BaL 6.07.13 - Beethoven's Piano Sonata no. 32 in C minor Op. 111

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Sir Velo
    Full Member
    • Oct 2012
    • 3259

    #91
    Originally posted by umslopogaas View Post
    Unsurprisingly to those who have read it, there have been several references to Thomas Mann's 'Doctor Faustus' in this thread. Could I implore anyone who has not read it to do so without further delay? It is mighty powerful stuff and it scared the daylights out of this agnostic biologist. Mann doesnt mess around with trivia, the whole novel is laden with large dark themes, but Leverkuhn's description of his conversation with ... Him ... and the final scene when He comes to collect his dues are enough to make stronger men than me hide behind the sofa.
    I don't deny the power of Mann's writing but surely we have come too far to be frightened by the bogeyman. It's like a story used to frighten little children: "Be good or Old Nick will come and get you!" All a case of creating God in man's own image. There is absolutely nothing to support it other than our own fancies and fears.

    Comment

    • umslopogaas
      Full Member
      • Nov 2010
      • 1977

      #92
      Sir Velo, what you say is true and as a rationalist I agree with you, but I suppose my point is that Leverkuhn did believe in the bogeyman and Mann makes you feel his fear even if you dont share it. Zeitblom is of course dealing with a much more rational fear, that of being blown to pieces by Allied bombing raids.

      Comment

      • amateur51

        #93
        Originally posted by umslopogaas View Post
        Sir Velo, what you say is true and as a rationalist I agree with you, but I suppose my point is that Leverkuhn did believe in the bogeyman and Mann makes you feel his fear even if you dont share it. Zeitblom is of course dealing with a much more rational fear, that of being blown to pieces by Allied bombing raids.
        The spectre of Hitler must have been influential too

        Comment

        • vinteuil
          Full Member
          • Nov 2010
          • 12936

          #94
          Originally posted by umslopogaas View Post
          I suppose my point is that Leverkuhn did believe in the bogeyman and Mann makes you feel his fear even if you don't share it. .
          ... but surely the reader by then has fully taken on board the nature of the syphilitic degeneration of Leverkühn's brain, and that what he was perceiving was the product of that?

          Comment

          • umslopogaas
            Full Member
            • Nov 2010
            • 1977

            #95
            Yes, the distanced reader has surely taken that on board, but it isnt clear to me that Leverkuhn himself has. For sure he knows he has syphilis and perhaps he knows it could affect his perception, but we are told by Mann that Leverkuhn believes he has paid for his genius by accepting damnation. Zeitblom doesnt accept that, even though he sees a different damnation looming as the Allies bomb his country to rubble.

            It really is a very disturbing book, though I'm glad I read it.

            Comment

            • rauschwerk
              Full Member
              • Nov 2010
              • 1482

              #96
              Originally posted by Brassbandmaestro View Post
              Hows the Paul Lewis?
              See post 31 for my opinion.

              Comment

              • amateur51

                #97
                Originally posted by rauschwerk View Post
                See post 31 for my opinion.
                http://www.for3.org/forums/showthrea...r-Op-111/page2



                Which Kempff performance of op.111 do you refer to, rauschwerk

                Comment

                • rauschwerk
                  Full Member
                  • Nov 2010
                  • 1482

                  #98
                  Originally posted by amateur51 View Post
                  http://www.for3.org/forums/showthrea...r-Op-111/page2



                  Which Kempff performance of op.111 do you refer to, rauschwerk
                  The 1951 mono recording.

                  Comment

                  • amateur51

                    #99
                    Originally posted by rauschwerk View Post
                    The 1951 mono recording.

                    Comment

                    • Andrew Preview
                      Full Member
                      • May 2011
                      • 78

                      Originally posted by Brassbandmaestro View Post
                      Hows the Paul Lewis?
                      Lewis is more restrained than Kovacevich, using a narrower dynamic range. The effect is slightly more detached, but it's still a very convincing performance. He scores with some beautifully articulated playing, using less sustain so that one can hear the right and left-hand parts much more clearly than with Kovacevich. As Rauschwerk says, Lewis also benefits from excellent sound. The same can't be said for Pollini, whose recording is bright and brittle-sounding - although the performance is again very good.
                      Last edited by Andrew Preview; 02-07-13, 18:46. Reason: Repeated word.
                      "Not too heavy on the banjos." E. Morecambe

                      Comment

                      • Eine Alpensinfonie
                        Host
                        • Nov 2010
                        • 20572

                        Being a pedant, I might point out that It was Stephen Bishop who made the recording.

                        Comment

                        • Andrew Preview
                          Full Member
                          • May 2011
                          • 78

                          Originally posted by Eine Alpensinfonie View Post
                          Being a pedant, I might point out that It was Stephen Bishop who made the recording.
                          Nice try, but I was referring to his 1992 recording for EMI (see post #88), by which time he was Stephen Kovacevich.

                          He once described in an interview a memo he saw while he was with Philips, which said something like "Re: Stephen Bishop. This product is now Bishop-Kovacevich". A charming way to refer to one of your artists!
                          "Not too heavy on the banjos." E. Morecambe

                          Comment

                          • richardfinegold
                            Full Member
                            • Sep 2012
                            • 7737

                            I'm late to this thread, so I'll put a plug in for a recording that hasn't been mentioned, and to my knowledge has never been transfered to CD: Gary Graffman--coupled on lp with Op 110. It was my intro the work. Other favorites are various Richter recordings, Arrau, and Richard Goode. I dislike the Pollini, which I have always thought to be to matter of fact.
                            Regarding the Mann Novel, which I have read twoice but not for a long time, I was always struck by the fact that the presenter, who is portrayed as a terrible stutterer, could keep a roomful of people entranced with such a question: Why is thee no third movement to lvB's last Piano Sonata. One thing that struck me was that this lecture was occurring before the turn of the century and the advent of recorded music. Not many Pianists were yet playing LvBs last Sonatas, just as his last String Quartets were not standard fare for most active ensembles. Op. 111 had achieved almost a mythical importance, and for many music lovers in the provincial town portrayed in Dr. Faustus, this would have been one of their few, if not only, opportunities to hear the music played in any form.
                            Now I can reach to my CD shelves, or hit a few keys on a computer, and bring up several versions of the work. How fortunate we are.

                            Comment

                            • Eine Alpensinfonie
                              Host
                              • Nov 2010
                              • 20572

                              Originally posted by Andrew Preview View Post
                              Nice try, but I was referring to his 1992 recording for EMI (see post #88), by which time he was Stephen Kovacevich.

                              He once described in an interview a memo he saw while he was with Philips, which said something like "Re: Stephen Bishop. This product is now Bishop-Kovacevich". A charming way to refer to one of your artists!
                              I must have been thinking of an early recording I think was made with EMI in the late 1960s. But it serves me right for trying to be clever.

                              Comment

                              • amateur51

                                Originally posted by richardfinegold View Post
                                I'm late to this thread, so I'll put a plug in for a recording that hasn't been mentioned, and to my knowledge has never been transfered to CD: Gary Graffman--coupled on lp with Op 110.
                                It's disc 22 of this 24 CD set to be released in early August, rfg

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X