Walter Gieseking
A Schmeder
bombs dropping in the distance. I think it was a Beethoven concerto, not sure.
Max Schmeder
mmsc...@cats.ucsc.edu
NINTRAUB wrote:
> Walter Gieseking is my favorite pianist. His wonderful tone and phrasing has
> given me much joy whether he's playing Bach, Mozart, Pfitzner, Schumann,
> Beethoven, Brahms, Ravel or Debussy.
>
> In fact, one of my most treasured memories has me lying in a hotel room in
> China next to my sleeping wife and newly adopted baby daughter, listening to
> Gieseking play Ravel's Le Tombeau de Couperin.
>
> As far as I know, there are no biographies of this musical genius translated
> into English. I only know what I've read about him in a variety of liner
> notes. What intrigued and dismayed me was a series of liner notes (Music &
> Arts) in which he was vehemently defended against charges of Nazi
> collaboration. I'm curious as to whether these charges stemmed from the mere
> fact that he stayed and played for the Reich - or whether there is evidence of
> his 'naming names', or being an active collaborator in some other way.
>
> I recently ran into a student of Gieseking's at Academy Records who spoke of
> the extreme sweetness and humanity of the man, as well as his prodigious
> musical abilities. I prefer to think of him in this light ( I was not at all
> comfortable in raising the issue with him).
>
> If anyone knows of any written materials that would shed more light on his
> background and life in general, I would be greatly appreciative.
>
> Thanks so much in advance.
>
> Neil
> nint...@aol.com
NINTRAUB
Kevin Rayburn
>
> Supposedly, he made a recording in Berlin during World War II in which one can hear
> bombs dropping in the distance. I think it was a Beethoven concerto, not sure.
Yes, it was the LvB "Emperor" recorded in 1944 in stereo. It is
available on Music & Arts.
I think the noises in the background are anti-aircraft artillery, not
bombs.
--
Kevin Rayburn
In Real Life: Editor--research, alumni titles, University of Louisville
In Spare Moments: Fatherhood, Music (Classical, Jazz, World), Cinema,
1920s, W.C. Fields, Monty Python, The Prisoner, Wine, etc.
Visit my sites:
W.C. Fields: The Great Man: http://www.louisville.edu/~kprayb01/WC.html
The 1920s: http://www.louisville.edu/~kprayb01/1920s.html
Ehrlich606
In article <19981001212349...@ng62.aol.com>, nint...@aol.com
(NINTRAUB) writes:
>
>Walter Gieseking is my favorite pianist. His wonderful tone and phrasing has
>given me much joy whether he's playing Bach, Mozart, Pfitzner, Schumann,
>Beethoven, Brahms, Ravel or Debussy.
>
>In fact, one of my most treasured memories has me lying in a hotel room in
>China next to my sleeping wife and newly adopted baby daughter, listening to
>Gieseking play Ravel's Le Tombeau de Couperin.
I agree with you and I think you have excellent taste. That recording of
"Tombeau" is better than most orchestral ones.
>
>As far as I know, there are no biographies of this musical genius translated
>into English. I only know what I've read about him in a variety of liner
>notes. What intrigued and dismayed me was a series of liner notes (Music &
>Arts) in which he was vehemently defended against charges of Nazi
>collaboration. I'm curious as to whether these charges stemmed from the mere
>fact that he stayed and played for the Reich - or whether there is evidence
>of
>his 'naming names', or being an active collaborator in some other way.
As someone else is sure to point out, after the war the Allies (particularly
the Americans) locked down all musicians who appeared during the Third Reich.
The reasoning was that, if they allowed musicians to just carry on, it might
imply that the Allies were not serious about uprooting Nazism.
Eventually, all of these musicians were brought before courts to answer to
charges of collaboration, the so-called "Denazification-tribunals". These
tribunals usually turned on whether the subject was a member of NSDAP, and then
secondly, what various people had to say for or against the defendant. In
other words, aside from Nazi party membership it was pretty subjective.
It may surprise you to know that, since there were something like 10 million
people in the Nazi party, few Germans wanted to be _completely_ absolved of
Nazi taint. It made them appear to be ass-kissers to the occupiers. What
everyone wanted to be was a "Class 5 - Laufer" that is, misdemeanor fellow
traveler who "went along" with the Nazis. The vast majority of de-Nazification
judgments were probably of this class, if not full exoneration. I don't
believe any of the musicians routinely described as "Nazis" on this board were
ever found guilty of anything higher than Class 5, if that much, and that
includes Walter Gieseking.
