Tommasini pleads for reason at the Philharmonic
Tony Movshon
Tommasini pleads with the Philharmonic not to appoint Maazel as
Music Director to succeed Masur. He suggests using people like
Davis and Boulez as interim Music Directors, giving time for the
likes of Robertson or Nagano to become known enough to take the
job. In a none-too-thinly veiled stick-and-carrot message, he
tells the Philharmonic that the critics would make the right new
young Music Director into a star, but that they would flay Maazel
and make everyone long for the days of Masur.
A strong piece. I wonder if it will have an impact.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/29/arts/29NOTE.html
--
Tony Movshon
mov...@nyu.edu
vaneyes
> In an unusually frank piece in the NY Times this morning, Anthony
> Tommasini pleads with the Philharmonic not to appoint Maazel as
> Music Director to succeed Masur. He suggests using people like
> Davis and Boulez as interim Music Directors, giving time for the
> likes of Robertson or Nagano to become known enough to take the
> job. In a none-too-thinly veiled stick-and-carrot message, he
> tells the Philharmonic that the critics would make the right new
> young Music Director into a star, but that they would flay Maazel
> and make everyone long for the days of Masur.
>
> A strong piece. I wonder if it will have an impact.
Makes sense to me. Neither Maazel's recent displays, nor his rumored
$3M + salary can be beneficial for the NYPO, although for the latter,
money is no problem for this organization.
I think Salonen and MTT are happy where they are, in locales and
careers. I haven't heard any overtures from either camp, to think
differently.
I'm very high on the talents Nagano and Robertson. No doubt the NYPO
powers think it's too early for them. It won't be long before both land
something significant. Wouldn't be surprised if Nagano is heir-apparent
to Levine at The Met.
Regards
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
David S. Phipps
Does anybody have any insight as to why Danielle Gatti does not seem to
be getting any mentions for American music director positions?
--
David S. Phipps
Hobbs, NM, USA
vaneyes
> Does anybody have any insight as to why Danielle Gatti does not seem
to
> be getting any mentions for American music director positions?
I occasionally notice his name in musical chairs articles, often with
Gergiev's (maybe it's a "G" thing), but neither strike me as being
interested in a North American move at the moment. There were rumors
about Gergiev for The Met a year or so ago.
I recall a couple of years ago when Gatti had a hot CD or two, he was
hyped as the second-coming for his NYC concerts. The reviews were
mixed, and his star kinda cooled after that. Thielemann's has cooled
big-time, as well as Harding's. Those things happen.
Gergiev and Gatti should land something big in the not-too-distant
future.
Regards
Eric Nagamine
> Does anybody have any insight as to why Danielle Gatti does not seem to
> be getting any mentions for American music director positions?
>
I saw a rehearsal of his with the NYPO last spring and came away most
unimpressed with his rehearsal style. Too much talking and too little
results. Frankly, the Philharmonic musicians looked bored and they
seemed less than interested.
--
-----------
Aloha and Mahalo,
Eric Nagamine
Alain Dagher
Tony Movshon wrote:
> In an unusually frank piece in the NY Times this morning, Anthony
> Tommasini pleads with the Philharmonic not to appoint Maazel as
> Music Director to succeed Masur.
>
He sounds like a sports columnist talking about the perennially
under-performing local team. The last coach was a disciplinarian, now we
need a motivator.
Alain
rkha...@adnc.com
one performance, but does his BRSO appt. prevent him from being
considered any further? Is his health good enough after his reported
heart trouble?
Gergiev sounds interesting too, but the problem with many of these
possibilities is that they are truly overcommitted.
One thing that I agree with the article on is that NY can set an example
by picking a talented and dedicated young star who will be bold and not
draw a high salary to begin with. Perhaps this would be the way to make
the music count for more than it does today and we can put conductors'
manes and other superficial things down the priority list. NYC, of all
places, should have little trouble in raising funds so as not to depend
on box office sales to sustain operations, and the "big guns" could
always be invitedto guest conduct.
Boulez sounds like an intriguing choice, but he gave me the impression
of being very happy with his European engagements and his CSO/Cleveland
commitments. I doubt he could devote much time to the NYPO, but I could
be wrong.
Robertson sounds like a nice choice. Has Vanska ever conducted the
NYPO? I vote for young talent.
Ramon Khalona
Matthew B. Tepper
<3A75A9B7...@hawaii.rr.com>:
>"David S. Phipps" wrote:
>
>> Does anybody have any insight as to why Danielle Gatti does not seem to
>> be getting any mentions for American music director positions?
>>
>I saw a rehearsal of his with the NYPO last spring and came away most
>unimpressed with his rehearsal style. Too much talking and too little
>results. Frankly, the Philharmonic musicians looked bored and they
>seemed less than interested.
Jarl Sigurd should perk his ears up if I remark that this anecdotally seems
similar to Mengelberg's rehearsal style there -- lots of talk, talk, talk.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm
My main music page --- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/berlioz.htm
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
"Compassionate Conservatism?" * "Tight Slacks?" * "Jumbo Shrimp?"
Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)
night before the official "dress" of L.A. Opera's Aida - it
should have been past the "talking" stage by then!)
vaneyes
rkha...@adnc.com wrote:
> I really don't understand why Jansons is being ruled out on the basis
on
> one performance, but does his BRSO appt. prevent him from being
> considered any further? Is his health good enough after his reported
> heart trouble?
>
> Gergiev sounds interesting too, but the problem with many of these
> possibilities is that they are truly overcommitted.
> One thing that I agree with the article on is that NY can set an
example
> by picking a talented and dedicated young star who will be bold and
not
> draw a high salary to begin with. Perhaps this would be the way to
make
> the music count for more than it does today and we can put conductors'
> manes and other superficial things down the priority list. NYC, of all
> places, should have little trouble in raising funds so as not to
depend
> on box office sales to sustain operations, and the "big guns" could
>
> Boulez sounds like an intriguing choice, but he gave me the impression
> of being very happy with his European engagements and his
CSO/Cleveland
> commitments. I doubt he could devote much time to the NYPO, but I
could
> be wrong.
>
> Robertson sounds like a nice choice. Has Vanska ever conducted the
> NYPO? I vote for young talent.
>
> Ramon Khalona
I'm glad Jansons isn't in the running. The man doesn't deserve the
NYPO's behind-the-scenes b.s. Who does? Maazel? heh heh
With what's available, I agree with your young MD and big-gun guesting
scenario (and if the young MD was smart, he'd stick around and learn
during those guestings), but I don't think the NYPO ego can stoop that
low. Chances are pretty good that they'll be taking on a "name" maestro
with his better days behind him, and complaining about him in six
months time.
Regards
Michael B
He played 1st horn. The next year he took of for England to study
conducting. I always thought he was a good musician.
His horn playing was excellent. So good, in fact, that I wondered why he
quit music to become a conductor.
-Michael
Eric Nagamine
>
> Sounds like what I saw of Domingo! (At a rehearsal the
> night before the official "dress" of L.A. Opera's Aida - it
> should have been past the "talking" stage by then!)
I suspect his inexperience has something to do with it. I sat
practically behind him at the MET during a performance last spring and
noticed his stick technique left alot to be desired. A friend who has
played under him didn't like his conducting either.
paulgo...@my-deja.com
"Michael B" <nos...@nospamplease.com> wrote:
> Wow, I knew David Robertson when we both played in a youth orchestra
in L.A.
> He played 1st horn. The next year he took of for England to study
> conducting. I always thought he was a good musician.
>
> His horn playing was excellent. So good, in fact, that I wondered why
he
> quit music to become a conductor.
Interesting - I can't recall another example of a conductor who
formerly played horn. (Barry Tuckwell definitely should have stuck to
his horn, judging from a couple of IMP discs from the early CD era.)
--
Paul Goldstein
Nicolas Hodges
>Wow, I knew David Robertson when we both played in a youth orchestra in L.A.
>He played 1st horn. The next year he took of for England to study
>conducting. I always thought he was a good musician.
>
>His horn playing was excellent. So good, in fact, that I wondered why he
>quit music to become a conductor.
David Robertson is a very fine musician, and certainly deserves a good
post. But would an orchestra with a relatively curtailed repertoire be
appropriate for someone like him? (I don't know the details of US
orchestral repertoires...)
--
Nic
greg
is Mazell's style, in your opinion? I was given a recording of his
Mahler's 1st which was absolutely flat, noticeably poor. I am
assuming it was just an outstanding situation.
Also, I think Bernstein is over-rated. So he reached into the
community. So he was a good ambassador. A handsome young guy, he
made good print. So what? I liked Masur and I am going to miss
him. They've played two Bernstein compositions in the past two
years that I have heard at the NYPO and each one of them sounds like
50s pop music with a salsa beat, like lounge music. Oh, and there
was a third celebrating the birth of the state of Israel or
something like that. I couldn't wait for it to end. I'm going to
miss a guy who values heart-warming music, instead of that
new-fangled statist, angry communist stuff of the last few
generations. Like Tippett. Have you ever heard his 'Child of our
Time'? Can you imagine that kind of thing over and over? Those
huge orchestras, dominated by percussion, without any hint of
passion in the playing. Everything reduced to isolated guttural
atonal statements. Yikes.
Marksten
Tommasini pleads with the Philharmonic not to appoint Maazel as
Music Director to succeed Masur. >>
Frank - and beans! I've found Tommasini to be uninformed and unreliable in the
past, especially when they send him to review Met performances.
As the NY Times ceased to be taken seriously as a classical music review
journal years ago (at least in the musician circles that I travel in),
Tommasini's latest blather was worth little more than a chuckle. I doubt his
screed will hold any sway whatsoever with the powers that are at the NYPO.
As far as the points AT attempts to make in his piece - certainly the NYPO
would be ill-advised to take on Boulez, at least if his latest series of DGG
recordings are any measure of his current ideas. Most of them suck, and I've
been a Boulez fan of long standing so it hurts me to say that. Colin Davis
regularly turns down posts in the USA as he prefers to be with his family in
Europe. The others mentioned in the article either have little to no track
record or have already seen their stars fading in the light of more than a
one-appearance sensation.
Maazel, on the other hand, is a seasoned orchestra builder and a conductor with
international credentials. Anyone listening with an open mind to his latest
efforts on BMG can't help but be impressed with the second wind he has found
interpretively. I heard both of his NYPO concerts in November - they were
extremely well-played and received. The orchestra clearly loved him. His
Tristan at Salzburg this past summer was simply glorious.
I'd say that far from being a poor man's replacement for Masur, Maazel is
clearly the most-qualified and, dare I say, most exciting choice the NYPO could
hope for at this point in time.
Bravo, Maazel!
Mark Stenroos
Simon Roberts
: Wow, I knew David Robertson when we both played in a youth orchestra in L.A.
: He played 1st horn. The next year he took of for England to study
: conducting. I always thought he was a good musician.
: His horn playing was excellent. So good, in fact, that I wondered why he
: quit music to become a conductor.
I love the notion that becoming a conductor entails quitting music....
Seriously, though, what's his repertoire? I've never heard him conduct
anything and indeed had never heard *of* him until his name was mentioned
last year as a possible Sawallisch successor.
Simon
Mike Painter
(Simon Roberts) wrote:
I've heard him 4 times in SF, first time in 1997. I was quite impressed,
both in terms of programming and results:
Messiaen: LÄ…Ascension
Walton: Viola Concerto
Beethoven: Symphony #5
----
Gabireli: Sonata pianÄ… e forte
Vivier: Siddhartha
Bernd Alois Zimmerman: Stille und Umkehr
Beethoven: Violin Concerto (Repin)
----
Keuris: Sinfonia
Dvorak: Violin Concerto (Midori)
Stravinsky: Petrushka (1911)
----
Ravel: Mother Goose Suite
Mozart: Piano Concerto #20 (Ohlsson)
Schubert: Symphony #5
cheers,
Mike
To respond via e-mail, remove * from address.
Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)
music"!!! (Au contraire - it's far more difficult than
simply playing a single instrument.)
Matthew B. Tepper
*cough*(Gunther Schuller)
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
Sol L. Siegel
>Michael B (Nos...@nospamplease.com) wrote:
>: Wow, I knew David Robertson when we both played in a youth
>: orchestra in L.A.
>: He played 1st horn. The next year he took of for England to study
>: conducting. I always thought he was a good musician.
>
>: His horn playing was excellent. So good, in fact, that I wondered
>: why he quit music to become a conductor.
>
>I love the notion that becoming a conductor entails quitting music...
That joke's almost as old as "How do you get to Carnegie Hall?".
>Seriously, though, what's his repertoire? I've never heard him
>conduct anything and indeed had never heard *of* him until his
>name was mentioned last year as a possible Sawallisch
>successor.
