Originally posted by Hornspieler
View Post
It has sometimes said that musicians and composers make their own best critics. Indeed it has also been said that the music critic is like one who, to misquote GBS, critiques what he or she cannot do.
In a way, speaking as an occasional member of the self-appointed, we are pimps who hopefully intercede for the purpose of enlighening the public with details on subjects we've at least mugged up on when the subject matter may, as far as presumed qualities are concerned, be as much in contention among our brigade as among the worlds of those who create it, whether as composers, performers, or all three! We non-musicians are placed in a privileged position to pontificate or elucidate; at best we may accord ourselves the merit of being in possession of a wide range of tastes and open-mindedness one would not automatically or justifiably expect of the composer or performer whose individuality may be hard-won. As one who has been asked to review recordings and performances, mostly of jazz, notwithstanding charges that critics in this country have a tendency to soft-pedal the home-grownh product, I have always turned down requests to review music that was not to my taste, feeling that the Cinderella world of jazz needs and deserves the maximum plaudits it can get. But I wonder what others think about this.
Comment