Klarinet Archive - Posting 000215.txt from 1994/01

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.EDU>
Subj: Re Karen's comments on performance practice
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 23:03:29 -0500

Karen, you have defeated me by your statement. It is so motherhood that it
cannot be understood much less responded to. I mean no disrespect to you,
but when you say that you have a "desire to do the music justice by
making it a part of me and communicating this union to someone who
wants to listen" all I can say is, great! But where's the beef?

I mean, we are in the flapdoodle because I say we don't play Mozart
correctly today (which may be a totally rediculous statement but I
think it to be true) and you rushed in sword drawn to say that
you are a 20th century woman and do things in a 20th century way
amd now you give
me a statement that is so apple pie and mom, that I can't get my
arms around it.

You pinned both of my shoulders to the mat when you said "my
performance of Mozart not completely 'authentic'" but we have not even
gotten to the point of understanding each others views of performance
authenticity. And whatever that understanding might be, your earlier
message said that, as a 20th century performer, you were not going to
do that thing anyway. Somehow, being born in the 20th century freed you
from doing something that you never spoke about in any detail.

I thought I had a good idea of what the discussion was all about, but
when I read your note now, I realize that we are light years apart
in understanding each other's point of view.

The bottom line here is that I am a practical, no-nonsense clarinet
player. I don't believe in esoterica, or feelings, or any of the
things that non-musicians think about when they think about musicians.
I believe only in one thing: knowledge. Feelings about how to play
a work are, in my view, a waste of talent. It is knowing the
mechanics of what was expected of the player (coupled with being
a hell of a technician) that makes one a
communicating musician, not the agony of the torment of Beethoven,
or the passion of Tchaikovsky. I think knowledge is king and
everything else is secondary. Of course, I may be all wrong, but
when one plays a Mozart work (which is what this discussion is
about), except for the wig, buckled shoes, and satin waistcoat,
one must do this as a man or woman from the 18th century. If one
does it as a 20th century person (which is how you described
yourself), I think that
it is going to come out all wrong. And that is why
the contemporary performance of Mozart's clarinet music is in
such a miserable, sorry, and difficult state. It doesn't matter
who plays it, it all sounds the same. We have worshipped Mozart
to death. (Several important exceptions
should be noted such as Neidick's recording of K. 622, for example.
Now that's an 18th century performance!!)

So what does a "desire to do the music justice by making it a part
of me and communicating this union to someone who wants to listen"
have to do the ornamentation, improvisation, lead-ins, cadenzas,
basset clarinets, textual problems, embellishment, and the price
of reeds in China? How does one deal with such a perspective of music?
In my case it is by shrugging one's shoulders and saying, "I give
up. You win."

I'm talking practical problems and you are talking esoterica.

I don't think we should get married. We'd kill each other.

====================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
(leeson@-----.edu)
====================================

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org