BaL 22.02.14 - Haydn: Symphony no. 44

[HighlandDougie]

As we appear to be hurtling towards another BaL record number of posts (without talking very much about recordings), I'm tempted to forward the above load of posts to Nick Kenyon (whom I know) and ask him to sort you all out before Saturday.

[waldo]

Okay, ferneyhoughgeliebte

Apologies for not giving your full name. It must have been very distressing for you. Someone once got my name slightly wrong at work and I spent the morning crying in the toilets.

Anyway, your version of the HIP manifesto is eminently reasonable. I don't think anyone could disagree with it. But many of us feel that there are elements in the HIP movement who go further than this. They imply and insinuate that their interpretation is more correct or more justifiable than others. They chuckle knowingly and shake their heads with mock amusement when alternative views are considered. Have you ever heard Roger Norrington in interview? He has a special smirk for discussing vibrato-heavy performances. As much as anything, it is a question of tone, an attitude. I don't know if any of them ever come straight out and say "That's wrong!", but that is often the underlying message.

Historical research is obviously a wonderful thing - when it is used undogmatically. But some of us feel that it is often used as a means of elevating some performances above others. Bach only had a small choir at such and such a cathedral: therefore, it is better to use a small choir. It is more faithful, closer to his "intentions", more valid than other ways........and so on. He would have been astonished to hear his music sung by a big choir........

But as I said, the argument is not often spelled out in its full, condescending detail. It is usually a matter of occasional asides and knowing smirks.

[waldo]

Here's another name for you: Philip Herreweghe has claimed that "the only music the modern instrument orchestra should play is
by Stockhausen and Penderecki".

Note the use of the word "should".

[Thropplenoggin]

As we appear to be hurtling towards another BaL record number of posts (without talking very much about recordings), I'm tempted to forward the above load of posts to Nick Kenyon (whom I know) and ask him to sort you all out before Saturday.

Nice refereeing, HD. Impressed by your acquaintance. When you next see him, perhaps you could ask him if Faber has any more plans for their generally excellent 'Pocket Guide' series; Sir Nicholas Kenyon CBE, as the Amazon page now informs us, wrote the ones on Mozart and Bach.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

No problem, waldo - I clarified my nom-de-web as there have been occasions in the past when it's been mistakenly assumed that I am the beloved composer. "fhg" saves a fair bit of typing time.

Moving on, can I sum up the bulk of #47 as "No"? Or do "implications and insinuations", "special smirks", "knowing chuckles", "condescending detail" amount to being "beaten about the head by a brigade" amongst the "many of [you] who feel" this way?

Sorry (sincerely ) - I'm descending into sarcasm. But this derogatory sort of statement is so often made against HIPPsters, who have enlivened attitudes to the established canon(s) and restored magnificent works neglected in previous generations back to the repertory. Pinned down, such "head beating" is just a "feeling" (as you say), unsubstantiated by actual comments/quotations. That there are so many available recordings of this superb work is largely (not exclusively) down to Musicians with an interest in Historical accuracy in performance. I think that they should be celebrated, not tarred with attitudes they do not hold.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I don't know about you guys, but I won't be satisfied until we have vibrato-free Mahler, Chopin on the clavichord and Brahms quartets with a continuo accompaniment.

...but on this question of Ferny's three examples, I can think of quite a few, but evidencing them is a little trickier. I recall a Faure BaL when the reviewer admitted to enjoying a performance, but said something along the lines of "You really shouldn't be listening to this performance".
Most examples are less direct, such as sneering at "vibrato-sozzled" playing by the ASMF in Corelli, or the dismissal of every non- HIPP recording of Beethoven's violin concerto by Roy Goodman.

[Nick Armstrong]

I don't know about you guys, but I won't be satisfied until we have vibrato-free Mahler, Chopin on the clavichord and Brahms quartets with a continuo accompaniment.

"kea, come to Daddy" (R. Norrington, 2014)

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

[Thropplenoggin]

"kea, come to Daddy" (R. Norrington, 2014)

That photo is the equivalent of those public health warning images on cigarette packets: look what happens when you apply the principles of HIP too vigorously.

or: Vinegary string sounds can kill.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I never quoted from the many ramblings a of the afore-photographed knight, as his most talked about recordings and performanced aren't HIPP at all, but revolutionary - famous for giving world premiere performances of vibrato free works by Tchaikovsky, Mahler and Elgar.

[waldo]

Thanks for the dove, fhg.

I agree: they should be celebrated. More than half my collection is HIP. When it comes to Bach, Haydn and Mozart, I listen to nothing else. (Keyboard works aside!) Out of taste: I prefer the sound of the instruments and the sound of the voices and the style of the performances.

Perhaps we are disagreeing about the best way of characterising the movement. I would insist that there are, indeed, elements in the movement who use their research to beat others over the head. Norrington is one of them. But whether this is true of the movement as as whole - it's hard to say. In the early days, especially, I think the evangelical thrust of the movement did sometimes spill over into a judgmental attitude that was not entirely reasonable. In addition, I know people (not professionals, just amateurs) who genuinely feel that HIP research has established the absolute rightness of wrongness of certain practices.

[Roehre]

...

Perhaps we are disagreeing about the best way of characterising the movement. I would insist that there are, indeed, elements in the movement who use their research to beat others over the head. Norrington is one of them. But whether this is true of the movement as as whole - it's hard to say. In the early days, especially, I think the evangelical thrust of the movement did sometimes spill over into a judgmental attitude that was not entirely reasonable. In addition, I know people (not professionals, just amateurs) who genuinely feel that HIP research has established the absolute rightness of wrongness of certain practices.

Some of the spin-offs of HIP recordings are very useful and on top of that scientifically well founded and not pretending to be the truth. One of these is Neil Zaslaw's book on Mozart symphonies, a spin-off of the AAM/Hogwood series from the late seventies- early eighties. Very readable and a treasure trove not only re these Mozart works, but also on performing practices, publishing practices etc in general too.

[waldo]

Just have a quick look at the Zaslaw book on Amazon, Roehre. Looks very interesting. I will put it on my birthday list........ Thanks.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Perhaps we are disagreeing about the best way of characterising the movement. I would insist that there are, indeed, elements in the movement who use their research to beat others over the head. Norrington is one of them. But whether this is true of the movement as as whole - it's hard to say. In the early days, especially, I think the evangelical thrust of the movement did sometimes spill over into a judgmental attitude that was not entirely reasonable. In addition, I know people (not professionals, just amateurs) who genuinely feel that HIP research has established the absolute rightness of wrongness of certain practices.

Yes - HIPPsters are only human, so it is unreasonable to suggest (as I did) that they are some sort of saintly and oppressed sect. If Herreweghe was sincere when he spoke about what modern orchestras "should" only play, then he was being a twonk. (Everybody knows they "should" only play Lachenmann and Ferneyhough ). Just as Andras Schiff suggested that it was a quaint idea to play Bach on the Harpsichord, so Leonhardt's suggestion that the keyboard works should never be played on piano. It's a sort of Third Law of Emotion - every stupid statement is balanced by another, equally and oppositely stupid.

The best sort of mindset for me is that encapsulated by Andrew Parrott in his opening and closing chapters of his The Essential Bach Choir, where he emphasises that other performing traditions from his own have their own validity, and to "forbid" Musicians and their audiences access to these traditions is pernicious. (Not an exact quotation - I can't find my copy - but the essence.)

[verismissimo]

... Just as Andras Schiff suggested that it was a quaint idea to play Bach on the Harpsichord...

I hadn't read that. My understanding is that he has a clavichord at home which he plays every day. And his playing (and conducting) of Mozart on a Walter fortepiano with the OAE at the Sheldonian last year was a great treat.