|
As this weeks discussion seems to be more about taste than of fact, I feel compelled to join the discussion. Bradley P Lehman wrote: >If I sound a little rough on GG in my disenchantment with
these And I immediately thought that this was the exact opposite to my conception. (With the exception of the Toccatas which Gould did not like and the small preludes and fugues which seems solely to be a duty-job for Gould (those pieces are coupled with the Partitas in the Sony release)) Leaving out the question of orthodoxy, I think his recordings of both the French and English suites are in many ways more convincing than for example the WTC I,II. They reveal to a higher extent the "backbone" of the music than any of his preceding Bach solowork recordings. In fact, I think that Gould in the recordings of the suites reaches his top as far as X-raying the music of Bach goes. Naturally, the process of taking an X-ray of the music does not automatically make it a good recording, but I think in the case of the suites it is a convincing approach. For example, the recording from 1981 of the first and last Contrapunctus of the Art of Fugue is a case where a more italicized (to use Bradley P Lehman’s _expression_) approach gives a great result. What do you think were the reason for Gould to avoid record all the fugues and canons from the Art of Fugue on the piano? (I know about his attempt at the organ) Do you think he was intimidated by the responsibility of undertaking this monumental work? Not that Gould ever seemed to be too interested in completing any project, but the Art of Fugue must be regarded as a special case for the "contrapuntal-person" Gould. /Kristian Johansson . |