Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Fri, 6 Aug 1999 12:04:53 +0100 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Felix Delbrueck:
>The bit about the Grieg concerto was a side stab by me - *I* think the
>Grieg concerto is a bad and shoddy work and people shouldn't waste their
>time over it.
That was definitely a side stab.
>Yes ... I don't buy that 'respecting a work as a piece of art' attitude,
>to be honest. Of course Rachmaninoff should have been able to see and
>admire B1's merits through its surface deficiencies. But an artwork is
>man-made; it wasn't sent down from the heavens, and composers are not
>infallable. Refusing, after years of consideration of the matter, to
>change things that you are convinced don't work or could be improved, is
>not respect but cowardice and does the work a disservice.
My guess is: Rach. didn't like the piano part, that's why he never played
it. But if you can improve things in the style of the composer, go ahead.
It is controversial though.
>I would never have thought that Wagner's operas lack dramatic significance!
>No, thats surely not right - I think the problem in Wagner is the same
>as with all opera - you've got a basic conflict between musical and
>verbal/dramatic requirements. Sometimes the needs of the drama take over
>and the music suffers, sometimes the other way round. ...
There are not so many climaxes in Wagner's music. Instead there is constant
tension which resolves occasionally.
Mikael
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|