Deryk Barker wrote:

>...there certainly is a problem when "star" performers earn many times
>what others of equal talent can.

Perhaps there should be an equation between talent and compensation but
the reality of the world is that there is not.  We would see the world
more clearly if we understand that compensation is often as much a product
of image-building as it is talent.  Image-building is necessary in order
to sell the CM product these days.  Partly this is due to the decline of
connoisseurship and deeply informed listening.  It's been happening for
some time--Liberace perhaps knew people were less likely to hear his little
screwups if they were focused on his smile, cuff links and candelabra.  We
have come today to expect artists to promote themselves at least in part by
image, and are convinced that it is in the interest of self-expression.  I
might be accused of political incorrectness were I to single out Awadagin
Pratt as an example of the "gotta be me" performer.  Fortunately there is
also Kennedy.  I don't know Kennedy.  I've met Pratt, he is a nice fellow
and plays quite well--although not any better than most professionals on
the circuit.  And perhaps one will never know whether they would have
gotten as popular as they are had they stuck to tails and standard
haircuts.  I realize this sounds like excessive conservatism, and I really
don't have anything against breaking dress tradition.  My point is that
it's part of the image machine, and that it's not conceivable performers
are unaware of this.  It's not the fault of the performers.  They are
caught in a game played by the people in charge of sales and marketing.
Perlman was mentioned in the previous post, and if you are referring to
him in the above quote I would modestly take some exception in his case.
He really has earned his reputation and high fees, I think.  He has his
detractors, but who rises that high that doesn't have them? The current
crop of Wunderkinder have a long way to go before they will be in his
class.  There are many fiddlers today who are technically capable of
anything.  Where Perlman stands apart is his sense of style.  That is a
gift, and it's worth some money.  He's maybe bombed on occasion, more so
in the past 10 or 15 years perhaps, but so what?

Sometime I want to talk about possible connections between historicism (or
social constructionism) and the homogenization of musical performance that
results in personal style becoming a thing of the past--but not tonight.
I will add, though, that in an age when it's not possible or prudent for a
performer to develop an individual style in performance, they tend to look
for other ways to distinguish themselves.

Chris Bonds