A remarkable Shostakovich 6 last year, in which he employed
something resembling the old Philly Sound. This year, Debussy's
Images (only the Orchestra's second complete rendition ever) in
which he evoked magical sounds if not a whole lot of tension;
a lovely Falla Noches; and a really stunning La Valse.
He also talks very well about music, in unaccented English, which
could be an incalculable asset for an orchestra that wants to
re-establish its connections with the community at large. So of
course he works mostly in Europe...
-Sol Siegel, Philadelphia, PA
--------------------------
That which does not kill you can make a good story.
------------------------
(Remove "junkfree" from the end of my e-mail address to respond.)
vaneyes
> Frank - and beans! I've found Tommasini to be uninformed and
unreliable in the
> past, especially when they send him to review Met performances.
Well, he's not reviewing much music here. What's scary though, is that
he's using Lebrecht information. But if that reported $3.5M salary for
Maazel is correct, I'll forgive him. That needs to be pointed out.
> As the NY Times ceased to be taken seriously as a classical music
review
> journal years ago (at least in the musician circles that I travel in),
What are some good ones? I read a Washington Post M6 review the other
day that was pretty bad. What/who should I have a reasonable amount of
faith in?
> I doubt his
> screed will hold any sway whatsoever with the powers that are at the
NYPO.
This probably won't matter.
> As far as the points AT attempts to make in his piece - certainly the
NYPO
> would be ill-advised to take on Boulez, at least if his latest series
of DGG
> recordings are any measure of his current ideas. Most of them suck,
and I've
> been a Boulez fan of long standing so it hurts me to say that.
I agree on each point.
Colin Davis
> regularly turns down posts in the USA as he prefers to be with his
family in
> Europe.
Not the only one. That's the dilemma. Boston would love Haitink as a MD.
The others mentioned in the article either have little to no track
> record or have already seen their stars fading in the light of more
than a
> one-appearance sensation.
>
> Maazel, on the other hand, is a seasoned orchestra builder and a
conductor with
> international credentials. Anyone listening with an open mind to his
latest
> efforts on BMG can't help but be impressed with the second wind he
has found
> interpretively. I heard both of his NYPO concerts in November - they
were
> extremely well-played and received. The orchestra clearly loved him.
So Maazel's a two-appearance sensation?
I don't think his recent RCA recordings are good value for those who
hafta pay for them. None offer an advantage over what's currently
available at a lower price. A 4 CD set of overall so-so R. Strauss? No
thanks. Debussy and Stravinsky by the VPO? No thanks, no thanks.
His
> Tristan at Salzburg this past summer was simply glorious.
Couldn't make it.
>
> I'd say that far from being a poor man's replacement for Masur,
Maazel is
> clearly the most-qualified and, dare I say, most exciting choice the
NYPO could
> hope for at this point in time.
At best, I'll say he'll be an even replacement for.
In other words, it's spinning-wheels for the NYPO.
Regards
Marc Perman
"Alain Dagher" <al...@bic.mni.mcgill.ca> wrote in message
news:3A75BB37...@bic.mni.mcgill.ca...
Bill Parcells is available.
Marc Perman
Josh Klein
website, 7pm tonight.
--
Josh Klein
Amherst College
evan johnson
Roberts) wrote:
Well, I happen to be listening to him right now conducting Manoury's
"60eme Parallele" on Naxos...
evan
greg
written and ill-considered post about Bernstein and Maazel.
greg wrote:
> I went out and bought/read the article and I have a question. What
> is Mazell's style, in your opinion? I was given a recording of his
> Mahler's 1st which was absolutely flat, noticeably poor. I am
> assuming it was just an outstanding situation. ...
Paul Goodman
Two conductors that I have played for, that would fit the "young and
upcoming definition" have been Robert Spano and Carl St. Clair. I
learned a lot from both of them and I think they should be strongly
considered by any orchestra looking for a music director.
--
Paul Goodman
prg...@qtm.net
Peter T. Daniels
> Also, I think Bernstein is over-rated. So he reached into the
> community. So he was a good ambassador. A handsome young guy, he
> made good print. So what? I liked Masur and I am going to miss
> him. They've played two Bernstein compositions in the past two
> years that I have heard at the NYPO and each one of them sounds like
> 50s pop music with a salsa beat, like lounge music. Oh, and there
> was a third celebrating the birth of the state of Israel or
> something like that. I couldn't wait for it to end.
Care to put names on those three works? Those descriptions don't sound
like any Bernstein I'm familiar with.
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@worldnet.att.net
Peter T. Daniels
> A remarkable Shostakovich 6 last year, in which he employed
> something resembling the old Philly Sound. This year, Debussy's
> Images (only the Orchestra's second complete rendition ever) in
> which he evoked magical sounds if not a whole lot of tension;
> a lovely Falla Noches; and a really stunning La Valse.
The New Yorker says Phila has *never* done Missa Solemnis before this
week!! Are they really a professional orchestra?
Simon Roberts
: Sol L. Siegel wrote:
No. Nevertheless, the posters on the Academy of Music state that this is
the first performance since 197something.
Simon
greg
Suite from a Quiet Place
Symphony no 1 'Jeremiah'
The third wasn't even his. It was Wynton Marsalis', which was only one
of the reasons I apologized for my stupid post (the other being the
misspelling of Maazel. (You don't have to tell me.) I remember not
liking the Quiet Place. I can't remember any details of it now, but I
definitely didn't like it because I wrote so in my log, and of course I
remember. I think it was kind of poppy, but not catchy like West Side
Story. The Marsalis piece All Rise was the salsa lounge music. Somehow
I associated All Rise with Bernstein.
William H. Pittman
mark...@aol.com (Marksten) wrote:
> Frank - and beans! I've found Tommasini to be uninformed and unreliable
> in the
> past, especially when they send him to review Met performances.
Well, IMHO he's right this time.
> Maazel, on the other hand, is a seasoned orchestra builder and a
> conductor with
> international credentials.
A somewhat less adulatory view of him has been expressed in this
newsgroup several times.
> Bravo, Maazel!
Nope.
William H. Pittman
Michael B
Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque) <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3A762672...@earthlink.net...
> Huh? Becoming a conductor is not exactly "quitting
> music"!!! (Au contraire - it's far more difficult than
> simply playing a single instrument.)
Evelyn, That was a joke.
Sorry, my computer keyboard doesn't have a sideways smileyface key.
Michael
Michael B
> upcoming definition" have been Robert Spano and Carl St. Clair. I
> learned a lot from both of them and I think they should be strongly
> considered by any orchestra looking for a music director.
>
> --
> Paul Goodman
> prg...@qtm.net
Paul,
Robert Spano is the new conductor of the Atlanta Symphony, certianly a major
post.
As for Carl St. Clair....I agree with you, and I don't understand why he
doesn't guest conduct major orchestras regularly.
Michael
Lani Spahr
>Anyone listening with an open mind to his latest
>efforts on BMG can't help but be impressed with the second wind he has
found
>interpretively.
My point exactly (in another thread). It seems that many of the knee jerk
reactions we get around here are from people listening with their *eyes*
and not their *ears*. I suspect many of us (and I've voiced my own
prejudices in the past) would be embarrassed in a blind listening test.
--
Cheers,
Lani Spahr
Bruckner Symphony Versions Discography
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/lspahr
wk...@my-deja.com
>Maazel, on the other hand, is a seasoned orchestra builder
But is this what the NYPO needs, particularly from someone who will, by
all appearances, be no more than an interim music director?
>Anyone listening with an open mind to his latest
>efforts on BMG can't help but be impressed with the second wind he has
>found interpretively.
I found his DAS LIED VON DER ERDE quite dull - which of his BMG
recordings would you recommend?
Bill
--
William D. Kasimer
wk...@juno.com
Never argue with idiots. They bring you down to their level, and then
beat you with experience.
Michael B
>
> I found his DAS LIED VON DER ERDE quite dull - which of his BMG
> recordings would you recommend?
>
> Bill
Bill,
"Dull and heartless" was my impression of that recording.
However, his Sibelius cycle with Pittsburg is wonderful, in my opinion.
Particularly the 5th.
I think these recordings (Sony) are now oop.
Has anyone out there heard Maazel conduct Sibelius live?
-Michael
vaneyes
>It seems that many of the knee jerk
> reactions we get around here are from people listening with their
*eyes*
> and not their *ears*. I suspect many of us (and I've voiced my own
> prejudices in the past) would be embarrassed in a blind listening
test.
All aboard on the "second wind" train (after over 350 recordings).
Regards
MSten4MHS
recordings would you recommend? >>
Agreed - I wasn't impressed by this.
His two BMG Wagner discs with Berlin are very good - I'm spinning Volume 2 in
my bug today. Also, his BMG Strauss series has great sound and interpretively
it beats his Sony discs from the late 70s or so. The Alpine is particularly
well-played and recorded. I found that I needed to crank the volume on these
Strauss discs to get the most out of them.
You may also want to try his Ravel disc - and here's why: I met one-on-one for
a few hours with Maazel in Salzburg this past summer. We discussed many things.
He related to me that he was upset by a review his Ravel disc got - the
reviewer didn't like the big ritardando he threw in at the key change at the
end - it wasn't in the score, etc. In fact, the particular reviewer compared
Maazel to 50 other Bolero recordings - none of them had the ritardando, so how
could it possibly be right? The reviewer opined that this was a case of
Maazel's growing eccentricity in his old age.
"Now, how do I respond to that?" he asked me. "Why do I do that ritard?" Maazel
then related that while a student violinist in Italy, he played the Bolero
under de Sabata who made this ritardano. De Sabata explained to the orchestra
that he made that ritardando once in a concert back in the 20s (or, whenever)
where Ravel was in attendance. Afterwards, Ravel himself came up to de Sabata
and said "I didn't write that ritard, but I love it. Leave it in."
So, here is Maazel incorporating a ritardando that he KNOWS the composer
sanctioned, yet he's skewered by the critics for having the strength of his
experience and convictions. Does he really need to justify every interpretive
gesture he makes just so the critics will be intellectually comfortable with
the results? Seems to me that's a job for the early music types, not a
first-rank orchestral conductor.
I simply relate this story as a caution - music critics are often the most
egregious practicers of listening to recordings with their ears shut and the
minds obsessed with prior experience. Ergo, it's easy to take pot shots at a
Maazel who hasn't always hit home runs on CD, just as it's easy to give Boulez
a pass on his recent DGG dreck based on his wonderful Sony & Erato recordings
of years past.
I agree with David Hurwitz who listens to all new recordings blind - why let
prejudices, good or bad, influence your evaluation of a new recording? It's all
about *listening*, isn't it?
Mark Stenroos
VP of Marketing & Catalog Development
Musical Heritage Society, USA
Peter T. Daniels
the delightful *Trouble in Tahiti* from 1953 or so.) I don't know what
might be in the Suite -- I've never listened to the opera again since my
first time through the album. The Jeremiah Symphony was one of his first
officially "classical" pieces; he might have been trying hard to keep it
from sounding too Broadway. You don't say what you didn't like about it.
As far as I'm concerned, his last halfway decent work was *Songfest*,
and his last totally decent work was *Mass*. Now that we can finally
hear *1600 Pennsylvania Avenue*, sort of ("White House Cantata"), we see
that we apparently weren't missing anything; the notes do say that the
best bits of it went into *Songfest*, as I long suspected.
Peter T. Daniels
Of the Debussy, or the Beethoven?
Peter T. Daniels
> You may also want to try his Ravel disc - and here's why: I met one-on-one for
> a few hours with Maazel in Salzburg this past summer. We discussed many things.
> He related to me that he was upset by a review his Ravel disc got - the
> reviewer didn't like the big ritardando he threw in at the key change at the
> end - it wasn't in the score, etc. In fact, the particular reviewer compared
> Maazel to 50 other Bolero recordings - none of them had the ritardando, so how
> could it possibly be right? The reviewer opined that this was a case of
> Maazel's growing eccentricity in his old age.
>
> "Now, how do I respond to that?" he asked me. "Why do I do that ritard?" Maazel
> then related that while a student violinist in Italy, he played the Bolero
> under de Sabata who made this ritardano. De Sabata explained to the orchestra
> that he made that ritardando once in a concert back in the 20s (or, whenever)
> where Ravel was in attendance. Afterwards, Ravel himself came up to de Sabata
> and said "I didn't write that ritard, but I love it. Leave it in."
So, why didn't he tell this story in the notes? Or, didn't de Sabata
make a recording?
To be sure, crappy liner notes are among the many reasons I gave up MHS
some years ago. (And this week, when I finally dumped the Katsaris
Liszt/Beethoven symphonies, having heard what they're *supposed* to
sound like in Leslie Howard's version, the used CD store gave me just $1
apiece for the MHS disks I offered -- and $3 for a Hyperion, and $10 for
Davitt Moroney's Art of Fugue on Harmonia Mundi that's $13.99 at Tower
Outlet, which I no longer need because it's in the HM box with WTC and
Musical Offering, a very good buy indeed.)
Simon Roberts
Paul Goodman
<Nos...@nospamplease.com> wrote:
>Paul,
>Robert Spano is the new conductor of the Atlanta Symphony, certianly a major
>post.
>As for Carl St. Clair....I agree with you, and I don't understand why he
>doesn't guest conduct major orchestras regularly.
>Michael
>
Michael,
Thanks for the update on Robert Spano. I had a great experience
performing Shostakovich's 5th, with him conducting. The orchestra
that I played in at the time really wasn't very good and he spent a
whole week rehearsing this work. The performance ended up being far
above the normal playing level of this group and was a great musical
experience for all the players involved.
--
Paul Goodman
prg...@qtm.net
vaneyes
Brave man, Maazel, talking about Bolero so soon after...the 1998 Madrid
Bolero Riot. I now wonder if it was "the big ritardando" that set
things off that day.
Regards
Michael
wrote:
>In an unusually frank piece in the NY Times this morning, Anthony
>Tommasini pleads with the Philharmonic not to appoint Maazel as
>Music Director to succeed Masur.
[snip]
Unfortunately, whoever makes these decisions at the Philharmonic is
stupid. What a dumb choice!
Michael
To reply by email, please eliminate "NOSPAM" from my address. Personal messages only!
high...@my-deja.com
> >: His horn playing was excellent. So good, in fact, that I wondered
> >: why he quit music to become a conductor.
> >
> >I love the notion that becoming a conductor entails quitting music...
>
> That joke's almost as old as "How do you get to Carnegie Hall?".
Sol,
I think Marcel Tabuteau, when speaking of Ormandy, originated that
joke.
-Mike
high...@my-deja.com
> Michael,
>
> Thanks for the update on Robert Spano. I had a great experience
> performing Shostakovich's 5th, with him conducting. The orchestra
> that I played in at the time really wasn't very good and he spent a
> whole week rehearsing this work. The performance ended up being far
> above the normal playing level of this group and was a great musical
> experience for all the players involved.
>
> --
> Paul Goodman
> prg...@qtm.net
Paul,
Carl St. Clair is also known for drawing the best playing out of an
ensemble. I played under him as a student when he taught at U of
Michigan. He led the contemporary music group in some quite
extraordinary performances.
Mike
dtritter
and now, having spilled his guts over maazel and his work ... not even
in a review of a specific performance ... we may expect that tommasini
will attend performances of the nyphil under maazel and render his
wholly objective critical opinions.
dft
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Peter Gold
>>In article <3a75f...@139.142.118.11>,
>> "Michael B" <nos...@nospamplease.com> wrote:
>>> Wow, I knew David Robertson when we both played in a youth orchestra in
>>> L.A. He played 1st horn. The next year he took of for England to study
>>> conducting. I always thought he was a good musician.
>>>
>>> His horn playing was excellent. So good, in fact, that I wondered why he
>>> quit music to become a conductor.
>>
>>Interesting - I can't recall another example of a conductor who
>>formerly played horn. (Barry Tuckwell definitely should have stuck to
>>his horn, judging from a couple of IMP discs from the early CD era.)
>*cough*(Gunther Schuller)
Several months ago there was a thread on this newsgroup about instruments
played by conductors. Someone pointed out that George Szell had been a horn
player as well as a pianist.
David Ashbridge
rkha...@adnc.com wrote:
> Boulez sounds like an intriguing choice, but he gave me the impression of being very happy with his European engagements and his CSO/Cleveland commitments. I doubt he could devote much time to the NYPO, but I could
be wrong.
>
Boulez was Music Director there after Bernstein until 1977. It would be
almost unheard of for a previous MD to return to any orchestra. That
said and for all the problems, real or otherwise during his tenure,
Boulez was a great choice for the NYP at the time. I remember hearing
this great orchestra on radio many times and live in London. The
performances they gave were really something else and at the time we had
Boulez as MD of the BBCSO and were used to top-notch Boulez
performances. The NYPO brass in particular had qualities we could only
dream about in London. Some of their recordings from this period are
STILL amongst the very best things any orchestra has ever put on disc.
Varese Ameriques and Arcana, and Ravel Daphnis et Chloe and Carter
Symphony of 3 orchestras and Concerto for orchestra being amongst them.
It is a pity that Boulez is not 25 years younger because he would be
EXACTLY the right choice. As it is, being an ex NYPMD and 75 it rules
him out completely. (I know there will be plenty out there who don't
agree on many of my points here, but so what!)
> Robertson sounds like a nice choice. Has Vanska ever conducted the
> NYPO? I vote for young talent.
> Ramon Khalona
Exactly right. The future lies with young talent. Vanska is a good
example. Plenty more as well. Sadly they have plumped for Maazel, a 70
year old, greedy megalamanic of dubious merits and glitzy ways. So
glitz is more important than content at the NYP these days. I think
this will be the case over the coming months as the first wave of
euphoria dies down and after a few memorable opening concerts, the truth
starts to emerge in boring old performances of the standard repertoire
works that Maazel has served up ad nauseam and has said nothing new in
for well over 20 years. Not the best way to start a new millenium, but
it takes allsorts.
Jennifer Martin
>ensemble. I played under him as a student when he taught at U of
>Michigan. He led the contemporary music group in some quite
>extraordinary performances.
U of M, under the guidance of Bob Reynolds (retiring this year) has produced
some remarkable conductors, as you know. Carl, Larry Rachleff, Jerry Judkin (U
of Texas). Those and so many more worked with Bob. Amazing.
I would add to the list of folks who will soon be, or maybe should be now,
considered for major posts: Rachleff, Apo Hsu, Marin Alsop. All Americans
(though Apo was born in China, now is US citizen).
Re: Carl St. Clair doesn't do too much traveling, I think, because the PSO is
truly his "baby". He's really involved in the :day to day" stuff, and he is a
true believe that that orchestra is going to major someday soon.
Jenn Martin
Bob Orr
Michael B wrote:
>
> Robert Spano is the new conductor of the Atlanta Symphony, certianly a major
> post.
> As for Carl St. Clair....I agree with you, and I don't understand why he
> doesn't guest conduct major orchestras regularly.
Not sure either. Always enjoyed his concerts with the Indianapolis Symphony
which is currently searching for a replacement for Raymond Leppard. Sadly, the
only two American born conductors receiving serious attention at the moment are
Marin Alsop (brilliant) and David Allan Miller. Names currently auditioning for
this and other second tier posts throughout the world include Thomas Daussgaard,
Mark Wigglesworth, Roberto Minczuk, Yakov Kreizberg (could be a real sleeper),
Pavel Kogan, Emmanuel Villaume, Jahja Ling, Vladimir Spivakov, Dmitry
Sitkovetsky, Paul Daniel, James Judd, Naoto Otomo, Yan Pascal Tortelier,
Lawrence Renes and Markus Stenz. Any speculation on this bunch.
It may be that Carl simply isn't looking or that some symphonic boards just
don't take him seriously enough - or perhaps his orchestral building and
community leadership skills aren't what is being sought.
Bob Orr
>
> Michael
--
"The game's easy Harry!" -- Richie Ashburn (1927-1997)
"The less we understand a thing, the more variables we need to explain it." -
Russell Ackoff
"It is never too late to be what you might have been." -- George Eliot
vaneyes
> and now, having spilled his guts over maazel and his work ... not even
> in a review of a specific performance ... we may expect that tommasini
> will attend performances of the nyphil under maazel and render his
> wholly objective critical opinions.
As long as Lorin doesn't play his violin, I expect professional reviews
from all NYT staffers.
Regards
vaneyes
> Several months ago there was a thread on this newsgroup about
instruments
> played by conductors. Someone pointed out that George Szell had been
a horn
> player as well as a pianist.
>
Maazel played second fiddle under Reiner in 1948.
Gerard Schwarz played trumpet for the NYPO.
vaneyes
Judging from reviews and personal impressions I've read and heard about
Wigglesworth (to include some superb Mahler) over the past two years,
he's THE one in this group.
greg
you said. If I could think of a word which captures it best for me, set
against the rest of that night's program (
NYPO 10/11/2000 program was:
bernstein jeremiah
mendelssohn piano concert no 1 in G minor
dvorak symphony no 8
), the word would be undistinctive. That might change the more I heard it.
On a different subject. I'm not a fan of the, as I specified, big symphony
that has no swing, a stage full of percussion instruments, disturbing,
dadaist unpredictability and unflaggingly non-lyrical/atonal sounds, and
singing passages that sound insane or disturbed. I realize that things which
sound urbane now may not have sounded so when they were first penned, going
back even to Mozart, so I may be the victim of my own small-mindedness
here. Nevertheless, I can commiserate with the Berlin Philharmonic's
steadfast resistance to some of the mid to late 20th century's trends.
Here are some new things that were standouts in concert:
John Corigliano's Vocalise for Soprano, Electronics, and Orchestra
Derek Bermel's Soul Garden for Viola and String Quintet
Bridge's Quartet in D minor
Duke Ellington, adaptation of Grieg's Peer Gynt Suite.
Hindemith, horn concerto
Michael B
produced
> some remarkable conductors, as you know. Carl, Larry Rachleff, Jerry
Judkin (U
> of Texas). Those and so many more worked with Bob. Amazing.
>
> I would add to the list of folks who will soon be, or maybe should be now,
> considered for major posts: Rachleff, Apo Hsu, Marin Alsop. All Americans
> (though Apo was born in China, now is US citizen).
>
> Re: Carl St. Clair doesn't do too much traveling, I think, because the PSO
is
> truly his "baby". He's really involved in the :day to day" stuff, and he
is a
> true believe that that orchestra is going to major someday soon.
>
> Jenn Martin
Jenn,
I can't believe H. Bob Reynolds in finally retiring! His shoes will be
nearly impossible to fill.
Larry Rachleff has a very secure, and major job at Rice. He seems to thrive
in academia. He did guest conduct in Seattle recently.
Another Michigan conducting grad doing well is Elizabeth Stoyanovich,
formerly known as Betsy Baker. She was Carl's assistant w/ the Pacific
Symphony for two years and has guest conducted all over the place.
Yet another UofM grad is Yakov Kreizberg, who is guest conducting the LA
Phil this year. I think he has a permanent position in Bournemouth,
replacing Kees Bakels.
Speaking of Bakels, he is yet another fabulous conductor who should be
considered by the major US orchestras......
-Michael
Simon Roberts
: > and now, having spilled his guts over maazel and his work ... not even
: > in a review of a specific performance ... we may expect that tommasini
: > will attend performances of the nyphil under maazel and render his
: > wholly objective critical opinions.
: As long as Lorin doesn't play his violin, I expect professional reviews
: from all NYT staffers.
These days it's more a hope than an expectation, isn't it?
Simon
Marksten
>Music Director to succeed Masur.
[snip]
Unfortunately, whoever makes these decisions at the Philharmonic is
stupid. What a dumb choice! >>
I guess you're saying that the players of the Philharmonic are stupid. The NY
Times reports that Maazel was their clear favorite to take the job after his
appearances there last year.
Mark Stenroos
Michael
Actually, I was wondering just how much input the musicians had in the
choice. But I will not change my statement.
vaneyes
>
> : As long as Lorin doesn't play his violin, I expect professional
reviews
> : from all NYT staffers.
>
> These days it's more a hope than an expectation, isn't it?
Yes on both counts.
Jennifer Martin
be
>nearly impossible to fill.
Yes indeed. He's a role model and a good friend. I'm thinking of flying to
Ann Arbor to see H. Bob at his last UM concert.
>Larry Rachleff has a very secure, and major job at Rice. He seems to thrive
>in academia. He did guest conduct in Seattle recently.
Indeed. Plus he has pro orchestras in Rhode Island and Chicago, and quite a bit
of guesting. An amazing person.
>Another Michigan conducting grad doing well is Elizabeth Stoyanovich,
>formerly known as Betsy Baker. She was Carl's assistant w/ the Pacific
>Symphony for two years and has guest conducted all over the place.
I need to learn more about her. I remember that a few years ago she was the
first conductor of the PSO training orchestra at Cal State Fullerton (my alma
mater).
Jenn Martin
Peter T. Daniels
> >Larry Rachleff has a very secure, and major job at Rice. He seems to thrive
> >in academia. He did guest conduct in Seattle recently.
>
> Indeed. Plus he has pro orchestras in Rhode Island and Chicago, and quite a bit
> of guesting. An amazing person.
I don't recognize the name -- what orchestra in Chicago is that? or is
it a recent appointment?
> I need to learn more about her. I remember that a few years ago she was the
> first conductor of the PSO training orchestra at Cal State Fullerton (my alma
> mater).
(Did you ever do linguistics or Arabic with Alan Kaye? Does he have any
sort of campus reputation?)
David Ashbridge
Why he has not yet landed a major job is a bit mystifying.
Paul Daniel did a fantastic job in Leeds building up Opera North. He
thoroughly deserved his move to ENO. Excellent at standard repertoire
and contemporary as well as opera Should go much further yet as well
and would deserve a major MD in the future.
James Judd Very capable and so under-rated. Can't work out why since
each time I have heard him he produces the goods.
Markus Stenz Has done some excellent work with the London Sinfonietta.
Good at both contemporary and standard repertoire.
Yakov Kreizberg Not really producing the goods. He had a lot of early
promise but it is not going very far. Perhaps he will change in the
future.
Yan Pascal Tortelier Sadly over-rated. He has not really developed the
BBCPO as an orchestra although the players like him by all accounts.
Highly variable as well. A bit like Menuhin, he can be brilliant one
day and awful the next, although the awful can be really awful. He gave
the worst performance of Sibelius Symp no5 I have ever heard four years
ago. Indifferent and uncommitted throughout (which takes some doing),
at the end of the final in the fff passage he managed to get 2 different
speeds going. Half the trombones and trumpets went one way and the rest
of the brass another for seven bars. (This for a professional conductor
and orchestra is not acceptable) The strings and woodwind did not
really have much say in the matter and any help the timpani gave to try
and bring things back straight was ignored. The first of the big chords
was just EVERYWHERE. For him to get a really a major directorship he
would have to improve beyond recognition or get very lucky.
Jennifer Martin
to
>thrive
>> >in academia. He did guest conduct in Seattle recently.
>>
quite a
>bit
>> of guesting. An amazing person.
>
>it a recent appointment?
He does Symphony II. Evidently it is made up of mostly players from the Lyric
Opera Orchestra.
>(Did you ever do linguistics or Arabic with Alan Kaye? Does he have any
>sort of campus reputation?)
Whoa! There's a blast from my past! When I was there in the mid 70s, I took
intro to linguistics from him. I believe that it was his first year there. I
enjoyed it, but I wouldn't know about his reputation there...sorry.
Jenn Martin
Bob Orr
Thank you very much for your insights. With your kind permission, I will
pass them on to the ISO Search Committee. I'm inclined to agree with your
assessments wholeheartedly. Wigglesworth did an awesome Shostakovich 10th -
so good that I gave serious consideration to trashing my copy of the work by
Yoel Levi. I suspect he will be invited back.
Only heard Paul D once - on a broadcast with the Minnesota Orch. Seemed
okay.
Judd gave a blistering performance of the Mahler One. The man understands
sound dynamics like few others. But I have heard he is a stern taskmaster
and in this day of unionization, his demeanor might not sit well with some.
Haven't caught Stenz yet. He is at the end of the season.
Couldn't agree more with you on YPT. First time I heard him I wasn't quite
sure that he and the orchestra were performing the same work. It was a
Russian programme and he failed miserably. Second go around was all French
and he did that quite well.
Am good friends with Raymond L so have been watching this search quite
closely. Curious if you are familiar with Alsop's work with the LSO. She
seems unafraid to take different approaches. Gave a remarkable reading of
MacMillan's Percussion Concerto - the piece actually made complete sense the
way she and the soloist handled it. She has the strength of being able to
relate personally with her audiences but being a woman sometimes holds her
back. Have some friends who play for Adelaide SO and they are very high on
Villaume. He did an outdoor concert for us last summer but that is an
unfair venue to assess skill.
Have fears about Kreizberg. Looked like one of those German clockwork dolls
conducting. Hope audience isn't being swayed by his good looks but they
reacted almost too favorably to him.
Bob Orr
David Ashbridge wrote:
--
Peter T. Daniels
> Jenn: >> Indeed. Plus he has pro orchestras in Rhode Island and Chicago, and
> quite a bit
> >> of guesting. An amazing person.
> >
> Peter: >I don't recognize the name -- what orchestra in Chicago is that? or is
> >it a recent appointment?
>
> He does Symphony II. Evidently it is made up of mostly players from the Lyric
> Opera Orchestra.
Another attempt at a springtime gig? (Between the opera's fall/winter
season and Grant Park's summer season. They tried to be Orchestra of
Illinois for two seasons.)
> >(Did you ever do linguistics or Arabic with Alan Kaye? Does he have any
> >sort of campus reputation?)
>
> Whoa! There's a blast from my past! When I was there in the mid 70s, I took
> intro to linguistics from him. I believe that it was his first year there. I
> enjoyed it, but I wouldn't know about his reputation there...sorry.
I first met him in 1976 when I gave my first conference paper. I can
imagine him being a good teacher.
Michael B.
> >Another Michigan conducting grad doing well is Elizabeth Stoyanovich,
> >formerly known as Betsy Baker. She was Carl's assistant w/ the Pacific
> >Symphony for two years and has guest conducted all over the place.
>
> I need to learn more about her. I remember that a few years ago she was
the
> first conductor of the PSO training orchestra at Cal State Fullerton (my
alma
> mater).
>
> Jenn Martin
Jenn,
I remember her as being an solid musician who was much better organized than
most of us students. She's guest conducted the San Diego Symphony, Rochester
Phil, Atlanta S.O. and the Women's Philharmonic in SF, among others. She
lives in Southern CA.
I've never actually seen her conduct but from the looks of her resume, she's
doing well.
-Michael
Brian Newhouse
greg wrote, re Masur's departure from the NYPO:
[snip with apologies to save screen space]
> I'm going to
> miss a guy who values heart-warming music, instead of that
> new-fangled statist, angry communist stuff of the last few
> generations...
Well, _that's_ a new one. Who knew that there was such a thing as
"statist" music over and above any associations with any actually
existing statist regime? Whatever happened to saying "ugly" when you
mean "ugly", instead of using whatever political epithet you find most
repellent? What are we going to decry next--secular humanist soups?
theocratic sport jackets? neoliberal album covers? patriarchal traffic
jams?
It's enough to make me long for the salad days of poetastical program
notes...
Brian Cantin
> Not sure either. Always enjoyed his concerts with the Indianapolis
> Symphony which is currently searching for a replacement for Raymond
> Leppard. Sadly, the only two American born conductors receiving
> serious attention at the moment are Marin Alsop (brilliant) and
> David Allan Miller. Names currently auditioning for this and other
> second tier posts throughout the world include Thomas Daussgaard,
> Mark Wigglesworth, Roberto Minczuk, Yakov Kreizberg (could be a real
> sleeper), Pavel Kogan, Emmanuel Villaume, Jahja Ling, Vladimir
> Spivakov, Dmitry Sitkovetsky, Paul Daniel, James Judd, Naoto Otomo,
> Yan Pascal Tortelier, Lawrence Renes and Markus Stenz. Any
> speculation on this bunch.
No speculation, but I like Wigglesworth, Spivakov, and Tortelier.
--
Brian Cantin
An advocate of poisonous individualism.
To reply via email, replace "dcantin" with "bcantin".
greg
would agree with and other people not. And it would take _much_ more
research than I have done.
But, I think a case can be made that 20th century artistic (often
corporate) patronage, particularly in NYC, has leaned on the New York
abstract expressionists, who were often Russian emigrees. Those things
westerns complain about in communism show up in these works. And they
established the status quo for a long time, sanctioned by the liberal
intellectuals. Art such as white-on-white paintings or Newmann's strips
could actually sell for millions of dollars. Meanwhile, the common person
who didn't have time to read the explanatory intellectualizing footnotes
was left in the dust. Most of this intellectualizing talked about the need
for a new vocabulary. Well, if they didn't wind up communicating with
'strips' and blank canvases, than it's not certain the vocabulary was a
working one. Understandably, pictorial arts had to move away from the
strict forms of representation that had been taken up by photography, and
into the other realms, such as the atmospherics of light which eventually
became the study of opacity in oil. Surrealism was another interesting
study, cubism another, but the Newmann's of the art world prevailed in
gaining the most corporate patronage. Banks loved it because it was
universal (i.e. faceless) and imposing.
Similarly in music, there was a move away from lyricism (which is a variant
of realism) and into an abstract reality that never succeeded in
communicating to the average listener. Some people say this is the
listener's fault, but I say the very best artists (Shakespeare, Escher,
Beethoven e.g.) don't alienate the general audience.
Getting back to my main point, much of the NEA and corporate endowment
seems to have liberal trends. Liberals are not accidentally associated
with the big state: socialism and communism. So, I'd say that the liberal
20th century patronage yielded works that are unwatchable/unlistenable and
it seems as though they were intended to ostracize, intimidate. Statism.
Matthew B. Tepper
<3A7B0ADF...@gregorybittar.com>:
>Getting back to my main point, much of the NEA and corporate endowment
>seems to have liberal trends. Liberals are not accidentally associated
>with the big state: socialism and communism. So, I'd say that the
>liberal 20th century patronage yielded works that are
>unwatchable/unlistenable and it seems as though they were intended to
>ostracize, intimidate. Statism.
Why not simply style it "Formalism" and have a goon squad liquidate the
practitioners thereof?
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm
My main music page --- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/berlioz.htm
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
"Compassionate Conservatism?" * "Tight Slacks?" * "Jumbo Shrimp?"
D.G. Porter
>
> To weave all this together would take a book, a book which some people
> would agree with and other people not. And it would take _much_ more
> research than I have done.
>
> But, I think a case can be made that 20th century artistic (often
> corporate) patronage, particularly in NYC, has leaned on the New York
> abstract expressionists, who were often Russian emigrees. Those things
> westerns complain about in communism show up in these works.
Now this is where you lost me. When I look at "communist" art it's
usually that boring "realist" CRAP reminiscent of the stuff Hitler
liked.
> And they
> established the status quo for a long time, sanctioned by the liberal
> intellectuals. Art such as white-on-white paintings or Newmann's strips
> could actually sell for millions of dollars. Meanwhile, the common person
> who didn't have time to read the explanatory intellectualizing footnotes
> was left in the dust. Most of this intellectualizing talked about the need
> for a new vocabulary. Well, if they didn't wind up communicating with
> 'strips' and blank canvases, than it's not certain the vocabulary was a
> working one. Understandably, pictorial arts had to move away from the
> strict forms of representation that had been taken up by photography, and
> into the other realms, such as the atmospherics of light which eventually
> became the study of opacity in oil. Surrealism was another interesting
> study, cubism another, but the Newmann's of the art world prevailed in
> gaining the most corporate patronage.
How can you call the above "communist"? I don't understand. Stalin was
into that "realist"-crap music and art. Hew couldn't even get into
Shostakovich's earlie stuff! "Muddle, not music." And Hitler's gang of
morons didn't like cubism or surrealism either. Where does your initial
claim of "communist" aesthetic come from???
> Banks loved it because it was
> universal (i.e. faceless) and imposing.
>
> Similarly in music, there was a move away from lyricism (which is a variant
> of realism) and into an abstract reality that never succeeded in
> communicating to the average listener. Some people say this is the
> listener's fault, but I say the very best artists (Shakespeare, Escher,
> Beethoven e.g.) don't alienate the general audience.
Heh, at a very early concert with the Pacific Symphony under Keith
Clark, they were playing at <gag!> KNOTT'S BERY FARM and it's "Good-tme
theater" (somrething like that) and he presented Webern's Opus 10. He
got through it once (he underrehearsed and it showed), and then he
turned to the audience and told them about how he once went into the
hills and woods of Austria, heard what Webern did, and how it related to
these five pieces, and asked, "Perhaps you'd like to hear them again."
And a definitely post-menopausal low female voice intoned from the
audience, "Not really." Ah, the audiences at Knottsy Barely Farm...
> Getting back to my main point, much of the NEA and corporate endowment
> seems to have liberal trends. Liberals are not accidentally associated
> with the big state: socialism and communism.
Uhhhh, dude, you are about to reveal really gross incompetence ignorance
and stupidity -- believe me, there are no communists in Severance Hall
and they play a lot of what you call "unlistenable" stuff.
> So, I'd say that the liberal
> 20th century patronage yielded works that are unwatchable/unlistenable and
> it seems as though they were intended to ostracize, intimidate. > Statism.
