Do Current Conductors Measure Up To The Greats Of The Past?

[vinteuil]

I am somewhat sceptical of the HIPP movement because, while it might be 'interesting' hear, say, Die Zauberflote played with the size of orchestra Mozart would have worked with and with the instruments used in his time, I'm unconvinced the performance is 'better' for being 'more authentic'. And I don't agree that what the composer had to settle for is the same as what the composer would, ideally, have wanted.

... perhaps this is to be expected of one who can write -

On a personal note, I've never been convinced of the greatness of Cosi Fan Tutte but in Klemperer's (not much-lauded) version, I am.

.




.

[Bryn]

I hear the reopening of a very large can of worms there. But: composers in general don't "have to settle for" less than what they "would. ideally have wanted"; they are inspired by, and write idiomatically for, what is available to them. Some people seem to have very strange ideas about how composers think!

“Do you believe that I think about your miserable fiddle when the muse strikes me?”

[Richard Barrett]

“Do you believe that I think about your miserable fiddle when the muse strikes me?”

As the estimable Mr Hockney says, "never believe what artists say, only what they do."

[pastoralguy]

Why is Scandinavia producing some of the most dynamic conductors on the scene?
Genuione question.

It's the long, dark nights...

Seriously, I believe that there is a lot of money put into music in those Northern countries as opposed to the parsimonious, make do and mend philosophy in this country

[MrGongGong]

. Some people seem to have very strange ideas about how composers think!

Some very strange ones indeed

[Richard Barrett]

Seriously, I believe that there is a lot of money put into music in those Northern countries as opposed to the parsimonious, make do and mend philosophy in this country

That is true, of Germany also. I recently attended a conducting masterclass where the young German participants were so far in advance of the others it was almost embarrassing. (There were no Nordic participants.) All kinds of music are generously supported by Scandinavian governments. While I wonder whether that's really appropriate in the case of commercial pop music, if there's enough to go around it would seem silly to complain.

[PJPJ]

I keep thinking of The Brandenburg Project, (Prom 29/30, Sunday August 5) and of how few listeners here bothered to attend to it or comment... it took up most of a Sunday (devotional in the best non-denominational sense!) with its marvellous interleaving of vivacious, freshly read presentations of the most familiar classical masterpieces with contemporary inspirations taking wing from them, none of which anyone would have heard before......

(It was an extraordinary experience for me - sonically, emotionally, spiritually; I didn't need to go to a concert hall to get it.)

Why was this a thrilling, unpredictable, spontaneous prospect to so few? Why was it not more popular here?

I thought the whole concept splendid and was much taken with the juxtaposition of Bach and our contemporaries. For me, this was one of the top concerts of this season and utterly rewarding. Perhaps it was more popular here than given in evidence.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I am somewhat sceptical of the HIPP movement because, while it might be 'interesting' hear, say, Die Zauberflote played with the size of orchestra Mozart would have worked with and with the instruments used in his time, I'm unconvinced the performance is 'better' for being 'more authentic'. And I don't agree that what the composer had to settle for is the same as what the composer would, ideally, have wanted.

You're very brave. I skirt round the issue.

My issue with some (but by no means all) HIPP musicians/advocates is that they take entrenched positions based on circumstantial evidence, and can be highly intolerant of differing viewpoints.

Human nature, I suppose.

[Beef Oven!]

You're very brave. I skirt round the issue.

My issue with some (but by no means all) HIPP musicians/advocates is that they take entrenched positions based on circumstantial evidence, and can be highly intolerant of differing viewpoints.

Human nature, I suppose.

HIPP does not seek to establish 'what the composer would have ideally have wanted' - that's quite impossible. Rather I would suggest it is as Richard puts it downthread; composers being inspired and writing idiomatically for what's available [and establishing as far as possible, what was available, the conventions etc and replicating them]

And I'm not sure what it is that's so sensitive that you must skirt 'round the issue. If some people are entrenched, I'm against them too and happy to say so. But we wouldn't be saying much.

But if you're saying that HIIP is entrenched and based on circumstatial evidence, I'd say you're wrong. the HIPP 'movement' has moved on and adapted quite a lot over the last 30 plus years, even if you haven't.

