Deryk Barker [[log in to unmask]] wrote:

>Joel Hill ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
>
>>... They didn't actually REFUSE to order the CD, they just said that
>>they were not able to order from the entire line of Naxos CD's. ...
>
>Ah! is it possible that the one you wanted was one of the Naxos Historical
>line? Most (all?) of these are specifically not for sale in the USA for
>copyright reasons.

But I live in Europe and I can inform our American Listfriends that I am
now sitting here listen to a wonderful "Tristan und Isolde"; 6 Feb.  1943
- Chorus and Orchestra of the Metropolitan Opera/Erich Leinsdorf] I love
Tristan as one of the ever best lovestories.  Of course there are now
pundits like Robert Gutman, who claims that Tristan is gay (along with
Pelleas, Romeo and other great male lovers].  The story goes [["Richard
Wagner: The Man, his Mind and his Music"]] that in Act 1 of "Tristan und
Isolde", Isolde says:

"Ich pflag des Wunden / I tended the wounded man
dass den Heilgesunden / So that, restored to health,
raechen schluege der Mann, / He should be struck down in vengeance by the man
der Isolde ihm abgewann." / Who won Isolde from him.

For that last line I've given the usual English translation of that line.
But the usual English translation quietly corrects one letter of the Wagner
text; "ihm" to "ihn".  With "ihm" that last line could be read, "Who won
him from Isolde."

Aha! says Gutman. There's an unexpected "m" here instead of an "n". That
could mean three things:

A. a typographical error;
B. an insult by Isolde; she is calling Tristan a woman, or a homosexual,
who could be "won" by a man; or
C. an entire sub-plot, not otherwise alluded to, involving a homosexual
side to Tristan, who is already involved in a three-sidedlove affair
involving Mark and Melot, before Isolde even comes on the scene.

What would you pick? The perfectly obvious and non-looney choice is A,
obviously.  There are typos in Wagner's opera texts.  And a plot line like
that is unlikely to hang on just one letter; it would surely be referred
to elsewhere.  And Gutman even admits that Wagner showed no interest in
correcting typographical errors in his texts, once they'd got into print.
Despite that, Gutman picks C, and invents an entire sub-plot, hanging on
nothing more than the difference between n and m, in a sentence with quite
complicated syntax.

It reminds me of the struggle between the homoiousians and the homoousians;
the difference of an i (in Greek "iota", hence expressions like "it doesn't
make one iota of difference"); hundreds of thousands of people died because
of an i, in this early argument over the nature of the Christian trinity.
(Gibbon tells the story of a band of armed homoousians charging into a
homoiousian village, waving swords and _with in the entrails of the
villagers from the last homoousian village they'd been through wrapped
around their bodies_.  Perhaps due to the effectiveness of these tactics,
the current orthodox Christian position is homoousian.  But even so, I
think Gutman's reading rather a lot into a single solitary "m".

Are we playing in the sandbox, Mr.Gutman?

Anyway the NAXOS historical recording is very good, with Lauritz Melchior
and Helen Traubel in the hauptrolle.  Highly recommended for those who want
a serios love story.

Andreas von Doebeln
[log in to unmask]