Klarinet Archive - Posting 000883.txt from 1999/09

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: [kl] re: Mozart 622 performance practice
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 23:43:12 -0400

> From: MX%"klarinet@-----.60
> Subj: Re: [kl] re: Mozart 622 performance practice

> I do think that it is important to keep in mind that in criticizing
> Marcellus' recording for lacking improvisation, he recorded the work in
> 1960, prior to the time Dan gives as the beginning of this research. If we
> cannot criticize Bellison because this research came later, then the same
> applies to Marcellus.
>
> Ed

Ed, read my note again. There was no criticism of Marcellus for
not improvising. My comments were devoted almost exclusively
to Gregory Smith's letter which, whatever he meant to say, read as
if there would have been no benefit had Marcellus done differently.
One of the things about the interenet is that when you write, you
need to be very clear on what you mean to say vs whatever your
intentions were.

>
> ----------
> >From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu>
> >To: klarinet@-----.org
> >Subject: RE: [kl] re: Mozart 622 performance practice
> > David, the subject of improvisation in Mozart (of which, of course,
> > K. 622 is a small piece of a very big problem) has been both under
> > discussion and in implementation since the mid 1960s. Actual recorded
> > performances of such activity can be found by the early 1970s. Marcellus
> > knew of the practice by virtue of the fact that he was so opposed to it,
> > but I suspect that he never had an opportunity to discuss it at any
> > length, partly because there weren't that many people around at the
> > time that could discuss it with him, and second, because he was a very
> > conservative person who was cautious about change, particularly change
> > that he believed was not in the best interests of the music that he
> > played so very well. He also was influenced by Szell who was even
> > more conservative.
> >
> <snip>
> >
> > Now none of this is a criticism of Marcellus who did not consider it
> > appropriate to do this thing. My earlier note on the subject was not
> > addressed to that point, but rather to how Smith couched his response
> > to Nohe. As I reflect on how I felt when I first heard Marcellus'
> > recording of K. 622, I was saddened at how the magnificent playing of
> > this great artist appeared to me to be constrained by his conservative
> > view of how to play that piece. In the case of, for example, Bellison,
> > I can't be critical because, during his time, there were no viable
> > voices discussing this performance issue. But when Marcellus was
> > working, that was not the case. He chose not to listen, which is his
> > right, but I must measure him differently because of that choice.
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
=======================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
leeson@-----.edu
=======================================

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