[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
GG: Two Short Comments About the Artist's Intentions
billy budd wrote:
Surely it is true that Glenn Gould was a product of his generation. He
was fascinated by the recording studio. Maybe if he had lived longer he
would have ventured into the digital realm. I feel certain that if he did
he would have done it with taste. But to use his desire for exploration as
a rationalization for altering his works after he is dead is sick.
Here is Glenn "on the record" regarding the alteration of his recordings.
From "GG Interviews GG About GG" (by GG!)
http://www.gould.nlc-bnc.ca/docs/ehf.htm]:
g. g. : And you're prepared to have similar unauthorised permutations
practised on your own recorded output by listener or listeners unknown?
G. G. : I should have failed in my purpose otherwise.
___
I think one needs to make a distinction between the end listener "altering"
as he desires, and the record-releasing party doing any such altering. I
don't think Sony is justified in changing Gould's recordings in any way, at
least as long as the artist is not around to give the go-ahead; its role
(now) is to distribute, not to "audit". What the last component of the
chain does, the listener, does not have the effect of changing the material
for anyone but himself. The two issues need to be judged separately.
If Sony removed the humming, they would indeed be denying each of you
anti-hummers the opportunity to do so! The burden is yours, not theirs
(without regard for the better 'business' decision). Pragmatically, my
opinion seems silly in the case of the humming dilemma, I know, but could
be usefully applied in more important matters. Removing the humming at the
source is taking away a little bit of Glenn, especially for those of us who
are as interested in the whole picture of GG as in strictly musical matters
(can of worms: opened).
- References:
- banality
- From: "billy budd" <afarrell@angelfire.com>