An opera about a handkerchief
The Historian
handkerchief, Verdi's Otello? My experience with the opera is limited
to one complete recording (Busch leading the Met chorus and orchestra
in 1948, with Vinay in the title role) and a couple of arias sung by
Domingo.
BTW, the Busch Otello I have is on a Membran/Quadromania set with the
1952 de Sabata Macbeth, with Maria Callas as Lady Macbeth. I can't
speak for the quality of the transfers, not having heard others, but
both are listenable. The 1948 recording sounds better.
Matthew�B.�Tepper
following letters to be typed in
news:18aeddf3-938f-43c9...@r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com:
I collect "Otello" recordings with Vinay, and the Busch is superb.
BTW, Rossini (who also composed an "Otello") had some business involving a
handkerchief in "Cenerentola."
--
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
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Kip Williams
> BTW, Rossini (who also composed an "Otello") had some business involving a
> handkerchief in "Cenerentola."
Johann Strauss touched on the subject operatically as well.
Kip W
wkasimer
wrote:
> What are some recommended recordings of the opera about a
> handkerchief, Verdi's Otello?
I have a slew of them; the ones that get the most air time are:
M. Price, Cossutta, Bacquier; Solti (Decca)
M. Price, Giacomini, Manuguerra, Lombard (Forlane)
Rethberg, Martinelli, Tibbett, Panizza (Naxos)
Studer, Domingo, Leiferkus, Chung (DG)
Watson, Hopf, Metternich, Solti (Walhall)
Vickers' studio recordings are both compromised by casting issues. I
actively dislike Domingo's other studio versions. Everyone should
probably have a Del Monaco recording, but I will confess that I don't
like any of them very much.
There are also a variety of live Vladimir Atlantov recordings kicking
around, very much worth hearing.
Bill
wagnerfan
news:18aeddf3-938f-43c9...@r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
The Toscanini is a must have even though it has a totally neutral Desdemona.
But the orchestral performance is so astounding that others pale in
comparison - if ever a conductor and orchestra were one mind, this is it.
The commercial recording is available on a number of labels and the unedited
broadcast is available on Naxos. Wagner fan
William Sommerwerck
double-feature!
Matthew�B.�Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:guf4et$hdn$1...@news.motzarella.org:
> Isn't there an opera based on Gogol's "The Nose"? What a great operatic
> double-feature!
Shostakovich. Two recordings: Rozhdestvensky/Moscow Chamber Opera (once
available on BMG) and Alain Lombard/Lausanne Chamber Orchestra, perhaps still
available on Cascavelle. No English-language libretto with either of them.
I can understand that for the Francophone label, but BMG just ... blew it.
Dontait...@aol.com
> The Toscanini is a must have even though it has a totally neutral Desdemona.
> But the orchestral performance is so astounding that others pale in
> comparison - if ever a conductor and orchestra were one mind, this is it.
> The commercial recording is available on a number of labels and the unedited
> broadcast is available on Naxos.
Agreed. Vinay is good as Otello; Herva Nelli is indeed her usual
neutral self, unfortunately. But it's Toscanini who is overwhelming.
It's not just the orchestral performance. It's the sense of a total
conception in which everything, every single detail of the opera and
drama, come vividly and completely to life with the singers. One can
tell that Toscanini is with them every second for every syllable they
sing (that's what singers always said about him). It's a completely
integrated experience. The opera becomes a gripping drama from first
note to last. And I, at least, never fail to notice and understand (I
think) for the first time things in the opera that I hear that
Toscanini does, subtle Verdi things of which I've never been conscious
with other conductors. The singers aren't the kind of cast Toscanini
surely had at the Met and La Scala in "golden" days, but the
performance remains overwhelming as an experience of Verdi's opera
(and as an example of what everyone who heard Toscanini in the opera
house always cited as his ability to bring everything more vividly to
life than any other conductor).
As a last comment: a couple of years ago I had lunch with a good
friend I won't name, although he is known to many here and elsewhere,
including as a Furtwaengler enthusiast, collector, and published
critic specializing in Furtwaengler and vocal music recordings. As we
rode in his car, I brought up Toscanini, about whom he once told me he
had "problems." He said that he found recordings by Toscanini devoid
of emotion or communication. I asked, "Even Otello?" He quickly
replied "oh no -- Toscanini's Otello is stupendous!" A recommendation
from someone who is even actively hostile to Toscanini.
Anyway, you might want to try it. Mono sound, some cast
limitations, and all. And a great question about one of my favorite
of all operas. A towering masterpiece. Thanks.
Don Tait
wkasimer
> Shostakovich. Two recordings: Rozhdestvensky/Moscow Chamber Opera (once
> available on BMG) and Alain Lombard/Lausanne Chamber Orchestra, perhaps still
> available on Cascavelle. No English-language libretto with either of them.
http://www.mdt.co.uk/MDTSite/product/NR_June09/MAR0501.htm
Bill
wagnerfan
news:4a561c4a-61b8-4a1d...@o30g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
Don Tait
The performance always give me the sensation of a slowly turning screw
culminating in the lightening fast revelations in the last scene -
shattering!!!! Wagner Fan
Curtis Croulet
> culminating in the lightening fast revelations in the last scene -
> shattering!!!! Wagner Fan
I can guess the companion Don was talking about.
My problem is with the opera itself. Why did Verdi feel compelled to write
an opera about such an absolute jerk? I know he thought of calling it
"Iago," and I think that might have been the better bet.
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
33�27'59"N, 117�05'53"W
William Sommerwerck
news:KIHOl.901$wR5...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> My problem is with the opera itself. Why did Verdi feel compelled
> to write an opera about such an absolute jerk? I know he thought
> of calling it "Iago," and I think that might have been the better bet.
Shouldn't you be daming William S? And I think he got the story elsewhere.
Matthew�B.�Tepper
following letters to be typed in
> I can guess the companion Don was talking about.
Chirp, chirp.
> My problem is with the opera itself. Why did Verdi feel compelled to
> write an opera about such an absolute jerk? I know he thought of
> calling it "Iago," and I think that might have been the better bet.
Lots of operatic characters are jerks (Pinkerton, Duke of Mantua, etc.), but
Otello is a really, really, really *complicated* jerk.
Curtis Croulet
Yes, I got it. That's what three semesters of German got me (45+ years
ago).
> Lots of operatic characters are jerks (Pinkerton, Duke of Mantua, etc.),
> but
> Otello is a really, really, really *complicated* jerk.
Pinkerton and the Duke are just out for a good time. And their operas
aren't named for them. As for Shakespeare: I never liked the play, either,
and for the same reason. Otello's music is so magnificent, it bothers me
that it's wasted on this simpleton.
Sol L. Siegel
<wkas...@comcast.net> wrote:
>On May 13, 3:39�pm, "Matthew�B.�Tepper" <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Shostakovich. �Two recordings: �Rozhdestvensky/Moscow Chamber Opera (once
>> available on BMG) and Alain Lombard/Lausanne Chamber Orchestra, perhaps still
>> available on Cascavelle. �No English-language libretto with either of them. �
>
>http://www.mdt.co.uk/MDTSite/product/NR_June09/MAR0501.htm
Whoa. Gergiev, of course, is leading the Met's premiere performances
of the opera next March (the economy permitting!).
But MDT's listing doesn't actually mention a libretto!
- Sol L. Siegel, Philadelphia, PA USA
The Historian
> "The Historian" <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I ordered the Verdi box on BMG - the Otello, Ballo, Aida, Falstaff,
Traviata, Rigoletto Act 4, Requiem, Te Deum, Hymn of the Nations, etc,
12 disc set. I have both a fondness for Toscanini recordings and a
blind spot when it comes to Verdi. This promises to address both
conditions.
The Historian
> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the
> following letters to be typed innews:18aeddf3-938f-43c9...@r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com:
>
> > What are some recommended recordings of the opera about a handkerchief,
> > Verdi's Otello? My experience with the opera is limited to one complete
> > recording (Busch leading the Met chorus and orchestra in 1948, with
> > Vinay in the title role) and a couple of arias sung by Domingo.
>
> > BTW, the Busch Otello I have is on a Membran/Quadromania set with the
> > 1952 de Sabata Macbeth, with Maria Callas as Lady Macbeth. I can't speak
> > for the quality of the transfers, not having heard others, but both are
> > listenable. The 1948 recording sounds better.
>
> I collect "Otello" recordings with Vinay, and the Busch is superb.
Even though it's my first encounter with the opera, I could sense that
this was a good performance. And surprisingly well recorded for an off
the air job. Was this taped from the ABC TV broadcast, or the Texaco
Saturday radio transmission? I'm assuming Membran/Quadromania is
taking it from the same private sources everyone else does.
> BTW, Rossini (who also composed an "Otello") had some business involving a
> handkerchief in "Cenerentola."
Probably a lot of operas involve hankies at some point. The thread
title was prompted by a 17th century writer who dismissed
Shakespeare's drama as "a play about a handkerchief."
The Historian
Between Toscanini and Busch, I'm set for now. At some point I'll
probably want a stereo set. Serafin from 1960 looks like the one to
beat, although Domingo's first recording with Levine is also well-
reviewed.
Matthew�B.�Tepper
letters to be typed in news:q6sm05l2dcfd8hui3...@4ax.com:
A 104-page booklet divided into notes in four languages couldn't possibly
have room for this long and complicated libretto!
Matthew�B.�Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:654bc7d2-0a9b-484a-8bf7-
3ac95d...@s20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
> On May 13, 11:50�am, "Matthew�B.�Tepper" <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the
>> following letters to be typed innews:18aeddf3-938f-43c9-8a03-7c07189d74a4
> @r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > What are some recommended recordings of the opera about a handkerchief,
>> > Verdi's Otello? My experience with the opera is limited to one complete
>> > recording (Busch leading the Met chorus and orchestra in 1948, with
>> > Vinay in the title role) and a couple of arias sung by Domingo.
>>
>> > BTW, the Busch Otello I have is on a Membran/Quadromania set with the
>> > 1952 de Sabata Macbeth, with Maria Callas as Lady Macbeth. I can't speak
>> > for the quality of the transfers, not having heard others, but both are
>> > listenable. The 1948 recording sounds better.
>>
>> I collect "Otello" recordings with Vinay, and the Busch is superb.
>
> Even though it's my first encounter with the opera, I could sense that
> this was a good performance. And surprisingly well recorded for an off
> the air job. Was this taped from the ABC TV broadcast, or the Texaco
> Saturday radio transmission? I'm assuming Membran/Quadromania is taking
> it from the same private sources everyone else does.
I couldn't say, but Melodram's reputation appears to be better than theirs,
and the Melodram (MEL 27501) is what I have.
>> BTW, Rossini (who also composed an "Otello") had some business involving
>> a handkerchief in "Cenerentola."
>
> Probably a lot of operas involve hankies at some point. The thread title
> was prompted by a 17th century writer who dismissed Shakespeare's drama as
> "a play about a handkerchief."
Wasn't there a singer in a production of this opera who vexed the conductor
by asking, "What is all this about a handkerchief?"?
William Sommerwerck
> > Chirp, chirp.
>> Lots of operatic characters are jerks (Pinkerton, Duke of Mantua, etc.),
>> but Otello is a really, really, really *complicated* jerk.
> Pinkerton and the Duke are just out for a good time. And their operas
> aren't named for them. As for Shakespeare: I never liked the play, either,
> and for the same reason. Otello's music is so magnificent, it bothers me
> that it's wasted on this simpleton.
Curtis raises a good point -- why do human being do stupid, self-destructive
things? Well, if they didn't, they'd probably be happy, and we wouldn't have
a lot of classic stories.
Look at Othello as a cautionary tale.
wagnerfan
news:a64d278c-7ad8-4584...@g20g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
Although the Serafin looks good on paper , its frankly awful. Probably
Rysaneks worse commercial recording - too much of the music lies in the
lower middle and is jumbled sounding. Vickers Otello is not the towering
interpretation it was later to come and Gobbi should have been immense but
it is merely good. The worst part of the reocrding is Serafin (!) who was
trying I guess for some sort of monumentality but instead winds up with a
slow and heavy reading lacking in impetus. Instead I would go for the
Karajan recorded around the same time. Desdemona was probably Tebaldis best
role and she is magnificent. Del Monaco has rerfined his interpretation
since his first Decca recording in 54 and Protti has refined his Iago though
the voice is second rate. The sound is absolutely magnificent and Karjan is
too - the sheen of his later work is allied to dramatic impetus and
strength. The newest transfer contain the ballet music in the third Act
which is very pretty but dramatically absurd - you can skip over it and play
it later. Wagner Fan
wagnerfan
Very good idea - the Falstaff, Otello, Aida. Ballo and Requiem are so
magnificently conducted, they make vocal inadequacies seem less important.
The Rigoletto Act 4 does have the right voices and is searing. The Traviata
I think is the least important - he pushes too much and the recording of the
dress rehearsal finds him more relaxed. You may want to also consider the
Naxos transfer of the Otello - beautifully remastered by Marston it is the
actual broadcasts with all commentaries - very exciting. Enjoy!!! Wagner Fan
makropulos
> The worst part of the reocrding is Serafin (!) who was
> trying I guess for some sort of monumentality but instead winds up with a
> slow and heavy reading lacking in impetus. Instead I would go for the
> Karajan recorded around the same time.
It's odd how Serafin's performance strikes different listeners so
differently. I think his conducting is magnificent here, full of
rhythmic energy that is quite different from Karajan's approach.
Serafin feels much more theatrical to me - not monumental at all (!)
and certainly not lacking in impetus, even though he doesn't rush
things. I suppose all I'm saying to the OP is to listen to it and make
up their own minds. Speaking for myself, it's the stereo Otello I play
more than any other.
Kip Williams
> Look at Othello as a cautionary tale.
Weirdly enough, some people took another message from the story:
http://www.archive.org/download/AdaJones_part1/AdaJones-MisterOthello.mp3
Ada Jones, "Mister Othello" (1909), fancies the idea of somebody who
cares about it so passionately.
(Then again, this is the artiste who also recorded "If the Man in the
Moon Were a Coon," though to be fair, her performance in "The Yama Yama
Man" works for me, and she seems to be in a number of old records I enjoy.)
Kip W
wagnerfan
news:0a759ea7-1875-4843...@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
intentions to a better degree but for me the whole thing has a "studied"
aura combined with slow tempi that really destroys the performance. Actually
that approach is better carried out in the Barbirolli recording which also
has slow tempi but a powerful underpinning to carry it through. But of
course everyone should make up their own mind. Wagner Fan
The Historian
It was cheap enough from "Claire" at Camain, so I ordered it too.
Meanwhile I listened to the Busch again. I can't wait for the
Toscanini sets to arrive.....
Simon Roberts
makropulos says...
I'm with you, even though I'm not wild about Rysanek's Desdemona (it also has
superb sound in the most recent transfer). For Karajan I prefer the EMI (or,
better yet, the unintentionally funny DVD of what's essentially the same
performance), even though Glossop is hardly a first rate Iago. Prior talk about
a certain Furtwangler fan's fondness of Toscanini's reminds me that one
shouldn't overlook Furtwangler's. Nor, among more recent live performances,
should one overlook Carlos Kleiber's (not sure which is the best - haven't
compared them side-by-side). One should, however, overlook Maazel's recording
on EMI.
Operashare members should also try some of the live performances featuring
Varady's incomparable Desdemona.
Simon
woytek
Ettore Panizza - Metropolitan broadcast from 1938. Marston transfer on
Naxos is absolutely splendid.
JAC
opera. Naturally I have my own opinions, but I enjoy challenging the
opinions I've built up over the years and revisiting ones I listened
to long ago. It really is an inexhaustibly great opera, on a great
subject. The ones I like:
Toscanini. No need to add to what others have said about it. It's a
searing experience.
Solti I. An Otello of unexpectedly near-top-rank stature from Carlo
Cossutta (I wasn't so surprised myself, having seen him be a
definitely top-rank Manrico at Covent Garden), a Desdemona of melting
beauty from Margaret Price, and one of the few Cassios cast with the
stature he ought to have (Petr Dvorsky).
Levine. I wish Scotto had Price's vocal loveliness (the part does ask
for it), but she has almost every other virtue. I also like Domingo
here, and Levine's leadership has the virtues of his Verdi work in the
1970s.
I also have a Carlos Kleiber, with Freni, Domingo, and Cappuccilli,
which I like very much.
For the others, I'm one of those frustrated and disappointed by the
Serafin, starting with the maestro himself. I don't mind a "stately"
approach to the work (Barbirolli does that quite well, I think, and
his cast has some interesting strengths and is certainly not
anonymous), but I just don't understand the point of this one. Vickers
doesn't have the stature he showed in his great live performances of
the title role, and Rysanek is truly hard to listen to -- but then I
always find her so except on the few occasions I was lucky enough to
see her in person.
I've now heard enough live tapes of Del Monaco to understand and
acknowledge the greatness he had in him. But I don't find it captured
in either of the studio performances of this opera.
JAC
Curtis Croulet
> Serafin, starting with the maestro himself. I don't mind a "stately"
> approach to the work (Barbirolli does that quite well, I think, and
> his cast has some interesting strengths and is certainly not
> anonymous), but I just don't understand the point of this one. Vickers
> doesn't have the stature he showed in his great live performances of
> the title role, and Rysanek is truly hard to listen to -- but then I
> always find her so except on the few occasions I was lucky enough to
> see her in person.
I have Barbirolli, and I rather like it, slow or not. Its major blot -- for
me -- is McCracken. Throughout, even during the good times of Act I, he
sounds like he's always on the edge of desperation, as though he's always on
the verge of a psychotic breakdown. OTOH, playing Otello that way makes
credible Iago's perception that he can "play" this "hero" to get what he
wants. He knows how fragile Otello really is, even if others do not. He's
probably seen Otello wracked by indecision and depression on the
battlefield, surviving only because of his highly competent subordinates.
I also have Serafin, and I guess the fact that I've only played it a couple
of times speaks to my true feelings about it.
Tassilo
> I have a slew of them; the ones that get the most air time are:
> M. Price, Cossutta, Bacquier; Solti (Decca)
Got it, although not for the singers. I like Solti’s faux Toscanini
far more than Levine’s. Of course, there is the passage in the middle
of the last act where Solti and Cossutta are measures apart for a few
bars.
> M. Price, Giacomini, Manuguerra, Lombard (Forlane)
Haven’t heard it.
> Rethberg, Martinelli, Tibbett, Panizza (Naxos)
Got it. Like it. Not least for Panizza.
> Studer, Domingo, Leiferkus, Chung (DG)
I’ve got it, and I like it, but I wish I could hear one of the live
performances that preceded the DG recording. DG’s engineers have done
Maestro Chung a disservice: every once in a while some of the shaping
and characterful playing that Chung is eliciting from his
instrumentalists comes through reasonably clearly for a brief moment.
