Re: GG: musical revisionism (GGL, June 22, 1968)

[music@netlink.co.uk (Neil Tingley)]

On Mon, 16 Mar 1998 19:05:58 -0500, you wrote :

>Junichi and everyone,
>
>Here's my paraphrase of the problematic prose of our pianist pal:
>
>Junichi Miyazawa wrote:
>> 
>
>> However, I am not sure that there's
>> all that much to be said about Liszt the transcriber, that
>> hasn't already been said via the interminable comments
>> of Mr. Harold Schoenberg and his undoubted British
>> counterparts.  Perhaps rather a discussion, if there is one,
>> and if we have a span greater than one hour available,
>> of sufficient latitude as to include
>> the whole nation of musical revisionism, would be
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> appropriate, in which case, the examples would not
>> have to come necessarily, certainly not exclusively,
>> from the symphony itself, and
>> thus the better surprises
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> which Liszt has in store would not lose their edge prematurely.
>> 
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> ===============
>> 
>
>> What does "the whole nation of musical revisionism" mean?
>
>It's not clear from the context of this letter.  "Nation" wouldn't be an
>apt term.  Maybe it's a typographical error for "notion"-- this seems
>likely given how poorly typed many of GG's letters were and how awful
>his handwriting was! 
>[If it *is* supposed to be "nation" maybe it refers to one of
>Schoenberg's theories about Liszt-- I'm not familiar with his take on
>the issue of the transcriptions.]


Agreed. Notion would be the correct word. 


>> What does the "whole nation" stand for?
>
>Given my theory that it should read "whole notion of musical
>revisionism" it would make sense that Gould would have talked about the
>art of transcription-- that Liszt wrote a very literal score without
>much concern for the limitations and qualities of the keyboard.  Of
>course GG, being the genius he was <smile>, would demonstrate how he had
>fixed Liszt's problematic score with various techniques...  '68...when
>did GG record the Wagner transcriptions?   
>
>> Does the "musical revisionism" refer to Lszt's transcribing
>> symphonies into piano music?
>
>I would think so, yes.  The problem with this theory, though, is that GG
>often made note of how (amusingly) literal Liszt's transcriptions were. 
>Perhaps in this context he means *his own* "revisions" of List's
>transciptions of Beet's symphony.
>

Agreed. This is what I thought too.

>> I don't understand the usage of "include".
>> In what to include the "whole nation"?
>