Klarinet Archive - Posting 000402.txt from 1997/12

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu>
Subj: RE: Slander, etc
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 1997 09:09:42 -0500

> From: MX%"klarinet@-----.35
> Subj: Slander, etc

> Gee Dan,
>
> First you chastise someone for attacking poor, defenseless Gervaise de Peyer,
> then you write THIS? Hmm. . .

If you cannot see the difference between the attacks on de Payer's playing
ability including sound, general musicianship, etc. and this highly
complimentary criticism of Morales' playing, then you are having
trouble dealing with grammar, syntax, and meaning.

I could not have been more complimentary to Morales. I could not have
been more appreciative of his playing. But I also mentioned a specific,
non-arguable element of what he played as being wrong. I said nothing
negative about how he played. I dealt only with an issue that cannot
be contradicted; i.e., Mozart calls for one set of notes, Morales played
another. Now it is true that someone suggested that this was not as
important as I believe it to be, but no one contradicted my facts. I
think it important. Others don't. That's not criticizing his playing.
Don't you see the difference or are you just being deliberately obtuse?

You really insult my intelligence by suggesting that the vitriolic attacks
on de Payer are indistinguishable from my remarks on Morales' failure to
recognize the original text of the aria as Mozart wrote it. Worse, you
show yourself to be unable to distinguish between criticism of how a
person plays from what a person plays.

>
> Date: Sat, 06 Dec 1997 11:51:47 EST
> From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu>
> Subject: Today's Titus on the Met Broadcast
>
> I admit that I stood in absolute awe of Morales' control and intelligence
> in the performing of the great Parto aria which employs an obliggato
> clarinet to such a stunning effect. It finished not 10 minutes ago.
>
> But the bottom line is that, despite the 1000 positive things one can
> say about the performance, the fact remains that he played it on the
> wrong clarinet! The part is written for a basset clarinet in B-flat
> and it was performed on a standard clarinet in B-flat.
>
> There are four reasons why he might have done this:
>
> 1) The conductor insisted on a performance played on
> traditional clarinet;
>
> 2) Morales was unable to find a basset clarinet that
> had the required professional characteristics and thus
> was compelled to ignore the explicit performance
> instructions;
>
> 3) Morales would have like to played in on the proper
> instrument but does not own one and decided not to
> incur the expense of one for such a rare occasion;
>
> 4) Morales does not know for what instrument the work
> is scored.
>
> I am sympathetic to the first two, very much less sympathetic to
> the third but consider the fourth the most likely.
>
> Morales is such an incredible talent and such a magnificent player
> that I believe he left college before completing his course of study.
> I am told that he began to play professionally at about the age of
> 20, a testament to his extraordinary technical facility. As such,
> it is unlikely that he had little opportunity to get to know things
> associated with music outside of playing. Bottom line is that I
> suspect that he never found out about the clarinet revolution
> currently in progress with the availability of contemporary
> basset clarinets and thus does not know that the part that he played
> on the radio is rife with wrong notes, "wrong" in the sense that they
> are not what Mozart wrote, they are occasionally an octave too high,
> and the balance of the aria is upset to some degree every time such
> an event occurs, and thus the entire aria is thrown out of kilter.
>
> It distresses me to think that he does know about the basset clarinet
> but does not consider it a very important thing. So I won't credit
> the problem to this phenomenon.
>
> Over the last week or two, the subject of "what the composer intended"
> has come up on this list a dozen times. Well, here we have a very
> practical case. What the composer intended was NOT played, and instead
> a modified version created ca. 1800 to fit a clarinet of reduced
> range was substituted. And neither the composer nor the aria were
> well served by this activity.
>
> Can Morales play well? He's breathtaking. Does he play intelligently?
> He is a joy to hear. Is he aware of the relationship between performance
> practice and proper execution of music from this era? I think not.
>
> And it makes no difference if no one in the world including Morales knows
> what he did. It is our duty to find out about these things and to do
> them, not for ourselves, but for the music. That is what constitutes
> the highest level of professionalism.
>
> =======================================
> Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
> Rosanne Leeson, Los Altos, California
> leeson@-----.edu
> =======================================
=======================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
Rosanne Leeson, Los Altos, California
leeson@-----.edu
=======================================