Kevin Sutton wrote of Lebrecht's "The Maestro Myth":

>Informative? A good read? Try nonsense, offensive, trashy, lower than the
>National Enquirer.  And those are the good points.   ...
>
>Was that too strong?

Yes, much too strong and the further abuse I have read today lends,
I think, very little to the discussion.  I just hope for Mr. Sutton's
continued good health that what he has written, which in my opinion goes
well beyond "fair comment", isn't being read by Mr.Lebrecht as he can be
absolutely sure that he would be hearing from him!

There is another perspective to Lebrecht's writing that has not been
mentioned and it is something that overcomes most of us when we read
newspapers.  We tend, let's be honest, to believe what we read in the
press.

However some of us, who have worked in the record industry, recognise
quite quickly the occasions (not too many, to be honest) when Lebrecht is
off-line in his writings, or talking nonsense, because we have 'been there'
and, to a degree, know otherwise.  I can't be specific (it is a long time
since I read it) but apart from those instances it is quite wrong for Mr.
Sutton to trash Lebrecht and the whole book because much of what he writes
is actually spot on!  His comments about *some of* the people who run the
artists is not wide of the mark at all.  I must emphasise that there are
some very excellent people involved.

It is funny, though, that in other areas of the press, when you know
a subject well, you realise quite often how much is shallow nonsense.
Whenever I read anything about Spanish tourism in the area where I live
it is usually wrong ...  from the price of a hire car to that of a bottle
of wine.  This is so commonplace to the point that one realises the UK
press have something against Spanish tourism or rather it's customers (I'm
not in that sort of place, by the way, and that's quite another subject).

The Maestro Myth requires many pinches of salt and the first third of the
book is far too long winded and somewhat repetitive (I had a feeling he
was perhaps being paid by the word!).  So why then, when he comes to write
about a certain agent in NY, about which I actually know nothing at all,
do I, and I suppose others, instinctively believe every word he writes?
Because one wants too? Because it seems highly likely to be true?

Nothing in life is that simple - and we should remember that these artists
are in the hands of their label's marketing departments - but the book
(and/or its sequel) does draw attention to certain "baton-waivers" who earn
well in excess of USD 1m but whose record sales are as abysmal as their
lack of charisma.  There Lebrecht's not wrong and yet they still are still
invited to go on making records.  This I find amazing.  Paradoxically are
not Osmo Vanska and Antonio Pappano much more interesting anyway?

Robin Newton has written much more sensibly on this subject but, for
myself, I accept that my common sense has to be called into question!
(And anyway I am beginning to waffle - had a bad day).

John G. Deacon
Home page: http://www.ctv.es/USERS/j.deacon