What utter crap.
I suppose you are going to tell us now that Ivesian music is "statist"
becaus it demands you stand up and listen with both your ears and your
wits and fists and feet too. Not some "nice little easy sugar-plum
sounds for the soft ears' velvet pocket books." (Matt, you know what
I'm quoting.) Or Ruggles' melodies that "twist yer guts."
This is that crap that Cornelius Cardew got roped into when he was
denouncing Stockhausen as "statist" music. (BTW, there are two
performances of Cage's "Atlas Eclipticalis" next week in Pasadena and
Los Angeles, the LA performance coupled with a Stockhausen piece.)
D.G. Porter
>
> em...@gregorybittar.com (greg) wrote in
> <3A7B0ADF...@gregorybittar.com>:
> >
> >Getting back to my main point, much of the NEA and corporate endowment
> >seems to have liberal trends. Liberals are not accidentally associated
> >with the big state: socialism and communism. So, I'd say that the
> >liberal 20th century patronage yielded works that are
> >unwatchable/unlistenable and it seems as though they were intended to
> >ostracize, intimidate. Statism.
>
> Why not simply style it "Formalism" and have a goon squad liquidate the
> practitioners thereof?
"Are these Parisians to be blamed if they say that the American
composers thus made known to them are restless experimenters, or
followers of Europeans whose position in the musical world is not yet
determined, men who show ingenuity chiefly by their rhythmic inventions
and orchestral tricks, men who apparently have no melodic gift, or,
having it, disdain it for the tiresome repetition and transformation of
an insignificant pattern; who neglect the sensuous charm of stringed
instruments and put their trust for startling effects in combinations of
wind and percussion choirs; followers, but with unequal footsteps, of
Stravinsky, Prokofieff and certain continental composers of whom
Hindemith is a prominent example?"
Bernie Holland did not write that one.
I wish I could find this hilarious review of Varese's "Arcana" by one
Thomas Barley for the OC Register. He complained that that nasty LA
Phil (Mehta's reign) had not only presented this "incomprehensible"
Varese piece, but they had failed to give him "La Gazza Ladra," and
well, "what to expect from an LA Phil that recently foisted an Ives
piece on us" (yeah, the FIRST SYMPHONY!!!).
John Thomas
> I think a case can be made that 20th century artistic (often
> corporate) patronage, particularly in NYC, has leaned on the New York
> abstract expressionists, who were often Russian emigrees. Those things
> westerns complain about in communism show up in these works.
(snip)
> Art such as white-on-white paintings or Newmann's strips
> could actually sell for millions of dollars. Meanwhile, the common
> person who didn't have time to read the explanatory intellectualizing
> footnotes was left in the dust.
(snip)
> Surrealism was another interesting study, cubism another, but the
> Newmann's of the art world prevailed in gaining the most corporate
> patronage.
(snip)
When someone can't even spell the name of the artist he's
criticizing, the rest of us may be excused for doubting the quality of
the "research" involved. I wonder if you could name those Russian
emigres, and tell us what percentage of the abstract expressionist
community they constituted. Have you ever wondered *why* they left
the Soviet Union? If you can't answer, don't despair; there's still
an opening for you in the John Ashcroft school of art criticism.
--
Regards,
John Thomas
vaneyes
greg
> Now this is where you lost me. When I look at "communist" art it's
> usually that boring "realist" CRAP reminiscent of the stuff Hitler
> liked.
Big murals and sculptures of workmen wielding chisels and anvils?! LOL. First
of all, I am not so sure Berlin's WWII artistic output is any worse than NYC's.
Another interesting sidenote: people talk about 'American' art in the early 20th
century, but many of these guys had just arrived in NYC and had a limited
exposure to the rest of the USA. The only thing American about it is that it
had American patrons, and occasionally Americana subject matter.
> How can you call the above "communist"? I don't understand. Stalin was
> into that "realist"-crap music and art. Hew couldn't even get into
> Shostakovich's earlie stuff! "Muddle, not music." And Hitler's gang of
> morons didn't like cubism or surrealism either. Where does your initial
> claim of "communist" aesthetic come from???
The abstract expressionism and the loss of lyricism and realism achieved one
central thing: it depersonalized art. Never mind what Stalin thought. What
would Karl Marx have thought of these new kinds of music and art? Communism
outlawed the church. It outlawed private ownership. It's bleak, it's
uncompromising, and, in its final form, it's totalitarian. People look at the
modern corporation like some symbol of capitalism, but these big corporations
are much like mini socialized states. There is no ownership (at work) for
employees, no self, no self esteem, no say. To me, these large corporations are
antithetical to self-determination. The denial that people must suffer through
all day long, as a basic function of their lives, is symptomatic of the
rejection they meet when they face the arts. Communism is the extreme case of a
society without self determination. Artists may have fled the USSR, but I
think they brought the concepts with them of alienation, and intellectualized
de-personalization.
> Uhhhh, dude, you are about to reveal really gross incompetence ignorance
> and stupidity -- believe me, there are no communists in Severance Hall
> and they play a lot of what you call "unlistenable" stuff.
I think the ideas have entered the artistic community to such a great degree
that the labels get lost. I mean, how many 'card carrying communists' are there
in Severence Hall? Probably none. But the ideas of a de-personalizing state,
in which faith, lyricism, and realism have been abandoned, are with us.
> > So, I'd say that the liberal
> > 20th century patronage yielded works that are unwatchable/unlistenable and
> > it seems as though they were intended to ostracize, intimidate. > Statism.
>
> What utter crap.
> I suppose you are going to tell us now that Ivesian music is "statist"
No. I wouldn't say that. But that was also lyical music. There's lots of
popular musical themes (from his day) embedded. Therefore, you know that he was
trying to communicate in a vernacular.
> ecaus it demands you stand up and listen with both your ears and your
> wits and fists and feet too. Not some "nice little easy sugar-plum
> sounds for the soft ears' velvet pocket books." (Matt, you know what
> I'm quoting.) Or Ruggles' melodies that "twist yer guts."
No one's arguing for Mozart II. The difference to me is whether music is being
written to be generally heard or whether it is intentionally throwing up
irremovable boundaries. For example, using Beethoven, he would push convention
to new places, but not at the expense of the general audience. He tried to
bring them with him.
> This is that crap that Cornelius Cardew got roped into when he was
> denouncing Stockhausen as "statist" music. (BTW, there are two
> performances of Cage's "Atlas Eclipticalis" next week in Pasadena and
> Los Angeles, the LA performance coupled with a Stockhausen piece.)
I've only had a handful of Stockhausen's recordings and each one's very
different (and expensive!). At the root, he seems almost as much of an engineer
as a musician. What's the difference between someone who architects a new
guitar effect and the guitarist who employs it? In Stockhausen's case, I don't
think it was his intention, nor will it ever be his fate, to speak to the
general population directly through his music. The ideas are interesting in an
intellectual sense, and sometimes in a more direct emotional sense as well.
Generally though, they are so buried in analytics that any appreciation must
also take into account what he's doing with all those inverted wave patterns.
Can it be appreciated without that knowledge? Sure, but not as intuitively as
Fleetwood Mac's Rhainnon, to pull a name out of a hat.
Jennifer Martin
>Clark, they were playing at <gag!> KNOTT'S BERY FARM and it's "Good-tme
>theater" (somrething like that)
Another blast from my past! I was in the first season of the PSO with Keith.
Fine conductor, and I studied with him for a bit. It was kind of an outgrowth
of the under-nourished orchestra at Cal State Fullerton. I remember playing
gigs at several strange places!
Jenn Martin
greg
in the 80s, and I have a big book of Abstract Expressionism which I read
three years ago. I've been to the MOMA plenty, and not remembering how to
spell these names without going over and grabbing a book doesn't mean diddly
squat.
Think of all the names of the early 20th century art. How would you handle
a spot spelling quiz?
greg
the ideas, or that they were against the general principles of that kind of
a social structure.
D.G. Porter
>
> "D.G. Porter" wrote:
>
> > Now this is where you lost me. When I look at "communist" art it's
> > usually that boring "realist" CRAP reminiscent of the stuff Hitler
> > liked.
>
> Big murals and sculptures of workmen wielding chisels and anvils?! LOL. First
> of all, I am not so sure Berlin's WWII artistic output is any worse than NYC's.
>
> Another interesting sidenote: people talk about 'American' art in the early 20th
> century, but many of these guys had just arrived in NYC and had a limited
> exposure to the rest of the USA. The only thing American about it is that it
> had American patrons, and occasionally Americana subject matter.
The "real" American art was stuff like Billings, shape-note singing,
ragtime and early jazz, and of course guys like Ives who nobody knew
about except those guys in the theater orchestra pits, who knew him as
"that guy who showed up after the last set with a fistfull of music in
one hand and a fistfull of money in the other." (It is intriguing to
think of these guys who first read through the Tone Roads pieces,
Centrasl Park in the Dark, the Ragtime Dances, the "take-offs," the
"Songs Without Voices," and all the other chamber pieces, who played
whatever you put in front of them (at least until the manager came in
and threw Ives out), providing you paid them, and who then went home,
maybe jamming on weekends, musing over that crazy feller Ives and his
music.)
> > How can you call the above "communist"? I don't understand. Stalin was
> > into that "realist"-crap music and art. Hew couldn't even get into
> > Shostakovich's earlie stuff! "Muddle, not music." And Hitler's gang of
> > morons didn't like cubism or surrealism either. Where does your initial
> > claim of "communist" aesthetic come from???
>
> The abstract expressionism and the loss of lyricism and realism achieved one
> central thing: it depersonalized art. Never mind what Stalin thought.
That's just plain silly, it's so ridiculous. Have you ever seen
Duchamp's "Sad Young Man on a Train"? Or "Nude Descending a Staircase"
or "The King and Queen Surrounded by Swift Nudes"? I don't know about
you bt that stuff is NOT "depersonalized" to me! Even "The Large Glass"
is an impressive and expressive work.
And in music -- take Webern's Opus 22 -- if it's played "right," it's
makes me want to dance! Or the final canon in his Opus 31 -- that's
PLENTY epressive! Or the 4th of the 6 Piece Opus 6 with those two low
bells pealing throughout -- you can't feel expression and lyricism in
that!???
> What
> would Karl Marx have thought of these new kinds of music and art?
I dunno, what would Brian Boitano think of them? What would Groucho
Marx have thought? (We know what he thought of "Carmen." He lampooned
it enough! "I want my shirt, I want my shirt! I can't be happy without
my shirt!")
> Communism
> outlawed the church. It outlawed private ownership. It's bleak, it's
> uncompromising, and, in its final form, it's totalitarian.
You don't know SQUAT about communism. You know about Leninism, which is
pretty stupid all right, but remember that Leninism took root in a THIRD
WORLD COUNTRY -- Tsarist Russia! DAMN, they had to be dragged a la
Peter the Great into the modern world, kicking and screaming! Sometimes
(only sometimes) I don't blame Stalin, those people were ass-backwards,
and in places like Central Asia, they're STILL like that! Real
"communism" doesn't outlaw those things you cite, they become
unnecessary. Besides, who needs the church anyway, bunch of foolish
supertitious nonsense! I'll tell you who the real enemy is, it's people
like John Ashcroft who have delusions of being "King of Judea" and
annoint themselves with Crisco oil, who are really into that church
stuff!
> People look at the
> modern corporation like some symbol of capitalism, but these big corporations
> are much like mini socialized states. There is no ownership (at work) for
> employees, no self, no self esteem, no say. To me, these large corporations are
> antithetical to self-determination. The denial that people must suffer through
> all day long, as a basic function of their lives,
Up to here I agree with you.
> is symptomatic of the
> rejection they meet when they face the arts.
No, the problem is people with stunted brains who can't handle anything
like the classical-music equivalent of Manny Barilow and Dull
McCartney. Or Yawny.
> Communism is the extreme case of a
> society without self determination. Artists may have fled the USSR, but I
> think they brought the concepts with them of alienation, and intellectualized
> de-personalization.
I cite as Example Prime -- AYN RAND! If SHE isn't a
"Stalinist-in-reverse" then what is she??
> > Uhhhh, dude, you are about to reveal really gross incompetence ignorance
> > and stupidity -- believe me, there are no communists in Severance Hall
> > and they play a lot of what you call "unlistenable" stuff.
>
> I think the ideas have entered the artistic community to such a great degree
> that the labels get lost. I mean, how many 'card carrying communists' are there
> in Severence Hall? Probably none. But the ideas of a de-personalizing state,
> in which faith, lyricism, and realism have been abandoned, are with us.
Oh come on. If you can't have "lyricism" without faith, that's YOUR
prob. And I hear plenty of lyricism in great works like Octandre.