Gieseking performed in concerts in occupied countries (with the Concertgebouw,
well-known recordings of Rachmaninov). He also recorded Beethoven's "Emperor"
Concerto in stereo, I believe in 1944, with the Berlin Staatskapelle, you can
hear the ack ack in the cadenza to the first movement (available on Music &
Arts).
Gieseking was a great musician, hold that thought. What you are likely to get
here are just a lot of anti-Nazi fulminations.
Alexander Leach
In his memoirs, Artur Rubinstein mentions a run-in he had with Gieseking in
1937, when the latter described himself as a 'confirmed Nazi', and declared
that 'Hitler is saving our country'. Rubinstein never spoke to him again.
Gieseking was later refused entry to the U.S., allegedly.
Alex
Allan Evans
<Alexand...@btinternet.com> wrote:
There isn't an easy answer. His family consisted of eminent Professors and
academics - highly learned and cultured, unlike the Nazi opportunists
Karajan or Bohm, or the Hitler fanatic Elly Ney. There are rumors that
Gieseking saved the lives of two Jewish musicians, one of whom he helped
to escape the country via underground connections. Perhaps he outwardly
conformed to the politics of his time, as did Gilels, who believed in a
Party which would have murdered him had not Stalin died in 1953 before
extending his purge of the Jews. Thus,if Gieseking was outwardly a
conformist (he wasn't a party member) and viewed as being beyond reproach
by the Nazis, he could have risked such rescues.
Rubinstein never fussed over bona fide Nazis such as Bohm or Karajan, as
they were no threat to his career. If one will ever unearth Sol Hurok's
files, it may emerge that the demonization of Gieseking was more for
business motives than ethical. Gieseking was refused entry around 1949 or
1951 to the US due to the protests and clamor which Hurok organized. He
came here in 1953 and returned each year to perform recitals and
concertos. My impression of him, knowing his family and some pupils, is
that he was apolitical. But more important, he was a great artist.
Allan Evans
Ehrlich606
>
>In article <01bdee30$3464bce0$cbedabc3@default>, "Alexander Leach"
><Alexand...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> In his memoirs, Artur Rubinstein mentions a run-in he had with Gieseking in
>> 1937, when the latter described himself as a 'confirmed Nazi', and declared
>> that 'Hitler is saving our country'. Rubinstein never spoke to him again.
>> Gieseking was later refused entry to the U.S., allegedly.
"confirmed Nazi" -- like they had a ceremony or something.
>>
>>
>> Alex
>
>There isn't an easy answer.
Sure there is. Gieseking and Rubinstein were two great pianists, but
Rubinstein's memoirs are stupid.
His family consisted of eminent Professors and
>academics - highly learned and cultured, unlike the Nazi opportunists
>Karajan or Bohm, or the Hitler fanatic Elly Ney. There are rumors that
>Gieseking saved the lives of two Jewish musicians, one of whom he helped
>to escape the country via underground connections.
Yeah, right, everybody saved some Jewish person's life.
Perhaps he outwardly
>conformed to the politics of his time, as did Gilels, who believed in a
>Party which would have murdered him had not Stalin died in 1953 before
>extending his purge of the Jews.
Stalin purged the Yiddish speaking Jews in 1948. There's no indication that he
was up to more in 1953, except to get his doctors.
Thus,if Gieseking was outwardly a
>conformist (he wasn't a party member)
This is the _only_ thing that is important in terms of characterizing him or
anyone else as a "Nazi." All the rest is boilerplate.
and viewed as being beyond reproach
>by the Nazis, he could have risked such rescues.
>Rubinstein never fussed over bona fide Nazis such as Bohm or Karajan, as
>they were no threat to his career.
Absolutely right, and the first person to point out that there was an element
of self-interested careerism in the organized boycotts against Gieseking,
Furtwangler, etc. by Rubinstein, Heifetz, Piatagorsky, Brailowsky, and several
others was Yehudi Menuhin's father.
But guess what: all of these people were great artists, so who cares?
If one will ever unearth Sol Hurok's
>files, it may emerge that the demonization of Gieseking was more for
>business motives than ethical.
Yes
Gieseking was refused entry around 1949 or
>1951 to the US due to the protests and clamor which Hurok organized.
That is correct; does anyone remember what he said on that occasion?
He
>came here in 1953 and returned each year to perform recitals and
>concertos.
Including an Emperor with Guido Cantelli at Carnegie Hall in 1954. (He died
2-3 years later)
My impression of him, knowing his family and some pupils, is
>that he was apolitical. But more important, he was a great artist.
The whole point.
>Allan Evans
>
>
Rtsina
>Gieseking was later refused entry to the U.S., allegedly.
>
>
Cantelli/NYPO concert at which they gave a terrific Mozart PC # 21.
I don't think he was any more a Nazi than Fuertwaengler.
DT
Atoddk
Allan Evans wrote:
>Rubinstein never fussed over bona fide Nazis such as Bohm or Karajan, as
>they were no threat to his career.
I wonder what is the definition of "fussed over." Artur Rubinstein *despised*
Karajan, Furtwangler, et al. Whatever he put or didn't put in his memoirs, his
statements elsewhere on the record about those men are at least as strong as
those about Gieseking or any pianist. We can agree or disagree with him, but it
simply isn't true to state that he was just trying to do in the musicians with
whom he was in direct competition; he was quite sincere in his disdain for all
of these people. He was one of the most active in the crusade to keep
Furtwangler out of the United States (Chicago, in particular) as a performer
after the war; he condemned him as a glory-seeking opportunist and expressed
doubts about the stories that WF had saved Jewish musicians. As for Karajan, he
wouldn't even acknowledge the man's presence when their families were seated a
table away in a hotel dining room. And he turned down numerous lucrative
opportunities to record or appear with Karajan, who seems to have been a
musical admirer.
From Harvey Sachs' "Rubinstein: A Life," p.359:
"Rubinstein fulfilled a series of scheduled engagements in Europe, and it may
have been on the occasion of what proved to be his last performance in Paris
that he was visited by Eliette von Karajan, the beautiful wife of Herbert, with
whom Rubinstein had always refused to perform because of the conductor's Nazi
past. "She came backstage and told him what a wonderful concert it had been,"
according to [Daniel] Barenboim. "She said, 'My husband has achieved everything
that he has wanted, but only one wish remains unfulfilled, and that is to make
music with you.' And Rubinstein said, 'Madame, when you come to see me -- such
a beautiful and attractive lady -- how do you expect me to talk about your
*husband*?'"
Todd K
NINTRAUB
>My impression of him, knowing his family and some pupils, is
>>that he was apolitical. But more important, he was a great artist.
>
>The whole point.
>
>
Allan/erlich et al -
Thanks so much for your comments about Gieseking.
I'm glad to hear that his only'crime' was staying in Germany and playing there
during the war. I'm also not surprised to hear that he was defamed for
economic/business reasons, though they were couched in moral outrage.
The fact that he was a great artist is clearly quite important, but not the
whole picture. To exaggerate, if he massacred a whole village but nailed
Debussy with incredible elan, it would certainly make a difference as to my
pianist of choice. For me personally, I like having a picture of the artist in
my head as I listen to the music. The liner notes gave me the impression of a
gentle giant who was not pretentious and was not worried about his 'precious'
hands as he joyfully dug in his garden. That might sound naive, but it is an
image, for me, that augments the beautiful music he made. I am so very glad
that there is apparently no evidence linking him with regard to harming anyone.
My initial question remains: Do you know if there are any biographical
materials on WG available in English? I am going to continue to collect and
enjoy his music, but would so much like to learn more about this incredible
genius.
Thanks
Neil
Benjamin Maso
Ehrlich606 wrote in message <19981002164125...@ng114.aol.com>...
>
>>
>>In article <01bdee30$3464bce0$cbedabc3@default>, "Alexander Leach"
>><Alexand...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In his memoirs, Artur Rubinstein mentions a run-in he had with Gieseking
in
>>> 1937, when the latter described himself as a 'confirmed Nazi', and
declared
>>> that 'Hitler is saving our country'. Rubinstein never spoke to him
again.
>
>>they were no threat to his career.
>
element
>of self-interested careerism in the organized boycotts against Gieseking,
>Furtwangler, etc. by Rubinstein, Heifetz, Piatagorsky, Brailowsky, and
several
>others was Yehudi Menuhin's father.
>
>But guess what: all of these people were great artists, so who cares?
>
>If one will ever unearth Sol Hurok's
>>files, it may emerge that the demonization of Gieseking was more for
>>business motives than ethical.
>
>Yes
>
> Gieseking was refused entry around 1949 or
>>1951 to the US due to the protests and clamor which Hurok organized.
>
>That is correct; does anyone remember what he said on that occasion?
>
> He
>>came here in 1953 and returned each year to perform recitals and
>>concertos.
>
>Including an Emperor with Guido Cantelli at Carnegie Hall in 1954. (He
died
>2-3 years later)
>
>>that he was apolitical. But more important, he was a great artist.
>
>The whole point.
>
>>
And Gieseking had the bad luck to be one of Hitler's two favorite pianists.
The other was Wilhelm Backhaus, who even after the war proudly claimed he
was number one. That must have been mutual admiration, because in 1936
Backhaus wrote an essay called "Nobody has German art in general and German
music in particular better understood tha Adolf Hitler.' Strange that
Gieseking even now has more trouble with his nazi-sympathies than Bakchaus
ever had. Or am I wrong?
Benjo Maso
Matthew B. Tepper
Benjamin Maso wrote:
>
> And Gieseking had the bad luck to be one of Hitler's two favorite
> pianists. The other was Wilhelm Backhaus, who even after the war
> proudly claimed he was number one. That must have been mutual
> admiration, because in 1936 Backhaus wrote an essay called "Nobody has
> German art in general and German music in particular better understood
> tha Adolf Hitler.' Strange that Gieseking even now has more trouble
> with his nazi-sympathies than Backhaus ever had. Or am I wrong?
>
> Benjo Maso
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm
My main music page --- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/berlioz.htm
And my science fiction club's home page --- http://www.lasfs.org/
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
John Grabowski
and such when no one worries about whether Russian composers were "real
Stalinites"? Papa Joe wasn't exactly a humanitarian...
John
--
Beauty is the purgation of superfluities.
Michelangelo
Allan Evans
ehrli...@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:
> >
> >In article <01bdee30$3464bce0$cbedabc3@default>, "Alexander Leach"
> ><Alexand...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In his memoirs, Artur Rubinstein mentions a run-in he had with Gieseking in
> >> 1937, when the latter described himself as a 'confirmed Nazi', and declared
> >> that 'Hitler is saving our country'. Rubinstein never spoke to him again.
> >> Gieseking was later refused entry to the U.S., allegedly.
>
> "confirmed Nazi" -- like they had a ceremony or something.
>
> >>
> >>
> >> Alex
> >
> >There isn't an easy answer.
>
> Sure there is. Gieseking and Rubinstein were two great pianists, but
> Rubinstein's memoirs are stupid.
>
> His family consisted of eminent Professors and
> >academics - highly learned and cultured, unlike the Nazi opportunists
> >Karajan or Bohm, or the Hitler fanatic Elly Ney. There are rumors that
> >Gieseking saved the lives of two Jewish musicians, one of whom he helped
> >to escape the country via underground connections.
>
> Yeah, right, everybody saved some Jewish person's life.
No, unfortunately "everybody" did not save "some Jewish person's life." If
Gieseking did, he was heroic, and remarkable in not having brought it up
to defend himself when being forced out of the US on his first pst-war
trip. He mentioned that he came only to play music.
Allan Evans
(NINTRAUB) wrote:
> >My impression of him, knowing his family and some pupils, is
> >>that he was apolitical. But more important, he was a great artist.
> >
> >The whole point.
> >
> >
>
> Allan/erlich et al -
>
> Thanks so much for your comments about Gieseking.
>
> I'm glad to hear that his only'crime' was staying in Germany and playing there
> during the war. I'm also not surprised to hear that he was defamed for
> economic/business reasons, though they were couched in moral outrage.
>
> The fact that he was a great artist is clearly quite important, but not the
> whole picture. To exaggerate, if he massacred a whole village but nailed
> Debussy with incredible elan, it would certainly make a difference as to my
> pianist of choice. For me personally, I like having a picture of the artist in
> my head as I listen to the music. The liner notes gave me the impression of a
> gentle giant who was not pretentious and was not worried about his 'precious'
> hands as he joyfully dug in his garden. That might sound naive, but it is an
> image, for me, that augments the beautiful music he made. I am so very glad
> that there is apparently no evidence linking him with regard to harming
anyone.
>
> My initial question remains: Do you know if there are any biographical
> materials on WG available in English? I am going to continue to collect and
> enjoy his music, but would so much like to learn more about this incredible
> genius.
>
> Thanks
>
> Neil
>
> nint...@aol.com
Perhaps it's now opportune to share a memory told me by Gieseking's
daughter. They were in Switzerland inIn Zurich they had access, for the
first time since war began, to uncensored newspapers. Gieseking read them
and was horrified. He immediately called his family together and proposed
that they defect. Mrs. Gieseking objected, saying they, being a prominent
family, should not abandon their aging parents, back in Germany, and
should return to stick it out, better or worse, so that their immediate
family might have a better chance of whatever was in store for them.
No book in English exists on him. A brief compilation of his writings
appeared in German as So Wurde Ich Pianist. His other great love in life
was butterflies, of which he was considered a great expert.
Allan Evans
<benj...@euronet.nl> wrote:
>>
> And Gieseking had the bad luck to be one of Hitler's two favorite pianists.
> The other was Wilhelm Backhaus, who even after the war proudly claimed he
> was number one. That must have been mutual admiration, because in 1936
> Backhaus wrote an essay called "Nobody has German art in general and German
> music in particular better understood tha Adolf Hitler.' Strange that
> Gieseking even now has more trouble with his nazi-sympathies than Bakchaus
> ever had. Or am I wrong?
>
> Benjo Maso
Hitler knew classical music & the arts quite well. When Carlo Zecchi was
forced to play for him, he offered a Sonata in D major, by Mozart; Hitler
demanded to know which one, "as there are three in D major." Is the
Backhaus screed available in any form?
Ehrlich606
>>
>> Yeah, right, everybody saved some Jewish person's life.
>
>
>No, unfortunately "everybody" did not save "some Jewish person's life." If
>Gieseking did, he was heroic, and remarkable in not having brought it up
>to defend himself when being forced out of the US on his first pst-war
>trip. He mentioned that he came only to play music.
>Allan Evans
>
>
Either someone is going to have to show me the emoticon for sarcasm or you are
going to have to do some remedial work on your irony detection.
Benjamin Maso
Allan Evans wrote in message ...
It was published in "Die Musik-Woche" of 27th of March 1936.
Benjo
Bob Harper
I've asked the same question myself, but no one seems to be interested.
A little selective outrage at work, perhaps?
Bob Harper
Yi-kuan Jong
Matthew B. Tepper <ducky兀deltanet.com> wrote:
:I thought Hitler's favorite pianist was Elly Ney.
:
:Benjamin Maso wrote:
::
:: And Gieseking had the bad luck to be one of Hitler's two favorite
:: pianists. The other was Wilhelm Backhaus, who even after the war
:: proudly claimed he was number one. That must have been mutual
:: admiration, because in 1936 Backhaus wrote an essay called "Nobody has
:: German art in general and German music in particular better understood
:: tha Adolf Hitler.' Strange that Gieseking even now has more trouble
::
:: Benjo Maso
:
:--
:My personal home page -- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm
:My main music page --- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/berlioz.htm
:And my science fiction club's home page --- http://www.lasfs.org/
:To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
I remember reading an article talking about Backhaus and Hilter. Someone ask
Backhaus why he played for the party. Backhaus said Hilter like my music.
Joey
Alain DAGHER
: John Grabowski wrote:
: >
: > I'm just wondering...Why all this concern about who was a "real Nazi"
: > and such when no one worries about whether Russian composers were "real
: > Stalinites"? Papa Joe wasn't exactly a humanitarian...
: I've asked the same question myself, but no one seems to be interested.
: A little selective outrage at work, perhaps?
The difference is pretty obvious. In Nazi Germany culture, and
especially music, was an integral part of the apparatus of
oppression, not to mention the demented ideas of Adolf Hitler.
So, conducting the Meistersingers Overture at the Nuremberg rally was
quite different than playing Tchaikovsky's piano concerto No 1 at the
Kremlin. Only in the first case was the performer explicitly siding
with the bad guys.
--
regards,
alain
John Grabowski
>
> Bob Harper (bha...@pacifier.com) wrote:
> : John Grabowski wrote:
> : >
> : > I'm just wondering...Why all this concern about who was a "real Nazi"
> : > and such when no one worries about whether Russian composers were "real
> : > Stalinites"? Papa Joe wasn't exactly a humanitarian...
>
> : I've asked the same question myself, but no one seems to be interested.
> : A little selective outrage at work, perhaps?
>
> The difference is pretty obvious. In Nazi Germany culture, and
> especially music, was an integral part of the apparatus of
> oppression, not to mention the demented ideas of Adolf Hitler.
And in Russia it wasn't? Geeze, glad you corrected me there. [throws
out Shostakovich collection]
John
--
POLITICIAN - (n) From the Greek "poli" meaing more than one,
and "tetian" for head; hence Poly-tetian, "two-headed," or,
literally, two-faced.
