CLASSICAL Archives

Moderated Classical Music List

CLASSICAL@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Steve Schwartz <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 7 Jun 2002 18:18:56 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (39 lines)
Dave Lampson airs a peeve:

>I've noticed a tendency writers for a certain printed record guide,
>published bi-monthly, to concentrate their observations on the quality
>of the compositions instead of the quality of the performance and/or
>recording.  It seems a little odd to devote 80% of a review to criticizing
>the music of a long-dead composer.  Certainly that artist won't be
>re-evaluating their approach based on what's being written about their
>music.  ...
>
>I'm not saying I don't want the reviewer to give me a description
>of the music - I definitely do, especially if the composer is particularly
>obscure.  I just wonder where the balance of a review should be,
>approximately.  For my taste, I'd prefer 20% critique of the music and
>80% commentary on the performance/recording.  But many reviews these
>days seem skewed the opposite direction.  Is this a recent phenomenon,
>or am I just recently sensitized? Or am I just misreading things.

Well, I'm definitely guilty of that.  Much of the time, I have thought
longer about the piece than about any particular performance.  Also much
of the time, there is an ideal picture of the piece in my head.  Does the
performance measure up? Does it even surpass expectations? Does it change
my mind about the piece? In order to get at any of that, it seems to me
I have to talk about that ideal picture.  Then again, most performances
aren't worth the kind of detail the piece is.

I much prefer, and find just as helpful (if not more so), a review
that goes 80%-20% music/performance.  First of all, I (and probably most
other reviewers) haven't heard close to all the recordings out there of a
standard work.  How helpful would the opinion of the performance be in that
case? This is one reason I like survey reviews, but I come across those so
rarely.  Second, my bias tells me that I would prefer to discuss a work
than a performance, for the sake of insight into the work.  As much as I
love Szell's recordings, I must say that Mahler's symphonies attract me
more, and I'd want to find out more about them than about any particular
performance.

Steve Schwartz

ATOM RSS1 RSS2