Re: GG and Mozart

[Alan <alan@dorsai.dorsai.org>]

RE: The following  -  with FULL respect for the author, E. Selig:> 

> As regards Mozart: GG was eager, actually insistent that he record the 
> sonatas. But his motive was not to produce a definitive set, but to use 
> the opportunity perversely to point out M's faults. Some years before 
> undertaking the set, he wrote an article for the now-defunct magazine 
> "Piano Quarterly" with the title "Why Mozart is not a great composer."
> In it, he used examples from one of the piano concertos actually, showing 
> some modulations that would have given a harmony student a poor grade. GG 
> was right! Keep in mind, the concertos contained far loftier writing than 
> the sonatas, which were created mostly for M's students, while the 
> concertos were written as perfomance vehicles for M. himself.
.......................................
>>>>>>>	We who listen to GG's recordings have possibly lost sight that 
the man was a great talent and a great eccentric, together.
	To assert that WMA was NOT a great composer possibly GG was in 
one of his mood swings or simply mad.
	GG MAY HAVE PLAYED THE INSTRUMENT EXCEPTIONALLY WELL but who can 
attest to his compsosing skills? What kind of ego would make that 
statement about Mozart?
	I am reminded of a Leonard Bernstein "Omnibus" TV program ( c. 
1954) in which he demonstrated Beethoven's sketches for the c minor 
symphony, played with proposed orchestrations, exposed the "Beethovenian" 
genius for us to see and hear.
	 LENNY could play the paino fairly well.
	LENNY could compose fairly well.
	LENNY could conduct fairly well.
	LENNY LOVED**** to stand before an audience.
	LENNY could make us want to cheer, cry, scream, throw bouquets or tomatoes.
	
	BUT LENNY NEVER HAD TO put down WMA or LvB or JSB.

Who the heck was Glen Gould, anyway?

alan
nyc