Author: Gregory Smith ★2017
Date: 2004-01-02 22:56
"I played it and thought it was a bore. It was as though the player knew what expression to put in, but lacked the guts really to go for it."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually there *was* a choice made. The choice was made *not* to put a certain type of expression into it, although Marcellus was perfectly capable of doing just that. Perhaps that is what is missed sometimes when this discussion inevitably comes up... what one *expects* the expression of a piece of music to be like in the first place. It's a question of style and context.
For instance, I would say that the versions that I've heard having *more guts* in them (depending on what *type* of guts one's talking about), are often a bore because they are over or inappropriately phrased. They draw one's attention away from the music, putting more onto the performer...which is what I think Szell's comment was meant to address, although indirectly.
In the business, a much used comment is bantered about amongst professionals describing this phenomenon. I heard Boulez use it just the other day in rehearsal. It went, "That's like pouring honey on sugar." If there is something already in the music, emphasizing it in a certain way sounds out of place *in context* with every other style of music. In the arts, whether it be literature, drama, etc, context and proportion are everything. There was a long discussion about this very thing not too long ago here on this bboard concerning the Debussy Rhapsodie and it's interpretation.
Harold Wright's interpretation of the Quintet with his string colleagues seems a good example of performers playing in a style which highlights the music and not as much the performers. The music seems not so much about his or their personality but about the inherent drama, lyricism, etc. already contained in *that style* of music.
Of course there is no one "correct" interpretation within a style, but many musicians (and non-musicians) seem to think that Marcellus's and Wright's interpretations speak to them as a thing of beauty to marvel at, falling well within the boundries of the classical style, at least as we have come to know it.
Then again, some may indeed like chocolate on their asparagus and honey on their sugar.
Although loosely related, this discussion reminds me of another another cut-to-the-bone quote from Szell. When criticized by a very few that his interpretations sounded *too perfect*, he responded thoughtfully:
"It is perfectly legitimate to prefer the hectic, the aryhthmic, the untidy - but to my mind, great artistry is not disorderliness."
I believe that there is a little of that philosophy exuded in the interpretation of Mozart by Marcellus.
Gregory Smith
Post Edited (2004-01-03 01:37)
|
|
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
