>There are times that I think music might be better served by not having
>programs at concerts so one could listen without as many expectations...
This raises so many questions and variables, about both people and works:
There are so many different kinds of listeners, with the full range of
general knowledge and specific acquaintance with pieces. For some, to
leave prejudices behind would undoubtedly be a good thing. Some others,
on hearing the first bars, would surely have an "Oh, no, not this again"
reaction. In both cases a fresh interpretation and performance might
happily defeat expectations. But still others, with open minds and
little acquaintance with a work, might simply have too much to process
to get a decent handle on the work. In the case of a new or unfamiliar
work, it can make a difference to know if it is, just for instance, an
unterrupted work of ten minutes duration or a long work with several
contrasing sections. And good program notes--or live pre-concert
commentary--can create landmarks to listen for along the way.
>and that reviewers would be sent recordings without performers being
>named. I wonder about how we might listen differently without such
As in blind auditions. But those are done to ensure fairness on an equal
playing field. With newcomers or not well known soloists this might be
a good thing. But with established soloists anticipation of a certain
kind of playing or degree of brilliance can be confirmed or defeated on
a particular occasion for the informed critic or listener, so the review
might suffer in these cases.
The CLASSICAL mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned LISTSERV(R)
list management software together with L-Soft's HDMail High Deliverability
Mailer for reliable, lightning fast mail delivery. For more information,
go to: http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html