Alain
> Alain DAGHER wrote:
>
> > The difference is pretty obvious. In Nazi Germany culture, and
> > especially music, was an integral part of the apparatus of
> > oppression, not to mention the demented ideas of Adolf Hitler.
>
> And in Russia it wasn't? Geeze, glad you corrected me there. [throws
> out Shostakovich collection]
Don't be dense. While it is true that, in Russia, music, like every other human
activity, was submitted to the cruel whims and paranoias of the state, it was not
an instrument of state oppression. They didn't play Swan Lake in the death camps
did they (or perhaps they did)?
Nazi Germany needed prominent cultural figures to bolster the state's image, of
which German music played a key part. It looked very bad when all the best
interpreters of that music decamped. That is why they kept trying to force
Furtwangler to conduct Hitler's birthday concert, and why he kept refusing. He
finally did in '42 or '43 under serious threat. He fled the country the next day.
However, there is no obvious link that I can see between the Stalinist horrors
and the musicians who lived there at the time, unless they were victims of that
terror (like Shostakovich). It would be bizarre, to put it mildly, if you were to
get rid of your Shostakovich because, as a victim of Stalinism, you somehow saw
him as an accomplice.
Please explain your logic.
alain
John Grabowski
>
> Alain (al...@bic.mni.mcgill.ca) wrote:
> : John Grabowski wrote:
> :
> : > Alain DAGHER wrote:
> : >
> : > > The difference is pretty obvious. In Nazi Germany culture, and
> : > > especially music, was an integral part of the apparatus of
> : > > oppression, not to mention the demented ideas of Adolf Hitler.
> : >
> : > And in Russia it wasn't? Geeze, glad you corrected me there. [throws
> : > out Shostakovich collection]
> :
> : Don't be dense. While it is true that, in Russia, music, like every other human
> : activity, was submitted to the cruel whims and paranoias of the state, it was not
> : an instrument of state oppression. They didn't play Swan Lake in the death camps
> : did they (or perhaps they did)?
>
> playing music at death camps made it an *instrument* of state
> opression.
>
> :
> : Nazi Germany needed prominent cultural figures to bolster the state's image, of
> : which German music played a key part. It looked very bad when all the best
> : interpreters of that music decamped.
>
> Ashkenazy to enter the 1962 Tchaikovsky competition?
>
> : That is why they kept trying to force
> : Furtwangler to conduct Hitler's birthday concert, and why he kept refusing. He
> : finally did in '42 or '43 under serious threat. He fled the country
> the next day.
>
> in April 1942, but did not flee Germany until early Febuary 1945.
>
> :
> : However, there is no obvious link that I can see between the Stalinist horrors
> : and the musicians who lived there at the time, unless they were victims of that
> : terror (like Shostakovich). It would be bizarre, to put it mildly, if you were to
> : get rid of your Shostakovich because, as a victim of Stalinism, you somehow saw
> : him as an accomplice.
> :
> : Please explain your logic.
>
> Germany, an evil repressive dictatorship; why, then, do we not condemn
> those artists who remained in Stalin's Soviet Union, an evil,
> repressive dictatorship?
>
> Now you may want to argue that the comparison is unfair because, for
> example, it was a lot easier for people to leave Germany - at least in
> the early years of the "Thousand Year Reich" - but I think the
> question is a fair one.
Deryk: good point at the end there, even though it goes against my own
position. Hadn't thought of that.
Alain: Oh, poo, you call that an argument? I don't even know how to
reply to it, it's so idiotic, but Deryk did a fine job.
John
--
During the latter part of the [Horowitz in Moscow] concert...I found
mist forming in my eyes for some mysterious reason I could not explain.
I was not sad. I was exultant. It had something to do with my pride,
at that very moment, in being part of the same civilization that this
great and endearing man playing the piano was part of.
"Almost at the same instant ... the television camera left Horowitz's
fingers on the keyboard and dissolved to the face of a Soviet citizen
in the audience. He did not look like the enemy. His eyes were closed,
his head tilted slightly backward so that his face was up ... and one
lone teardrop ran down his cheek.
"It was the same teardrop running down mine."
--Andy Rooney, 1986
Deryk Barker
--
|Deryk Barker, Computer Science Dept. | Music does not have to be understood|
|Camosun College, Victoria, BC, Canada| It has to be listened to. |
|email: dba...@camosun.bc.ca | |
|phone: +1 250 370 4452 | Hermann Scherchen. |