Klarinet Archive - Posting 000113.txt from 1999/03

From: "Steven J Goldman, MD" <sjgoldman@-----.com>
Subj: RE: [kl] Some remarks on composer Mark Gustavson's interesting comments
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 14:36:11 -0500

How depressing. I really thought your point of view became extinct years
ago. It certainly should have. It was all too common when I was a
undergraduate music major. But thanks to the brave work of Harnoncourt,
Leonhardt, Bruggen, the Kuijken's, Monrow, Hogwood, and so many others (I
leave out the somewhat odd but irreplaceable charters of the early 20th
century who pioneered the movement), it is a view who's time has passed. The
best, well balanced commentary I know is an article by Stanley Sadie, "The
Idea of Authenticity" which can be found in the "Companion to Baroque Music"
edited by Julie Anne Sadie, U of California Press. I implore the readers on
the list with an interest to read and consider this article if they want a
true understanding of what the HIPsters are trying to do, including the
limits to authenticity.

One point of irony is that the composers whose works we try to recreate may
not have understood what we are trying to do (I think old JS just may have).
They had very little historic perspective. The original Academy of Ancient
Music was assembled to play works about 20 or so years old!!! The way people
thought about "art" music then was really very similar to the way people
view popular music today, audiences expecting something new all the time,
yesterday's music like yesterday's news. There are several reasons for our
changing views. On the positive side, it is a sign of a more mature outlook
in Western musical thought. Prior to the modern era, we were sometimes like
adolescents, living only in the here and now, completely egotistical and
desperately insecure, trying to stay "with it"(there were exceptions such a
Mendelssohn). The HIP movement is a sign that we just may be moving past
that stage, to a realization that the asthetics of past generations have
something to say to us today.

A much less positive reason is the failure of modern composers to capture
the interest of a large percentage of the musically educated population. As
one can only hear the 19th and fewer 20th century "classics" so many times
before ennui sets in, and as, for whatever reason, 18th century and earlier
aesthetics seem to speak more strongly to many people they, both on the
performing and listening end, have filled the vacume with old music (please,
let's not get into a long discussion of modern music, the archive speaks
volumes). You may not like this, but it's a fact.

Whatever the reasons for its increased popularity, however, I feel that
striving for authenticity is admirable, useful, and to a surprising degree
achievable.

Amen.

End of sermon and overly long sentences.

Steve Goldman,
Glenview, IL

sjgoldman@-----.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Gustavson [mailto:mgustav@-----.com]
Subject: Re: [kl] Some remarks on composer Mark Gustavson's interesting
comments

Doing historical research and using that knowledge to update scores of their
inaccuracies is one thing. But to think that one can perform an authentic
performance or to do as they would have--even though you are totally out of
the flow of the performance practice of late 18th c. Vienna--a performance
practice which never ended or died it evolved organically and mutated into
another performance practice and into yet another performance practice etc.
to where we are now. Our current practice includes that practice as part of
its history. But there are no direct common bonds between now and then only
a continuous flow of change. Yet for some reason there are those who want
to go against nature and find the authentic way as if the old way is
better. Just as I am sometimes unhappy about some aspects of the current
performance practice of my music I am sure Mozart wasn't always crazy about
the performance practice of his time.

Mr. Leeson if you want to inquire about my musical education, teachers and
my approach to composing, just ask , DON'T GUESS which you seem to want to
do in performance. My attack on this thread is based on the impossibility
and absurdity of wanting authenticism and an attack on those who believe it
should change the current practice. As far as my homework assignment, I have
done some reading on this subject and I lived in Amsterdam for a year on a
Fulbright where plenty more of this goes on than here and I went to Columbia
University and knew scholars who did research in this area. But it is all
historical and one cannot simply think we are doing music wrong because one
discovers how it was done then or buy an old clarinet and perform on it and
even think for a moment that this is more correct.
I agree with you that there are different ways of performing a piece or
period but I think your attitude suggests that your way should change what
is happen now when in fact it had its time.

Mark Gustavson

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org