|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.239.122.162
In Reply to: RE: I kind of agree, and yet. . . posted by Chris from Lafayette on April 16, 2014 at 10:24:46
I think we can both pick out individual recordings or performances to illustrate our points. Personally, I am not as slavishly adoring of the old greats as might seem. I have found many contemporary recordings I really, truly enjoy. I have heard and met musicians who I think are exceptionally talented. I think we both agree that some of the performances/recordings for generations past were great, and in some cases definitive -- and that there have been some very worthy recordinghs in more recent times.
I have talked with quite a few musicians, mostly young conductors and touring solists, who have felt hobbled by the current situation in classical music -- the shrunken repertoire of warhorses that they are required to repeat over and over, the need to perform modern composers they really don't like that much, the parade of soloists or conductors who are talented but not accomplished, but most of all, being locked into artist management systems sand contractual requirements that limit their ability to expand.
There was a very interesting piece written by Martin Kettle in The Guardian over a decade ago that meditated on the declining art of the piano. It was titled "Why are today's concert pianists so boring?" I couldn't really disagree with what he said, but to me, he missed the cause of the circumstances -- the marketing of musicians and the tyranny of the score.
You've probably seen the article. It's here, for those who haven't:
Why are today's concert pianists so boring?
Yes, I think Yuja has some interesting takes on Rachmaninoff, but also mixed in her recordings/performances are a lot of really weird moments that, to me, seem like lapses in either technique or concentration or understanding. But she's not going to rewrite entire passages the way Horowitz did, or improvise the passages the way Rachmaninoff did. And by appearing in those skimpy dresses and doing these little interpretive moments, she's put herself into the position (right or wrong) of being an "act" like Lang Lang or Hough or Salerno-Sonnenberg, instead of an "artist" like Lugansky. It may be unfair to the musicians, it may be inaccurate in terms of talent, but it is a result of marketing and management that defines artists today.
BTW -- I wasn't saying that Piatigorsky's Dvorak was iconic. I was simply using it to illustrate the freedom that performers had in personal interpretation back during that era. (And I was thinking of Piatigorsky's recording with Ormandy, not Munch.) Same with Furtwangler or Stokowski or Toscanini. One can argue about the merits of their personal vision, yet still appreciate that personal visions were valued much more than today.
There are many wonderfully talented musicians these days, but there is a lot about the current classical music environment that limits them (and us).
"Life without music is a mistake" (Nietzsche)
Follow Ups:
I saw Yuja Wang play the Rach 3 here in Cleveland last week, conducted (wonderfully) by Giancarlo Guerrero. She put her own stamp on the music but didn't Lang-Lang it to show everyone "Look what a wonderful pianist I am!" Everything she did was musical. It was a phenomenal performance--as is her recording, which was not exactly the same interpretation we had here last week. BTW, she did NOT wear a skimpy dress.
nt
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: