RE: [F_minor] Glenn Gould

["Houpt, Fred" <fred.houpt@rbc.com>]

Bob:

What an outstanding post.  I am occasionally motivated to say things
about Glenn and from two different places.  They are distinct and both
heart felt.  First, I write notes totally out of a reaction to something
I have read in some magazine (usually) by a critic or perhaps another
musician who has said something I felt was untrue or overly negative
about Glenn's music making.  The other times I write is just to express
my awe and joy at discovering what Gould has said in his interpretation.
Way too often people of all stripes make the assumption that Gould
played a piece the way he did because that was the limitation of his
imagination.  They could not be more wrong.  First of all, he had a
gigantic musical memory.  He spent all of his life swimming in and
absorbing music at the deepest levels.  He spent all of that time
contemplating and revising his mind. When he decided to play something,
say for example his infamous Mozart, he did so very deliberately,
sometimes to annoy, sometimes to highlight a point through great
exaggeration, sometimes to satisfy his own demonic sense of humor.  He
knew exactly what he was doing, knowing full well the manner in which
the music had been performed by countless others before him. Glenn did
not want to play the music the same way, over and over.  He considered
this tantamount to mental suicide.  He said it was a prime motivation to
quit the touring stage.  Ok, that was his choice.  The upside to that
choice was that he could freely explore many different approaches to
music with only his own self to satisfy.  

When I read that Glenn is portrayed as some sort of freak it just gets
me very upset.  He knew there were no absolutes in interpretation.  He
also knew that his critics usually did not possess his level of
knowledge.  He bravely went on his discovering way regardless of
reaction.  He played to please his own sense of beauty and sense of
"just right".  

With the recent and very sad passing of Oscar Peterson, a man known to
hum and buzz his way through those tunes as he ripped up the keys, I am
reminded at how much unnecessary flack Glenn took for an uncontrollable
urge to sing. If I have to read someone making another critical remark
about it I will tell them to do better or shut the heck up.  (As an
aside, my old Danish friend Eric was a piano tuner to BOTH Oscar and
Glenn and he's already told me some stories about Oscar with more to
come next time he drops by for supper).

Glenn deserves the passionate love we fans pour out.  He has way too
many ignorant detractors who do not know his radio work, some of which I
consider to be 50 years ahead of its time and visionary.  Finally, after
reading last summer of an interview with his former lover, I was so
happy to see the human and physical side of that very ultra private man.
I was happy to think of him having a loving relationship.  That it
didn't work out and that ultimately his mental demons took over is the
sad legacy of that part of him he would want us to keep private.  He
would argue that it had no bearing on his interpretations of Wagner. And
he would be correct.

We love him and I say let us always correct the negativity with our own
clear points.  Let us also remain committed to telling younger kids
about this really great dude who, like Oscar, could give you a thrill
ride over the ivories.   

[Personally, I think that some of the critics are still jealous that it
was Glenn's recordings placed on the Voyager spacecraft (hurtling out of
the solar system) and not them.]

Best regards to all.  In the spring I will make that trek over to his
grave and place some flowers.  

Fred Houpt
Toronto

-----Original Message-----
From: f_minor-bounces@email.rutgers.edu
[mailto:f_minor-bounces@email.rutgers.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Merkin
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 2:19 PM
To: paul wiener; F_MINOR@EMAIL.RUTGERS.EDU
Subject: Re: [F_minor] Glenn Gould

I think the question lurking beneath Chester's question is: Who are we?

Are we people simply and honestly mesmerized with Glenn Gould's
achievements and life?

Or have we also assumed the responsibility of evangelizing and
proselytising Glenn Gould to the Great Unwashed (particularly to
teenagers and college students)? Are we also the active guardians and
apostles of his legacy? Are we draymen hauling Glenn Gould into the
future?

Does it suffice to kick back, disconnect the phone, and listen to an
hour of Byrd and Gibbons on a nice stereo in a comfortable chair?

Or are we morphing into people who knock on the doors of strangers and
offer them a chatty, upbeat introduction to Glenn Gould, and some
full-color pamphlets, or a free DVD?

I don't know ... take Caruso as an example. After he died, how important
was an army of his surviving admirers to making him an idol and
superstar of the recorded music era? Or does Caruso keep hurtling into
the future for the inherent content of his squawky cylinders alone?

For his entire career, from bobbysoxer teen phenom to death, Sinatra
attended obsessively to his fan base -- personal letters and cards,
personally autographed photos to any fan who asked, numerous in-person
visits to local fan clubs. One high-class magazine article about this --
possibly Esquire -- felt that, beyond Sinatra's inherent great talents,
his attention to the folks in the audience played a great role in his
ultimate success. (Remember Dick Haymes? Eddy Fisher survives today
pretty entirely on his marriage to Debby Reynolds and Elizabeth Taylor.
Maybe they weren't taking care of the fans.)

It seems to me that an artist's path to the future is pretty much a
crapshoot, and depends on the arbitary whims and accidents of society
and industry, of economic and legal forces. There's a six or seven year
Hole in the middle of Prince's most creative years during which he and
Warners were having intractible contract disputes -- the world was
pretty much denied access to any new work, and he intentionally fought
back by not working.

Or perhaps poor product placement -- somebody takes Gene Kelly's
delightful, charming, innocent "Singin' in the Rain" and gives it an
indelible association with brutal sociopathic teenagers (one of whom
sincerely loves Beethoven).

I don't know, dare we let Glenn find his own path to the future without
too much of our active help and interference? Perhaps this is the moment
to stop taking worlwide popularity polls, which strikes me as being a
lot like tracking cocoa futures?

Of course it's a pleasure equal to music itself to share beautiful music
with others. But, of just the performances, can we trust in their
inherent power to keep Glenn Gould as popular with future listeners as
Caruso? Or do we need to shower them with ballyhoo and comments left on
YouTube? Do we have a mission, and how consonant would our mission seem
to the dead gentleman himself? "32 Short Films" plays with these themes
of the relations between Glenn Gould and the Outside World. They were
very complicated.

Bob
Massachusetts USA



> [Original Message]
> From: paul wiener <pwiener@ms.cc.sunysb.edu>
> To: Singh <k_dawg71@hotmail.com>; Brad Lehman <bpl@umich.edu>; 
> <f_minor@email.rutgers.edu>
> Date: 1/22/2008 11:13:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [F_minor] Glenn Gould
>
> This would be more or less upsetting if some facts came with it.
>
>
> At 11:48 AM 1/20/2008, Singh wrote:
>
> >Just two days ago, my teacher told me something extremely troubling. 
> >Ratings of Glenn Gould's recordings have gone done alot in the past 
> >short while. This, for me, points out the resurgence of everything 
> >Glenn Gould philosophically tried to disprove. It shows the 
> >resurgence of traditionalism, and an increased taste for 
> >traditionalist recordings from the general public.
> >I just thought everyone should know. However, this also gives an 
> >opportunity for another Glenn Gould-like figure to emerge. And we can

> >only hope,
> >
> >Chester Singh
+
_______________________________________________
F_minor mailing list
F_minor@email.rutgers.edu
https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor
_______________________________________________________________________

This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not waive any related rights and obligations.
Any distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient is unauthorized.
If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by return e-mail or otherwise) immediately.  

Ce courrier électronique est confidentiel et protégé. L'expéditeur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations qui s'y rapportent.
Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) destinataire(s) désigné(s) est interdite.
Si vous recevez ce courrier électronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser immédiatement, par retour de courrier électronique ou par un autre moyen.
_______________________________________________
F_minor mailing list
F_minor@email.rutgers.edu
https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor