Klarinet Archive - Posting 000083.txt from 1999/03

From: "Steven J Goldman, MD" <sjgoldman@-----.com>
Subj: RE: [kl] Sabine Meyer's Stamitz
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 03:53:02 -0500

Dear Dan,

Well, I just may have to elope with your daughter! And can you change that
order to hard salami on rye with mustard on the side?

First, I think that our idea of ideal performances of "ancient music" are
pretty much the same. Our point of difference is the amount of variation
around the mean that we find acceptable. From my point of view, at any time
in musical history, there was a variance, at times quite large, as to what
constituted proper performance practice and allowable interpretation. While
music theorists tried to see absolute laws in the performance practice of
their time, they usually were forced to ask performers to at least try to
use "good taste" in their performances, as the possibilities of
interpretation were too wide to specify, and varied from town to town,
province to province, and country to country. You seem to take the approach
that one should, within our present state of knowledge, try to reproduce a
performance as close to that conceived by the composer. However, a popular
18th century work would circulate throughout Europe, each music center
having its own peculiarities in regards to performing style. Would a Mozart
concerto be played using the same rules in London, Paris, or Italy? I would
suggest not. For example, your wonderful differentiation of cadenza vs. ein
gang would have been thrown out the window in Italy where more was better.
Now Mozart certainly had a specific group of musicians whose style and
musical vocabulary was well known to him, and this style should be that by
which others are judged. But can we condemn another style of historically
correct performance just because it used a different definition of
"tasteful"? Just as today we can enjoy and compare the interpretation of
modern works by different ensembles with different playing philosophies, can
we not accept different historical styles. Variety is the spice of life and
as long as a performance does not stray from techniques proven to be
historically valid, can we reject them? HIP may be a science but it's a soft
one. And, yes, the word taste can hide a mountain of errors, but it can also
be useful when used in the sense it was meant to by all the 18th century
theorists

As far as my ability to accept performances that do not follow the rules
used at the time of a works composition, it derives from my view of
differences in general. I do not believe or follow the tenants of Roman
Catholicism or Islam etc., yet I do not condemn people who do (I am not
suggesting for a second that you do either). I accept that it a view that
works for them and let them be. Now I usually do not personally enjoy
pre-modern music played without regard for historical practices, and for
classical and before much prefer period instruments, played well, when given
the choice. However, I am willing to accept the fact that many people are
perfectly happy with other types of performance, and I can live with it, at
least until someone proves to me it violates some natural law.

I am not nearly as good at writing about musical theory as clinical
medicine. I hope these comments are not too general, and make some sense.

Steve Goldman
Glenview, IL

sjgoldman@-----.com

-----Original Message-----
From: leeson@-----.edu]
Subject: RE: [kl] Sabine Meyer's Stamitz

Dear Steve,

BALONEY!! It has nothing to do with taste. "Taste" is an excuse
that permits the performer to do anything s/he wants and then claim
that it is historically informed.

A HIP is a science with very much absolute rules. The problem is that
for some of those rules we no longer have clear understanding of what
was meant. But there was a rule. We don't know what it is.

I once did a work with a conductor who said, "Well, in the final analysis,
taste must be the overriding consideration in any performance" to which
I replied, "The last thing that one should apply to any performance
should be taste. It's simply an excuse for not knowing anything."

Don't fall into that trap by excusing what you do with the "taste"
excuse. Should you continue in this way, I will not permit you to
marry my daughter. Is that clear? Reform your ways, please or the
wedding is off.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org