Klarinet Archive - Posting 000560.txt from 1997/12

From: Hat NYC 62 <HatNYC62@-----.com>
Subj: Re: klarinet-digest V1 #488
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 1997 19:42:33 -0500

Christ Dan,

I never suggested you were wrong about what Mozart wrote. Ponting out
historical inaccuracies is one thing. What I objected to was when you decided
to put reasons into Ricardo's head as to why he did what he did. You basically
accused him of being some kind of clarinet jock. . .playing through anything
that's put in front of him without any thought to history or context. That's
at least as insulting as saying someone's tone is nasty. At least I consider
it so.

If you had just written "Morales plays an arrangement of the clarinet part,
rather than the bassett original from the manuscript." I would have had no
problem. Suggesting he was too lazy or ignorant to know what was in the
original was going to far for me.

<<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.
>>