Re: GG: Music and Morality

[Marco Poli <poli@imiucca.csi.unimi.it>]

Dear Robert and other f_minorites,

           OK, I agree that you're probably right about Gould's involvement
in the non purely hedonic aspects of art.   Of course he claimed to be, and
in a sense he was, "the last Puritan".   But, to go back to the Karajan
dispute, either he was unaware of HvK "dark spot" (and this seems to me as
quite difficult to believe, given the publicity given by the media to this
matter when Karajan started touring the world after WWII - apparently Gould
was well informed about the musical and non-musical feats of a man he
humorously called "the Musikdirektor of Europe"!), or he thought that his
musical merits far outweighed it (and, of course, moral judgements are not
always straightforward for a very intelligent and open-minded person:
Gould's parameters of reference might have been quite different from and
reached far deeper than the ones adopted by other people).
Of course, this has to remain a matter for speculation!

Also, about the "Bata" question, I'm not really sure, but it could well be
that  this was in fact a film company which had HvK under contract until,
in order to have the utmost control on his production, he decided to found
his own private company.   In fact, many of HvK choices seemed motivated
not (or, at least, not only) by greed, but by a maniacal desire of having
complete control over _every_ aspect of the musical enterprise: to gain
such a complete control he was also ready to lose money.   His famous
dispute with "La Scala" is just an example.
In a sense, this maniacal search for control had some points of contact
with one of Gould's own obsessions (this had probably something to do with
his withdrawal from the concert halls).   Moreover, Karajan was also a
visionary of sorts, and this might have been important for Gould.

By the way, a CD of Gould and Karajan collaborating in Beethoven's c-minor
concert has been available, published in the States by Music & Arts (CD
678) and in Italy by Nuova Era (013.6323).


Best wishes to all


Marco

>Dear Marco,
>
>	Your points are well taken, but it does seem to me that Glenn Gould
>mixed
>artistic and political (or moral) considerations, or at least claimed that
>it was proper to do so.  He justified his withdrawal from concert
>performances on moral grounds, he articulated (I think) moral grounds for
>his disapproval of the stereotype virtuoso (I think of his satire of
>Rubinstein in this regard), and he indicated that he disapproved of
>Mozart's compositions not wholly on musical grounds but as products of a
>"hedonistic lifestyle."  Certainly he said in his self-interview that the
>Soviet concerns about art were justified (thereby apparently accepting the
>possibility of artistic censorship).  I find Gould's concern for the moral
>dimension of art to be one of the most intriguing things about his
>thinking.  Gould may be wrong; his "moral" positions may be claptrap, or
>elaborate self-justifications; and he may seem curiously inconsistent in
>the application of his putative moral criteria.  But I am in a number of
>ways moved by the depth of Gould's conviction that music has a Purpose
>besides being "the art of pleasing sounds," and his sense that Art is
>connected to larger human concerns.  It may be sheer self-delusion, but I
>hear more in Gould's performances precisely because I know that he so
>explicitly wanted to do much more than just play the piece perfectly.  I
>know that all performers want to "communicate," but very few are as
>committed to a moral sense of their art as Glenn Gould, and, at least for
>some people, I think that is a part of Gould's fascination.
>
>Robert
>
>----------
>> From: Marco Poli <poli@imiucca.csi.unimi.it>
>> To: f_minor-og@email.rutgers.edu
>> Subject: Re: GG:Goldberg Variations...and Conservatory
>> Date: Monday, March 23, 1998 10:31 AM
>>
>> Dear Elisha,
>>
>>
>>        as far as I know, two versions of "Burleske" played by Glenn are
>(or
>> have been) available:
>> one with the Toronto S. O. conducted by Golschmann, and recorded on
>> November 15, 1967 has been re-issued by Sony (Sony SMK 52687); this
>version
>> had also been published in the past by at least two independent firms,
>> Music & Arts (CD 678) in the States, and Nuova Era (2310) in Italy;
>> A different version, with Adler conducting the Baltimore S.O.and recorded
>> on January 3, 1962, has also been published by Music & Arts (CD 297).   I
>> suspect that this latter version comes from a CBC broadcast.
>> I also think to remember - but am unable to check just now - that
>Strauss'
>> Burleske is also available in the Sony videotape or laser-disc Gould
>> collection.
>>
>> On the Karajan discussion: don't you agree that anyway, some 50 years
>after
>> the end of the war, he deserves to be judged, at least on this list, only
>> on his musical merits?
>> I can understand that anybody's involvement in Nazism should not be
>> forgotten - but then one should always put things in an historical
>> perspective (how many of us, had we lived in Germany in the early
>Forties,
>> would have been brave enough to publicily dissent from Nazims?) and,
>> moreover, judge the real degree and circumstances of this involvement,
>but
>> I strongly question the rightness of mixing artistical and political
>> considerations.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>>
>> Marco
>>
>>
>> >Hi all!
>> >I'm sorry to trouble this list with even more garrulous questions--we
>> >were having an interesting discussion on Karajan and the deal with Nazi.
>> >Well, Richard Strauss was a Nazi as well.  (Well said, Robert!) These
>> >musicians did not join for political conviction, but simply to
>> >stay--alive, I guess--in Germany, but with strings attached.  I have an
>> >article from the New York Times which talked about the famous conductors
>> >during the time of Nazi, and they were made to play some rather
>> >propagandistic (or rather stupid) songs to boost nationalism.  Some
>> >performances must be rather humiliating for Karajan.  Just a side info,
>> >Strauss was a friend of Mahler (who was a Jew) before WW II (Mahler died
>> >in 1921. Strauss in 1950?)  Also, Hitler's favorite composer was Wagner,
>> >who was one of leading musical figure for anti-Semiticism.  Despite
>thus,
>> >I still like Wagner's and Strauss's music.
>> >
>> >I'm getting way out of line!  I was listening to GG's last recording of
>> >Goldberg Variations ("Gouldberg," as GG once liked to call it), and I
>> >noticed some skittering while playing the CD (listen real carefully at
>> >the end of track 5, and track 7).  Either that or my CD isn't in good
>> >quality.  There are several tracks like it as well.
>> >
>> >About the Conservatory, I've visited the website (thanks to all of you
>> >for the info!) and had requested some info.  The place is still called
>> >Royal Conservatory of Music, but the actual conservatory is called "The
>> >Glenn Gould Professional School" (go figure!;-).  Has anyone in this
>list
>> >seen or been to this school?  My mom is doubtful about me going to
>> >Toronto at the end of my senior year (she's afraid that the school
>> >changed its name in order to attract more students.  Plus it is rather
>> >far away).  I mean, GG graduated from there, so it must be somewhat
>> >distinguished--am I right?
>> >
>> >Thanks(;-), Elisha
>> >
>> >P.S. Did GG ever recorded Strauss's Burleske for Piano and Orchestra (I
>> >heard it on the  NLC website)?  This piece seems rare and hardly
>> >performed--in my search I found only one CD which contains this piece.
>> >
>> >
>> >Strong conviction is capable of destroying any prejudice.  The proof:
>> >Glenn Gould.
>> >--Nathan Perelman
>> >
>> >_____________________________________________________________________
>> >You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
>> >Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
>> >Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
>>
>>
>>