Segovia's REAL scandal
Jeff Rossman
trivial compared with his real scandal. Segovia was an unabashed, virulent,
and admitted anti-semite. This is not a theory, or an unsubstantiated
allegation. This is an historical fact. How, or if, people consider this in
appraising his legacy is entirely a personal choice. History is filled with
great artists who had some very base characteristics.
Majjick
ross...@dukemc.mc.duke.edu (Jeff Rossman) writes:
>Segovia's collaboration/conspiracy with Ponce on the 'Weiss' suites
>are trivial compared with his real scandal. Segovia was an unabashed,
>virulent, and admitted anti-semite.
If so, I beg that we omit any further discussion. Segovia was hardly
conspicuous for moderateness in any of his expressed opinions, and this
one has no relation to music. Even those that have (such as his various
remarks to the effect that the only worthwhile instrument was the guitar,
and the only worthwhile guitarist was himself), I believe, are of no more
than historical interest now that he has passed beyond the possiblity of a
change of heart.
Reason: IMHO, such discussions tend to ramble on and on, without ever
reaching any useful resolution.
Paul Magnussen
Kozinn
I have heard, on fairly good authority, that he had Nazi and
Franco-Fascist sympathies in the 30s; I don't know how long they lasted.
But I haven't heard this specifically. I'm not sure it would surprise me,
but it's not something I've run into, and I'd be interested in any
elaboration you could provide.
Allan <kozinn@aol> or <a.ko...@genie.geis.com>
Kozinn
more
than historical interest <<<<
"no more than historical interest" seems a strange reservation to hold.
Anything of historical interest seems to me to be worth exploring. And
anything worth covering up is worth exposing.
Allan <kozinn@aol> or <a.ko...@genie.geis.com>
Carl Christensen
>In article <rossm001.7...@dukemc.mc.duke.edu>
>ross...@dukemc.mc.duke.edu (Jeff Rossman) writes:
>>Segovia's collaboration/conspiracy with Ponce on the 'Weiss' suites
>>are trivial compared with his real scandal. Segovia was an unabashed,
>>virulent, and admitted anti-semite.
>If so, I beg that we omit any further discussion. Segovia was hardly
>conspicuous for moderateness in any of his expressed opinions, and this
>one has no relation to music. Even those that have (such as his various
>remarks to the effect that the only worthwhile instrument was the guitar,
Yes, this would be pointless. Hell, we can say Elizabethan-era English
writers like Shakespeare and Marlowe were anti-Semitic, or find
innumerable references of famous writers or musicians that weren't exactly
bastions of the politically correct. The poet Robert Frost was supposedly
a real prick. This it doesn't mean that "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy
Evening" is a terrible, useless poem that we should ignore, though. We
should look at someone's body of work not on the basis of their possibly
distorted view on religion or race or some other issue, especially when
we're talking about non-politicians. This sort of sanitizing of the arts
worries me more than Segovia's anti-Semitism, e.g. when schools wanted to
stop using Mark Twain books because of the dreaded "n" word so prevalently
in use at the time he wrote, but rightfully not nowadays (except in rap
songs).
Actually, what really gets me mad about Segovia is that he thought the
electric guitar was an evil, useless instrument! :-)
------
Carl Christensen /~~\_/~\ ,,, For music fun in Windows
E-mail: ca...@netaxs.com | #=#==========# | download alcomp11.zip
C/C++/FoxPro Consultant \__/~\_/ ``` at a popular FTP site!
Philadelphia, PA Obligatory WWW page --> http://www.netaxs.com/people/carl
Jeffrey Briggs
Read the correspondance between Segovia and Ponce in the letters
published by Editions Orphee. There are references to a Jewish conspiracy
against him because of his political views - these are Segovia's words.
His fascist sympathies are clearly spelled out in his own words. That's
part of the reason he spent much of the war in Uruguay - the (mostly)
Jewish empresarios in NY wouldn't book him in the US due to his views.
I was shocked, because, like thousands, I had idolized him
since the age of 15 when my father gave me a Segovia album. But, as was
well pointed out earlier in this thread, many great artists have been
grossly misguided ethically speaking. Ezra Pound (the American poet)
was convicted of treason for collaborating openly with the Italian
fascists under Musolini.
Jeff Briggs
jbr...@capital.edu
.
Donald Harris
anti-semitism there. It's the first I've heard the assertion. Could you
relay to us the evidence for it?
Brian Scruby
The REAL scandal in Segovia's life was that he kept recording long past the point
where his ability was able to keep up with his reputation. He traded on a great
name, but left a legacy of some of the most miserable guitar recordings ever made.
The sad thing is that people who knew no better bought them and though they were
wonderful, just because the cover said Segovia.
Brian
Majjick
(Shillitoe) writes:
> Much as I did not like Segovia's playing when I was young (and
> stupid) I liked his opinionated self importance and 'artistic'
> narrowminedness even less.
Yes. But Harold Robbins makes what I think is a valid point in (I seem to
remember) The Carpetbaggers: it is that the arrogance, the conviction that
they're right and everyone else is wrong, is a necessary quality for such
people to achieve what they do (Robbins was talking about film directors).
If Segovia had not had this quality (that Robbins calls "creative
conceit"),
could he have sustained that long battle to get the guitar accepted as fit
for more than just strumming song accompaniments? Against the mentality
that told Bream never to bring his guitar to music college again, because
it was corrupting the other students? I think not.
Of course, for the people on the receiving end of Segovia's prejudices,
they
were not a joke. For myself, though, I thought they livened the world up
--
rather like Zsa Za Gabor.
Paul Magnussen
Kozinn
reprehensible views, we should revise his opinion of him as a performer.
This whole concept is old news: Mengelberg was a Nazi sympathizer, and
was drummed out of Holland for it after the war; but that notwithstanding,
his recordings show an extraordinary interpreter. Yes, the man and the art
are separate, although it is not only in America that the myth of art as a
moral force has been put forth as a truism. Be that as it may, now that
we've established this, I don't see any reason to avoid looking into what
Segovia's beliefs actually were. The lectures on how we should use the
information, or how we should regard Segovia as an artist in light of his
views, are entirely beside the point.
Allan <kozinn@aol> or <a.ko...@genie.geis.com>
Derrick G. Pitard
>In article <3l988d$3...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> shil...@aol.com
>(Shillitoe) writes:
>> Much as I did not like Segovia's playing when I was young (and
>> stupid) I liked his opinionated self importance and 'artistic'
>> narrowminedness even less.
>Yes. But Harold Robbins makes what I think is a valid point in (I seem to
>remember) The Carpetbaggers: it is that the arrogance, the conviction that
>they're right and everyone else is wrong, is a necessary quality for such
>people to achieve what they do (Robbins was talking about film directors).
Perhaps part of the problem is that we want to see musical beauty as
"timeless," but such characteristics in Segovia (or characteristics in any
artist that we today find distasteful: what *did* Shakespeare think of
Jews?) remind us that in fact it isn't; that great art is a response to and
part of the currents of the time it arose from. For us to say it is
timeless is to turn it into some sort of absolute "Good," but art is surely
a function of an individual's interpretative sensibilites, and these
sensibilities are an integral part of the time in which he or she lived;
they are a response to it as well as an effort to elicit responses from
others. I would argue therefore that we in fact *can't* separate Segovia's
character from his music--it just doesn't make sense, since it is his
character which created it, and art can't exist separately from the
artist. This doesn't mean that we can't love his music--but we do have to
see it as part of a time which, as it recedes, we can get a greater and
greater perspective on.
Segovia's legacy, then (by which I mean the thing that *does* endure
through time) I would say isn't his recordings per se; they are a part of
his time which we may or may not develop a taste for. His legacy *is* the
fact that he virtually alone created the guitar as a modern classical
instrument. I think the proof of this is in the first statement above--even
if you dislike his interpretations or his character or both, it is doubtful
that most of us would be playing it or much of the music we do without him.
my .02!
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
Derrick G. Pitard "Just sit your ass in the chair. . ."
dg...@troi.cc.rochester.edu --David Bleich
________________________________________________________________________________
Shillitoe
man, not the artist, if that is of interest (which it is to me.) I'm not
clear on your comment about lack of sources. What sources--about which
issue?
In the long run, I believe that our understanding and ability to
appreciate an artists contribution should include his karmic circumstances
and their effects on his/her art art. I think we all have to wrestle with
our attachment or aversion to particular political/social issues as they
relate to art. But after all, they are the field upon which the artist
plays, no?
Shillitoe
liked his opinionated self importance and 'artistic' narrowminedness even
difficult for Americans who believe we are what we do for a living.
Heidegger was a brilliant philosopher and a Nazi sympathizer in the
beginning. Trungpa an accomplished Tibetan lama and a drunk. Both made
enormous contributions in their respective fields of endeavor inspite of
their personal failings. What we can learn to do, if we choose to, is to
separate the man/woman from the teacher/artist, letting each stand on its
own merits.
N. Montover
- take a new look at the negative effects of anti-semitism, it is safe to
say that anyone who wasn't jewish was, to an extent, anti-semitic. Jews
have ALWAYS taken it on the chin for whatever reasons. These reasons are
beyond the scope of this newsgroup so I will not elaborate (however, my
undergraduate degree is in religious studies and I will be happy to
discuss them privately so as not to bore everyone else). To acknowledge
that Segovia fell victim to prevailing religious attitudes does not
excuse him from his ignorant views (BTW, not ONE solid sourse has been
presented to prove these allegations) but we must remain painfully aware
that during his day Segovia was in the majority...thus this discussion,
as has been pointed out, can probably be applied to any non-jew living
before the 1930's. Let's let the dead rest. His views have died with him,
but his music and legacy have survived, and I just bought two of his disks!
Nate
Sean Matthews
> In article <3l988d$3...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> shil...@aol.com
> (Shillitoe) writes:
>
> > Much as I did not like Segovia's playing when I was young (and
> > stupid) I liked his opinionated self importance and 'artistic'
> > narrowminedness even less.
> If Segovia had not had this quality (that Robbins calls "creative
> conceit"),
> Of course, for the people on the receiving end of Segovia's prejudices,
> they
> were not a joke. For myself, though, I thought they livened the world up
>
> Paul Magnussen
I think this is definitely wrong. While some people (not me) might find
Segovia's pretensions and arrogance amusing, it is difficult to deny
that his attitude did enormous damage to the modern repertoire of the
Guitar. As someone else pointed out, he was sufficiently prominent
that, given a little counterfactual speculation, we are left to contemplate
a library of Bartok, Messiaen, Stravinsky and Schostakovich which never
happened.
This is especially sad since, even with his nasty philistine prejudices (and
the way he expressed them damns them as nasty and philistine rather than just
conservative) the 20th C. is one of the strongest parts of the guitar
repertoire, with lots of guitar music written by composers, as opposed to
music written by guitar composers (if you appreciate the distinction).
Sean
--
Sean Matthews <se...@mpi-sb.mpg.de>
Work: Max-Planck-Institut fuer Informatik, phone: +49 681 302 5363
Im Stadtwald, D-66123 Saarbruecken, Germany fax: +49 681 302 5401
Home: Grossherzog-Friedrich Str. 70, Saarbruecken phone: +49 681 64015
MARGORA
In a former article we saw...
---begin former article---
From: "N. Montover" <nmon...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu>
Subject: Re: Segovia's REAL scandal
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 1995 23:44:00 -0600
---end former article---
and MAR...@ctrvx1.Vanderbilt.Edu (MARGORA) comments...
Not "one solid source"? You should obtain a copy of the
Segovia-Ponce letters, published by Editions Orphee, which
contains copies of extant letters from Segovia to Ponce.
You will find more than one solid source for Segovia's
anti-semitic views.
Majjick
Matthews) writes:
> As someone else pointed out, [Segovia] was sufficiently prominent
> that, given a little counterfactual speculation, we are left to
> contemplate a library of Bartok, Messiaen, Stravinsky and Schostakovich
> which never happened.
Hard to dispute objectively, but rather ungenerous, surely? It seems to
me like criticising Einstein for not inventing the Uncertainty Principle
as well.
Would *you* be playing, or otherwise enjoying, the guitar today, if it
hadn't been for the influence of old Fatty, Sean?
Paul Magnussen
Roger Adams
mop...@orphee.usa.com (Matanya Ophee) writes:
> I once used this as a title for an article in Guitar International
> magazine, showing that a well-known piece by Luigi Mozzani, was
> actually written by a Spaniard named Jose Sancho. The article fitted
> pefectly with the bias of its editor, the late George Clinton. (No
> relation to Bill, I hope...). When I wrote a similar article, showing
> that the first guitar concerto of this century was not written by
> Castelnuovo-Tedesco for Segovia, but rather by a little known Mexican
> composer-guitarist named Rafael Adame, and performed in Mexico City
> _when Segovia was there_, George and I parted ways. Historical
> interest, then, is really a question of what one is interested in.
> Some people are not interested in _any_ information which may put the
> subject of their veneration in a questionable light, regardless of
> how true it may be. Faith is a powerful emotion. It has nothing to do
> with the truth.
>
Could you elaborate on this. I used to play the concerto and thought I
knew who wrote it! Did this Adame set out to write it in the style of
Tedesco (which it appears to be assuming Tedesco wrote anything)?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Adams
rad...@cerritos.edu To those in whom love dwells,
Cerritos College the whole world is one family.
11110 Alondra Blvd A Hindu Proverb
Norwalk, California 90650
USA 295 Dwapara :-)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Rossman
>From: maj...@aol.com (Majjick)
>Subject: Re: Segovia's REAL scandal
>Paul Magnussen
I think you are missing the point. No one is arguing about Segovia's greatness
or his influence on generations of guitarists. What I am saying is that his
personal biases against composers who were universally regarded as towering
musical giants potentially cost our instrument an even more profound
repertoire. How many times have you heard how it is such a shame that Mozart,
Brahms, Mendelssohn, Schubert, etc. never wrote for the guitar. Well Segovia
had the reputation and influence to commission compositions from 20th century
composers every bit as important as the great 18th and 19th century
composers. If he were truly a visionary figure in the development of the
guitar he could/should have put aside what I believe were unreasonable and
ill-conceived attitudes towards "modern" music and not perpetuated the
unfortunate apathy of most great composers to the guitar through the ages.
For someone who fought his whole life for respect for the instrument, it seems
he passed up great opportunities to bring the guitar more fully into the
family of orchestral instruments. I wrote this before, but just imagine if
Segovia had Julian Bream's love of contemporary music and his proclivity for
commissioning works for the guitar. Ponce/Torroba/Tansman/Castelnuovo-Tedesco
are all wonderful composers, but why NOT Stravinsky, Bartok, Shostakovich,
Prokofieff, Messiaen, Copland, Barber, Ives, Hindemith (he wrote Sonatas for
every instrument BUT guitar).
Matanya Ophee
| Would *you* be playing, or otherwise enjoying, the guitar today, if it
| hadn't been for the influence of old Fatty, Sean?
|
| Paul Magnussen
This question is tantamount to going back in time and trying again.
Not workable. Personally, I am sure I would still be playing the
guitar even if Old Fatty never happened. _My_ first introduction to
the guitar was via the recordings of Rey de la Torre, and my first
teacher was a student of Luigi Mozzani. She did have one lesson with
Segovia during his brief passage through Palestine. In his hotel
room, if you get my drift. Of course I eventually got hold of Segovia
recordings, and of course his concert in Town Hall in New York in
1960, the first time I heard him live, was an unforgettable
experience. I too, was a believer in those days.
Faith matters aside, the guitar has been a powerful force in human
affairs for three centuries now. It existed, and will continue to
exist, because of _all_ of us, and in spite of any one of us. If
Segovia never happened, we would still be influenced by his forgotten
contemporaries, Miguel Llobet, Julio Martinez Oyanguren, Benvenuto
Terzi, Luigi Mozzani, Heinrich Albert, Rey de la Torre, Julio Prol,
the Valdez-Blain brothers, Vahda Olcott-Bickford, Richard Pick and
the list goes on and on.
Of course Segovia had an important influence on the way the guitar
developed during his life time. It would have developed differently,
if he was not there. We can only speculate on how that would have
been. But to think no one would have played the guitar today if not
for Segovia, is to display a view of human history which based on
false premises.
Matanya Ophee
Matanya Ophee
| In article <95Mar31121240.$T10...@IH.USA.Com>,
| mop...@orphee.usa.com (Matanya Ophee) writes:
|
| > that the first guitar concerto of this century was not written by
| > Castelnuovo-Tedesco for Segovia, but rather by a little known Mexican
| > composer-guitarist named Rafael Adame, and performed in Mexico City
| > _when Segovia was there_,
| Could you elaborate on this. I used to play the concerto and thought I
| knew who wrote it! Did this Adame set out to write it in the style of
| Tedesco (which it appears to be assuming Tedesco wrote anything)?
I am sure you know well who wrote _Castelnuovo-Tedesco's_ concerto.
It was C-T himself. You are reading into my statement something I
did not say. The C-T concerto was written in 1939. The Adame
concerto is a different work altogether, written for a guitar
with a seventh string tuned in low B and titled Concierto de
Mariachi (copy of the score can be had from the Free Library in
Philadelphia) was performed by the composer in Mexico City on
February 5th 1933. Segovia always said that the first concerto of
this century was written for him by C-T in 1939. Having been in
Mexico City in February of 1933, there is no way he could not have
known about the Adame, particularly when the work was conducted by
Julian Carillo, perhaps the most important Mexican musician of the
1920-30s. As a matter of fact, in an aside in Guitar International,
its editor reports that he asked Segovia in person about this, and
Segovia admitted to him that Carillo actually came to see him in
person, soon after the performance. He did not say what they talked
about. Do you think it is possible they discussed the guitar concerto
Carillo just conducted a few days earlier? your guess is as good as
mine.
Matanya Ophee
John Pearce
BS>>>trivial compared with his real scandal. Segovia was an unabashed, virulent
BS>>>and admitted anti-semite. This is not a theory, or an unsubstantiated
BS>The REAL scandal in Segovia's life was that he kept recording long past the
BS>nt
BS>where his ability was able to keep up with his reputation. He traded on a g
BS>t
BS>name, but left a legacy of some of the most miserable guitar recordings ever
BS>de.
BS>The sad thing is that people who knew no better bought them and though they
BS>e
BS>wonderful, just because the cover said Segovia.
Now this I agree with. Long live the old Decca recordings,
scratches, squeaks and all! - JP.
---
* OLX 2.1 TD * And when yourself with silver foot shall pass
Brian Egras
> or his influence on generations of guitarists. What I am saying is that his
> personal biases against composers who were universally regarded as towering
> musical giants potentially cost our instrument an even more profound
> repertoire. How many times have you heard how it is such a shame that Mozart,
> Brahms, Mendelssohn, Schubert, etc. never wrote for the guitar. Well Segovia
> had the reputation and influence to commission compositions from 20th century
> composers every bit as important as the great 18th and 19th century
> composers. If he were truly a visionary figure in the development of the
> guitar he could/should have put aside what I believe were unreasonable and
> ill-conceived attitudes towards "modern" music and not perpetuated the
> unfortunate apathy of most great composers to the guitar through the ages.
> For someone who fought his whole life for respect for the instrument, it seems
> he passed up great opportunities to bring the guitar more fully into the
> family of orchestral instruments. I wrote this before, but just imagine if
> Segovia had Julian Bream's love of contemporary music and his proclivity for
> commissioning works for the guitar. Ponce/Torroba/Tansman/Castelnuovo-Tedesco
> are all wonderful composers, but why NOT Stravinsky, Bartok, Shostakovich,
> Prokofieff, Messiaen, Copland, Barber, Ives, Hindemith (he wrote Sonatas for
> every instrument BUT guitar).
>
I understand that you wish Segovia posessed a love for contemporarty
music and had commissioned works from the aforementioned composers, but the
facts remain apparent. Segovia did not like contemporary music all that much.
For him to play it while he did not like it would be wrong. You can't BLAME
him for disliking certain styles of music can you? Hell, I wouldn't want to
listen to any musician play music that he dislikes. How can it be any good?
All you can say is "What if Segovia..." . You can't blame him for his
tastes.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Later,
[Ralph Eyman]
>In article <3lf95d$7...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> maj...@aol.com (Majjick) writes:
>are all wonderful composers, but why NOT Stravinsky, Bartok, Shostakovich,
>Prokofieff, Messiaen, Copland, Barber, Ives, Hindemith (he wrote Sonatas for
>every instrument BUT guitar).
Didn't Hindemith write a guitar trio (in sonata form?)?
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
| Ralph Eyman ra...@sys4689.orl.mmc.com |
| Systems Integration Analyst |
| Lockheed Martin Information Systems (for whom I don't necessarily speak) |
| (407)826-6167 alt Email: u77...@sys30030.orl.mmc.com |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
dan...@gate.net
>In article <3lf95d$7...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> maj...@aol.com (Majjick) writes:
>I think you are missing the point. No one is arguing about Segovia's greatness
>or his influence on generations of guitarists. What I am saying is that his
>personal biases against composers who were universally regarded as towering
>musical giants potentially cost our instrument an even more profound
>repertoire.
I don't think anyone here has missed that point. I think what's happening is that
we're all trying to move on. Segovia's prejudices probably did cost classical guitar
some good pieces, possibly some *defining* pieces that may have moved cg into
the kind of respect and recognition we all crave for it.
There's not a damn thing anyone here can do about that.
What we can do is what Segovia didn't - abandoning the attitude that 'traditional'
music is better than modern music would be a good start. Music is music, and some
music is timeless. A 400 year old lute piece is no better or worse than the stuff
being written today, and the more we get caught up in whether something is 'classical'
or no it's 'flamenco' no wait it's 'new age' or 'jazz' or whatever, the more shackles
we bolt to our guitars. And now I'm not going to play any more pieces dedicated to
Segovia because he was nasty old bastard and I don't like him anymore. Hmm, looks
like I have to throw out half my guitar peices now....
Talk about lost opportunities! Let's don't repeat Segovia's mistake by taking
the same attitude towards him that we're condemning him for having towards
others.
Dan