Steve Schwartz wrote:
>I disagree. Do you know how many recordings of standard rep there are?
>Nobody has the kind of detailed knowledge to reliably pronounce. Indeed,
>I remember Neville Marriner on a British program (My Music?) being
>subjected to a "blind" test of listening to a Handel recording. He was
>rather hard on it. Of course, it turned out to be his own recording.>
>I think it enough for a critic to say what he likes or dislikes and why.
Good stuff, Steve! Music isn't a commodity that can be formulated and
auditted. It's completely unfair to blame Hattogate on the reviews.
If there are real examples of false reviewing, perhaps they can be cited?
And even if people change their minds it doesn't mean what they did was
dishonest. To Chris Howell's credit, he's even revisted what he heard.
A reviewer's duty is to assess performance. It's about analysis, not
nit picking, or policing. And by all accounts ConArtists was wise enough
to chose well in musical terms.
Blaming reviewrs deflects attention from what really caused the situation.
Hattogate was so convincing becauise whoever was behind it knew exactly
what emotive buttons to press to impress. In the real world, no one
produces so much, in so many styles and at that level. while living in
such secrecy. But people were lulled by the sympathetic story. Hatto's
death - verified by personalities involved with promoting her - came at
a time when the pressure for her to appear grew stronger. The Pristine
comparisons came later, a result on continuing doubts. Fantasists have
always been around, but the net gives greater opportunites for them to
worm themselves into credibility than ever before.
[log in to unmask]
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