Re: Gould's Orthodoxy

["Burkhardt Ingersoll Wilke" <bwilke@knox.edu>]

Neil wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 13:19:11 +0000, you wrote:
>
> >his raises the question of whether Gould was
> >unusually intellectual for a musician?  Any debate?
>
> Not question in my mind that he was perhaps the most outwardly intellectual of
> musicians; and no question that his performances were very much akin to him
> airing his personal speculations about the music he played.
>
> But with Gould there always seems to be two forces which drive his
> interpretations: spontaneity and analysis. The former always shines in live
> performances where he lives the music; the later dominates the studio recordings
> especially from about 1970 onwards. I think the balance is the crucial factor in
> success or failure of GG performances.
>

I think that we are missing a very crucial element here as well.  I think psychology
played an essential part to his interpretations as well as what he chose to play.  I
have a theory(and it is just that) that Gould's Mozart sonata undertaking was
heavily influenced by the public.  Ever since he began preforming he had been
wrangled by the critics in reviews and other places.  It is easier to record stuff
that the public knows you dislike so when the critisism comes, it doesn't affect you
as much.  Perhaps we can relate this to not only the discussion about the Art of
Fugue, but the toccatas, and everything else.  I get so angry at people and their
"norm" because i feel that they frightened and smothered Gould's brilliance!  In
fact, the entire dissucion of orthodox is a shame.  There is no possible way to
represent what the composer truely intended.  All that we have are rough outlines.
Gould took those outlines and through the media availiable, showed us a different
perspective.  Each of us has grasped differenet aspects from his perspective.  It
is, to me, a truely wonderful proccess.

bw

i appologize if i am rehashing old disscussions with my 2 cents.