
>- given private or public performances of standard repertoire before
> audiences
Your points 2 & 3 have nothing whatsoever to with being a virtuoso
pianist, point 1 only marginally. However, point 4 is crucial,
although the "standard" part is somewhat ambiguous.
"Scelsi already revealed his extraordinary musical gifts as a child
in free improvisation on the piano. He studied composition with
Giacinto Sallustio in Rome.... He worked in Geneva with Egon
Koehler who introduced him to Scriabin's compositional system; he
studied twelve-tone music in Vienna in 1935-36 with Walter Klein,
a student of Arnold Schoenberg...."
--Adriano Cremonese
"Scelsi was a first class pianist: equally as an outstanding virtuoso
and as an inspired extemporiser. Many of his piano works are
revised and reworked improvisations taken from tape recordings he
himself made, the scoring then being carried out with the collaboration
of a copyist or assistant, a working procedure which has given rise
to much misunderstanding (as regards the authorship of his music)
-- even though similar examples exist in musical history, from
Domenico Scarlatti to Janacek. ... Scelsi's piano works are still
mostly unexplored.... But it is merely a matter of time before
they take their place in every pianist's repertoire, not only for
their artistic value, but, conceived as they are by a virtuoso
player, for their admirable pianistic qualities."
--Harry Halbreich
"...he later invited me to his house to read some scores. ...
While listening to tapes, a strange sensation welled up in my body;
I was overcome by heat and experienced a loss of balance. ... This
was the most powerful music I'd ever heard. ... He expressed his
ambiguity towards publishing his music,.... I had the privilege
of working with Giacinto for years on these compositions.... During
the two years I spent in daily contact with him, while helping to
organize his complete musical output for eventual publication, I
had the opportunity to study the chamber music and orchestral
scores."
--Frances-Marie Uitti
"Poetry and music mourn for Giacinto Scelsi, that creator
extraordinary...."
--Paul Mefano
Todd Michel McComb
mcc...@best.com http://www.best.com/~mccomb/home.html
Support the Arts & Humanities news hierarchy! Web or email for details.
Andrea Riderelli
(?) prompt help.
Second, do not blame me please, if I will respond in Italian instead
of English. That is because English is not my first language so
I do not want to be misinterpreted.
So.
********************
********************
Francis Cox wrote (r.c.m. 135658):
> I have recently been in correspondence with an Italian gentleman
who has strong doubts over the authenticity of the works of Giacinto
Scelsi, the reclusive composer.
**********
Io non ho alcun *dubbio*. Le mie sono *certezze* basate su ottima
conoscenza del caso!
********************
********************
Gregory Tailor wrote (r.c.m. 135765):
> Well, this part ought to be easy. Is there any Scelsi which
predates '47? I could be wrong, but doesn't his first string quartet
come earlier than that, or are we arguing that the Italian correspondent's
teachers wrote all of Scelsi's *later* [post-collapse] work?
**********
Infatti non fu Tosatti a scrivere le composizioni *antecedenti*
il 1947, ma - molto probabilmente - Sallustio (come gia' si sapeva
a suo tempo). L'unico intervento di Tosatti su composizioni precedenti
il 1947 e' il *make-up* della 'Le Naissance du Verb' per presentarla
al concorso del S.I.M.C. Mi sembra inutile dire che quello che
Tosatti trovo' tra le sue mani era un cumulo di incongruenze messe
insieme senza la minima cognizione di causa.
********************
> The Dutch version of the brouhaha that I'm aware of is that
Scelsi had someone *transcribe* the later works from improvisations.
There's certainly enough bile in the original description here
(along with some proper revisionist hints of "destroyed evidence")
to make me suspicious, but I'll entertain any other convergent
evidence.
**********
Non esiste *bile*, ne' *suggerimenti revisionisti* in quello che
dico. Il fatto e' che nessuno e' andato a verificare i manoscritti,
semplicemente perche' *non esistono* manoscritti originali di
mano scelsiana. Le tanto citate registrazioni delle improvvisazioni
scelsiane sull'Ondiolina (questo e' il nome dello strumento musicale
usato allora), qualora verranno ascoltate, sveleranno una *audacissima*
:-) somiglianza con quello che puo' ottenere un bambino di 1anno
lasciato solo a giocare con uno strumento.
********************
> But whoever *did* write the stuff put together some pretty wonderful
work.
**********
De gustibus...
********************
********************
Y.Nonomura wrote (r.c.m. 135799):
> 1. He at least wrote some Sonatas for piano by himself, and
styles of these works look like "his" later compositions.
2. Tosatti himself wrote some compositions with his own name,
but they are known to be traditional and dull.
**********
Punto 1). Quello delle sonate per pianoforte fa parte del periodo
'percussivo', nel senso che Scelsi accendeva il registratore e
poi iniziava a gettare le mani sulla tastiera del piano esattamente
come fanno i bambini incuriositi dal suono dello strumento e dal
nuovo gioco.
Punto 2). Tosatti non ha scritto *qualche* composizione con il
proprio nome, ma:
- 1 Opera teatrale "Il sistema della dolcezza" (una delle opere
piu' rappresentate nei teatri Italiani appartenti a un compositore
contemporaneo!).
- 4 Drammi musicali "Il Giudizio Universale", "La Fiera delle
Meraviglie", "L'Isola del Tesoro" e "Il Paradiso e il Poeta".
- 1 Cantata per soli, voce recitante, coro e orchestra "La Partita
a Pugni".
- 1 Requiem per soli, coro e orchestra.
- 2 Concerti per strumento solista e orchestra "Concerto Iperciclico
per clarinetto" e "Concerto per Viola"
- Il "Gedichtkonzert" per soprano e orchestra da camera.
- Il "Divertimento" per orchestra da camera.
- Un Quartetto per archi.
- Due sonate per pianoforte "La Sonata del Sole" e la "Deutsche
Sonate".
- La sonatina per violino e pianoforte.
- Vari Lieder per voce e pianoforte.
- Altre composizioni.
Sarebbe molto interessante sapere se Lei ha ascoltato la musica
di Tosatti. Le ho fornito il catalogo. Il commento da Lei riportato
"Tosatti himself wrote some compositions with his own name, but
they are known to be traditional and dull." sembra *copiato* da
coloro che hanno tutto l'interesse a difendere l'immagine di Scelsi
e che non hanno ascoltato una singola nota della musica di Tosatti.
********************
As long as I know, Scelsi "composed" his works as follows:
1. Scelsi makes improvisations on a microtone-organ and records
them.
2. Tosatti listens to these tapes and arranges them to compositions.
3. Scelsi checks these notes and revises them.
**********
Punto 1). Gia' spiegato precedentemente.
Punto 2). Vero, ma solo in parte. Di fatto in questo periodo e
per questo lavoro collaboro' anche un pianista Italiano, il Maestro
Sergio Cafaro.
Punto 3). Vero all' 1 per cento (1%).
********************
> If you have already heard some of "his" works, I cannot believe
why you can use such a word as "bullshit".
**********
Devo dire innanzi tutto che conosco bene la musica *di* Scelsi.
E devo aggiungere che la trovo estremamente infantile, come estremamente
infantile e' pure l'atteggiamento *naive* di coloro che no possono,
non vogliono o non sanno superare l'adolescenza per diventare
persone adulte. Fare di Scelsi uno tra i *compositori piu' importanti
della seconda meta' del nostro secolo*, specialmente alla luce
dei fatti, mi sembra una mancanza di spirito.
********************
********************
Vance Maverick wrote (r.c.m. 135818):
> Who cares who wrote it -- whether we accept the official version,
which has Scelsi collaborating with various composers and performers,
or this purely negative version. Has e.g. Tosatti written anything
comparable in quality to the Quattro Pezzi?
**********
Una domanda: Lei e' un compositore? Ha mai scritto una qualche
musica? Sa cosa significa pensare la musica, scrivere la musica,
trasmettere la musica?
La mia non e' una *versione negativa* dei fatti. E' semplicemente
una considerazione sulla musica, sul fare musica da parte di una
persona che la musica la fa per davvero e che quindi conosce le
problematiche inerenti.
Tosatti *non* ha scritto niente di *comparabile* con quella che
ha scritto per (o meglio, al posto di) Scelsi semplicemente per
il fatto che quando scriveva le sue composizioni, Tosatti era
il 'Musicista Tosatti', mentre quando scriveva *al posto di* Scelsi,
Tosatti scriveva *da* musicista competente cercando di rendere
eseguibili cose che non avevano attinenza con la musica.
Tra l'altro, chi ha orecchie e sensibilita' per accorgersene,
chi ascoltasse l'intera produzione *scelsiana* riconoscerebbe
subito quali sono i pezzi scritti da Tosatti e quali non. Certo,
e' questione di orecchie e, soprattutto, sensibilita' (merce
rara in questo mondo...).
********************
********************
Gregory Taylor wrote (r.c.m. 135864):
> So I checked. The first of Scelsi's string quartets is dated
1944. This would seem to present a problem for the account presented
here, to say nothing of the fact that the style itself is sufficiently
different in its
construction as to make the "some drops on paper" part seem problematic
as well.
**********
Ho gia' risposto che prima di Tosatti, cioe' prima del 1947, c'era
stato sicuramente qualcun'altro (probabilmente Sallustio).
********************
********************
Todd Michel McComb wrote (r.c.m. 136031):
> "At least collaborations" in what possible sense? You think
that having someone else notate music from recordings is deserving
of equal credit? Sheesh... I could find a thousand first-year
music students who could do that.
**********
Il problema e' che Tosatti non ha semplicemente *trascritto* su
carta il contenuto delle registrazioni. Le ha letteralmente *ricreate*.
Come prova basta ascoltare le registrazioni originali e confrontarle
con la partitura.
********************
> Scelsi studied with pupils of Scriabin & Berg.
**********
Allora anche io posso dire di aver studiato con Karajan, Bernstein
e Sawallish e tanti altri direttori d'orchestra semplicemente
per il fatto che ho parlato con loro di musica in generale e di
problemi tecnici in particolare (e' proprio vero. Ho avuto la
fortuna di parlare con loro!). Il mio buon gusto, pero', mi dice
di non vantarmi di questo (anche perche' non vedo il motivo di
vanto), al contrario dei tantissimi mediocri che non fanno altro
che sbandierare cose non corrispondenti al vero. Ho semplicemente
parlato, discusso con loro; *non* ho studiato con loro (anche
se ho imparato molto da quelle discussioni).
********************
> He was also a virtuoso pianist.
**********
Ma chi l'ha detto?
********************
> Or so people claim. Are they making it up?
**********
Se Lei sapesse quanti incompetenti, quanti mediocri parlano senza
sapere di cosa stanno parlando. Quanti mentono per interesse...
********************
> How about petty jealousy? These people probably derided the
man as a dilettante for his entire career, and now he's considered
one of the most important composer of the later 20th century.
Funny, huh?
**********
Geloso? E perche'? Il fatto che Scelsi sia adesso considerato
da alcuni come uno dei piu' importanti compositori della seconda
meta' del ventesimo secolo, e' semplicemente una mistificazione
come tante altre. Consideri che le fonti primarie di tale mistificazione
sono le prime a sapere che Scelsi non valeva un soldo.
********************
> But, let's see... just in a recent Tower Classical Pulse, Irvine
Arditti talks briefly about preparing the quartets with Scelsi.
Is Arditti gullible? A liar? You decide. Frankly, I think
Arditti has enough good judgement that he could lose half of it
and still be a brilliant man.
And there's also the testimony of Marianne Schroeder, Francis
Marie Uitti, Joelle Leandre, et. al.
**********
Queste sono appunto alcune tra le persone che hanno *speculato*
sul caso Scelsi. Vede, Signor McComb, non so che rapporto abbia
Lei con la musica fatta seriamente, ma - per quanto mi riguarda
- lavorando tutti i giorni accanto ai musicisti, ne conosco un
po' la psicologia.
Spesso, anzi quasi sempre, e' buona cosa - per un interprete mediocre
- *attaccarsi* ad uno sconosciuto (molto probabilmente mediocre
anch'esso) e difenderlo strenuamente, pur di giustificare la propria
*inutilita'*. Questo fa di se stessi un *Messia* e fa si' che
si dimentichino pian piano i presupposti da cui si era partiti
e si veda nell'*autore* il nuovo genio del nostro secolo. La storia
dell'arte ci da innumerevoli esempi di cio' e, come al solito,
sara' il tempo a fare giustizia delle mistificazioni.
********************
********************
Todd Michel McComb wrote (r.c.m. 136324):
> I am only quoting Harry Halbreich (modern musicologist) for
my statement; I have no direct experience of Scelsi's piano playing.
But, as I said in the last message, since some of the greatest
musicians of our time were able to study with Scelsi and conclude
that he was a brilliant composer, there is little that could possibly
sway me -- into even considering a different position, let alone
adopting one. Or, to put it another way, Irvine Arditti has far
more credibility with me than anyone who claims differently about
Scelsi. Not to mention what my own ears tells me....
**********
Harry Halbreich e' appunto la persona che ha costruito la sua
carriera sulla truffa Scelsi e che oggi ha creato questa mistificazione.
Da testimonianza diretta Le posso dire che preso in maniera informale,
Halbreich Le potra' confermare che l'evidenza da me citata (cosa
che ha gia' fatto almeno una volta).
Sebbene io sia d'accordo che i gusti non si discutono, sarei curioso
di sapere quali sono quei musicisti, tra i piu' grandi del nostro
tempo, ai quali Lei fa riferimento.
********************
> even though similar examples exist in musical history, from
Domenico Scarlatti to Janacek. [Harry Halbreich]
**********
|-D |-D |-D Una delle cose piu' esilaranti che abbia mai sentito!
. Mai fu data una piu' grande ed efficace prova dell'incompetenza
musicale di una persona!
Si potrebbe continuare all'infinito. Non ne ho voglia e neppure
il tempo. Parlare di musica e' molto bello (mi spiace che questa
non sia stata l'occasione), pero' questo e' possibile solo tra
persone (non necessariamente musicisti) che abbiano una cultura
*vera* e non *nozionistica* (il che significa che non sono esclusi
i contadini, per esempio...), una maturita' interiore di livello
adeguato e soprattutto una apertura mentale e spirituale notevole.
Il parlare a dei nuovi "naive" e' del tutto inutile.
Questo e' quanto.
Cordiali saluti,
Andrea Riderelli.
Todd Michel McComb
Andrea Riderelli <MC9...@mclink.it> wrote:
>I wrote:
>>But, let's see... just in a recent Tower Classical Pulse, Irvine
>>Arditti talks briefly about preparing the quartets with Scelsi.
>>Is Arditti gullible? A liar? You decide.
>Queste sono appunto alcune tra le persone che hanno *speculato*
>sul caso Scelsi. Vede, Signor McComb, non so che rapporto abbia
>Lei con la musica fatta seriamente, ma - per quanto mi riguarda
>- lavorando tutti i giorni accanto ai musicisti, ne conosco un
>po' la psicologia.
>Spesso, anzi quasi sempre, e' buona cosa - per un interprete mediocre
>- *attaccarsi* ad uno sconosciuto (molto probabilmente mediocre
>anch'esso) e difenderlo strenuamente, pur di giustificare la propria
>*inutilita'*. Questo fa di se stessi un *Messia* e fa si' che
>si dimentichino pian piano i presupposti da cui si era partiti
>e si veda nell'*autore* il nuovo genio del nostro secolo. La storia
>dell'arte ci da innumerevoli esempi di cio' e, come al solito,
> sara' il tempo a fare giustizia delle mistificazioni.
This simply is not sufficient.
It is true that my knowledge of Scelsi is only second-hand (and by
listening to the music, of course). However, you have given not
the slightest reason for believing your version above that
of someone like Irvine Arditti. You can say what you want about
Arditti, but he is one of the leading interpreters of modern music
and whether or not he *chose* to perform Scelsi's music is only
incidental to his career.
And that is exactly why I *first* mentioned Arditti and only then
Halbreich, because as you say the latter is not so lacking in
self-interest.
Vance Maverick
> > Who cares who wrote it -- whether we accept the official version,
> which has Scelsi collaborating with various composers and performers,
> or this purely negative version. Has e.g. Tosatti written anything
> comparable in quality to the Quattro Pezzi?
> **********
> Una domanda: Lei e' un compositore? Ha mai scritto una qualche
> musica? Sa cosa significa pensare la musica, scrivere la musica,
> trasmettere la musica?
I'm afraid I don't have enough Italian to get all this. You're asking
whether *I'm* a composer? Yes, in the sense that I've studied
extensively and written pieces that have been performed, though I am
not a professional. On the other hand, why does it matter? Surely
the criterion for music is how it sounds to listeners! We may differ
here on whether music is to be regarded as (a composer's) thought or
(a listener's) experience; for me, even as a composer, the answer is
experience, always.
> La mia non e' una *versione negativa* dei fatti. E' semplicemente
> una considerazione sulla musica [...]
No, you said nothing about the music itself, only about its origin.
As far as I'm concerned, it could have been written by monkeys; the
important question is what we make *as listeners* of e.g. the Ensemble
2e2m recording with the _Quattro Pezzi_, _Okanagon_, etc. IMHO this
is one of the great recordings of modern music. When the facts are
agreed on, this should affect how we credit the pieces, not whether
they're good.
> Tosatti *non* ha scritto niente di *comparabile* con quella che
> ha scritto per (o meglio, al posto di) Scelsi semplicemente per
> il fatto che quando scriveva le sue composizioni, Tosatti era
> il 'Musicista Tosatti', mentre quando scriveva *al posto di* Scelsi,
> Tosatti scriveva *da* musicista competente cercando di rendere
> eseguibili cose che non avevano attinenza con la musica.
Sorry if I offended you with my invidious syntax. ;-) What Tosatti
piece strikes you as especially rewarding? How can I get hold of a
recording? (The UC library system has scores of the Divertimento and
one of the operas, but that's it.)
> Tra l'altro, chi ha orecchie e sensibilita' per accorgersene,
> chi ascoltasse l'intera produzione *scelsiana* riconoscerebbe
> subito quali sono i pezzi scritti da Tosatti e quali non. Certo,
> e' questione di orecchie e, soprattutto, sensibilita' (merce
> rara in questo mondo...).
There's also the little question of access to the music, doubtless
unfairly biased toward Scelsi here in the US. (For the sake of
argument, it would be more humane to assume I have adequate
sensibilita', so let's.) If, through Tosatti, I can find more music
like the Scelsi I admire (e.g. _Anahit_), I will be very pleased.
Vance
PS. The article numbers you used for reference aren't very useful --
they only reflect the ordering on a particular server.
Francis Cox
Re Scelsi's supposed technique of improvisation -> recording ->
transcription, do any of the tapes used in this process still exist? I'm
sure they would be very valuable for several reasons. They would answer the
question of whether GS had technique or not, and would give another angle on
the scores as we are obliged to see them through the transcriber's
perceptions. Should be worth a good few $$$ if released as CD's too: Scelsi
plays Scelsi!
Of course, determining *their* authenticity is another can of worms!