Klarinet Archive - Posting 000347.txt from 1996/12

From: thehat@-----.org
Subj: Goodman and classical mus
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 01:39:18 -0500

In a message dated 12-11-96 INTERNET: bill.fogle=ASPE wrote to ** ALL **:
Ib> It's always troubled me, the legend that Benny Goodman couldn't play
Ib> classical. More to the point, what I have heard are phrases to the
Ib> effect " The King of Swing" was disappointing in another medium. To
Ib> Goodman's contemporaries who wrote the reviews, what did this
Ib> attitude mean? How would Goodman have "warmed up" classical? How does
Ib> swing music apply to classical? I guess that is why the question, the
Ib> bad reviews, interest me. Are the Benny Goodman critics saying Draper
Ib> had "it" and Goodman didn't?

Ib> I have a book of Goodman's music (piano and clarinet parts). When I
Ib> have worked on the technical bits, the "expression" comes without too
Ib> much difficulty for me. This is less true in my case for *certain*
Ib> classical works. Often when playing, I wonder how Goodman--or any
Ib> professional-- handled playing the different types of music.
Ib> -----Bill Fogle.

It depends on what you compare Goodman with. By the standards of the 1930s,
Goodman was an excellent "legit" player. By today's standards, he is still at
least extrememly competent. I think Goodman's reputation as a classical
player was done much harm by several recordings he made for RCA in stereo
later in his career, particularly that Nielsen recording with Gould and the
CSO, which he should never have released. His early classical recordings are
finally becoming available again, providing a better perspective.

The COntrasts recording with Bartok and Szigeti is not bad at all,
considering that no inta-movement splicing was possible. Benny learned and
performed Contrasts without taking a break from playing 2-3 shows a day with
his big-band. He practiced it in between sets! THen he took a night off to
play the premiere at Carnegie Hall. Who else would dare to do that?

Other early classical Goodman is similarly good. The old Mozart Quintet with
the Budapest Q may not be a first choice today, but compare it with the
standards of the 1930s clarinet playing and it's pretty impressive. Same goes
for the Debussy with the NYPO and Barbarolli. Technically, it's cleaner than
Hamelin's. Later, Kell convinced Benny to play double lip in classical music
and told him some other things which changed Benny's classical playing (in my
opinion for the worse). The later recordings which I mentioned at the top
show a deterioration of the tone and much more air leaking and worse
intonation than his early classical work.

Remember also that much of what we call 20th century clarinet repertoire
exists because of Benny. Not one piece I can think of that was written for
Kell compares with any of half a dozen great works written for Benny (or even
the Ebony Concerto, which was written for Woody Herman).

There were only a handful of players in NYC early on who played better legit
than Benny. Legends like Gallodoro (perhaps the most underrated player ever),
McClane, DeSantis, Brody and a few others. But none of them could do the
things Benny could do as a jazz player. Brody even played 2nd to Benny on a
recording of Milhaud's "La Creation" with Bernstein conducting (out of print).

As for Draper, he was a wonderfulplayer. But he was no Al Gallodoro and if he
were around today he would not be a legend, merely a professional. Benny
deserves respect for what he tried to do. He even practiced the day he died.
He always sought advice from clarinetists he respected, even if they were
younger. He heard Marcellus's Mozart recording and called him for lessons etc.
etc.

In my opinion, we owe Benny a debt that is too big to calculate for
popularizing the instrument. He had shortcomings as a man, and he wasn't
perfect as a musician either. But where would we be as clarinetists if he
hadn't been around?

David Hattner
clarinetist-at-large, NYC
-> Alice4Mac 2.5d3 E QWK Eval:04Feb96
Origin: Hat's Nut House