[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [F_minor] Glenn Gould
Chester hopes for a new Gould-like figure to emerge. If you hope and
look hard enough, one WILL emerge - possibly on American Idol. That's
not the way charismatic geniuses make their mark, however. Such
figures are always a surprise! Gould emerged out of his times ,
before the internet, before Bach was brilliantly interpreted and
performed by many other pianists, before a world that worships
celebrity, less than half a century after the birth of the recording
industry, and before a world where good music can be dialed up on
cell phones. Like any unique creative genius, he was there at the
right time, when we needed him most, not when we wanted him. He was
there to usher in a new era of music as a technology. If there is a
backlash against Gould developing, it's probably thanks in part to
the many fans who have hungrily overhyped him and to our wishful
tendency to separate musical experience from mental experience. Two
recent books explore the neurological aspects of musical memory and
reception, and will help us learn why we hear what we hear: Oliver
Sacks' Musicophilia, and Daniel Levitin's This Your Brain on Music.
Since his death many other geniuses have emerged in many of the arts
(let's not forget his contemporary Leonard Bernstein).
At 02:19 PM 1/22/2008, Robert Merkin wrote:
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