Date: |
Thu, 1 Nov 2001 08:59:00 -0600 |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Bernard Chasan wrote:
>The discussions under the subject title of this note are downright
>surrealistic because they are generally not about Levine at all, but
>rather about Munch and others. Levine is dismissed from consideration,
>and generally disapproved for musical reasons which "everybody" knows.
>I need enlightenment. Why the negativity?
I can only speculate that others might share something of my own
perspective.
From what I have heard of his performances, Levine's work does not
move me. It is not a question of his abilities, it is a question of his
approach to music. To my ears his performances are designed to "sound
like the record." For me, that means polished and controlled. I find no
excitement in his interpretive perspective. Likewise, I rarely found any
excitement in Ozawa's interpretive perspective.
It was during the Munch years that I acquired a tape machine and
started recording BSO broadcasts. I also sought out collectors who had
Koussevitzky performances. When Ozawa arrived I lost interest. The
repertoire seemed to me to be more mainstream and the performances,
lacking in the excitement I had come to expect from that orchestra.
In my mind, there are few who would do right by the BSO. I believe
Slatkin or Tilson Thomas would be worthy successors to the tradition of
Koussevitzky and Munch.
For me, the choice of a conductor for the BSO is more about what was and
what it could be instead of what it will be.
Karl
|
|
|