|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
142.255.91.115
In Reply to: RE: Question posted by Amphissa on April 21, 2014 at 09:27:37
Amphissa, take it easy! Who's talking about sanctity of anything. I hope we can at least agree that, just as as there can be judicious use of artistic license, there can also be excessive and tasteless use of it. Care needs to be taken; no?
Follow Ups:
Well, according to your previous post, doubling an instrument is excessive artistic license, even if the effect is better, because it's not in the score. And that conductors making changes like that are second-guessing the intent of the composer.
I would say that conductors do not necessarily make changes in an attempt to second-guess the intent of the composer. I would say that conductors often make changes for creative, artistic purposes. Mahler did not revise Schumann's symphonies in order to second-guess the intent of the composer. Furtwangler was not especially concerned about rigid fidelity to the scores of Brahms and Beethoven. Celibidache interpreted Bruckner by way of his own conception of how to best bring the music to life. Most everyone ignores the tempo markings of Gliere's 3rd and most recordings contain cuts imposed by the conductors, not approved by the composer.
The list could go on and on. My only point is that the world of music is enriched by the creative interpretation of conductors that often intentionally deviates from the score.
"Life without music is a mistake" (Nietzsche)
I think that our personal predispositions re any given subject tend to slant how we interpret what we read as well as how we each express ourselves. I think that regardless of the strength of the argument, when all is said and done, I will tend to fall on the more conservative (honor the score) side of this issue, while you would probably fall on the more liberal side of it. Having said that, I said nothing about the subject that was absolutist in nature.****I am not opposed to the idea in principle, but second guessing a composer's intentions is always a fine line to walk.****
I also said:
****....even if the end result is SUBJECTIVELY better****
IOW, if it is better to a particular listener; it may not be to some one else.
Perhaps I expressed myself poorly, but my point was simply that care should be taken when, yes, second guessing what the composer intended. I agree with you that much fine music has been made that deviated from the score, but I hope you are not suggesting that there is no room for caution; that "anything goes" in the interest of an interpreter's vision of a work. There certainly are many examples, recorded and otherwise, of artistic license that did not serve the music well; admittedly, judged using my yardstick and that of other like minded listeners if not that of every listener. Or is there also no room for criticism as poster merlinus seems to suggest?
Edits: 04/21/14 04/21/14 04/21/14
Criticism is fine, as long as it does not make someone wrong. Beauty, for better or worse, is in the eye of the holder, and indeed, it is futile to argue about taste.
Even as a relatively accomplished amateur pianist, I can never hope to play the presto and vivace tempi indicated in the LvB sonatas, but the music is still incredible, to my ears and spirit, at any speed.
As another example, Bernstein is often criticized for his attempts to wring out every bit of emotion in Mahler, often using much different tempi and accents than written in the score, but for me, he is unsurpassed.
Excessive and tasteless? What is the yardstick -- your experience, or mine?
Mine; of course :-). In seriousness, and if interested, please read my response to Amphissa.
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: