Posted by AW on March 18, 2003 at 14:50:47:
In Reply to: Re: Re: a pause for thought (my two bits) posted by Steve Marcus on March 18, 2003 at 12:50:09:
I have to differ with the statement "...performed exactly as Bach and other composers of 100, 200, 300 years ago intended...." Years ago, I had the pleasure of attending several of Fox's concerts (he died in 1980), and I can assure you that he took many liberties with the music. His interpretations were in the spirit of the 19th century virtuosi who were quite willing to re-arrange the classical music of their time in order to please their adoring fans. All of the more "straight" organists used to look down their noses at Fox and his interpretations. The mildest word they used was inauthentic!
Still, this brings up a great point. To the extent that present-day symphony musicians are viewed as mere conduits for the composer's intentions, the public will wonder why they can't be replaced with a bunch of MIDI sequencers (unfair, I know). One of the big reasons why "classical" music was popular in its time (18th and 19th centuries) is that it was living and contemporary. Musicians did interpretations that went as far as re-arrangements. Indeed, before the 19th century, a composer would be delighted to hear that a musician was so inspired by his composition that he used it to create the piece anew, or did extensive improvisations upon the original.
To the extent a modern symphony orchestra sees its mission as preserving in the museum sense a limited body of 18th and 19th century music, along with showcasing some modern esoteric music that only composers can understand, the public will rightly consider the orchestras to be a specialized interest, like the local rhodendron society, and not worthy of broad public support. To the extent that orchestras can be living instutions, using past music as an ingredient in creating new musical experiences for everyone, they should have no trouble finding support. However, like Virgil Fox, they have to be willing to change, and to do what it takes to reach out to people and make them feel something. After all, as a teacher used to say, "making music is the most fun you can have with your clothes still on." Populate a stage with musicians who feel that way, and you have a lot of the raw material for big audiences.
I'm not against "authentic" performances of earlier music; indeed I've spent years immersed in just that. The real stuff is full of improvisations and bawdy spirit; it's a bit like jazz, although within a much more rigid framework. You just don't hear a lot of that kind of authenticity in modern symphony orchestras.
I could go on. For instance, there is the entirely inadequate number of tubas...
Cheers,
Allen Walker