"Faith" is for children -- I'm a grown-up, with grown-up musical and art
tastes. And what IS "realism" anyway?? "The Fourth of July" is as
"real" as you can get!
There's some nub to your reasoning somewhere, please get to it.
> > > So, I'd say that the liberal
> > > 20th century patronage yielded works that are unwatchable/unlistenable and
> > > it seems as though they were intended to ostracize, intimidate. > Statism.
> >
> > What utter crap.
> > I suppose you are going to tell us now that Ivesian music is "statist"
>
> No. I wouldn't say that. But that was also lyical music. There's lots of
> popular musical themes (from his day) embedded. Therefore, you know that he was
> trying to communicate in a vernacular.
>
> > ecaus it demands you stand up and listen with both your ears and your
> > wits and fists and feet too. Not some "nice little easy sugar-plum
> > sounds for the soft ears' velvet pocket books." (Matt, you know what
> > I'm quoting.) Or Ruggles' melodies that "twist yer guts."
>
> No one's arguing for Mozart II. The difference to me is whether music is being
> written to be generally heard or whether it is intentionally throwing up
> irremovable boundaries.
Exactly how some people perceive Ruggles and Varese. (I WISH I could
find that Thomas Barley review of "Arcana"! It had one line like,
"Whatever Varese is trying to say, it would be best if he kept it to
himself!")
> For example, using Beethoven, he would push convention
> to new places, but not at the expense of the general audience. He tried to
> bring them with him.
I used to play a lot of those pieces by Cage which are seen as
"non-expressive." I probably violated Cage's intention because I found
"expressivity" in them and brought it out. Even when you play arpeggios
and deal cards into the piano and tune in AM radio stations, or knock on
the wooden parts of the piano. You can do it like it has something in
it for you, or you can just "shit all over it" (as Ruggles might say).
There are going to be two performance of one of Cage's star-chart pieces
here next week. I'm hoping that the players don't (a) play it like it's
meaningless crap but try to find some way of making random notes sound
"musical" and lyrical (like my own chance piece for cello solo), or (b)
play it like some "high-minded" piece like Carhorns Stock-housing thinks
his music is, every note so lofty that "these Gods only shit marble."
Personal observation: We used to play this trio by Christian Wolff, "In
Between Pieces." It's graphic with occasional suggestions for pitches
to be used (and so many choices that it's arbitrary). But we took it
seriously and tried to make it "sing." And it did! (The time we did it
at McCabe's with Fender Rhodes, electric bass and vibes was the best
time.) If you feel that this art has turned its back on you, maybe you
need to turn yourself around.
Bad performances don't help. Robert Craft's box set of Webern didn't
help Tony's music very much, but now we have TWO sets by Boulez and
there's no excuse for finding this music "unlyrical."
There's this Odeon LP set I have by the "Bad Music Ensemble" with pieces
by Cage, Feldman, Brown, Wolff, etc., and they complained that atfer
they had made an arrangement of the Brown piece to sound "ugly," Brown
came in and rearranged it to sound "lyrical," and they thought (in the
height of their Teutonic wisdom) that he was violating the nature of his
own piece! (They also misread the Feldman scores by thinking the horn
parts were written with transposed pitch.)
> > This is that crap that Cornelius Cardew got roped into when he was
> > denouncing Stockhausen as "statist" music. (BTW, there are two
> > performances of Cage's "Atlas Eclipticalis" next week in Pasadena and
> > Los Angeles, the LA performance coupled with a Stockhausen piece.)
>
> I've only had a handful of Stockhausen's recordings and each one's very
> different (and expensive!). At the root, he seems almost as much of an engineer
> as a musician. What's the difference between someone who architects a new
> guitar effect and the guitarist who employs it? In Stockhausen's case, I don't
> think it was his intention, nor will it ever be his fate, to speak to the
> general population directly through his music. The ideas are interesting in an
> intellectual sense, and sometimes in a more direct emotional sense as well.
> Generally though, they are so buried in analytics that any appreciation must
> also take into account what he's doing with all those inverted wave patterns.
> Can it be appreciated without that knowledge? Sure, but not as intuitively as
> Fleetwood Mac's Rhainnon, to pull a name out of a hat.
ARGH!!!!!
Fleetwood Sack!
"Rumors" has got to have on side 1 track 1 the LAMEST piece of SHIT ever
made! Damn, I'd even be able to put up with Yawny for an hour before
that!
If that's "accesssible," then it just shows how LAME music in 1977 was
and still is.
As for people who are limited to that kind of crap, as Zappa said, "If
your children ever find out how LAME you really are, they'll murder you
in your sleep."
You should check out what Lyndon LaRouche says about Webern versus
Beethoven. He's really BIG-TIME on the argument you are advocating.
D.G. Porter
>
> Well you can forget it, because I read a bunch of Barnett Newman's writings
> in the 80s, and I have a big book of Abstract Expressionism which I read
> three years ago. I've been to the MOMA plenty, and not remembering how to
> spell these names without going over and grabbing a book doesn't mean diddly
> squat.
>
> Think of all the names of the early 20th century art. How would you handle
> a spot spelling quiz?
Mar-sell Dew-shom. He's cool.
Avidas Dollars. He's Baroque
Pablo Pick-Asso. ("Pick your own asso, m-heh!")
Kandisky is cool.
I like Rauchenberg too.
And the guy who did the thing with the two teens making out in the back
of the car. Keinholtz?
John Thomas
<em...@gregorybittar.com> wrote:
You still haven't named these "a lot of people" or indicated what
their percentage was in the abstract expressionist community as a
whole. You've stated that "these people" had only lived in New York
and didn't know the rest of the country, as if all the abstract
expressionists were foreign immigrants. Your statement in the first
paragraph doesn't demonstrate anything except that you think that the
things you want to believe must be possible. Your comments in your
previous post about your sources of information about abstract
expressionism I assume were meant facetiously, since no responsible
person could put them forward as evidence of serious scholarship.
Your "theories" in fact are typical of the foolish ideas that fester
on the internet, though usually they are offered in forums populated
by other fools equal in ignorance to the poster. I suggest you try
selling them on late-night talk radio - except that's probably where
you heard them (with "Russian immigrant abstract expressionists" used
as a code word for "Jew Communists") yourself.
--
Regards,
John Thomas
greg
it up). And remembering Barnett Newman has two Ts and one N. To be honest, after
a few days have passed since I last read it, I forget again if it's Barnett
Newmann. After more time, I am not sure if it's Barnet Newman. A marketing
genius but an artistic fraud. Next time I'll go to my library and get all proper
names properly spelled so I won't have to duck this sort of nonsense. I mean -
we're talking about the man with the strips here, one of the biggest artistic
frauds ever perpetrated on the rest of hte world by the intellectual NYC elite.
D.G. Porter
I know Keith. I like Keith. I like him a lot. But I could not stand
working for him. His organizational skills were shall we say less than
ideal??
Hey, sorry Keith-baby, but you know it's true!
Do you remember his first Librarian? After two seasons she up and quit
in a huff over something he did. I came in as her replacement and
things were a mess.
"David, go to the LA Public Library and get The Planets."
"OK, do I need to know anything?"
"Nah, we have an acocunt."
So I go to downtown LA.
"Sir, you cannot check out these parts without a library card in your
own name and a letter from your boss and a new account."
Two more trips later, I finally had everything I "didn't need."
Another time:
"David, I want you to get this reduced-instrumental score to Mahler's
Second."
"OK, but it's $400 a month rental."
"Uhhhhh, wait 'til next month."
Three days later...
"David! Where's that score to the Mahler!!??"
"Uh, you said to wait a month."
"Oh... um... get the parts from Luck's Music Library."
Got them. Gave Israel the First Violin part to mark up. Never got it
back.
"David!!! Where's that Violin part!??"
"Israel hasn't returned it yet."
"Ohhhh ... here, here's one I've marked up."
At rehearsal, from a 2nd- or 3rd-row 1st Violinist:
"Hey Porter, who marked this part up, it's amateur-hour stuff!"
Meanwhile, Israel changes all the bowing on an ad lib basis as we go
through it. Wasn't any big deal to him, but he was used to studio gigs
and could think fast on his feet.
Another time:
"David!!! Where's the Respighi!!??"
"I called Schirmer last Friday and they said they sent it next-day
Express."
Next day:
"David! Where's the Respighi!???"
"I don't know! Do you want me to call them and rent a second set??"
"Uhhhh, no."
Schirmer sent it 7-day non-Express. Evey day for 5 days Keith was on my
ass about it but didn't want to rent a second set because it was
EXPENSIVE. It showed up the day before the concert, but fortunately it
was not on the concert, just scheduled for the recording sesion two days
later.
I made extra copies of all the parts of this 2nd Resphighi piece and put
it in all the folders. But apparently no one bothered to tell anyone to
look at the 2nd piece -- it wasnt on the concert, just scheduled for the
recording session that Sunday.
So Sunday rolls around and when Keith says "Take out Poem Autumnale" (or
whatever it's called), everybody went "WHAT????"
Two years of that was too much of that.
Hey Jenn, were you there when we played Dorothy Chandler Pavilion? I
had a rotten time with those IATSE jerks after they set up the seats
wrong and got mad at me when I had to reset the stage myself because
they all took off for an hour.
There was also the time Leonard Pennario (what a pretentious clown!) was
our guest. Pennario is no John Browning.
I think this is why I decided I did not want to work in the Music Biz.
Eric Schissel
top of my head. (I think it's "Poema Autunnale.") "Autumnal Poem,"
then...
Sigh... a conductor actually wants to _conduct_ the piece and apparently
(if Mr. Porter is to be credited; I see no reason why not) it's one who
doesn't have his act together. Sounds like the Brian curse, all over
again, just a different composer and more specific.
-Eric Schissel (imagines one of these days someone's going to get around
to performing a Scontrino quartet, say, but doesn't suppose anything's
going to go right then, either. Seems to be the nature of the thing.)
D.G. Porter
Well, to be fair to KC, the time we did Le Sacre (my LAST concert
withthe PSO), everything went well, because we owned a set of the
original version and had everything ready months in advanbce, and
everyone had played that thing before with someone else anyway. (But I
did need to copy a couple of cued parts out for alternate players.)
However, when I showed the list of required peronnel -- quintuple brass
and winds, ten horns two doubling euphonia, the pesonnel guy nearly shit
a brick.
You don't need to invent weird stuff in this bizness, it happens every
day!
Brian Newhouse
greg wrote:
> To weave all this together would take a book, a book which some people
> would agree with and other people not. And it would take _much_ more
> research than I have done.
>
> But, I think a case can be made that 20th century artistic (often
> corporate) patronage, particularly in NYC, has leaned on the New York
> abstract expressionists, who were often Russian emigrees.
--most of which tended to be violently anti-Communist, with good reason.
Otherwise they wouldn't have emigrated. Igor Stravinsky and Vladimir Nabokov,
to name the two most famous emigre Russian artists (in the broader sense of
the term) to settle in the United States, may have come from quite different
ideological backgrounds (White Russian tsarist vs. nineteenth-century-style
agnostic liberal), but they certainly converged on that.
And Hans Hofmann was a _German_ emigre.
"Much more research", indeed...
In other words:
--Certain music sounds disagreeable and forbidding.
--Statist regimes are characterized by their being disagreeable and
forbidding.
--Anything that is disagreeable and forbidding is therefore statist.
I know this is a highly respectable mode of thought in certain academic
quarters, particularly if one substitutes, say, "patriarchal" or "sexist" or
"Eurocentric" for "statist". Given the structure of the argument, it's easy
enough to plug in your least favorite kind of regime into that blank; and
people have. Being disagreeable and forbidding is not a monopoly of statist
regimes; you find that sort of thing everywhere.
(And isn't there more to statism than just being disagreeable and
forbidding?)
That's the problem with that sort of mode of thought. If you can slip terms
from wildly divergent and even contradictory political ideologies into a
nonpolitical argument without changing the structure of the argument, then
you're not describing anything at all, neither the music nor (really) your own
response to it. If you find a style of music disagreeable and forbidding, why
not just call it disagreeable and forbidding and forget the dubious, forced,
and ultimately irrelevant political parallels?
I really cannot understand this mania for describing musical style in
political terms...
D.G. Porter
>
> greg wrote:
>
> > To weave all this together would take a book, a book which some people
> > would agree with and other people not. And it would take _much_ more
> > research than I have done.
> >
> > But, I think a case can be made that 20th century artistic (often
> > corporate) patronage, particularly in NYC, has leaned on the New York
> > abstract expressionists, who were often Russian emigrees.
>
> --most of which tended to be violently anti-Communist, with good reason.
> Otherwise they wouldn't have emigrated. Igor Stravinsky and Vladimir Nabokov,
> to name the two most famous emigre Russian artists (in the broader sense of
> the term) to settle in the United States, may have come from quite different
> ideological backgrounds (White Russian tsarist vs. nineteenth-century-style
> agnostic liberal), but they certainly converged on that.
>
> And Hans Hofmann was a _German_ emigre.
>
> "Much more research", indeed...
>
> > seems to have liberal trends. Liberals are not accidentally associated
> > with the big state: socialism and communism. So, I'd say that the liberal
> > 20th century patronage yielded works that are unwatchable/unlistenable and
> > it seems as though they were intended to ostracize, intimidate. Statism.
> >
>
> In other words:
> --Certain music sounds disagreeable and forbidding.
> --Statist regimes are characterized by their being disagreeable and
> forbidding.
> --Anything that is disagreeable and forbidding is therefore statist.
Sodium and chlorine are poisonous.
Salt contains sodium and chlorine.
Therefore, salt is poisonous.
> I know this is a highly respectable mode of thought in certain academic
> quarters, particularly if one substitutes, say, "patriarchal" or "sexist" or
> "Eurocentric" for "statist". Given the structure of the argument, it's easy
> enough to plug in your least favorite kind of regime into that blank; and
> people have.
I guess that's why I'm not working in the Los Angeles Community College
system. Years ago I applied, and I aced the theory test (in about 30
minutes). (Dang, what an EASY test!) Then I was interviewed. They
were more interested in how I handled potential "ethnic conflicts" than
in what I knew about music. I told them I try to avoid such disputes
among students, and I didn't see what a person's ethnicity had to do
with music theory. (In all my own education, it was all about theory,
not what color, sex, faith or lack thereof, age or background was. It
was about voice-leading, melodic qualities, etc.) Silly me, I thought
they wanted music instructors.
Natch, I no gots de job.
greg
Brian Newhouse wrote:
>
> --most of which tended to be violently anti-Communist, with good reason.
> Otherwise they wouldn't have emigrated. Igor Stravinsky and Vladimir Nabokov,
> to name the two most famous emigre Russian artists (in the broader sense of
> the term) to settle in the United States, may have come from quite different
> ideological backgrounds (White Russian tsarist vs. nineteenth-century-style
> agnostic liberal), but they certainly converged on that.
>
> And Hans Hofmann was a _German_ emigre.
>
> "Much more research", indeed...
I'm not so uninformed as to realize that we've had a steady stream of Russian
immigrants fleeing Russia for almost 100 years now. I think the actual causes of
their flight is more complicated than the western press gives it out. Some of
these emigrees may have had sympathies with the fundamental political causes of
the Soviet Union. I don't think it's the White Russians who dominated the New
York art world, either.
> In other words:
> --Certain music sounds disagreeable and forbidding.
> --Statist regimes are characterized by their being disagreeable and
> forbidding.
> --Anything that is disagreeable and forbidding is therefore statist.
No. That would imply prickly plants are statist.
> I know this is a highly respectable mode of thought in certain academic
> quarters, particularly if one substitutes, say, "patriarchal" or "sexist" or
> "Eurocentric" for "statist". Given the structure of the argument, it's easy
> enough to plug in your least favorite kind of regime into that blank; and
> people have. Being disagreeable and forbidding is not a monopoly of statist
> regimes; you find that sort of thing everywhere.
>
> (And isn't there more to statism than just being disagreeable and
> forbidding?)
Yes. You also need a big bureaucratic state/corporation which uses its clout to
commission particular kinds of art works.
> That's the problem with that sort of mode of thought. If you can slip terms
> from wildly divergent and even contradictory political ideologies into a
> nonpolitical argument without changing the structure of the argument, then
> you're not describing anything at all, neither the music nor (really) your own
> response to it. If you find a style of music disagreeable and forbidding, why
> not just call it disagreeable and forbidding and forget the dubious, forced,
> and ultimately irrelevant political parallels?
>
> I really cannot understand this mania for describing musical style in
> political terms...
Well music has had political terms for a long time. Maybe politics aren't
present or overt in every case. Many great composers have had political leanings
which affected their works. Why should that be any different for the present
day? Personally, I think much of the 20th century's arts were dominated by the
politics of NYC liberals and critics.
greg
"D.G. Porter" wrote:
> The "real" American art was stuff like Billings, shape-note singing,
> ragtime and early jazz, and of course guys like Ives who nobody knew
> about except those guys in the theater orchestra pits, who knew him as
> "that guy who showed up after the last set with a fistfull of music in
> one hand and a fistfull of money in the other." (It is intriguing to
> think of these guys who first read through the Tone Roads pieces,
> Centrasl Park in the Dark, the Ragtime Dances, the "take-offs," the
> "Songs Without Voices," and all the other chamber pieces, who played
> whatever you put in front of them (at least until the manager came in
> and threw Ives out), providing you paid them, and who then went home,
> maybe jamming on weekends, musing over that crazy feller Ives and his
> music.)
Ives uses lyrical motifs from popular music, was not alyrical. Here's an 'American'
artist, btw, who was actually an American. He didn't just arrive off a boat and land
in NYC and all of a sudden represent 'American' culture. Sure, the term when subject
to scrutiny falls away. What is 'American'? Suffice it to say that when an artform
is held up as being uniquely American, it seems disingenuous if its artists have just
immigrated to the US and their understanding of the USA is limited to NYC.
> > > How can you call the above "communist"? I don't understand. Stalin was
> > > into that "realist"-crap music and art. Hew couldn't even get into
> > > Shostakovich's earlie stuff! "Muddle, not music." And Hitler's gang of
> > > morons didn't like cubism or surrealism either. Where does your initial
> > > claim of "communist" aesthetic come from???
> >
> > The abstract expressionism and the loss of lyricism and realism achieved one
> > central thing: it depersonalized art. Never mind what Stalin thought.
> That's just plain silly, it's so ridiculous. Have you ever seen
> Duchamp's "Sad Young Man on a Train"? Or "Nude Descending a Staircase"
> or "The King and Queen Surrounded by Swift Nudes"? I don't know about
> you bt that stuff is NOT "depersonalized" to me! Even "The Large Glass"
> is an impressive and expressive work.
Nude Descending a Staircase is not on the same plane as a white-on-white canvas. The
NDaS has rhythm, personification. Granted, you can't see the face, but its
representation of a human figure in graceful movement makes it all the palpable.
That doesn't mean you need a human figure to be artistic, but my point here is that
the work does not create the impression of an intellectual glass ceiling,
notwithstanding the sculpture's links to the intellectual artistic fashions of the
day.
> You don't know SQUAT about communism. You know about Leninism, which is
> pretty stupid all right, but remember that Leninism took root in a THIRD
> WORLD COUNTRY -- Tsarist Russia! DAMN, they had to be dragged a la
> Peter the Great into the modern world, kicking and screaming!
I'd take White Russia anyday over the communists.
> Sometimes
> (only sometimes) I don't blame Stalin, those people were ass-backwards,
> and in places like Central Asia, they're STILL like that!
It sounds to me like you approve of a large, powerful, intellectual body which
dictates 'progressive' culture. Are you a Democrat by any chance?
> Real
> "communism" doesn't outlaw those things you cite, they become
> unnecessary. Besides, who needs the church anyway, bunch of foolish
> supertitious nonsense!
I don't agree with everything that the church (or the synagogue) represent either,
but I wouldn't be so bold as to call them nonsense.
> I'll tell you who the real enemy is, it's people
> like John Ashcroft who have delusions of being "King of Judea" and
> annoint themselves with Crisco oil, who are really into that church
> stuff!
I don't believe the liberal press' lynch mob. They'll find a way to smear anyone who
opposes them or has different views from theirs.
> > People look at the
> > modern corporation like some symbol of capitalism, but these big corporations
> > are much like mini socialized states. There is no ownership (at work) for
> > employees, no self, no self esteem, no say. To me, these large corporations are
> > antithetical to self-determination. The denial that people must suffer through
> > all day long, as a basic function of their lives,
>
> Up to here I agree with you.
I know you do. Let's concentrate on the things we agree with.
> > is symptomatic of the
> > rejection they meet when they face the arts.
>
> No, the problem is people with stunted brains who can't handle anything
> like the classical-music equivalent of Manny Barilow and Dull
> McCartney. Or Yawny.
I like McCartney, even if he isn't always as interesting as some. He brought the
world a lot of good cheer.
> I cite as Example Prime -- AYN RAND! If SHE isn't a
> "Stalinist-in-reverse" then what is she??
She's probably one of the worst writers I ever read. I can't believe she was
published. To this day, there's only been one book that I've thrown in the garbage,
and it was hers. I threw it away because it was simplistic. Don't ask me to cite
it, because it's in a landfill.
> > I think the ideas have entered the artistic community to such a great degree
> > that the labels get lost. I mean, how many 'card carrying communists' are there
> > in Severence Hall? Probably none. But the ideas of a de-personalizing state,
> > in which faith, lyricism, and realism have been abandoned, are with us.
>
> Oh come on. If you can't have "lyricism" without faith, that's YOUR
> prob.
First of all, what kind of faith are you describing? You don't know me well enough
to know where my faith lies.
> I used to play a lot of those pieces by Cage which are seen as
> "non-expressive." I probably violated Cage's intention because I found
> "expressivity" in them and brought it out.
I think Cage is way over-rated. He's a typical 20th century self-promoter. You can
only talk something to death so long before it comes to the bottom line: where's the
music? Several minutes of silence, as a complete composition, isn't exactly music,
is it? Oh I forgot. If an intellectual says it's music, then it is.
> Even when you play arpeggios
> and deal cards into the piano and tune in AM radio stations, or knock on
> the wooden parts of the piano. You can do it like it has something in
> it for you, or you can just "shit all over it" (as Ruggles might say).
> There are going to be two performance of one of Cage's star-chart pieces
> here next week. I'm hoping that the players don't (a) play it like it's
> meaningless crap but try to find some way of making random notes sound
> "musical" and lyrical (like my own chance piece for cello solo), or (b)
> play it like some "high-minded" piece like Carhorns Stock-housing thinks
> his music is, every note so lofty that "these Gods only shit marble."
Bunch of rubbish. How about a composition where you throw dead birds at the piano
wires, and then string up some naked women (oh- scratch that - liberal won't like
it), and then string up some white men and then run a paint roller over them.
That'll sell, and I'm calling it art! And you're buying, goddamit, because I know
someone in the NY TImes who's going to write in next week's issue that it _is_ art.
You're going to be wondering for years why I used dead birds, and I'll be raking it
in, going on the collegiate lecture circuit talking about the need for a new
identity.
D.G. Porter
>
> snipped for brevity.
>
> "D.G. Porter" wrote:
>
> > You don't know SQUAT about communism. You know about Leninism, which is
> > pretty stupid all right, but remember that Leninism took root in a THIRD
> > WORLD COUNTRY -- Tsarist Russia! DAMN, they had to be dragged a la
> > Peter the Great into the modern world, kicking and screaming!
> > (only sometimes) I don't blame Stalin, those people were ass-backwards,
> > and in places like Central Asia, they're STILL like that!
>
> It sounds to me like you approve of a large, powerful, intellectual body which
> dictates 'progressive' culture. Are you a Democrat by any chance?
No, I might be Green, but I really don't have a true affiliation at this
time. I do know quite a bit about Central Asia, and they're all fools
(most of them anyway). Khazaks are Khyrgizians are the same but they
don't think so. Tajiks and Uzbeks are practically the same but they
think otherwise. And there's one little islet of Khazakstan within
Uzbekistan, and they tell you when you drive through there not to get
out of your car. Fukkin' ridiculous. What is Massachusetts decided
Connecticut was this alien??? And don't even get started on Rhode
Island, it was founded by a heretic! Some day, those loonies in Central
Asia just might get their act together -- and maybe annex Uiguristan too
-- but right now they're a herd of clowns.
> I don't believe the liberal press' lynch mob. They'll find a way to smear anyone who
> opposes them or has different views from theirs.
"Liberal press" My ass. They're having a love-fest with Shrub. Haven't
you heard? "No negative stories about Bush, nothing that might be
sensed as 'liberal bias.'"
> > I used to play a lot of those pieces by Cage which are seen as
> > "non-expressive." I probably violated Cage's intention because I found
> > "expressivity" in them and brought it out.
>
> I think Cage is way over-rated. He's a typical 20th century self-promoter. You can
> only talk something to death so long before it comes to the bottom line: where's the
> music? Several minutes of silence, as a complete composition, isn't exactly music,
> is it? Oh I forgot. If an intellectual says it's music, then it is.