But much of the time it’s smoothed over by the slick engineering.
Chung is so good that even that doesn’t rule him out of court.
> Watson, Hopf, Metternich, Solti (Walhall)
Never heard it. Are you a particular fan of Solti’s performances of
this opera?
> Vickers' studio recordings are both compromised by casting issues.
Unlike many others, I love the first recording (Rysanek-Vickers-Gobbi-
Serafin). Then again, I don’t have any problem with any of the cast,
including Miss Rysanek. This is one of those late Serafin recordings
in which he’s a lot less energetic than he used to be, and some of the
orchestra’s ensemble is fairly embarrassing, and much of it is too
slow, but I still essentially like Serafin’s performance, and I like
much of the orchestral playing: the trumpets in Act I are simply
terrific, thrillingly involved in the performance. I’d rather listen
to Serafin’s less than first rate orchestra play with a proper sense
of the style than hear either of Karajan’s orchestras. (Then again,
the sinister silky black playing of the VPO in Tebaldi-Del Monaco-
Protti-VPO-Karajan is one of my guilty pleasures.)
> Everyone should
> probably have a Del Monaco recording.
Why? Surely not for him. Then again, I can’t live without De los
Angeles-Del Monaco-Warren-MET-Cleva because of Miss De los Angeles.
Probably my favorite performance of the role of Desdemona, and not
just because she’s in fresh youthful voice, which she is, but because,
one of the most intelligent yet artless singers who ever lived, she’s
at once intelligent and ingenuous.
The best conducted performance of Otello I’ve ever heard is the Cetra
recording—derived from a live RAI broadcast (8 June 1955)—with Cesy
Broggini, Carlos Guichandut, and Giuseppe Taddei with Franco Capuana
conducting the Orchestra Sinfonica di Torino della RAI. This is a
magnificently shaped, idiomatic, and rip roaring performance from
beginning to end. Among the many other things missing from most
orchestral performances today is the range and variety of
articulations that conductors routinely used to induce
instrumentalists to use in phrasing music. This performance is an
object lesson in just that. Nor does Capuana miss a trick at any
level: the various interlinking movements in Act I, for example,
interlink with a palpable rightness as in no other performance I’ve
heard, the rhythm in one section palpably continuing the rhythm of the
previous. With Capuana around, who needs Carlos Kleiber, good as he
is in this opera?
None of the sublime Capuana’s singers really has a voice, not even
Taddei, who is nevertheless a remarkable Iago . . . and many people
will have difficulty tolerating Guichandut’s ungainly production and
far from gorgeous sound, but he’s a reasonably sensitive singing actor
with more brains and a far better sense of pitch than Del Monaco and
more imagination than Domingo. With a sound even less beautiful than
Vinay’s.
I also love Toscanini’s performance, although not quite as much as
Capuana’s, which is in a league with what you might have expected of,
say, Gui or the younger Serafin on their very best night. The
Toscanini broadcast also features my favorite performance by my
favorite Otello, Ramon Vinay.
I also have Albanese-Vinay-Warren-Busch, of course. On Preiser.
-david gable
Tassilo
> Agreed. Vinay is good as Otello; Herva Nelli is indeed her usual
> neutral self, unfortunately.
I’m not particularly wild about Nelli’s disappointing performance of
Desdemona for Toscanini, but Nelli’s usual self was anything but
neutral, and her Amelia in Ballo and Alice in Falstaff are miracles of
sensitive singing acting from a musical singer with the dramatic
instincts of a Callas: the Italian Sprechstimme moments in the
gallows scene in Ballo alone are worth the price of admission. Who
cares if she didn’t have the most gorgeous voice in the world?
Tebaldi did, and she could neither phrase musically nor sing in tune.
-david gable
Tassilo
> My problem is with the opera itself. Why did Verdi feel compelled to write
> an opera about such an absolute jerk?
The theme of sexual jealousy runs throughout the Romantic drama and
throughout Italian opera, and it was a central theme in Verdi’s
operas: Othello was Shakespeare’s supreme treatment of this theme,
the very most obvious Shakespeare play for Verdi to have chosen to
set. In any case, it’s too easy simply to dismiss Otello as a jerk.
No doubt, his character was simplified in reducing Shakespeare’s text
for an opera, and there are important distinctions in Shakespeare’s
attitude toward his story and characters and Verdi’s and Boito’s, but
the interactions between Otello and Iago are certainly fuel enough for
a viable drama.
My problem is not with Otello per se, but with the mores that 19th-
century audiences seemed to accept whole heartedly, at least on the
stage. (One can only hope that they were more understanding in real
life.) In the last act of Luisa Miller, based on Schiller’s Kabale
und Liebe, we are supposed to countenance Luisa’s poisoning at the
hands of the Romantic lead when he wrongly suspects her of adultery.
She accepts these unpalatable mores, too, having refused to tell the
young nobleman who is in love with her the truth—which is that she is
innocent—because she has sworn an oath. The truth is her father was
thrown into prison to force her to pretend she’s betrayed the young
man so that he will renounce her, and she rejoices when she realizes
that she’s dying at his hand, because that frees her to tell him the
truth. At no point does anyone question his right to have poisoned
her under the circumstances as he incorrectly perceives them. (Nor,
of course, am I suggesting that the young man would have had a right
to kill her had she not been innocent.)
When Verdi wrote an opera about a married protestant priest who
forgave his wife’s adultery—Stiffelio—it’s not clear which plot
element Italian audiences found more improbable: the notion of a
married priest or the idea that a married man might forgive his wife’s
adultery.
-david gable
Tassilo
> Instead I would go for the
> Karajan recorded around the same time. Desdemona was probably Tebaldis best
> role and she is magnificent.
One reason Tebaldi sang Desdemona so often is that the role lies so
low and is not, comparatively speaking, terribly demanding vocally.
In fact, Tebaldi had a “short top” long before Domingo, and it showed
very early on in her career: the same people who crucify him for this
routinely give La Tebaldi a pass (although I’m not necessarily talking
about the Wagner Fan!) I find Tebaldi’s Desdemona vastly overrated:
her ear was all too fallible, her sense of intonation dubious, and I
never thought her phrasing was the least bit interesting, despite
claims to the contrary based on her actually rather odd and ultimately
shapeless legato. Tebaldi had a gorgeous sound and an immense
likability—her instrument itself is ideal for the role—but I’ll take
Rysanek any day of the week, flaws and all.
-david gable
Al Eisner
> <Dontait...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:4a561c4a-61b8-4a1d...@o30g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
> On May 13, 12:29pm, "wagnerfan" <wagner...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> The Toscanini is a must have even though it has a totally neutral
>> Desdemona.
>> But the orchestral performance is so astounding that others pale in
>> comparison - if ever a conductor and orchestra were one mind, this is it.
>> The commercial recording is available on a number of labels and the
>> unedited
>> broadcast is available on Naxos.
>
> Agreed. Vinay is good as Otello; Herva Nelli is indeed her usual
> neutral self, unfortunately. But it's Toscanini who is overwhelming.
> It's not just the orchestral performance. It's the sense of a total
> conception in which everything, every single detail of the opera and
> drama, come vividly and completely to life with the singers. One can
> tell that Toscanini is with them every second for every syllable they
> sing (that's what singers always said about him). It's a completely
> integrated experience. The opera becomes a gripping drama from first
[etc., long unquoted text, apparently all by Don Tait]
> The performance always give me the sensation of a slowly turning screw
> culminating in the lightening fast revelations in the last scene -
> shattering!!!! Wagner Fan
[Those three unquoted lines are from Wagner Fan]
Why is it so difficult for you to properly quote text, so that you
*visually* distinguish what you are saying from what you are quoting?
ALmost everyone else here seems to have no trouble getting it right.
--
Al Eisner
The Historian
>
> > The Toscanini is a must have even though it has a totally neutral Desdemona.
> > But the orchestral performance is so astounding that others pale in
> > comparison - if ever a conductor and orchestra were one mind, this is it.
> > The commercial recording is available on a number of labels and the unedited
> > broadcast is available on Naxos.
>
> Agreed. Vinay is good as Otello; Herva Nelli is indeed her usual
> neutral self, unfortunately. But it's Toscanini who is overwhelming.
> It's not just the orchestral performance. It's the sense of a total
> conception in which everything, every single detail of the opera and
> drama, come vividly and completely to life with the singers. One can
> tell that Toscanini is with them every second for every syllable they
> sing (that's what singers always said about him). It's a completely
> integrated experience. The opera becomes a gripping drama from first
> think) for the first time things in the opera that I hear that
> Toscanini does, subtle Verdi things of which I've never been conscious
> with other conductors. The singers aren't the kind of cast Toscanini
> surely had at the Met and La Scala in "golden" days, but the
> performance remains overwhelming as an experience of Verdi's opera
> (and as an example of what everyone who heard Toscanini in the opera
> house always cited as his ability to bring everything more vividly to
> life than any other conductor).
>
> As a last comment: a couple of years ago I had lunch with a good
> friend I won't name, although he is known to many here and elsewhere,
> including as a Furtwaengler enthusiast, collector, and published
> critic specializing in Furtwaengler and vocal music recordings. As we
> rode in his car, I brought up Toscanini, about whom he once told me he
> had "problems." He said that he found recordings by Toscanini devoid
> of emotion or communication. I asked, "Even Otello?" He quickly
> replied "oh no -- Toscanini's Otello is stupendous!" A recommendation
> from someone who is even actively hostile to Toscanini.
>
> Anyway, you might want to try it. Mono sound, some cast
> limitations, and all. And a great question about one of my favorite
> of all operas. A towering masterpiece. Thanks.
>
> Don Tait
Hi Don,
Thanks for the detailed comments, as usual. I've received the BMG box
set and I'll be listening to the Otello sometime this weekend.
Your friend's comment is as much as slam as praise. It's little more
than the old charge that Toscanini only understood Italian music.
The Historian
The box arrived yesterday. With the bounty offered in the little box
it seems churlish to quibble, but.....
The presentation is pretty feeble. Nothing on the operas, no libretti,
and the only set of notes the usual praise and misinformation RCA has
dished out for 70 years. Sachs thirty years ago debunked the story RCA
created the NBC Symphony from scratch for Toscanini, but it shows up
yet again in the essay in the booklet.
And while I understand the concept behind this box is to put all
Toscanini's Verdi together, there was space to add other works. The
Prologue to Boito's Mefistofele would have fit nicely on the disc with
the first act of Aida, for instance.
Complaints aside, I'm enjoying myself with this set. Even the tacky
Hymn of the Nations is fun.
I have a question about the Aida recording I'm listening to now. I
understand from Sachs' biography of the conductor that some re-
recording was done in Carnegie Hall 5 years after the broadcasts. I
know Oh Patria Mia was redone - Sachs mentions that aria, and the
acoustic is different. What else was rerecorded?
jeffc
1944, Böhm, live Recording: complete opera
Version: -, Language: sung in German,
Place: Vienna, Date: August 1944, Condition: live,
Issues: Preiser 90230 (Pic - 2 CDs, -), Cantus 5.00096 (2 CDs, -),
Myto 922.60 (2 CDs, -) Cast: Torsten Ralf (Otello) ---- Hilde Konetzni
(Desdemona) ---- Paul Schöffler (Iago) ---- Josef Witt (Cassio) ----
Elena Nicolaidi (Emilia) ---- Tomislav Neralic (Lodovico) ---- Peter
Klein (Roderigo) ---- Viktor Madin (Montano) ---- Roland Neumann
(Araldo)
Chorus: Wiener Staatsopernchor
Orchestra: Orchester der Wiener Staatsoper
Conductor: Karl Böhm
wkasimer
Last time I looked, this was available at Berkshire.
Bill
wagnerfan
"The Historian" <neil.the...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1c281685-6eaf-4679...@s28g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
Aida - both soprano arias rerecorded to correct Nelli's mistakes
Requiem - part of Libera me redone for ditto reason
Falstaff - Fentons aria rerecorded to correct Massi's errors
Otello - opening scene rerecorded to correct offstage brass entry
Wagner fan
Matthew�B.�Tepper
letters to be typed in news:pe-dnd_QYIJzwojX...@giganews.com:
> "The Historian" <neil.the...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1c281685-6eaf-4679...@s28g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>
>> I have a question about the Aida recording I'm listening to now. I
>> understand from Sachs' biography of the conductor that some re-recording
>> was done in Carnegie Hall 5 years after the broadcasts. I know Oh Patria
>> Mia was redone - Sachs mentions that aria, and the acoustic is different.
>> What else was rerecorded?
>
>
> Aida - both soprano arias rerecorded to correct Nelli's mistakes
> Requiem - part of Libera me redone for ditto reason
> Falstaff - Fentons aria rerecorded to correct Massi's errors
> Otello - opening scene rerecorded to correct offstage brass entry
Paul Renzi, longtime flutist of the NBC Symphony and principal for its final
year, told me that they also re-did the intro to "Va, pensiero" with that
little flute solo "because Carmine Coppola couldn't play the scale in tune."
I had the impression at the time he told me that this was another take during
the June 1954 sessions, but now that I think about it, he could have been
misremembering (or, more likely, I could have misunderstood him), and it was
done earlier.
And now more time has passed since he told me that than had passed between
the final sessions and the time I discussed that with him.
Roger Kulp
> On May 13, 12:29 pm, "wagnerfan" <wagner...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > The Toscanini is a must have even though it has a totally neutral Desdemona.
> > But the orchestral performance is so astounding that others pale in
> > comparison - if ever a conductor and orchestra were one mind, this is it.
> > The commercial recording is available on a number of labels and the unedited
> > broadcast is available on Naxos.
>
I have a large Toscanini collection,going from the early 20s acoustic
La Scala 78s,to Toscanini Society Lps from the early 80s.There are a
lot of his records that I can't listen to for this very reason.The
"Pictures at an Exhibition" on LM-1838 is one that immediately springs
to mind.
Roger
Dontait...@aol.com
> On Wed, 13 May 2009, wagnerfan wrote:
What are you talking about? And to whom are you referring? My
comments were in a post toward the start of this thread, and you can
read them there. I don't recall quoting text at all.
Don Tait
Dontait...@aol.com
{snip}
> I have a large Toscanini collection,going from the early 20s acoustic
> La Scala 78s,to Toscanini Society Lps from the early 80s.There are a
> lot of his records that I can't listen to for this very reason.The
> "Pictures at an Exhibition" on LM-1838 is one that immediately springs
> to mind.
>
> � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Roger
What is the "very reason" that yoiu can't listen to them? I've had
the impression from your posts that you will only acquire and listen
to pre-digital recordings pressed on shellac and vinyl. No CDs. So
what's the reason that you can't play Toscanini's 78s, 45s, and LPs?
Don Tait
Dontait...@aol.com
> "wagnerfan" <wagner...@comcast.net> appears to have caused the following> > "The Historian" <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:1c281685-6eaf-4679...@s28g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> I have a question about the Aida recording I'm listening to now. I
> >> understand from Sachs' biography of the conductor that some re-recording
> >> was done in Carnegie Hall 5 years after the broadcasts. I know Oh Patria
> >> Mia was redone - Sachs mentions that aria, and the acoustic is different.
> >> What else was rerecorded?
>
> > Aida - both soprano arias rerecorded to correct Nelli's mistakes
> > Requiem - part of Libera me redone for ditto reason
> > Falstaff - Fentons aria rerecorded to correct Massi's errors
> > Otello - opening scene rerecorded to correct offstage brass entry
>
> Paul Renzi, longtime flutist of the NBC Symphony and principal for its final
> year, told me that they also re-did the intro to "Va, pensiero" with that
> little flute solo "because Carmine Coppola couldn't play the scale in tune." �
> I had the impression at the time he told me that this was another take during
> the June 1954 sessions, but now that I think about it, he could have been
> misremembering (or, more likely, I could have misunderstood him), and it was
> done earlier.
>
> And now more time has passed since he told me that than had passed between
> the final sessions and the time I discussed that with him.
Interesting. Thanks. "Va, pensiero" was a 1943 broadcast, so if
there was a later "patch" of that passage, the Victor people
camouflaged it well sonically.
There was clearly a fair amount of "patching" done for the Toscanini
broadcast recordings issued by RCA Victor. Especially the late ones.
Years ago, Mike Gray sent me photocopies of RCA Victor sheets for
"patches" with members of the NBC SO for Strauss's Don Quixote (a late
1953 broadcast). It didn't involve many musicians, and Toscanini was
not said to have been there. I don't know where those sheets are now.
I'll try to locate them and post more details.
Don Tait
Matthew�B.�Tepper
typed in
news:5f03ca5f-dcaf-41ab...@m24g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
> On May 21, 11:41�am, Roger Kulp <thorenstd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> {snip}
>
>> I have a large Toscanini collection, going from the early 20s acoustic
>> La Scala 78s, to Toscanini Society Lps from the early 80s. There are a
>> lot of his records that I can't listen to for this very reason. The
>> "Pictures at an Exhibition" on LM-1838 is one that immediately springs
>> to mind.
>
> What is the "very reason" that yoiu can't listen to them? I've had
> the impression from your posts that you will only acquire and listen
> to pre-digital recordings pressed on shellac and vinyl. No CDs. So
> what's the reason that you can't play Toscanini's 78s, 45s, and LPs?
Turntable not working, perhaps?
Matthew�B.�Tepper
typed in
news:328000dd-7a02-45cf...@n8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com:
> On May 21, 9:45 am, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> Paul Renzi, longtime flutist of the NBC Symphony and principal for its
>> final year, told me that they also re-did the intro to "Va, pensiero"
>> with that little flute solo "because Carmine Coppola couldn't play the
>> scale in tune." I had the impression at the time he told me that this
>> was another take during the June 1954 sessions, but now that I think
>> about it, he could have been misremembering (or, more likely, I could
>> have misunderstood him), and it was done earlier.
>>
>> And now more time has passed since he told me that than had passed
>> between the final sessions and the time I discussed that with him.
>
> Interesting. Thanks. "Va, pensiero" was a 1943 broadcast, so if there
> was a later "patch" of that passage, the Victor people camouflaged it
> well sonically.
I've thought about that every time I've heard it since. One possibility is
that he was kidding, and he was just taking a shot at Coppola. I dunno.
> There was clearly a fair amount of "patching" done for the Toscanini
> broadcast recordings issued by RCA Victor. Especially the late ones.
> Years ago, Mike Gray sent me photocopies of RCA Victor sheets for
> "patches" with members of the NBC SO for Strauss's Don Quixote (a late
> 1953 broadcast). It didn't involve many musicians, and Toscanini was
> not said to have been there. I don't know where those sheets are now.
> I'll try to locate them and post more details.
If Toscanini wasn't there, who was conducting? Frank Miller?
The Historian
wrote:
> On May 14, 5:34 am, "wagnerfan" <wagner...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "The Historian" <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:901acc09-23e2-4c02...@q14g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
> > On May 13, 1:29 pm, "wagnerfan" <wagner...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > "The Historian" <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:18aeddf3-938f-43c9...@r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > handkerchief, Verdi's Otello? My experience with theoperais limited
I've listened to the Naxos set, and narrowly prefer this transfer to
BMG's. And I like the announcements and applause as well. The one
drawback is the annotations, which rely heavily on Horowitz - can one
really call him a Toscanini "biographer?"
Matthew�B.�Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:5b2233c1-109a-4699-bf97-
7c769b...@u10g2000vbd.googlegroups.com:
> I've listened to the Naxos set, and narrowly prefer this transfer to BMG's.
> And I like the announcements and applause as well. The one drawback is the
> annotations, which rely heavily on Horowitz - can one really call him a
> Toscanini "biographer?"
If it's Joseph Horowitz, he's a Toscanini *basher*, not a biographer. That
guy couldn't write a weather report or a shopping list without slipping in
some denunciation of Toscanini along the way.
The Historian
> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the
> following letters to be typed in news:5b2233c1-109a-4699-bf97-
>
> > I've listened to the Naxos set, and narrowly prefer this transfer to BMG's.
> > And I like the announcements and applause as well. The one drawback is the
> > annotations, which rely heavily on Horowitz - can one really call him a
> > Toscanini "biographer?"
>
> If it's Joseph Horowitz, he's a Toscanini *basher*, not a biographer. That
> guy couldn't write a weather report or a shopping list without slipping in
> some denunciation of Toscanini along the way.
Understood. Harvey Sachs' comparison of Horowitz and David Irving
rings true.
Dontait...@aol.com
> Dontaitchic...@aol.com appears to have caused the following letters to be
> typed innews:328000dd-7a02-45cf...@n8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 21, 9:45 am, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >> Paul Renzi, longtime flutist of the NBC Symphony and principal for its
> >> final year, told me that they also re-did the intro to "Va, pensiero"
> >> with that little flute solo "because Carmine Coppola couldn't play the
> >> scale in tune." �I had the impression at the time he told me that this
> >> was another take during the June 1954 sessions, but now that I think
> >> about it, he could have been misremembering (or, more likely, I could
> >> have misunderstood him), and it was done earlier.
>
> >> And now more time has passed since he told me that than had passed
> >> between the final sessions and the time I discussed that with him.
>
> > � Interesting. Thanks. "Va, pensiero" was a 1943 broadcast, so if there
> > was a later "patch" of that passage, the Victor people camouflaged it
> > well sonically.
>
> I've thought about that every time I've heard it since. �One possibility is
> that he was kidding, and he was just taking a shot at Coppola. �I dunno.
>
> > � There was clearly a fair amount of "patching" done for the Toscanini
> > broadcast recordings issued by RCA Victor. Especially the late ones.
> > Years ago, Mike Gray sent me photocopies of RCA Victor sheets for
> > "patches" with members of the NBC SO for Strauss's Don Quixote (a late
> > 1953 broadcast). It didn't involve many musicians, and Toscanini was
> > not said to have been there. I don't know where those sheets are now.
> > I'll try to locate them and post more details.
>
> If Toscanini wasn't there, who was conducting? �Frank Miller?
I just got back to this topic.
As I wrote, I don't know where the sheets are now. I'll have to
search for them. So I must go upon memory. I seem to remember that
only a few musicians were involved -- wind players, perhaps. No
conductor was listed. Perhaps they were doing virtually solo passages.
This is a wake-up call to search. Sorry for the tardy reply.
Don Tait
Matthew�B.�Tepper
following letters to be typed in
David Irving is an extreme case, and his agenda is considerably more vile
than Horowitz'. With Horowitz, it seems to be a personal obsession.
And then how does one explain Norman Lebrecht, other than the obvious fact
that he wants to sell his books? (Especially after being sued by Heymann.)
Dontait...@aol.com
> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the
> following letters to be typed in news:5b2233c1-109a-4699-bf97-
>
> > I've listened to the Naxos set, and narrowly prefer this transfer to BMG's.
> > And I like the announcements and applause as well. The one drawback is the
> > annotations, which rely heavily on Horowitz - can one really call him a
> > Toscanini "biographer?"
>
> If it's Joseph Horowitz, he's a Toscanini *basher*, not a biographer. �That
> guy couldn't write a weather report or a shopping list without slipping in
> some denunciation of Toscanini along the way.
Matthew's totally accurate. As Robert Newton said so eloquently as
Long John Silver in Disney's "Treasure Island," "ahrrr-menn!"
Joseph Horowitz's 1980s book about Toscanini, "Understanding
Toscanini," was a hatchet job about a conductor he almost
pathologically loathes. Perhaps because, as becomes clear in the book,
he is a big Furtwangler fan; sad as it is, there are (or were) still
people who adhere to that old and foolish idea that to love the
conducting, or even person, of one means that one has to hate that of
the other.
Horowitz's book is based upon the idea that because Toscanini's
broadcasts and recordings attracted huge audiences, and as a result
helped to make classical music more popular in the USA from
approximately 1935 to 1955, Toscanini perverted classical music and
helped to debase it. It also posits that Toscanini conspired with NBC
and RCA Victor so they could make him popular enough to do that. Both
contentions are absurd. Unfortunately, however, Horowitz's screed has
been taken seriously for some years.
There's much more, but I'll stop.
In the meantime, on to your Toscanini and Verdi....
Cheers.
Don Tait
Richard S. Sandmeyer
<701a3c9e-21a6-4648...@e20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
Dontait...@aol.com wrote:
> On May 27, 9:32?am, "Matthew?B.?Tepper" <oy?@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the
> > following letters to be typed in news:5b2233c1-109a-4699-bf97-
> > 7c769bfd0...@u10g2000vbd.googlegroups.com:
> >
> > > I've listened to the Naxos set, and narrowly prefer this transfer to
> > > BMG's.
> > > And I like the announcements and applause as well. The one drawback is
> > > the
> > > annotations, which rely heavily on Horowitz - can one really call him a
> > > Toscanini "biographer?"
> >
> > If it's Joseph Horowitz, he's a Toscanini *basher*, not a biographer. ?That
> > guy couldn't write a weather report or a shopping list without slipping in
> > some denunciation of Toscanini along the way.
>
> Matthew's totally accurate. As Robert Newton said so eloquently as
> Long John Silver in Disney's "Treasure Island," "ahrrr-menn!"
>
> Joseph Horowitz's 1980s book about Toscanini, "Understanding
> Toscanini," was a hatchet job about a conductor he almost
> pathologically loathes. Perhaps because, as becomes clear in the book,
> he is a big Furtwangler fan; sad as it is, there are (or were) still
> people who adhere to that old and foolish idea that to love the
> conducting, or even person, of one means that one has to hate that of
> the other.
>
> Horowitz's book is based upon the idea that because Toscanini's
> broadcasts and recordings attracted huge audiences, and as a result
> helped to make classical music more popular in the USA from
> approximately 1935 to 1955, Toscanini perverted classical music and
> helped to debase it. It also posits that Toscanini conspired with NBC
> and RCA Victor so they could make him popular enough to do that. Both
> contentions are absurd. Unfortunately, however, Horowitz's screed has
> been taken seriously for some years.
Given the current state* of classical music in the USA, I could only
wish that some conductor (or other musician) of today would conspire
with NBC and RCA Victor (or their successors or competitors) to attract
huge audiences and make CM more popular (without dumbing it down).
>
> There's much more, but I'll stop.
>
> In the meantime, on to your Toscanini and Verdi....
>
> Cheers.
>
> Don Tait
* I refer, of course, not to the quality of the performances, but to the
treatment of classical music in the so-called entertainment industry,
its neglect in most schools, the age distribution of its audience, the
stereotyping of the typical enthusiast etc.
--
Rich Sandmeyer
rich dot sand at verizon dot net
Dennman6
> Matthew's totally accurate. As Robert Newton said so eloquently as
> Long John Silver in Disney's "Treasure Island," "ahrrr-menn!".......
>
> In the meantime, on to your Toscanini and Verdi....
>
> Cheers.
>
> Don Tait
This is off-topic, but thank you Don, for making a reference to both
Disney's "Treasure Island" film & Robert Newton's delicious,
definitive, & perfect performance as Long John in it. I have loved
this version of the story since I first saw the film at school as a 13
year old(1975), presented in 16mm. A magical & beautifully
Technicolored gem, with gorgeous musical score to boot. Does anyone
recall the composer? I don't, off hand. Newton & little Bobby Driscoll
seal up the perfection in this film for me, as well as Geoffrey
Wilkinson as Ben Gunn. The late film historian Leslie Halliwell in his
film guide called Robert Newton "a ham, but a succulent one." From
1939's "Jamaica Inn" thru 1952's "Les Miserables" & beyond. he was
always worth watching. I cited Hitchcock's "Jamaica Inn" as I haven't
yet seen any of Newton's earlier films before this one. Sad to read of
the dismal ends. for both Newton & Driscoll, the former due to "demon
rum"(at 50) & the latter due to drug abuse(at only 35). But a great
thing is film, to have preserved such an iconic trio of performances
as in "Treasure Island".
I feel as emotionally & aesthetically connected to the craft of film-
making as I do towards that of audio recording. Each in its way
preserving an actual moment(live recording to disk or tape or film) or
a created one(most later studio recordings & certainly most films) of
the greater arts.
