Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Sat, 25 Mar 2000 18:40:24 -0800 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
William Strother <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>Repeats are somewhat important as far as structure goes.
That's a bit like saying that walls are somewhat important to the structure
of a house.
>But unless you have a big thing about repeats, it is my opinion that
>there are many other aspects of a performance that are more important.
That is debatable. Is a performer's observance of dynamics less important
than that of maintaining the right tempo? Are either more or less important
than observing repeats? What about putting feeling into the performance?
Since these and other elements are all indispensable, I say they are
equally important.
>But for myself, if a performance grabs me and I become swept up in the
>music, at that point I no longer care about such esoterica.
And when I get swept up in the music, having a repeat omitted completely
destroys it for me, as it amounts to sabotaging the composer's art. Did
someone say something in an earlier post about a trap door?
-Jocelyn Wang
Culver Chamber Music Series
Come see our web page: www.bigfoot.com/~CulverMusic
|
|
|