Reviewers in the press grrrrrrrr

[Guest]

Just been reading the press reviews for the gala recital of the rebuilt Festival Hall organ last Tuesday. Was infuriated to read both John Allison of the Torygraph and Barry Millington of the Standard lambast John Scott's performance of the Passacaglia and Fugue in C Minor. As an organist I admired his beautiful articulation and phrasing (something Millington tears into). I know that organ is very unforgiving to play as the dry acoustic shows up the slightest error.

Allison says the majority of the programme was indifferently played: did he really listen to Isabelle Demers' performance of the Prelude and Fugue in B major: one of the most difficult pieces in the repertoire (played from memory according to the presenter).

Quite frankly I don't know what authority guys like this have to make comments like this. Are they organists? As an amateur player i look up to players like this and get wound up when these people casually pan their efforts. As I have always maintained: those who can do; those who can't review.

[pastoralguy]

These reviewers have a certain number of column inches to fill so they have to say something. Don't worry about it. Just enjoy the music andtry to feel a little sympathy for those who can't.

[Petrushka]

I believe that Richard Morrison of the Times is an organist. If you want to contribute to Murdoch's coffers his review may be there.

I tend not to take much notice of reviewers these days and prefer to use my own judgement as to whether I enjoyed a performance or not. As an exception to the rule, Colin Anderson's review of the Maazel Strauss concert last Thursday (see relevant thread) is brilliant, well written and makes me want to hear the concert (which I will do tomorrow night). I may not agree with him but my opinion of his excellent review will not change either way.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I may not agree with him but my opinion of his excellent review will not change either way.

But surely if after listening to the concert and consider his review to be entirely wrong, your opinion of that review will surely change, even thought you may still respect his right to hold such opinions?

[Ferretfancy]

There's only enough space in the Friday edition of the Guardian for about half a dozen CD reviews. It always amuses me that of these items Andrew Clements usually reviews about half unfavourably, or at least with faint praise. Being Andrew Clements, he is always keen on avant garde offerings while dismissing the rest, the whole enterprise is a waste of space.

[Alison]

I always think John Allison is bland and boring.

I like reviewers who try to understand where a performance is coming from even if it doesn't fit the template of their preconceived ideal.

[Petrushka]

But surely if after listening to the concert and consider his review to be entirely wrong, your opinion of that review will surely change, even thought you may still respect his right to hold such opinions?

No, because I would still consider it a brilliant, well written review regardless. It is a considered and thoughtful review, not one that has been hastily cobbled together to meet a deadline, and if I disagreed with his opinions I'd still think it so.

[Alison]

Nobody seems to have mentioned John Scott's Friday evening recital which was fabulous to my ears.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I see where you are coming from, but I have referred t before to a (well-written) review of Rattle's Proms Rheingold, which was so inaccurate that it was evident that the critic had not attended the live concert (but probably stayed at home and listened on the radio). The eloquence of the writer is a bonus but the substance is what really matters. In the case of the Maazel concert the controversy is subjective anyway. I don't suppose it's wrong to stretch a 45 minute piece by a further 22 minutes, but it's laying your head on the block just a little.

[teamsaint]

I stopped accepting what papers prints as having any automatic validity after reading a report of a football match that I had been at, and the " reporter " clearly hadn't, a long time ago.

Reviewers have to earn and keep respect. Those who consistently slate a big proportion of concerts and discs need treating with great caution. I expect they have ego issues.

[Pabmusic]

Sibelius is supposed to have said (presumably in Finnish or Swedish - the latter of which was his first language) "Pay no attention to what the critics say. No statue was ever put up to a critic".

It's a lovely quote, but does anyone know if it's true?

[Sir Velo]

Just been reading the press reviews for the gala recital of the rebuilt Festival Hall organ last Tuesday. Was infuriated to read both John Allison of the Torygraph and Barry Millington of the Standard lambast John Scott's performance of the Passacaglia and Fugue in C Minor. As an organist I admired his beautiful articulation and phrasing (something Millington tears into). I know that organ is very unforgiving to play as the dry acoustic shows up the slightest error.

Allison says the majority of the programme was indifferently played: did he really listen to Isabelle Demers' performance of the Prelude and Fugue in B major: one of the most difficult pieces in the repertoire (played from memory according to the presenter).

Quite frankly I don't know what authority guys like this have to make comments like this. Are they organists? As an amateur player i look up to players like this and get wound up when these people casually pan their efforts. As I have always maintained: those who can do; those who can't review.

To be fair it was a dog's dinner of a programme. Why on earth we had three arrangements of pieces which, by no stretch of the imagination, were "organistic" when there are far more interesting pieces in the repertoire. The PMD and the Tavener hardly showed the instrument off to its best either. But that's "gala" evenings for you.

Agree that Friday's concert was far better.

[teamsaint]

Sibelius is supposed to have said (presumably in Finnish or Swedish - the latter of which was his first language) "Pay no attention to what the critics say. No statue was ever put up to a critic".

It's a lovely quote, but does anyone know if it's true?

Shaw do. well, sort of.I think his plays may have more to do with it, though !



Alex Ross thinks there are one or two>

http://www.therestisnoise.com/2006/03/statues_of_crit.html

[Pabmusic]

Shaw do. well, sort of.I think his plays may have more to do with it, though !



Alex Ross thinks there are one or two>
http://www.therestisnoise.com/2006/0...s_of_crit.html

[mercia]

isn't everybody a critic from time to time, just not by profession? I expect Sibelius during his lifetime opinionated (opined ?) on a few performances (and pieces of music) either privately or publicly. Naturally I feel sorry for anyone who believes their career has been affected or ruined by critics.