[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [F_minor] Beethoven sonatas (was Gibbons on piano)

Or that there is a, is *one*, correct indication. There's a rat hole here: Either there is *one* right interpretation, metronome, etc., which is the composer's *singular*, and printed, intention, in which case there should be slavish attention to the some form of Urtext. And then we need far fewer musicians, to occasionally produce new recordings when technology changes.

Or, a composer could be "wrong", simply have offered suggestions, change his/her mind, "evolve" his/her mind, potentially be convinced, or simply appreciative, by some alternative introduced by another interpreter at arbitrary remove in time and place.

Ultimately, the proof of an interpretation is the "musicality" of that interpretation, and that is a question of individual perception, not a Platonic form. The best interpretations are usually those *informed* by history, but not subjugated to history; but even sometimes those completely uninformed by history (if that is even possible) can be compelling. Some or many "authentic" interpretations are convincing; some or many are not. Some or many "alternative" interpretations are convincing; some or many are not.

This puts an extreme responsibility on the listener; they cannot simply say, "oh, this conforms to the tradition of what is the correct interpretation". (Tradition being "the last bad performance" - once "tradition" indicated a Pleyel harpsichord; now, for a good laugh, listen to harpsichordists, say on the HPSCHD-L analogue to F_minor rant against Pleyels.)

Neither *should* they just say, "it's what I like". I'm *not* here saying, "it's simply what I like, and you can't argue with me" - there should always be reasoned, as well as emotional, responses, and these should be verbalized for critical discussion. How else can you discover new things?

Towards a Popperian (or Feyerabendian :-) ) critically rational theory of musical listening,
Charles


At 10:58 AM -0400 3/17/08, Houpt, Fred wrote:
This brings up a very important point. Who is to say that the composer
is correct 100% of the time when he/she indicates speed of playing?

Regards.

Fred Houpt
Toronto




-----Original Message-----
From: f_minor-bounces@email.rutgers.edu
[mailto:f_minor-bounces@email.rutgers.edu] On Behalf Of Charles McElwain
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 5:02 PM
To: f_minor@email.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: [F_minor] Beethoven sonatas (was Gibbons on piano)

At 12:01 PM -0400 3/14/08, Brad Lehman wrote: 

The one Gould performance of Beethoven that I'd say is at "ludicrous
speed" (thank you, Mel Brooks's "Spaceballs") is the finale of the
sonata #5 in C minor.  It's so fast that in at least one spot he really

DID NOT even play the notes. I slowed down a tape of it once, to check

it.


When Gould's recording of the Hammerklavier was released, in comparison
to the recordings I then had of the sonata, it seemed that Gould
actually had internalized the passage in Fred Hoyle's classic science
fiction novel, "The Black Cloud", where an alien (super) intelligence
establishing communication with scientists on Earth hears a recording of
the first movement, and sends a message back:

"Very interesting.  Please repeat the first part at a speed increased by
thirty per cent."

Beethoven's metronome advice for the first movement was a half note =
138.  Gould's timing for the first movement was 11'04".  In comparing to
what I currently have on hand, Nikolayeva's first movement is 14'30".
The cloud would probably have approved of Gould's version.
On the other hand, even Gould's pales in comparison to Badura-Skoda's
9'47" (on an 1824 Graf).

Myself, I'm not sure I'd use the Hammerklavier, or even Beethoven, as an
introduction to an alien super intelligence.  I'd go with Lewis Thomas's
advice here, even if it was bragging.

Charles

--

| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || |||

Charles McElwain
33 Vernon Street
Somerville, MA 02145
617-628-5542 (home)
617-501-1591 (cell)
charlesmcelwain1@verizon.net

 | || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || |||
_______________________________________________
F_minor mailing list
F_minor@email.rutgers.edu
https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor