When I hear people talk critically about conductors and instrumentalists,
it is usually in terms of "good" and "bad," or of "better" and "worse."
Now at the outset I'll say I have no problems with these terms, and I'm
inclined to believe their application is more objective than many other
folks I've encountered.  But I'm not interested in talking about these
terms here, because I was thinking today not of how conductors are better
or worse, but of how they fall into categories.  By "category" I mean
something about the character of their music making, and I'm not interested
here in suggesting that one type of music making is superior to another.
So I started playing a game with myself:  what are some of categories that
can be suggested that usefully reveal something about the way conductors
in that category make music, a way that is not unique to any one conductor
but helpfully associates him with others of his colleagues? (Obviously, the
game isn't limited to conductors, but that's how I started.) For example,
one category might be "noble, aristocratic" and examples might be Giulini
and Kubelik.  Another type of conductor is the one whose performances are
"supercharged," "galvanizing"; examples could be Bernstein and Solti.
Among "spiritual" conductors I would include Furtwaengler, Walter, and
Jochum.  A suggestion is this (and it goes beyond agreement with the use
of particular categories or the inclusion of this or that conductor
under them):  when some people express, say, an aversion to this or that
conductor, aren't they often betraying their taste for this or that style
of music making? In any case, what characterizations would you regard as
most illuminating? (I'll confess I'm not very happy with my own.) Which
conductors are you inclined to group together as naturally akin?

Nick
[log in to unmask]