Herbert von Karajan
FD...@aol.com
Someone I met in Austria was a fan of Herbert von Karajan and quoted him
as saying "It is all for show". Can anyone tell me when an why he said
this? What exactly did he mean? Thank you.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Constantine Thomas
In <5t2r0p$6j$2...@netnews.upenn.edu> si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon
Roberts) writes:
>
>FD...@AOL.COM wrote:
>: Someone I met in Austria was a fan of Herbert von Karajan and quoted
>heterosexuality,
Boy when one has enemies.
Was there any hint that he was not a heterosexual?
C Thomas
>Simon
Simon Roberts
Constantine Thomas (ct...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: In <5t2r0p$6j$2...@netnews.upenn.edu> si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon
: Roberts) writes:
: >
: >
: >Goodness, there are so many things "it" could be: his presumed
: >heterosexuality,
: Boy when one has enemies.
: Was there any hint that he was not a heterosexual?
: C Thomas
: >Simon
Well, if you think I'm an enemy, I'm not, at least not from a musical
perspective (obviously his behavior in Germany between 1934 and 1945 is
morally questionable, to say the least); I love some of his recordings,
hate some, and have other reactions in between. I based that particular
remark on something I read in a biography on him (I forget which) which
referred to his fondness for the company of younger homosexual males,
including one of his EMI producers, which is hardly standard heterosexual
behavior. Anyway, I find it interesting that you should believe that
homosexuality is the sort of trait that would be used by an enemy to smear
him; you assume, for one thing, that I disapprove or believe others
generally do and hope to disparage him in their eyes by saying so.
Simon
Constantine Thomas
In <5t354l$npi$1...@netnews.upenn.edu> si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon
Roberts) writes:
>
>Constantine Thomas (ct...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>: In <5t2r0p$6j$2...@netnews.upenn.edu> si...@dept.english.upenn.edu
(Simon
>: Roberts) writes:
>: >
>: >
>: >Goodness, there are so many things "it" could be: his presumed
>: >heterosexuality,
>
>: Boy when one has enemies.
>: Was there any hint that he was not a heterosexual?
>
>: C Thomas
>
>: >Simon
>
>Well, if you think I'm an enemy, I'm not, at least not from a musical
>perspective (obviously his behavior in Germany between 1934 and 1945
is
>morally questionable, to say the least); I love some of his
recordings,
>hate some, and have other reactions in between. I based that
particular
>remark on something I read in a biography on him (I forget which)
which
>referred to his fondness for the company of younger homosexual males,
>including one of his EMI producers, which is hardly standard
heterosexual
>behavior.
From 1968 to 1970 I was working for GPL (NASA electronics) and i was
placed on the same bench with an out of the closset homosexual.
He was one of the best persons one could ask to have next to him at
work.
I learned to apriciate his mind and I can tell you i was very fond of
Jim because he was, polite, smart, very creative, and kept his sexual
preferance to himself, as i did with mine.
Do you realy mean there are some coworkers that might think that i was
a homasexual too because Jim was an interesting person?
I think your brush is too wide
Constantine Thomas
>Simon
Simon Roberts
FD...@AOL.COM wrote:
: Someone I met in Austria was a fan of Herbert von Karajan and quoted him
: as saying "It is all for show". Can anyone tell me when an why he said
: this? What exactly did he mean? Thank you.
: -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
: http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Goodness, there are so many things "it" could be: his presumed
heterosexuality, claims not to have been a "real" Nazi, his obsession with
orchestral technique, music in general, his planes/cars/houses, his
career. What did the person you met say he meant?
Simon
Simon Roberts
Constantine Thomas (ct...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: From 1968 to 1970 I was working for GPL (NASA electronics) and i was
: placed on the same bench with an out of the closset homosexual.
: He was one of the best persons one could ask to have next to him at
: work.
:
: I learned to apriciate his mind and I can tell you i was very fond of
: Jim because he was, polite, smart, very creative, and kept his sexual
: preferance to himself, as i did with mine.
: Do you realy mean there are some coworkers that might think that i was
: a homasexual too because Jim was an interesting person?
: I think your brush is too wide
: Constantine Thomas
Obviously not; the point of what I read wasn't that he had
friends/associates who are/were gay, but that he actively sought out the
company of people who were. I have no idea whether this is true or not,
whether Karajan was straight, bi, or gay, and don't care one way or the
other. The question was what might have been meant by saying "it's all
for show;" this seemed an obvious possible answer, that's all.
Simon
Roland van Gaalen - Amsterdam - NL
si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon Roberts) writes:
: >referred to his fondness for the company of younger homosexual males,
: >including one of his EMI producers, which is hardly standard
: >heterosexual behavior.
Younger homosexual males? You mean age 17 or so? That would definitely
indicate that Karajan was a child-molesting PEDOPHILE (as our friends
Goodwin and Lebrecht might say). And this WHOLE NEWSGROUP has been trying
to cover it up. For all I know, Karajan CDs are still being sold
openly in the Netherlands--how can a whole country--AND its supporters--be
so BENIGHTED? These people MUST be stopped, now.
Roland van Gaalen
Amsterdam
Constantine Thomas
In <5t4a2k$5ui$1...@netnews.upenn.edu> si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon
Roberts) writes:
>
>Constantine Thomas (ct...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>
>: From 1968 to 1970 I was working for GPL (NASA electronics) and i was
>: placed on the same bench with an out of the closset homosexual.
>: He was one of the best persons one could ask to have next to him at
>: work.
>:
>: I learned to apriciate his mind and I can tell you i was very fond
of
>: Jim because he was, polite, smart, very creative, and kept his
sexual
>: preferance to himself, as i did with mine.
>
>: Do you realy mean there are some coworkers that might think that i
was
>: a homasexual too because Jim was an interesting person?
>: I think your brush is too wide
>: Constantine Thomas
>
>Obviously not; the point of what I read wasn't that he had
>friends/associates who are/were gay,
Please use the peoper word which, HOMOSEXUAL leave the word gay where
Mr Webster asign it.
Yes one thing, this war on H V Karajan, has backfired, there are more
of his CDs sold than the ones suggested by his oponents.
As far as his activities in the third reich, any one would grab a
chance when that chance presented it self.
He wound up in the loosers' side, imaging if Germany had won the war
what would have happened to Ronald Reagan.
If you think i sympathize with the nazis, I will tell you ( and the
others) a story during the war where my mother had one egg and two
hungry children.
Constantine Thomas
>Simon
>
>
Simon Roberts
Constantine Thomas (ct...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: In <5t4a2k$5ui$1...@netnews.upenn.edu> si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon: >
: >Obviously not; the point of what I read wasn't that he had
: >friends/associates who are/were gay,
: Please use the peoper word which, HOMOSEXUAL leave the word gay where
: Mr Webster asign it.
The vocabulary you choose is your business, the vocabulary I choose is
mine. If "Mr. Webster" hasn't yet woken up to the fact that the use of
the word of which you disapprove has become the prominent one, and thus,
by default if nothing else, its principal meaning, too bad for him (and
you, I suppose).
: Yes one thing, this war on H V Karajan, has backfired, there are more
: of his CDs sold than the ones suggested by his oponents.
: As far as his activities in the third reich, any one would grab a
: chance when that chance presented it self.
: He wound up in the loosers' side, imaging if Germany had won the war
: what would have happened to Ronald Reagan.
: If you think i sympathize with the nazis, I will tell you ( and the
: others) a story during the war where my mother had one egg and two
: hungry children.
: Constantine Thomas
What is this "war" on Karajan to which you refer? As for grabbing
chances, that may be true but doesn't make his willing
participation in Goebbels' propaganda activities any more
acceptable. And it's fairly obvious that party membership was not
necessary for a successful career -- e.g. Furtwaengler and most of
the members of the BPO. If your reference to the fact that
Karajan was on the losing side means that you think that history
is written by those who win, so that no-one would be attacking
Karajan for his party membership, etc., that's true but irrelevant
for reasons too obvious to state. Besides, you seem
awfully defensive for someone concerning whom no-one, as far as I can
tell, has made accusations of Nazi sympathizing.
Simon
Simon Roberts
Rodger Whitlock (toto...@mail.pacificcoast.net) wrote:
: si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon Roberts) wrote:
: >FD...@AOL.COM wrote:
: >: Someone I met in Austria was a fan of Herbert von Karajan and quoted him
: >: as saying "It is all for show". Can anyone tell me when an why he said
: >: this? What exactly did he mean?
: >Goodness, there are so many things "it" could be: his presumed
: >heterosexuality, claims not to have been a "real" Nazi, his obsession with
: >orchestral technique, music in general, his planes/cars/houses, his
: >career. What did the person you met say he meant?
: Personally I do not care one iota what HvK did in bed or in the bushes or
: wherever or whose company he preferred or why. The biggest strike against him
: in my eyes is the ungodly adulation of the British critics for his every
: recording. One senses a powerful and well-tuned PR engine in the background and
: where PR comes in, truth goes out.
: As I have quite a prejudice against him, I am not broadly familiar with his
: overall recording oeuvre. Was he *really* that good? Or are the criticisms
: accurate about surface gloss with no depth?
: ----
: Rodger Whitlock
: Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
: on beautiful Vancouver Island
I agree with all of what you said, especially that the most annoying thing
about Karajan is the publicity machine to which you refer -- his doing to
a considerable extent, I suspect -- and, worse, the adulation of certain
British critics centered on Gramophone and its satellite, the Penguin
Guide. You are duly warned that his biggest worshipper -- Richard
Osborne, who in many respects is a perceptive, if narcissistic, reviewer
-- is writing a book on Karajan which is due out, he says (in the current
Gramophone), in the fall of 1998 in which he claims he will explain (away,
I assume he means) Karajan's career between 1934 and 1945.
I sometimes wonder if there's a certain generational factor involved: the
glamorous foreigner who arrives to inject a little glamor into the British
music scene -- hence Beecham's devastating comment, neatly disposing of
two birds with one stone, that Karajan was "a sort of musical Malcolm
Sargent" -- and helps create what was at the time perhaps the greatest
orchestra in Europe, the Philharmonia (dismissed later as a bunch of
amateurs or some such by a rather ungrateful Karajan). I notice that the
newer Gramophone reviewers don't seem to share the old idolatry; nor, I
should add, do/did many British reviewers of an older generation. The EMG
Monthly Newsletter and Records and Recordings certainly weren't staffed by
Karajan fans (sadly both magazines died in the late 1970s); and when
Karajan died, Rodney Milnes, one of Britain's most eminent opera critics,
ended his obituary in The Spectator with "Ultimately, Karajan was a bad
man and a bad musician and the world is a better place without him."
As for your questions about his abilities as a conductor, hardly anyone is
as good as the reputations their worshippers create. There can be no
disputing his technical abilities; he certainly created a distinctive
sound. The problem is that he used precisely the same sound and legato
style without regard to the music at hand, though at times certain pieces
escaped (much of Fidelio, for instance), and towards the end a degree of
incisiveness was allowed back in (which is why I think his last Brahms
cycle is the best of his 3, or however many it was). I think that most of
the time the results were musically rather bad, including in music in
which he is often most praised like Richard Strauss's, but occasionally
there are performances that are sublime, like his Tristan, most of
Fidelio, his second EMI Missa Solemnis, which transcend the faults that
remain even there. Sometimes I like the results precisely because of how
wrong they are because the result is something that "works" in a perverse
way, like his ridiculous, galumphing, overblown Schubert symphonies and
his second recording of the Marriage of Figaro.
But would someone else please suggest some alternatives to mine for what
the "it" was that was "all show"?
Simon
Simon Roberts
Roland van Gaalen - Amsterdam - NL (r...@xs2.xs4all.nl) wrote:
: Roland van Gaalen
: Amsterdam
I was thinking more like 4 or 5, the average age of EMI producers....
Simon
Rodger Whitlock
FDURR
Thank you for responding to my question. I think the man who quoted von
Karajon meant that -- the true meaning of a thing is much deeper than the
external experience.
Ramon Khalona
Simon Roberts wrote:
>
> FD...@AOL.COM wrote:
> : Someone I met in Austria was a fan of Herbert von Karajan and quoted him
> : as saying "It is all for show". Can anyone tell me when an why he said
>
> Goodness, there are so many things "it" could be: his presumed
> heterosexuality, claims not to have been a "real" Nazi, his obsession with
> orchestral technique, music in general, his planes/cars/houses, his
> career. What did the person you met say he meant?
>
> Simon
I'm sure Herbie was talking about his tattoos. :-)
--
"Un torturador no se redime suicidandose... pero algo es algo"
- Mario Benedetti
Ramon Khalona
Carlsbad, California
drgonzopipeline.com
ct...@ix.netcom.com(Constantine Thomas) wrote:
>Yes one thing, this war on H V Karajan, has backfired, there are more
>of his CDs sold than the ones suggested by his oponents.
Not completely correct, at least in the US; SoundScan numbers indicate the
vast majority of Karajan's recordings are competitive with repertoire by
other artists, but he is not the best-selling conductor in the US; both
Fiedler and Bernstein outsell Karajan (total units) in the US, and there
are far less titles with Fiedler in print than with Karajan!! I'd like to
see similar reliable figures for Europe.
Doctor Gonzo
Sara Freeman
In <5t5lf7$n...@camel4.mindspring.com> drgonzo<at>pipeline.com (Doctor
Gonzo) writes:
>
>ct...@ix.netcom.com(Constantine Thomas) wrote:
>
>>Yes one thing, this war on H V Karajan, has backfired, there are
more
>>of his CDs sold than the ones suggested by his oponents.
>
>Not completely correct, at least in the US; SoundScan numbers indicate
the
>vast majority of Karajan's recordings are competitive with repertoire
by
>other artists, but he is not the best-selling conductor in the US;
both
>Fiedler and Bernstein
What a pair!
outsell Karajan (total units) in the US, and there
>are far less titles with Fiedler in print than with Karajan!! I'd
like to
>see similar reliable figures for Europe.
>
>Doctor Gonzo
>
--
If you can't say anything nice about
anybody . . . come sit by me.
Simon Roberts
Distribution:
Neil Tingley (mu...@netlink.co.uk) wrote:
: On 16 Aug 1997 16:22:07 GMT, si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon Roberts) wrote:
: >The vocabulary you choose is your business, the vocabulary I choose is
: >mine. If "Mr. Webster" hasn't yet woken up to the fact that the use of
: >the word of which you disapprove has become the prominent one, and thus,
: >by default if nothing else, its principal meaning, too bad for him (and
: >you, I suppose).
: My OED (oxford English dictionary) has a note about usage of gay "...is
: now well established and in widespread general use."
: Who is Webster ? No relation of the Fowler brothers ?
Good god no. Webster's is perhaps the preeminent American dictionary,
not a tome on usage. Whether he would have been capable of anything
remotely resembling Fowler's (or Gowers' in the later edition) wit, flair
and style I can't say.
Simon
Neil Tingley
On 17 Aug 1997 15:01:36 GMT, si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon Roberts) wrote:
>
>Good god no. Webster's is perhaps the preeminent American dictionary,
>not a tome on usage. Whether he would have been capable of anything
>remotely resembling Fowler's (or Gowers' in the later edition) wit, flair
>and style I can't say.
Simon, my question was toungue in cheek. The brothers Fowler edited the 1st
edition the OED, and coincidentally taught English at my old school. Of course I
have a copy of Fowler's Modern English Usage somewhere.
N.
------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Tingley (at home) |http://www.netlink.co.uk/users/music
mu...@netlink.co.uk |Furtwaengler, Sokolov, GH Gould, links
"mozart died too late rather than too soon." !! G Gould
Neil Tingley
On 16 Aug 1997 18:52:59 GMT, si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon Roberts) wrote:
>
>I sometimes wonder if there's a certain generational factor involved: the
>glamorous foreigner who arrives to inject a little glamor into the British
>music scene -- hence Beecham's devastating comment, neatly disposing of
>two birds with one stone, that Karajan was "a sort of musical Malcolm
>Sargent" -- and helps create what was at the time perhaps the greatest
>orchestra in Europe, the Philharmonia (dismissed later as a bunch of
>amateurs or some such by a rather ungrateful Karajan). I notice that the
>newer Gramophone reviewers don't seem to share the old idolatry; nor, I
>should add, do/did many British reviewers of an older generation. The EMG
>Monthly Newsletter and Records and Recordings certainly weren't staffed by
>Karajan fans (sadly both magazines died in the late 1970s); and when
>Karajan died, Rodney Milnes, one of Britain's most eminent opera critics,
>ended his obituary in The Spectator with "Ultimately, Karajan was a bad
>man and a bad musician and the world is a better place without him."
>
Interesting. Milnes is a very wise and perceptive critic (that's why he wrote in
the Spectator...not dead is he ?). The huge karjan cult in the UK may in part be
due to the fact (as Simon says) that he conducted the Philhamonia during its
early haydays. The then leader, Hugh Bean was quite firm about it , "karajan was
exiting ..." (compared klemp). Today's critics would have been brought up his
concerts and recordings - probably startlingly different from the Boult, JBs and
Beechams. It may have been karajan's sound, his glitzy showmanship - I'm not
sure. The very big Klemperer following in this country, not always by the
critics, is because he was a household name for 15 years. But I think the subtle
difference between Klemp and Von K is what Beecham noted - that with Klemp you
were inspired, awed, moved. Von K just dazzled.
My reaction to his recordings has wained. I used to worship his Sibelius 5 but
after hearing Barbirolli am Horenstein Karajan sound mechanical and over
polished. I've never like his Shostakovich 10 and am at a total loss to explain
its popularity. It took me a long time to appreciate any karajan recordings and
I can't really say I treasure any. Compare that reaction to my feelings for
Barbiroli, Klemperer and my beloved Horenstein.
Perhaps the element of showmanship. PR machine and spin is a much more
influentual factor in forming people's perceptions about an artist's musicality.
Look at Helfgot ! Seriously though, take Horowitz. His reputation in part was
due to his virtuosity with the press. Much of his legend is a myth. The
"greatest of the greatest" is a nonsense.
In the BBC music mag, there's another ominous sign - a fawning article by the
usually wise jeremy siepmann on Evgeny Kissin. This boy is now becoming a media
celebrity - 10 million encores, prime slots on Classic FM, glamourous poses in
armani etc. Yet how many people really listen, carefully, his music making ?
Sunday morning editorial over !
Neil Tingley
On 16 Aug 1997 16:22:07 GMT, si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon Roberts) wrote:
>The vocabulary you choose is your business, the vocabulary I choose is
>mine. If "Mr. Webster" hasn't yet woken up to the fact that the use of
>the word of which you disapprove has become the prominent one, and thus,
>by default if nothing else, its principal meaning, too bad for him (and
>you, I suppose).
My OED (oxford English dictionary) has a note about usage of gay "...is now well
established and in widespread general use."
Who is Webster ? No relation of the Fowler brothers ?
N.
Simon Roberts
Neil Tingley (mu...@netlink.co.uk) wrote:
: On 16 Aug 1997 18:52:59 GMT, si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon Roberts) wrote:
: >
: >
: Interesting. Milnes is a very wise and perceptive critic (that's why he wrote in
: the Spectator...not dead is he ?).
I've no idea; hope not.
: My reaction to his recordings has wained. I used to worship his Sibelius 5 but
: after hearing Barbirolli am Horenstein Karajan sound mechanical and over
: polished. I've never like his Shostakovich 10 and am at a total loss to explain
: its popularity. It took me a long time to appreciate any karajan recordings and
: I can't really say I treasure any. Compare that reaction to my feelings for
: Barbiroli, Klemperer and my beloved Horenstein.
: Perhaps the element of showmanship. PR machine and spin is a much more
: influentual factor in forming people's perceptions about an artist's musicality.
: Look at Helfgot ! Seriously though, take Horowitz. His reputation in part was
: due to his virtuosity with the press. Much of his legend is a myth. The
: "greatest of the greatest" is a nonsense.
: In the BBC music mag, there's another ominous sign - a fawning article by the
: usually wise jeremy siepmann on Evgeny Kissin. This boy is now becoming a media
: celebrity - 10 million encores, prime slots on Classic FM, glamourous poses in
: armani etc. Yet how many people really listen, carefully, his music making ?
I agree with all the above (though am sceptical about Horenstein); and
you're absolutely right about the Kissin fuss; sure he's good, but
no-one's THAT good -- I must say, though, that his new Beethoven 2/5 is
pretty impressive, though I don't think he will displace favorites such as
Kovacevich even if Kissin's playing is technically superior.
Simon
Warren
I thought 4 or 5 was their average IQ.
Steve Wolk
Simon Roberts
3...@erols.com>Distribution:
Warren (don...@erols.com) wrote:
: >
: > I was thinking more like 4 or 5, the average age of EMI producers....
: >
: > Simon
: I thought 4 or 5 was their average IQ.
: Steve Wolk
That too; you've doubtless heard the joke that EMI stands for "Every
Mistake Imaginable."
Simon
Alain DAGHER
I'd place Karajan in the middle of the pack ... of conductors who's
name start with the letter K.
Better than Kempe, Keilbreth, Knappertsbusch, and Krips.
About as good as Kubelik.
Not as good as the Kleibers or Klemperer.
(And far far better than Kurt Masur or Kent Nagano).
