Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site olivej.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!oliveb!olivej!greg
From: greg@olivej.UUCP (Greg Paley)
Newsgroups: net.music
Subject: (Classical) Note-perfect but dull performances
Message-ID: <161@olivej.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 27-Apr-84 10:19:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: olivej.161
Posted: Fri Apr 27 10:19:11 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 30-Apr-84 05:38:08 EDT
Organization: Olivetti ATC, Cupertino, Ca
Lines: 68


In a mailed response, I was criticizing a recent recording
of Wagner's "Ring" cycle (the Dresden performances under
Janowski) which touched on what I have noticed to be an
increasingly general problem.  I am hearing, both live and
on records, more and more performances whose intent seems
to be the negative one of avoiding errors and mistakes rather
than the positive one of expressiveness.

A prime example was a recent set of San Francisco Symphony
performances of the third act (in concert form) of Wagner's
"Parsifal", Edo de Waart conducting.  There were no wrong
or ugly notes from either the orchestra or the soloists.
There was also absolutely no sense of anything from these
performances other than that they were doing their job
in order to pick up their check.  The music may not be the
best Wagner wrote.  This is very controversial - some
Wagnerites find it his most sublime, and others consider
it an example of deteriorating powers in his old age.  
Nonetheless, there are undeniable moments of power and
mystery in the music, none of which were evident in the
performances.  The weak handling of the principle brass
motive even provoked audible chuckles from the audience.

One possible cause of the problem: the local critics gave
this performance ecstatic reviews.  I found, however, that
my opinion was confirmed not only by other musically
knowledgeable friends and acquaintances who heard it, but
also by members of the orchestra with whom I've had the
chance to discuss it.  They also concurred with the feeling
that this is a general phenomenon.  As technical achievements
reach higher levels, performances with "guts" and "soul"
are tending toward extinction.

Several months ago, there was a televised tribute to Maria
Callas.  Performers from around the world did various scenes
and arias "in tribute" (although some of them seemed to
have nothing whatsoever to do with Callas herself) and, in
between, film clips of Callas herself in concert and in a
segment from the second act of "Tosca" were shown.  These
clips came from a time when Callas could be said artistically
(and certainly vocally) to be well past her prime.  However,
even in those moments were the actual sounds she produced were
at their most unpleasant (the high notes in "O Don Fatale"),
there was a fire and commitment that shined through and made
it impossible to take my eyes off of her.  In contrast, the
current world stars who were shown seemed cautious, pallid,
and ultimately dull.  Again, there were no bad notes (well,
Renata Scotto's high B might have spayed a few cats)
but there was no fire.

I'd be very interested in other peoples ideas about this, and
possible explanations.  Is the competition of recordings with
editing to remove mistakes getting to be too much for live
performers?  Have critics harped too much on details and
forgotten the overall picture to the point of making performers
paranoid about the importance of their mistakes?  Are people
in general being submerged in the glossy images presented
on all sides by the media to the point where they don't let
themselves be exposed emotionally and therefore possibly make
fools of themselves?  In every great performance, there are
tremendous risks involved.  Why have performers lost the
courage to take them?

	- Greg Paley