Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:51:43 +0000 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Juozas Rimas writes:
>Donald, is artists' identification with the composer's world really
>so important to you?
Yes, because experience tells me that my listening enjoyment and
enlightenment peaks when the identification is strong. I'm not talking
about the composer's "world" in terms of the social environment as much
as the composer's inner world of thought and emotion. There's no better
world to enter than the one inhabited by the creator of the music.
>You've reviewed probably dozens of CDs of Bach on the piano and this is a
>field where the mentioned quality is not paramount.
I think it is as paramount with Bach as it is with any other composer of
great merit. One prime reason I don't mention the lack of identification
much in my Bach reviews is that I tend to stay clear of recordings which
I expect to be way off the mark. However, I do bring up the subject when
I come across recordings such as some Bach recordings from Labadie (Mr.
Hollywood), Schiff, Stowkowski, and Tillmanns.
I'm not sure why Juozas brings up Bach on piano. Bach's inner musical
world is built on math/logic, architecture, and emotion. The exact
instrument used to get there is not the issue; the artist is the key.
I prefer Bach's organ music on historical organs, but there are still a
wealth of performers on modern organ who dive right into Bach; they are
going to hit the target regardless of what tool they use. The same applies
to Bach on piano or any other instrument.
Don Satz
|
|
|