Satoshi Akima:

>Boulez is a man with many enemies. That is why there is deep prejudice
>against his interpretations. Yet whoever approaches his performances
>(and dare I say it his music) with an open mind will find a musician of
>the utmost profundity, and heartfelt sincerity.

Though I don't like much his music, I have the best opinion of Boulez as a
conductor. His interpretation of Mahler's 10th. (1st. movement) is great.
His recordings of Strawinsky's orchestral works are hardly to be surpassed.
The same can be said about his recording of Webern's works, or of his
recording of "Lulu" and Debussy's "Pelleas et Melisande". I haven't heard
him conducting Bruckner, but I don't have the slightest doubt that there
must be very interesting issues in his interpretation. Moreover: I like him
not only as a conductor of post-romantic/ XX century works: his recording
of Haendel's Water Music and Royal Firework Music is very good too.
Concerning the prejudices about Boulez, some people believes --taking in
account his antecedents as "enfant terrible" (now he is a "grand-pere
terrible") of post war music--  that he poisons everything that he does
with an ideological view. That's false, or at least partial: there are
so many Boulez as works he conducts. Other people says that he is too
"rational":  that's simply stupid; he is not more "conscious" of his own
performing practice than the vast majority of conductors, but people think
that he got the surname "rational" just because he married once to integral
serialism.

Pablo Massa
[log in to unmask]