Re[2]: GG: Mozart

["Mark Williamson" <mwilliamson@alston.com>]

     I enjoyed the various e-mails on Mozart.  I am also a Mozart 
     fanatic and I am glad to hear other people say nice things 
     about Mr. Gould's recordings of them.  (I have piped up on 
     that theme here before.)  After all, he recorded them all; 
     that says something right there.
     
     I have never understood why these recordings are so 
     controversial.  It's true that they show some GG 
     idiosyncrasies (or style, depending on your perspective), 
     but what did he ever record that doesn't?  We know he has a 
     bright crisp way of playing, that he will emphasize parts of 
     the music that aren't ordinarily emphasized, etc., etc., and 
     so he does that with Mozart too.  I think they are 
     beautifully played and very characteristic of the classical 
     period.
     
     With respect to Mozart being too easy for beginners and too 
     hard for artists, Mozart was in the habit of writing things 
     that, no matter how difficult, lie very naturally on the 
     keyboard -- or at least as naturally as possible.  He also 
     wrote music that sustains very well at a variety of tempos.  
     That certainly allows his music to be adapted to a wide 
     range of playing levels.  The c major k545 (???), supposedly 
     written "for beginners" but popular with professionals as 
     well, is notable for its brevity.  If you slow it down to 
     half tempo or more, it is about the right length.  
     Interesting, isn't it.
     
     Love & kisses to you all
     
     Mark


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: GG: Mozart
Author:  Rohan Masilamani <romasi@leland.Stanford.EDU> at internet
Date:    9/3/97 9:33 AM


hello f_minor's,
     
hey! why all the mozart dissing on this page? aren't there any other gould 
fanatics on the list who are also unabashed mozart lovers?! well, i'm coming 
to the defense of our friend wolfgang here. :) 
     
cynthia, i'm sorry that you've always found mozart's sonatas boring and 
without substance. ironically, as an amateur pianist myself, those were the 
pieces that really ignited my passion for classical music and recordings, 
which eventually found its way to GG. i'm glad that you found the Gould 
recordings inspiring, though. i'm curious to know how Gould defined the 
"early" period that he liked, and the "later" period that he found 
uninspired. i myself have never been a great fan of some of the later 
sonatas, like K.457, and certainly not K.570 and K.576. however, i've always 
found the sonatas K.309-311 and K.330-333 to be some of the most creative 
works, and poignant works he ever wrote. did gould consider these sonatas to 
be part of the "early" or "later" period.
     
in response to tim's comment about why people denigrate Gould's recording of 
Mozart, i should say that i've never heard the Gould Mozart recordings. (i 
probably should). the common criticism i've heard of those recordings are 
the erratic tempos and the prominence of the alberti bass over the melodic 
line (especially in K.545). personally, i've always found Mozart appealing 
because his work exemplifies a neo-classical sense of control while 
simultaneously evoking a poignant lyricism. i've heard some critics dislike 
gould's recordings because these elements are missing. ironically, Mozart 
was actually pushing the bounds of what was acceptable for his neo-classical 
patrons. this subject is discussed at length in maynard solomon's biography, 
"Mozart: A Biography." i can't remember the name of the chapter offhand. 
     
Rohan
----------------------------------------- 
Rohan James Masilamani, Metaphor-At-Large 
Class of 2000, Stanford University
romasi@leland.stanford.edu
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~romasi