Klarinet Archive - Posting 000068.txt from 2001/04
From: stewart kiritz <kiritz@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] REsponse to Stewart
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 04:30:03 -0400
Dear Dan,
I'm glad you take my message in the spirit it was intended, e.g., respectful
disagreement rather than acrimony. But I'm afraid that the gap in our
intellectual approach to things is insurmountable. We simply see things, at
least as related to musical aesthetics, too differently. And apparently so
is the gap in our appreciation of pianists.
When I was in college there was a debate in the music department between the
Arthur Rubenstein fans and the Horowitz fans, since these were two of the
greatest reigning viruosi of the time. I was a philosophy major myself, but
played with and had lots of friends in music. Personally I loved them both.
I completely and unequivocally disagree that Horowitz had "7 tons of
technique...and no understanding of the music." Horowitz, in my opinion,
was an incredibly nuanced artist, a transcendent one, in fact, and so was
Rubenstein.
Once again, they had very different approaches to most pieces, which
approaches have been described as Dionysian (Rubenstein) vs. Apollonian
(Rubenstein). I love the Chopin Ballades by Horowitz...they are fiery and
icy. I love the Chopin Ballades by Rubenstein, they are sublime and rich.
I love Horowitz' Rachmaninoff Concerti and Etudes (and so did Rachmaninoff)
and his Scriabin and Scarlatti. Anyone who has tried to play the seemingly
simple Scarlatti sonatas and then listened to a recording of one of them by
Horowitz (as I have) will find it very difficult to characterize Horowitz as
merely a technician. Listen to every phrase, rhythm. Compare the
introduction of a motif the first time with its recapitulation. Try to
achieve the subtle variation in emphasis, in phrasing. I prefer Rubenstein
(and others) for Beethoven, Mozart. And so on. It is hard for me to
understand that someone doesn't hear these things. But then, I don't think
it has anything to do with "reasons, thinking out things carefully, etc."
So you see, we are very very different. But I respect your right to have
different tastes from me...
Stewart
d----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Leeson" <leeson0@-----.net>
Subject: [kl] REsponse to Stewart
> With respect to your paragraph which reads (in part):
>
> "What is your favorite food? And what is your "rational reason" for
> preferring it? Sorry, I must restrain myself because I realize that we
> are so far apart in our understanding of aesthetics and taste that I am
> convinced there is no way to bridge the gap and I respect you too much
> to get into any kind of acrimony here."
>
> Your point deserves a response.
>
> As an eater of food who never made any money doing it, I can and do
> chose things based on how I feel. As a listener of music, I do the same
> thing. But as a player, I suggest that most of what we do needs to be
> thought out very carefully, with all of the subjectivity removed. We
> (should) play things in a certain way because there is a historical,
> technical, or psychological purpose to playing them in that way, and
> doing it differently runs the risk of making the music sound awkward, or
> an anachronism.
>
> Show me a player who is about the perform K. 622 and who holds the view
> that s/he does not need to study the work from a variety of perspectives
> including historical and/or informed performance practice, and I'll show
> you a person who would just as soon put a hoop skirt on the Venus de
> Milo, "because it feels right. It's a lovely dress on a lovely statue."
>
> We have a responsibility to the music. I am confident that you feel
> that also. Those responsibilities force us into constant questioning
> about why and how we are doing things. A paid performer cannot take the
> position that "some people like asparagus and some don't," or at least I
> suggest that the paid performer should not do that with respect to how
> s/he plays.
>
> As an example, I mention Vladimir Horowitz, an extraordinary technician
> who could do anything on the piano, but one who, in my opinion, had no
> musical idea of what he was doing. And that is because, whenever he
> approached a piano, all he had was 7 tons of technique and no
> understanding of the music he was about to perform.
>
> It's the same way with vibrato. Perhaps I misunderstood your earliers
> statement and questioned it with the belief that you were speaking in
> broad terms rather than small and personal ones. But I suggest that
> before anyone uses or refuses to use vibrato on a clarinet, there is a
> great deal of personal baggage that has to be thrown away, and a serious
> investigation made of the purpose, use, and character of the technique.
>
> See, no acrimony. Two nice people expressing their views on something.
> --
> ***************************
> ** Dan Leeson **
> ** leeson0@-----.net **
> ***************************
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
