Who can get angrier than a music critic?
A retired music critic, of course.
And thus, the Ottawa Citizen's Jacob Siskind unpacks in today's book
section on Stelios Galatopoulos' `Maria Callas: Sacred Monster' under
the headline:
`The Saddest Song: Digital tampering betrays Maria Callas' artistic
integrity.'
Harrump!
Strangely enough, when you hear what he has to say, chances are you will
get mad too. If you care, that is.
The burden of the article:
`The discography at the end of this otherwise excellent new biography
is shocking. Checking the items listed against the 164 entries in
my Callas CD collection, it was appalling to be confronted with
comments on the most recent "digitally enhanced reissues" of this
material.
`In the 1953 "Puritani" recording, the "wayward high D is steadier";
in the 1960 "Norma," "Callas' slight wobble has all be disappeared."
In the 1958 "Butterfly," digital remastering has all but smoothed
out Butterfly's high D." In the 1955 "Aida," the "much publicized
unsteadiness in `O patria mia' has ben all but rectified." And so it
goes, on and on.
Callas was painfully aware of her vocal problems but she was too
honest an artist to have sanctioned these "improvement." She wanted
to be loved and appreciated for what she achieved, warts and all,
not for what some merchandisers and technicians have simulated in
their imaginings of a more palatable, sanitized truth.
Now, with an audience that has never heard her live creating a a
possible new market for Callas recordings, it seems the spin doctors
and digital technicians have taken over with a vengeance. But today's
listeners, with no previous experience of Callas, may well wonder
what all the fuss was about. If there is justice in this world, this
crassly commercial scheme will backfire.'
[log in to unmask]
in Ottawa to 5/8
|