Klarinet Archive - Posting 000069.txt from 1996/01

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.EDU>
Subj: Bruce Hudson's comments on Stoltzman
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 05:49:20 -0500

Vincent deLuise made some comments on Stoltzman, saying that he
believed that, except for Wright and Neidich, Stoltzman is the
most prominent and elegant clarinetist of the generation. Strong
opinion, but that is the nature of independent thinkers who hold
strong views.

Bruce Hudson takes serious issue with Vincent's perspective and says
so in no uncertain terms. So far, life continues in its normal
fashion; i.e., one likes asparagus, the other does not. Thank goodness
for a democratic society that tolerates diverging views.

But Bruce's note give the opinion (forgive me Bruce, I'm exaggerating
for a rhetorical purpose) that there was a meeting two weeks ago
Thursday at which Vincent was not present and all the people at the
meeting were professional clarinet players who voted that Stoltzman
to have a 1.73 rating on a scale of -10 to +57. Bruce says, "But
surely when a great number, arguably the majority, of the ranks of
professional clarinetists find Stoltzman's frequent failure to ..."
and then he gives some very objective reasons why he feels as he does.

That's OK with me. I'll be that if I met Bruce, I'd buy him a beer
in a minute. However, what the majority arguably say is, to the best
of my knowledge, not known to Bruce; that is, unless I wasn't at the
meeting two weeks ago when Stoltzman was voted down the tubes.

So I disavow his comments as applying to me and to several first class
players with whom I am associated. In effect, he cannot sign my name
or anyone else's as being in agreement with his view on this matter,
unless he has some credible evidence that what he suggested is indeed
the case.

I really don't want to argue the specifics of Bruce's assertion. It
was reasonable and, I am certain, he spoke about what he hears in
Stoltzman's playing. And it may all be quite true. That is not the
issue.

What is the issue is that he suggested that the majority of professional
clarinet players (and there are some very good non-professional players
and ex players and the like) who felt this way, too. And to this I must
object unless he specifies the source for his statement.

Stoltzman, like Kell, creates strong opinions in people. He is a breaker
of idols, to be sure. It is good that an articulate person like Bruce
is prepared to be so very specific in his criticism of Stoltzman's
playing. He didn't say "Stoltzman is yucky and I hate his playing." No,
he was very specific in his criticism and very professional in his point
of view. But I do not agree with his assessment as to what the
arguable marjority of players have to think about Stoltzman. Perhaps in
a few weeks, and using this list as a statistical sample, we will be
able to make supportable statements about majority thought. But not now.

It poisons the well for those who think differently and makes them afraid
to voice their opinions because no one wants to be associated with the
minority view.

And for what it is worth, I think Stoltzman sensational!! I've worked
with him, reviewed his records, commented on the time he streaked naked
in Grace Rainery Rogers auditorium in NYC, and once was playing at a
concert in which the lights went out 40 measures into the Weber 1st
concerto just as he picked up his horn to make his solo entrance.

As I said, he is a man whose playing creates strong feelings.

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