Re: GG: First Releases, First Authorized Releases and the Vault !

[kimmoor@mindspring.com (Kristen Immoor)]

At 5:28 PM 4/29/97, Charlie Siffermann wrote:
>Dear f-minor,
>As I continue to scoop up my share (or more) of the GG discography, I
>have taken a moment to wonder...
[ occasional snips]
>Does anyone know how or why the GG estate would decide to first issue a
>GG recording?
>How do they decide what not to issue?

Dear Charlie and group,
        The bulk of this response may be innacurate and/or tangentially
related at best, but the question got me thinking...
        The motivating factors in the release of the unreleased Gould
material? This is a subject that I can't begin to understand, it seems to
follow no discernable rhyme or reason. The unsubstantiated release
guidelines I've heard have been along the lines of: 1) Any live pieces of
historical significance to Gould's career; 2) Any works missing from the
cycles of Gould's 'pet' composers; 3) Any projects intended by GG for
release but indefinitely shelved post-demise. Did the Estate decide? I
think Sony made it up as they went along.
        Here we are at the end of the Edition, which would seem to imply
that the flow of releases is finished, but there are so many pieces of
genuine interest to the Gould public that are still unavailable - for
example the Brahms 1st cto. that Charlie mentioned. The reissue producers
and engineers are the same folks who do many of Sony's Special Editions,
and I haven't heard any names of people who were guiding or responsible for
the content of the GG Edition as a whole, so just who *is* deciding the
content? Strange example: the introductory 'mission statement' printed
inside each cd booklet of the edition states that the Baltimore & Buffalo
concerts would be among the live performances released, but where are they?
Did I miss them? Was someone speaking out of turn? Can we sue for fraud?
And what about all the fabulous Music & Arts cds that were halted - if Sony
doesn't plan on doing anything with the content on those cds, why not let
M&A continue to print?
        Additionally, I am disappointed with the release of the
Leningrad/Moscow material. I have heard a complete version of the Moscow
concert, and it was terrific! So why not release the whole thing? Why do we
get combined snippets of the live shows smooshed together onto one short
cd? That's a pretty cheap effort. I don't think Sony can argue that the
sound quality from these early performances is too inferior for a long-form
recording, because the horrific recording of the Shostakovich Op 57
released on the 8th volume cd blows that argument all to hell. I mean,
there's a guy near the mic holding an audible conversation while Gould and
the quartet are playing! Come on, Sony will release that but not the Moscow
concert? (I'm tempted to start blasting away at the butchered GG video
series while I'm on a roll, but I've given that topic plenty of bandwith as
it is.)
        My point is, and I do have one, that if a thing's worth doing (and
you are the only evil megacorporation with the almighty legal right to do
it) then it's worth doing well. Obviously the GG Edition is an important
project for Sony, that is apparent from a quick volume comparison to the
puny Casals edition. So as long as they've decided to make that commitment
to volume, why not make good on it and be as thorough as possible? Don't be
piecemeal in your release methods, go all out! I can understand that this
is special interest material and that the audience might be small, but
curious non-GG fans are not going to altogether refuse to buy GG material
because they see that the live sets are 3 hours long, instead they will buy
'smattering' cds like Images, The Art of GG, and the sndtrk to 32 Shorts.
In the meantime, those who are fans will buy the live box and love it!
        Similarly, I think the CBC should release the GG radio
documentaries (Casals, Strauss, Stokowski). I know they're slowly chipping
away at their Gould catalog, releasing a cd every now and then as the
budget permits, but I hope they do not neglect these documentaries.
        Whether Gould would approve of this "open the floodgates!" method
of issue is impossible to know. (Personally, I suspect he would be
horrified and go into cardiac arrest.) At first I was horrified too, I
thought it was very sneaky and greedy to sell these unapproved recordings,
and I even resisted buying them at first. Then it occured to me that, with
the exception of pieces like Beeth Op. 78 and Hammerklavier, which Gould
disliked and/or deliberately shelved, the rest of this new material
consisted of performances Gould was very confident about at the time, and
it was simply a matter of unfortunate timing and circumstance that more
people didn't get to hear them the first time around. I mean, had I been in
Toronto in the 60s & 70s I would have heard the CBC broadcasts, had I been
in Moscow or Leningrad I would have seen the live concerts, so what
difference do a few decades make? At the time the music was geniune and
deliberate, and I think it should be viewed as such today. I no longer feel
that I am flouting Gould's desires to withhold material when I listen to my
1954 Goldbergs! I am proud of my copy of the Brahms Quintet! I play my cds
with verve and joy!
        Thus ends the manifesto, thank you and goodnight.

Kristen
(Sorry if this letter is sloppy, I was marching and saluting as I wrote it...;-)

___________________________________________________________________________

"...you can never say no to a stewardess in a dream."

                                                              -Glenn Gould