And to all this I will again give salute to Don Tait & his
"Collector's Item" program, which I first heard over KUSC in 1984 &
has shaped my reception & attitude towards the very earliest vintage
of music recordings. which has I think given me much more appreciation
of them than had there never been a Don Tait in our midst. And as a
theatre & acting enthusiast I have always marvelled at Don's nearly
perfect enunciation & clarity of points spoken. I think of his voice
as being the American Gielgud, with such smoothness & liquidity, &
certainly miss his part in the Chicago Symphony retrospective
broadcasts. I would compare his voice to that of Robin McNeil, only
with a greater instrument as regards range & timbre.
Dennis Forkel
.
Scott Foglesong
>
> Matthew's totally accurate. As Robert Newton said so eloquently as
> Long John Silver in Disney's "Treasure Island," "ahrrr-menn!"
>
> Joseph Horowitz's 1980s book about Toscanini, "Understanding
> Toscanini," was a hatchet job about a conductor he almost
> pathologically loathes. Perhaps because, as becomes clear in the book,
> he is a big Furtwangler fan; sad as it is, there are (or were) still
> people who adhere to that old and foolish idea that to love the
> conducting, or even person, of one means that one has to hate that of
> the other.
>
> Horowitz's book is based upon the idea that because Toscanini's
> broadcasts and recordings attracted huge audiences, and as a result
> helped to make classical music more popular in the USA from
> approximately 1935 to 1955, Toscanini perverted classical music and
> helped to debase it. It also posits that Toscanini conspired with NBC
> and RCA Victor so they could make him popular enough to do that. Both
> contentions are absurd. Unfortunately, however, Horowitz's screed has
> been taken seriously for some years.
>
> There's much more, but I'll stop.
>
> In the meantime, on to your Toscanini and Verdi....
>
> Cheers.
>
> Don Tait
Joseph Kerman on Horowitz's "Understanding Toscanini":
"My advice to Joe Horowitz: get over it."
--
Scott Foglesong
Chair, Department of Musicianship and Music Theory
San Francisco Conservatory of Music
SF Classical Music Examiner
Matthew�B.�Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:2009052716482216807-
scottfoglesong@comcastnet:
> Joseph Kerman on Horowitz's "Understanding Toscanini":
>
> "My advice to Joe Horowitz: get over it."
Harvey Sachs wrote a point-by-point refutation of Horowitz' crap book, but it
didn't make much of an impression among the intelligentsia since it appeared
in J. ARSC rather than being published by Knopf.
Matthew�B.�Tepper
typed in news:701a3c9e-21a6-4648-a015-b318b529df84
@e20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com:
> Matthew's totally accurate. As Robert Newton said so eloquently as
> Long John Silver in Disney's "Treasure Island," "ahrrr-menn!"
>
> Joseph Horowitz's 1980s book about Toscanini, "Understanding
> Toscanini," was a hatchet job about a conductor he almost pathologically
> loathes. Perhaps because, as becomes clear in the book, he is a big
> Furtwangler fan; sad as it is, there are (or were) still people who
> adhere to that old and foolish idea that to love the conducting, or even
> person, of one means that one has to hate that of the other.
>
> Horowitz's book is based upon the idea that because Toscanini's
> broadcasts and recordings attracted huge audiences, and as a result
> helped to make classical music more popular in the USA from approximately
> 1935 to 1955, Toscanini perverted classical music and helped to debase
> it. It also posits that Toscanini conspired with NBC and RCA Victor so
> they could make him popular enough to do that. Both contentions are
> absurd. Unfortunately, however, Horowitz's screed has been taken
> seriously for some years.
There is one reason, and one reason only, why it is taken seriously:
It was published by Knopf.
The day of reckoning for the so-called "major" record labels is now upon us.
But the so-called "major" book publishers are due for their own reckoning,
and it will be no prettier.
Matthew�B.�Tepper
caused the following letters to be typed in
> Given the current state* of classical music in the USA, I could only
> wish that some conductor (or other musician) of today would conspire
> with NBC and RCA Victor (or their successors or competitors) to attract
> huge audiences and make CM more popular (without dumbing it down).
>
> * I refer, of course, not to the quality of the performances, but to the
> treatment of classical music in the so-called entertainment industry,
> its neglect in most schools, the age distribution of its audience, the
> stereotyping of the typical enthusiast etc.
Amen to that. I'm just waiting to see how a domestic application of "El
Sistema" will be watered down once the abovereferenced entertainment types
get their mitts on it.
William Sommerwerck
> "Treasure Island" & Robert Newton's delicious, definitive,
> & perfect performance.
You might want to look at my Amazon review, in which I semi-lavishly praise
this film. (I have a copy of the 1935 (?) version with Jackie Cooper and
Wallace Beery, directed by Victor Fleming, but have not yet watched it.)
The Disney "Treasure Island" is one of those extremely rare instances where
the film is a major improvement on the novel. Not only does it have dramatic
thrust and emotional complexity largely missing from the novel, which is
primarily a boys' adventure story (as Stevenson * explicitly states in the
introduction), but -- amazingly -- the screenplay adds a scene not in the
novel in which Long John Silver attempts to "seduce" Jim.
Note that "Treasure Island" has a PG rating for the scene in which Jim
shoots a pirate in the head, but "Gone With the Wind", which has an
identical scene -- plus Belle Star, a man raping his wife, and a bunch of
other stuff little kiddies shouldn't be seeing -- gets a G. Go figure.
* His grandson would become one of Disney's "house" directors, his best work
being "The Absent-Minded Professor".
> The late film historian Leslie Halliwell in his film guide called
> Robert Newton "a ham, but a succulent one."
Maybe not. Newton plays the character exactly as he appears in the novel.
Yes, it's an over-the-top performance, but so is Long John Silver. Newton
never chews the scenery -- he knows what he's doing and is in control at
every moment.
The Historian
> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the
>
>
>
> > On May 27, 10:32 am, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the
> >> following letters to be typed in news:5b2233c1-109a-4699-bf97-
> >> 7c769bfd0...@u10g2000vbd.googlegroups.com:
>
> >> > I've listened to the Naxos set, and narrowly prefer this transfer to
> >> > BMG's. And I like the announcements and applause as well. The one
> >> > drawback is the annotations, which rely heavily on Horowitz - can one
> >> > really call him a Toscanini "biographer?"
>
> >> If it's Joseph Horowitz, he's a Toscanini *basher*, not a biographer.
> >> That guy couldn't write a weather report or a shopping list without
> >> slipping in some denunciation of Toscanini along the way.
>
> > Understood. Harvey Sachs' comparison of Horowitz and David Irving
> > rings true.
>
> David Irving is an extreme case, and his agenda is considerably more vile
> than Horowitz'.
Understood. Sachs made the comparison to Irving 'pre-Lipstadt", so to
speak.
With Horowitz, it seems to be a personal obsession.
>
> And then how does one explain Norman Lebrecht, other than the obvious fact
> that he wants to sell his books? (Especially after being sued by Heymann.)
>
> --
> 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
Matthew�B.�Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:fba2f295-9586-43c3-abb6-
d949b7...@u8g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:
> On May 27, 3:53�pm, "Matthew�B.�Tepper" <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the
>> following letters to be typed innews:ae19ae58-c996-4831-872f-2508dbed0fa8
> @r34g2000vba.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > On May 27, 10:32�am, "Matthew�B.�Tepper" <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the
>> >> following letters to be typed in news:5b2233c1-109a-4699-bf97-
>> >> 7c769bfd0...@u10g2000vbd.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> >> > I've listened to the Naxos set, and narrowly prefer this transfer to
>> >> > BMG's. And I like the announcements and applause as well. The one
>> >> > drawback is the annotations, which rely heavily on Horowitz - can one
>> >> > really call him a Toscanini "biographer?"
>>
>> >> If it's Joseph Horowitz, he's a Toscanini *basher*, not a biographer.
>> >> That guy couldn't write a weather report or a shopping list without
>> >> slipping in some denunciation of Toscanini along the way.
>>
>> > Understood. Harvey Sachs' comparison of Horowitz and David Irving
>> > rings true.
>>
>> David Irving is an extreme case, and his agenda is considerably more vile
>> than Horowitz'. �
>
> Understood. Sachs made the comparison to Irving 'pre-Lipstadt", so to
> speak.
>
> With Horowitz, it seems to be a personal obsession.
Indeed. There have been times when I have actually wondered whether -- well,
let me put it this way, whether he is Edmund to Walter Toscanini's Edgar.
--
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
Dontait...@aol.com
> Scott Foglesong <scottfogles...@comcast.net> appears to have caused the
> following letters to be typed in news:2009052716482216807-
> scottfoglesong@comcastnet:
>
> > Joseph Kerman on Horowitz's "Understanding Toscanini":
>
> > "My advice to Joe Horowitz: get over it."
>
> Harvey Sachs wrote a point-by-point refutation of Horowitz' crap book, but it
> didn't make much of an impression among the intelligentsia since it appeared
> in J. ARSC rather than being published by Knopf.
Do you mean the ARSC Journal? If so, do you happen to have the
details to hand about the issue in which it appeared? If not, it's no
problem. I'll search.
There was a refutation of Horowitz titled "Misunderstanding
Toscanini" as chapter 9 of Sachs' book "Reflections on
Toscanini" (Grove Weidenfield, New York, 1991). As usual with Sachs,
it was balanced and well-done. The credits say that major parts of the
chapter had appeared in The New Republic and Tuttolibri -- La Stampa
(Turin, Italy) before their publication in this book. Sachs does an
excellent job of demolishing the theories Horowitz uses to support his
anti-Toscanini book, examining and then exposing them as either the
result of illogic (i.e. Theodor Adorno) or of Horowitz's emotion-based
dislike of Toscanini as a musician and performer.
I heard about three years ago that there was going to be a
discussion -- debate, perhaps -- in New York City between Harvey Sachs
and Joseph Horowitz about Toscanini and Horowitz's book. I'd love to
know how it turned out. I got to meet Harvey Sachs in February 2007;
all he said about it was that it had been cordial and he thought it
had gone well.
I seem to remember hearing that some years after the publication of
his book, Horowitz told someone that if he were preparing the book
then, he would moderate his attacks on Toscanini because his views had
changed somewhat; but I don't remember who told me that, so please
discount it if you want.
Don Tait
Matthew�B.�Tepper
typed in
news:7706857e-cd7b-4697...@b1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com:
> On May 27, 7:18 pm, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> Scott Foglesong <scottfogles...@comcast.net> appears to have caused the
>> following letters to be typed in news:2009052716482216807-
>> scottfoglesong@comcastnet:
>>
>> > Joseph Kerman on Horowitz's "Understanding Toscanini":
>>
>> > "My advice to Joe Horowitz: get over it."
>>
>> Harvey Sachs wrote a point-by-point refutation of Horowitz' crap book,
>> but it didn't make much of an impression among the intelligentsia since
>> it appeared in J. ARSC rather than being published by Knopf.
>
> Do you mean the ARSC Journal? If so, do you happen to have the details
> to hand about the issue in which it appeared? If not, it's no problem.
> I'll search.
>
> There was a refutation of Horowitz titled "Misunderstanding Toscanini"
> as chapter 9 of Sachs' book "Reflections on Toscanini" (Grove
> Weidenfield, New York, 1991). As usual with Sachs, it was balanced and
> well-done. The credits say that major parts of the chapter had appeared
> in The New Republic and Tuttolibri -- La Stampa (Turin, Italy) before
> their publication in this book. Sachs does an excellent job of
> demolishing the theories Horowitz uses to support his anti-Toscanini
> book, examining and then exposing them as either the result of illogic
> (i.e. Theodor Adorno) or of Horowitz's emotion-based dislike of Toscanini
> as a musician and performer.
That's the article which appeared in the ARSC Journal (I use that other
name to make fun of naming conventions of scholarly publications). I had
forgotten that Sachs included it in _Reflections on Toscanini_. I've been
re-organizing my books with the addition of three new bookcases (along with
the three bookcases I got last year), and right now my music books are
scattered, with some Toscanini books on one shelf and some on another.
> I heard about three years ago that there was going to be a discussion
> -- debate, perhaps -- in New York City between Harvey Sachs and Joseph
> Horowitz about Toscanini and Horowitz's book. I'd love to know how it
> turned out. I got to meet Harvey Sachs in February 2007; all he said
> about it was that it had been cordial and he thought it had gone well.
>
> I seem to remember hearing that some years after the publication of
> his book, Horowitz told someone that if he were preparing the book
> then, he would moderate his attacks on Toscanini because his views had
> changed somewhat; but I don't remember who told me that, so please
> discount it if you want.
I wonder if Horowitz said that after his discussion with Sachs?
Dontait...@aol.com
> Dontaitchic...@aol.com appears to have caused the following letters to be
> typed innews:7706857e-cd7b-4697...@b1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com:
I don't think so. At least as I remember it. Mike Gray (who was as
outraged by Horowitz's screed of Toscanini slander as the rest of us)
might have told me that around 1997; but I don't remember for sure.
Probably before Horowitz and Sachs might have talked.
Do you have the reference for the issue of the ARSC Journal about
Harvey Sachs?
Don Tait
Matthew�B.�Tepper
typed in news:d5e900f5-755e-47f8-a0dc-9ce307f232e3
@v2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com:
> On May 28, 3:04 pm, "Matthew B. Tepper" <o...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> > I seem to remember hearing that some years after the publication of
>> > his book, Horowitz told someone that if he were preparing the book
>> > then, he would moderate his attacks on Toscanini because his views had
>> > changed somewhat; but I don't remember who told me that, so please
>> > discount it if you want.
>>
>> I wonder if Horowitz said that after his discussion with Sachs?
>
> I don't think so. At least as I remember it. Mike Gray (who was as
> outraged by Horowitz's screed of Toscanini slander as the rest of us)
> might have told me that around 1997; but I don't remember for sure.
> Probably before Horowitz and Sachs might have talked.
>
> Do you have the reference for the issue of the ARSC Journal about
> Harvey Sachs?
I'll check when I get home. I *think* I've managed to get all my copies of
J. ARSC on the same shelf. (Unpacking from two successive moves, including
getting back stuff that was in storage, can be "fun.")
Matthew�B.�Tepper
one of its patented tricks on me. I have before me a list of Communists in
the State Department, er, *two* separate items which I lumped together:
ARSC Journal, "Volume 18 Number 1-3 1986," on which it is noted at the bottom
of the front cover, "Issued November, 1987." (And I thought that *I* was a
procrastinator!) The cover lists three of the major articles: "The Birth of
Decca Stereo," "A Schnabel Discography," and "Misunderstanding Toscanini."
Within, the authors are listed respectively as, Michael H. Gray (of course!),
David Bloesch, and ... not Harvey Sachs, but Christopher Dyment! (Dyment
also contributes a review of the 3-LP (!) Seraphim (!) set of Toscanini
Beethoven recordings and performances with the BBC Symphony Orchestra, and of
two of RCA's second try (after the Japanese disaster, and before the Gold
Seal Toscanini Edition) at issuing Beethoven symphonies on CD.
Glancing at the "Misunderstanding Toscanini" included here, this is what I
had remembered as the point-by-point refutation of Horowitz' book. You can
read it for yourself, but I chuckle at every iteration of phrases such as "of
little value" and "it is also worthless."
Sachs' chapter of his book _Reflections on Toscanini_, which is also entitled
"Misunderstanding Toscanini," originally appeared in The New Republic in 1987
under the title "The Maestro Maligned." Again, you will wish to read it in
full, but again I will snicker at his demolition of the subject book by means
of such terms as "grating," "nonsensical," and "arrogant" (referring to
Horowitz himself, as a critic).
I hope that's sufficient to get you started for a pleasant evening's read.
Tassilo
> Given the current state* of classical music in the USA, I could only
> wish that some conductor (or other musician) of today would conspire
> with NBC and RCA Victor (or their successors or competitors) to attract
> huge audiences and make CM more popular (without dumbing it down).
Amen.
On a not entirely unrelated topic, I think that many people who
dislike Toscanini would dislike him far less had he not been singled
out as The One True God by so many others, and had this deity status
not been used as a marketing tool. If you think of him as just one of
the many talented conductors of the recording era, I think you come to
a much more reasonable assessment of his abilities.
-david gable
Dontait...@aol.com
Matthew --
Many, many thanks for your research and message. It's the next day
after your post, but I'm going to use it to dig and, for sure, read.
Thanks again.
Don Tait
francis
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don't have much to add to this conversation, other than noting that
I'm with the Furtwangler critic on the subject of the Toscanini/Vinay
Otello. A question: an Vinay Otello conducted by Furtwangler at the
'51 Salzburg Festival has been around for years and is currently
available on several labels. Can anyone comment/compare with the
earlier Toscanini-led recording? Thanks FC
Matthew�B.�Tepper
be typed in news:89aa946c-fc32-4739-b0b2-
77092a...@f19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
> I don't have much to add to this conversation, other than noting that I'm
> with the Furtwangler critic on the subject of the Toscanini/Vinay Otello.
> A question: an Vinay Otello conducted by Furtwangler at the '51 Salzburg
> Festival has been around for years and is currently available on several
> labels. Can anyone comment/compare with the earlier Toscanini-led
> recording? Thanks FC
Vinay is more elemental with Toscanini, more granitic with Furtw�ngler; the
latter also has a total nonentity for a Desdemona, instead of the middling
fair Nelli for Toscanini.
Vinay's Otello is also available as conducted by Fritz Busch, Sir Thomas
Beecham, Rafael Kubelik, and Gabriele Santini.
Matthew�B.�Tepper
typed in
news:8608138a-a06c-4697...@s16g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
My pleasure! Or it will be, to read your reactions to the articles.
Dontait...@aol.com
> On May 27, 3:55�pm, Dontaitchic...@aol.com wrote:
>
> > � Matthew's totally accurate. As Robert Newton said so eloquently as
> > Long John Silver in Disney's "Treasure Island," "ahrrr-menn!".......
>
> > � In the meantime, on to your Toscanini and Verdi....
>
> > � Cheers.
>
> > � Don Tait
>
> This is off-topic, but thank you Don, for making a reference to both
> Disney's "Treasure Island" film & Robert Newton's delicious,
> definitive, & perfect performance as Long John in it. I have loved
> this version of the story since I first saw the film at school as a 13
> year old(1975), presented in 16mm. A magical & beautifully
> Technicolored gem, with gorgeous musical score to boot. Does anyone
> recall the composer? I don't, off hand. Newton & little Bobby Driscoll
> seal up the perfection in this film for me, as well as Geoffrey
> Wilkinson as Ben Gunn. The late film historian Leslie Halliwell in his
> film guide called Robert Newton "a ham, but a succulent one." From
> 1939's "Jamaica Inn" thru 1952's "Les Miserables" & beyond. he was
> always worth watching. I cited Hitchcock's "Jamaica Inn" as I haven't
> yet seen any of Newton's earlier films before this one. Sad to read of
> the dismal ends. for both Newton & Driscoll, the former due to "demon
> rum"(at 50) & the latter due to drug abuse(at only 35). But a great
> thing is film, to have preserved such an iconic trio of performances
> as in "Treasure Island".
A tardy response. I also love the film. Newton's characterization of
Silver is so vivid, so formidable, that whenever I've seen him in
another film I've been unable to not think of him as Silver; although
he might be clean-shaven and speaking normally, I find the connection
impossible not to make. His Silver characterization seems to have
almost made him typecast: around 1954 or so there was a television
series, half-hour programs, called "Long John Silver" starring him.
The portrayal was identical. I remember the programs' plots as fairly
feeble. Yes, he almost literally drank himself to death. There are
websites devoted him that go into it. It's sad. And you're correct
that the Bobby Driscoll situation is even more than that. Found dead
at 35 of natural causes in an empty, abandoned Manhattan tenement. A
promising life destroyed tragically.
> �I feel as emotionally & aesthetically connected to the craft of film-
> making as I do towards that of audio recording. Each in its way
> preserving an actual moment(live recording to disk or tape or film) or
> a created one(most later studio recordings & certainly most films) of
> the greater arts.
>
> And to all this I will again give salute to Don Tait & his
> "Collector's Item" program, which I first heard over KUSC in 1984 &
> has shaped my reception & attitude towards the very earliest vintage
> of music recordings. which has I think given me much more appreciation
> of them than had there never been a Don Tait in our midst. And as a
> theatre & acting enthusiast I have always marvelled at Don's nearly
> perfect enunciation & clarity of points spoken. I think of his voice
> as being the American Gielgud, with such smoothness & liquidity, &
> certainly miss his part in the Chicago Symphony retrospective
> broadcasts. I would compare his voice to that of Robin McNeil, only
> with a greater instrument as regards range & timbre.
>
> Dennis Forkel
Thank you. I can't tell you how touched and grateful I am. I don't
know what else to say except -- I tried.
Don Tait
Dontait...@aol.com
I agree completely with your first two sentences. I have felt for
decades that some American critics went so far overboard in their
praise of Toscanini at the expense of every other conductor that they
created a backlash toward their hero. It is "at the expense of every
other conductor" that I'd emphasize, because they didn't simply write
about Toscanini being a great conductor, which he unquestionably was.
During the 1940s, '50s, and into the '60s those critics combined their
praise for Toscanini with negative, sometimes sarcastic, criticism and
even ridicule of every other conductor whose performances differed in
any way from Toscanini's. B.H. Haggin, Robert C. Marsh, and Harris
Goldsmith were the leading practitioners. Their hagiography was
grounded in the doctrine of strict musical literalism and "purity":
what was published by Mozart or Beethoven or Schubert or Verdi or any
other composer was ipso facto the only truth. Any performer who
deviated from a strictly literal performance of the printed notes was
therefore guilty not only of ignorance, but of being a sort of musical
criminal.
Their villains varied, but Furtwangler and Stokowski, who often
modified tempi, led the list. So I have long felt that the contempt
and ridicule those critics and some of their colleagues heaped upon
Toscanini's contemporaries could have provoked a backlash.
I must add, regarding your final sentence, that Toscanini was more
than talented; he was gifted, a genius. Other conductors were and are
too, of course. But when one reads about Toscanini's life -- Harvey
Sachs or others -- it becomes clear that other musicians, and
Toscanini's conducting colleagues, regarded him as both outstanding
and even with awe. He was highly praised by such as Nikisch, Mahler,
Stravinsky, Puccini, Respighi, Bruno Walter, Monteux, Stokowski,
Klemperer, Boult, Arthur Rubinstein, Charles Munch, Karajan, the
entire Wagner family, Yehudi Menuhin, Kurt Weill, and many more. Most
(not all) of that during his conducting career.
I am sure you know all of that, so please don't interpret this as
argument or an attempt to "instruct" you. In fact, I agree with you
about the baleful effect upon Toscanini's reputation by his fans. It's
too bad he could not be protected from his "friends."\
Don Tait
O
<8c91b12f-f87b-4b8f...@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
<Dontait...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> I agree completely with your first two sentences. I have felt for
> decades that some American critics went so far overboard in their
> praise of Toscanini at the expense of every other conductor that they
> created a backlash toward their hero. It is "at the expense of every
> other conductor" that I'd emphasize, because they didn't simply write
> about Toscanini being a great conductor, which he unquestionably was.
> During the 1940s, '50s, and into the '60s those critics combined their
> praise for Toscanini with negative, sometimes sarcastic, criticism and
> even ridicule of every other conductor whose performances differed in
> any way from Toscanini's. B.H. Haggin, Robert C. Marsh, and Harris
> Goldsmith were the leading practitioners. Their hagiography was
> grounded in the doctrine of strict musical literalism and "purity":
> what was published by Mozart or Beethoven or Schubert or Verdi or any
> other composer was ipso facto the only truth. Any performer who
> deviated from a strictly literal performance of the printed notes was
> therefore guilty not only of ignorance, but of being a sort of musical
> criminal.
> Their villains varied, but Furtwangler and Stokowski, who often
> modified tempi, led the list. So I have long felt that the contempt
> and ridicule those critics and some of their colleagues heaped upon
> Toscanini's contemporaries could have provoked a backlash.
I agree with you Don, but to some extent, Toscanini also encouraged the
notion that he "adhered strictly to the score," and, by implication,
others didn't. He was pretty savvy when it came to marketing
Toscanini, and the critics liked the idea that there was one great
standard in classical music, that the US had him, much like they liked
the fact that the Yankees were best in baseball...
-Owen
Simon Roberts
says...
>
>The Historian <neil.the...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the
>following letters to be typed in news:5b2233c1-109a-4699-bf97-
>7c769b...@u10g2000vbd.googlegroups.com:
>
>> I've listened to the Naxos set, and narrowly prefer this transfer to BMG's.
>> And I like the announcements and applause as well. The one drawback is the
>> annotations, which rely heavily on Horowitz - can one really call him a
>> Toscanini "biographer?"
>
>If it's Joseph Horowitz, he's a Toscanini *basher*, not a biographer. That
>guy couldn't write a weather report or a shopping list without slipping in
>some denunciation of Toscanini along the way.
Would you (or one of the others making similar accusations) be kind enough to
provide examples of said Toscanini "bashing" in Horowitz's book? Based on your
comment and others in this thread, I just reread it (not all of it terribly
carefully) and found nothing of the sort - I did, however, find more than once
the phrase (or equivalents) "Toscanini was an unquestionably great conductor,"
and lengthy explanations of Toscanini's virtues (as a conductor and otherwise),
including a two page account of why his Salzburg Falstaff from the mid-30s is
"perfect" (a description used without irony). Even assuming that the book
contains inaccuracies (I'm in no position to judge), they aren't used to "bash"
Toscanini.
(Besides, the book isn't a biography, as most of those who have read it easily
discern. As Robert Craft described it in his evidently laudatory review, the
book is "a socioeconomic study of the classical music industry and of the
growth, through radio, recording and television, of musical mass culture"; in
particular it is a book about perceptions of Toscanini and the uses to which he
was put by publicists and corporations.)
Simon
Simon Roberts
Tassilo says...
What you just wrote would do quite well as part of a brief description of
Horowitz's book (except that he more than once pronounces Toscanini
"indisputably great")!
Simon
Dontait...@aol.com
[edit]
> I agree with you Don, but to some extent, Toscanini also encouraged the
> notion that he "adhered strictly to the score," and, by implication,
> others didn't. �He was pretty savvy when it came to marketing
> Toscanini, and the critics liked the idea that there was one great
> standard in classical music, that the US had him, much like they liked
> the fact that the Yankees were best in baseball...
>
> -Owen
He certainly proclaimed that idea, but I wonder whether he did it on
purpose "to market Toscanini" to critics or others, or whether it was
just something he said to people and upon which his fanatical
adherents pounced as a further way to promote him to the god-like
status, superior to all others, in which they regarded him. I suspect
the latter.
Everything written about Toscanini seems to indicate that, separate
from his musical genius, in his other thoughts and remarks he was
guided by his emotions. Given to, perhaps, hyperbole, even
exaggeration and distortion. And although he modified his tempi all
the time and changed scores (Brahms 3, Beethoven Coriolan, Moussorgsky-
Ravel Pictures and many more), his occasional comments about "play as
written!" were taken as gospel by his hagiographers (Haggin, Marsh,
Goldsmith, et cetera) and made into a sort of gospel about him. Used
to attack any other conductor whose alterations of any kind were more
noticeable, too (Furtwangler, Stokowski, and Koussevitzky especially).
I wonder whether Toscanini meant "do as I *think* it should be as
written." But thereare so many stories about all of this....
So I suspect that the critics just picked up on what Toscanini said
because of their blind worship of him, not because he planted the idea
to advance his reputation or fame. (Especially after having read
Harvey Sachs's-edited book of Toscanini's letters. Have you read it?
He was an astonishingly candid man.)
But I could be wrong. A nice discussion. Thanks. Feel like still
talking?
Don Tait
davi...@yahoo.com
entitled as "Misunderstanding Toscanini", appeared - as previously
mentioned - in the Journal of the Association for Recorded Sound
Collections.
It has been placed by the Association as a pdf on the internet at the
following location:
http://www.arsc-audio.org/journals/v18/v18n1-3p144-171A.pdf
It's lengthy and detailed.
Perhaps it may be of interest.
Regards from over here,
David Mendes