It's not a question of this or that way, and no other. There are lots of ways to play old music. I'm happy that we have lots of different approaches to listen to.

[ahinton]

Some people seem to have very strange ideas about how composers think!

But then those "some people" are mostly if not invariably people who are not themselves composers!

[Conchis]

I've heard JEG\s version of Symphonie Fantastique, which - we're told - is closer to Berlioz' version than Karajan's. And I prefer Karajan's.

I'm sure my life is enriched for 'the option' of listening to the 'raw intonation' of a late 20th century orchestra trying to sound like a mid-19th one but, for my listening pleasure, I'll opt for a big, well-funded 20th century orchestra playing 19th century repertoire like a big, well-funded 20th century orchestra would play it!

[Conchis]

Anyway, isn't 'authenticism' dead as a force in music?

It was a big deal in the late eighties/early nineties and a cynical part of me (that's a fairly big part) still thinks it was just a ploy to sell CDs. But none of the conductors involved were able to draw big audiences (one of he most pitifully attended Proms I ever attended was presided over by JEG) and a lot of those conductors were deeply unpopular with the orchestras they conducted (to the extent that some of them had to form their own bands).

I think the wheel is coming full circle and audiences now want to hear 'big band' versions of Mozart et al, rather than the slimmed-down (sometimes anorexic!) stuff they've been fed on for nearly thirty years.

At some point in the near future, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn et al will be cloned and will be given the chance to listen to their own works performed by orchestras since, say, 1914. It would be very amusing if they vastly preferred Furtwangerl, Karajan, Walter and Klemperer to the HIPP crowd.

[MrGongGong]

Anyway, isn't 'authenticism' dead as a force in music?

No
Just look at the number of things like this

http://www.langhamresearch.co.uk

[Richard Barrett]

It's not a question of this or that way, and no other. There are lots of ways to play old music. I'm happy that we have lots of different approaches to listen to.

Quite so. Some people will prefer JEG's recording of the Symphonie fantastique while others will prefer Karajan's. The mistake is to deingrate one or the other on the spurious grounds of being "wrong" (or sounding like it isn't "well-funded"!)

[Richard Barrett]

Anyway, isn't 'authenticism' dead as a force in music?

I think you're once more showing a rather serious misunderstanding of what HIPP is trying to achieve. "Authentic" is more of an advertising slogan than a performing attitude, although I imagine that every performer, whatever their approach, tries to be "authentic" in their own way.

It was a big deal in the late eighties/early nineties and a cynical part of me (that's a fairly big part) still thinks it was just a ploy to sell CDs. But none of the conductors involved were able to draw big audiences (one of he most pitifully attended Proms I ever attended was presided over by JEG) and a lot of those conductors were deeply unpopular with the orchestras they conducted (to the extent that some of them had to form their own bands)

Does drawing big audiences equate to musical excellence? And I think if you look at the history of period-instrument ensembles you'll find that overwhelmingly they were formed before their musical directors had ever been invited to conduct symphony orchestras or had any thought of doing so.

I think the wheel is coming full circle and audiences now want to hear 'big band' versions of Mozart et al, rather than the slimmed-down (sometimes anorexic!) stuff they've been fed on for nearly thirty years.

Your evidence for which is what?

At some point in the near future, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn et al will be cloned and will be given the chance to listen to their own works performed by orchestras since, say, 1914. It would be very amusing if they vastly preferred Furtwangerl, Karajan, Walter and Klemperer to the HIPP crowd.

Now you're just being silly. Leaving aside the technical question of whether someone who's been dead for centuries can be cloned at all, which is extremely doubtful "in the near future", you're ignoring the fact that a human personality is not just, or even primarily, a result of their genetic inheritance, as anyone who knows the slightest thing about genetics will be aware. And even if these clones would amuse you with their preference for Furtwängler et al., why should that affect anyone else's opinion? The point is not what the composer "would have preferred" but what the composer did. The former is undecidable while the latter is a fascinating area for musical exploration. Preferring what the composer most certainly didn't do is fine if that's your bag, but you really shouldn't pretend it's anything other than that.