Obviously you know nothing of Cage's music. Try getting some and
playing it. I can take those pieces for piano Nos. 4-90 and make them
sound purtty. Even "Water music." (That was a fun one. The
frequencies he specifies for the AM radio got me KABC news, Ray Breim
and some Mexican music station.)
> > Even when you play arpeggios
> > and deal cards into the piano and tune in AM radio stations, or knock on
> > the wooden parts of the piano. You can do it like it has something in
> > it for you, or you can just "shit all over it" (as Ruggles might say).
> > There are going to be two performance of one of Cage's star-chart pieces
> > here next week. I'm hoping that the players don't (a) play it like it's
> > meaningless crap but try to find some way of making random notes sound
> > "musical" and lyrical (like my own chance piece for cello solo), or (b)
> > play it like some "high-minded" piece like Carhorns Stock-housing thinks
> > his music is, every note so lofty that "these Gods only shit marble."
>
> Bunch of rubbish. How about a composition where you throw dead birds at the piano
> wires,
Done that. "Chuck Estes, Prepared Piano Piece, 1975. Place dead
chickens (as prepared for cooking) on piano strings and play Chopin
Etudes." "Ersatz Prepared Piano Piece -- the chickens are frozen."
> and then string up some naked women (oh- scratch that - liberal won't like
> it),
I would. Nekkid chix are cool! M-heh!
> and then string up some white men and then run a paint roller over them.
> That'll sell, and I'm calling it art! And you're buying, goddamit, because I know
> someone in the NY TImes who's going to write in next week's issue that it _is_ art.
Yeah, yeah, Bernie Holland reviwed the Ives Emerson Concerto like that.
Who cares? I'm talking some good pieces by Cage and you're talkin'
crap.
> You're going to be wondering for years why I used dead birds, and I'll be raking it
> in, going on the collegiate lecture circuit talking about the need for a new
> identity.
You're probably wondering why I'm here, and so am I, so am I...
Just as much as you wonder 'bout me being in this place, that's just how
much I marvel at the lameness on your face.
You paint your face and then you chase to meet the gang where the action
is. Stomp all night and drink your fizz. Roll your car and say "Gee
whiz." You tore a big hole in your convertible top. What will you tell
your mom and pop?
You're probably wondering why I'm here, and so am I, so am I...
Just as much as you wonder 'bout me staring back at you, that's just how
much I question the corny things you do.
You told your mom you're stoked on Tom, and went for a cruise in
Freddy's car. Tommy's asking where you are. You boogied all night in a
cheesy bar. Plastic boot and plastic hat, and you think you know where
it's at?
Brian Newhouse
greg wrote:
> Brian Newhouse wrote:
>
> >
> > --most of which tended to be violently anti-Communist, with good reason.
> > Otherwise they wouldn't have emigrated. Igor Stravinsky and Vladimir Nabokov,
> > to name the two most famous emigre Russian artists (in the broader sense of
> > the term) to settle in the United States, may have come from quite different
> > ideological backgrounds (White Russian tsarist vs. nineteenth-century-style
> > agnostic liberal), but they certainly converged on that.
> >
> > And Hans Hofmann was a _German_ emigre.
> >
> > "Much more research", indeed...
>
> I'm not so uninformed as to realize that we've had a steady stream of Russian
> immigrants fleeing Russia for almost 100 years now. I think the actual causes of
> their flight is more complicated than the western press gives it out. Some of
> these emigrees may have had sympathies with the fundamental political causes of
> the Soviet Union. I don't think it's the White Russians who dominated the New
> York art world, either.
The complaints I've always heard have been about _German and Austrian_ emigres (i.e.
from Naziism) dominating postwar American culture. Granted, some were emigres
because they were socialists or Communists, but not all were (e.g. Schoenberg, to
name a musically relevant example).
Or do you include Eastern European Jews fleeing (pre-Soviet) Russian pogroms for the
ghettos of New York among those "Russian emigres"? That's the only way you're going
to get Mark Rothko in there--if you don't mind getting Irving Berlin in there as
well.
>
>
> > In other words:
> > --Certain music sounds disagreeable and forbidding.
> > --Statist regimes are characterized by their being disagreeable and
> > forbidding.
> > --Anything that is disagreeable and forbidding is therefore statist.
>
> No. That would imply prickly plants are statist.
Which is just what I was saying (see below).
>
>
> > I know this is a highly respectable mode of thought in certain academic
> > quarters, particularly if one substitutes, say, "patriarchal" or "sexist" or
> > "Eurocentric" for "statist". Given the structure of the argument, it's easy
> > enough to plug in your least favorite kind of regime into that blank; and
> > people have. Being disagreeable and forbidding is not a monopoly of statist
> > regimes; you find that sort of thing everywhere.
> >
> > (And isn't there more to statism than just being disagreeable and
> > forbidding?)
>
> Yes. You also need a big bureaucratic state/corporation which uses its clout to
> commission particular kinds of art works.
What if the big bureaucratic state/corporation explicitly demands that the art works
it commissions _not_ be disagreeable and forbidding? Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia
and Communist China have all been notorious for demanding and commissioning large
quantities of art that isn't disagreeable or forbidding.Would the art still not be
"statist" then, even if produced under the aegis and with the encouragement of a
regime commonly considered as statist as one gets?
(For that matter, might that imply that, since Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia and
Communist China discouraged the production of "statist" art, none of rhose regimes
were as statist as we've made them out to be? That's what comes of equating
aesthetics with politics.)
>
> > That's the problem with that sort of mode of thought. If you can slip terms
> > from wildly divergent and even contradictory political ideologies into a
> > nonpolitical argument without changing the structure of the argument, then
> > you're not describing anything at all, neither the music nor (really) your own
> > response to it. If you find a style of music disagreeable and forbidding, why
> > not just call it disagreeable and forbidding and forget the dubious, forced,
> > and ultimately irrelevant political parallels?
> >
> > I really cannot understand this mania for describing musical style in
> > political terms...
>
> Well music has had political terms for a long time. Maybe politics aren't
> present or overt in every case. Many great composers have had political leanings
> which affected their works. Why should that be any different for the present
> day?
Very simple. You can't predict what sort of sociopolitical convictions will go with
what style of music by reference to the sound or technique of the music alone. Some
Communists have composed atonal music (e.g. Nono); others have composed tonal music,
often quite traditionally tonal, not only under Communist regimes (e.g.
Shostakovich) but outside of them (Copland, for instance, was a notorious
fellow-traveller, especially during the 30s and 40s as he composed his most
Americanizing works; but I suppose you would consider him one of those "emigrees
[who] may have had sympathies with the fundamental political causes of the Soviet
Union") Some postwar post-serialists, like Boulez, adopted the intellectual
fashions of the European left; others became neo-conservatives (e.g. Milton Babbitt)
or devoutly identified their serialism with neo-orthodox Catholicism (e.g. Krenek,
to some degree Stravinsky)
More important, why _should_ political terms be the main terms in which we describe
and evaluate music, or anything else outside of explicitly political thought and
activity for that matter? Whether or not it "debases" music, it certainly
trivializes politics.
greg
"D.G. Porter" wrote:
> Obviously you know nothing of Cage's music. Try getting some and
> playing it.
Well obviously I've done that or I wouldn't be able to talk about it, would I? Or do you
mean I should start preparing my own pianos? I did that when I was five, and my parents
scolded me. I guess when you can afford your own grand piano, you're free to fit it with
spare chicken parts to check the effects. My brother once took a hammer to the ivories
and broke a couple of them, in a moment of high art. We called that 'piano desynthesis in
C for two hands'.
> > Bunch of rubbish. How about a composition where you throw dead birds at the piano
> > wires,
>
> Done that. "Chuck Estes, Prepared Piano Piece, 1975. Place dead
> chickens (as prepared for cooking) on piano strings and play Chopin
> Etudes." "Ersatz Prepared Piano Piece -- the chickens are frozen."
There goes my fifteen minutes of fame. It sounds like a good recipe though. Does it say
anything about BBQ sauce?
What was that last bit of prose, btw?
D.G. Porter
>
>
> What was that last bit of prose, btw?
LOON ON THE LOOSE!
True Tales of ZORAK COURIERS
By Joe Schwind (1979)
The Mother Lode was doin bout 95 on the outskirts of a fillin station
called Gulfport. A solid week of aspirin, Coke, and concrete.
Saw the thing at dusk. A 30 foot muscleboy daring me to kick sand in
his face.
The monster melted away; Mother rammed into a tree. Another foul
Pimbledon telepathic decoy!
"Charm Spot of the Deep South."
AMERICA IS SHORT 100,000 MECHANICS AND 25,000 SHOPS.
Agent McNab was on my tail. I snarfed the evidence and scrammed.
Scored some hot credit cards and a ride to St. Paul. Slept all the
way. Bought a Longer Thicker at Cordial John's Auto World.
Split for the desert.
Met a whacked-out physicist called Captain Video in Pietown, New
Mexico. He had some futuristic schemes.
The Captain converted the Thicker in a week. Gave him an ounce of meth
I copped at the border. The Thicker was one in a million!
Cap was nailed in '59. He converted eight cars, the Pimbledons
recovered five.
Picked up a gang of escaped Lobotomoids in Leawood, Kansas. Lost them
at a rest area near Birdseye, Indiana.
They were maimed by Pimbledon butchers for display at causeless
telethons.
Bumped into a wild thing named Raydine in Ann Arbor. The cheese was
ripe for dropping out.
We left Detroit in rush hour, no particular place to go.
THE MIRACLE OF OWNING BIG CARS.
Parked for a week in a pasture in Peewee Valley, Kentucky. Soaked the
upholstery with blood and jiz. Raydine kept humming "Bluberry Hill." I
got used to it.
A "LIFT" FOR THE OLD FOLKS.
We gobbled six boxes of airsickness pills on Haunted Hiway Nine.
Couldn't stand but I could almost drive.
Raydine foamed at the mouth for 700 miles. When I remembered how to
stop the Thicker we were on a Flathead reservation in Montana.
"OK" SAY FOUR WHEEL DRIVE OWNERS.
Raydine joined the Sisterhood of Aural Sensualists in Rolla, Mo. The
burg stunk of Pimbledons and the welts on my ass needed time to heal, so
I drove into the sunset, a bottle of Bud between my legs.
The law stopped me outside of Mayberry, near Mount Pilot.
The cop was too loaded or too goofy to run a make on the Thicker.
We found a possum stuck to the grill.
The Longer Thicker melted down on Pahute Mesa in Nevada. The fuel rods
were burnt out and I could feel feel something gaining on me.
Didn't look back.
---
hur...@my-deja.com
"Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Sounds like what I saw of Domingo! (At a rehearsal the
> night before the official "dress" of L.A. Opera's Aida - it
> should have been past the "talking" stage by then!)
>
That's true I saw a rehearsal of Domingos Where he did the same!
Hurvitz
Jennifer Martin
>> >Clark, they were playing at <gag!> KNOTT'S BERY FARM and it's "Good-tme
>> >theater" (somrething like that)
>>
with
>Keith.
>> Fine conductor, and I studied with him for a bit. It was kind of an
>outgrowth
>> of the under-nourished orchestra at Cal State Fullerton. I remember
>playing
>> gigs at several strange places!
D.G.: >I know Keith. I like Keith. I like him a lot. But I could not stand
>working for him. His organizational skills were shall we say less than
>ideal??
LOL! Yes, I know. And problems in the "people" area have cost him several
gigs. I hope he's doing OK in Portland.
Jenn Martin
M. Edward Borasky
> In an unusually frank piece in the NY Times this morning, Anthony
> Tommasini pleads with the Philharmonic not to appoint Maazel as
> Music Director to succeed Masur. He suggests using people like
> Davis and Boulez as interim Music Directors, giving time for the
> likes of Robertson or Nagano to become known enough to take the
> job. In a none-too-thinly veiled stick-and-carrot message, he
> tells the Philharmonic that the critics would make the right new
> young Music Director into a star, but that they would flay Maazel
> and make everyone long for the days of Masur.
> A strong piece. I wonder if it will have an impact.
Why an old fart like Maazel, Davis or Boulez? How about someone younger? Gerard
Schwarz, for example?
--
zn...@aracnet.com (M. Edward Borasky) http://www.aracnet.com/~znmeb
If God had meant carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given rabbits
fire.
dtritter
"M. Edward Borasky" wrote:
> Why an old fart like Maazel, Davis or Boulez? How about someone younger? Gerard> Schwarz, for example?
because schwartz was a fine trumpeter and is a lousy conductor.
dft