Re: more Schoenberg (and GG, and JSB)

[Juozas Rimas <JuozasRimas@TAKAS.LT>]

I found it a paradox (but true!) that it was Gould's Schoenbergian Bach that
aroused so much interest in Bach's keyboard music.

He sort of gave the deserved place to keyboard Bach - it was a necessary thing
to do because harpsichord Bach couldn't find so much keyboard listeners and fans
who have in fact been raised on Romantic piano music. On the one hand Gould
seems to have harmed harpsichordists because he made many people prefer piano
Bach, but one the other hand he aroused the *general* interest in keyboard Bach
and harpsichordists have benefited from that because they could now offer an
alternative for the majority listening to the piano Bach.

Although I mostly agree with Bradley's recast statement that "Looking at Bach
through Schoenberg's and Gould's glasses, we see Gould's ideas about ideal
music" but I feel a little shade of absoluteness in it. As if the music started
and ended with Gould. The more I listen to Gould's Bach, other piano Bach and
harpsichord Bach, I pay less and less attention to the perfomer. Although I
realize there are huge differences in styles and approaches, I regard them just
as different facets of one same diamond. As distorted as Gould's BWV924
preambulum may seem, the heart of the piece still can be felt underneath the
Gould's peculiarities. And, frankly, a big part of Gould's Bach is not so
acutely peculiar - many not exceptionally experienced listeners can easily take
another performer for Gould and vice versa - believe me, I've tested it :)

Bradley's statement about Gould "probably also" enjoying Bach artistically makes
it seem that Gould sweated at the huge Schoenberg's oeuvre and only in his
leisure time, partly to have some light-hearted fun at the keyboard, partly to
pay his bills, remembered to play some Bach. Gould must have been a great master
of making it appear he showed a considerable dedication to Bach while not caring
much in fact, and a master of doing something really well while only probably
liking it.

Do you think Gould regarded Schoenberg to be the most significant composer who
wrote "substantial" music of the highest possible level? I would rather presume
he saw Schoenberg as a sort of teacher (one can be very dedicated to a teacher),
almost a contemporary with whom he could gladly communicate, a source to take
some stylistical elements from, a man who brought something new and original
into music etc.

My $0.02, although quite a lengthy message :)

Juozas Rimas Jr
http://www.mp3.com/JuozasRimas