His live recordings from Salzburg are amazing. If that was all we had,
and a few studio recordings (Sibelius, Brahms, Bruckner), he'd be an
r.m.c.r. legend like Celi or Kleiber. But he made too many records and
he was a jerk to boot.
--
Regards,
"De la musique avant toute chose"
Alain Dagher, M.D.
Montreal Neurological Institute -Paul Verlaine
Neil Tingley
On 17 Aug 1997 14:57:12 GMT, si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon Roberts) wrote:
>I agree with all the above (though am sceptical about Horenstein)
Don't think you need be. He's the genuine article !
Simon Roberts
Distribution:
Neil Tingley (mu...@netlink.co.uk) wrote:
: On 17 Aug 1997 15:01:36 GMT, si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon Roberts) wrote:
: Simon, my question was toungue in cheek. The brothers Fowler edited the 1st
: edition the OED, and coincidentally taught English at my old school. Of course I
: have a copy of Fowler's Modern English Usage somewhere.
: N.
Oh well, you never know; I had never heard of Webster until I came here,
and forgot they had done the first OED. It's a shame more people don't
know "Modern English Usage" in either the first or second editions; apart
from being the best book on the subject, I also think it's one of the
funniest books ever written. I understand that the new edition is awful;
do you know?
Simon
Rodger Whitlock
al...@bic.mni.mcgill.ca (Alain DAGHER) wrote:
>...[HvK] was a jerk...
Methinks thou hath hit ye naile on ye heade.
Alain DAGHER
Neil Tingley (mu...@netlink.co.uk) wrote:
: Interesting. Milnes is a very wise and perceptive critic (that's why
: he wrote in the Spectator...
You mean like Paul Johnson?
By the way Neil, how's the Duchess of York's Spectator column? I hear
she's writing about Dante this week.
Alain Dagher
Simon Roberts wrote:
>
> Alain DAGHER (al...@bic.mni.mcgill.ca) wrote:
>
> : By the way Neil, how's the Duchess of York's Spectator column? I hear
> : she's writing about Dante this week.
>
> know (I absolutely agree with your implied criticism of the loathsome Paul
> Johnson).
It's no joke. See here:
This article is so incredibly bad that one suspects the editors of the
Spectator are just trying to score brownie points with the Windsors by
allowing Fergie to humiliate herself.
It's a well known fact that the publisher of the Spectator, the evil
Canadian press baron Conrad Black, is always trying to ingratiate
himself to the British establishment. In this case, I'd say he's come up
a bit short. On the other hand, those other brown-nosers, the Al-Fayeds
...
The only flaw in my argument is that horrendous writing, craven
name-dropping, lame humour, and odious tittle-tattle are actually
standard fare in British journalism. And to think they hired a Brit to
edit the New Yorker.
--
Regards,
Alain Dagher, MD "nowadays to be intelligible
Montreal Neurological Institute, is to be found out"
Montreal. - Oscar Wilde
Ramon Khalona
Alain DAGHER wrote:
>
> I'd place Karajan in the middle of the pack ... of conductors who's
> name start with the letter K.
>
> Better than Kempe, Keilbreth, Knappertsbusch, and Krips.
>
> About as good as Kubelik.
Nope. I'd take Kubelik's Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Bruckner, Mahler
and Dvorak any day over Karajan's. We're talking core of the
repertoire.
>
> Not as good as the Kleibers or Klemperer.
Agreed.
>
> (And far far better than Kurt Masur or Kent Nagano).
Silly comparison. These are just "K" fillers here.
>
> His live recordings from Salzburg are amazing. If that was all we had,
> and a few studio recordings (Sibelius, Brahms, Bruckner), he'd be an
> r.m.c.r. legend like Celi or Kleiber. But he made too many records and
> he was a jerk to boot.
>
> --
> Regards,
> "De la musique avant toute chose"
> Alain Dagher, M.D.
> Montreal Neurological Institute -Paul Verlaine
>
--
Simon Roberts
Alain DAGHER (al...@bic.mni.mcgill.ca) wrote:
: Neil Tingley (mu...@netlink.co.uk) wrote:
: : Interesting. Milnes is a very wise and perceptive critic (that's why
: : he wrote in the Spectator...
: You mean like Paul Johnson?
: By the way Neil, how's the Duchess of York's Spectator column? I hear
: she's writing about Dante this week.
I hope that's a joke; I haven't seen the magazine in years, so you never
know (I absolutely agree with your implied criticism of the loathsome Paul
Johnson).
Simon