Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site olivee.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!sun!idi!oliven!olivee!greg
From: greg@olivee.UUCP (Greg Paley)
Newsgroups: net.music.classical
Subject: Re: Re: S.F. Opera Ring - Part 3 "Siegfried"
Message-ID: <399@olivee.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Jun-85 13:13:36 EDT
Article-I.D.: olivee.399
Posted: Mon Jun 24 13:13:36 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 27-Jun-85 07:49:48 EDT
References: <387@olivee.UUCP> <11312@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Distribution: net
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino, Ca
Lines: 31

> I happened to run across the New York Times criticism/review of this
> exact same performance, after reading this net article on it. They could
> have been talking about two entirely different events! The NYT review
> came across as carping, unpleasant, and hostile. I am certainly glad I
> had the chance to read this review first, and I thank the poster for his
> efforts. 
> 
> Will

Actually, one of the main reasons I was stimulated to post my reviews
of these performances (particularly of such length) was my astonishment
at reading some of the hatchet-jobs done by supposedly noteworthy
critics, both local and otherwise.  The experiences of art and music
are often so intensely personal that differences of opinion are bound
to crop up.  This is to be expected.  No two people are likely to agree
all of the time on whether a particular voice is "beautiful" or whether
or not the emotional impact of a performance is moving and uplifting.
Perception of such things depends as much on the openness and state of
readiness of the audience member as it does on the performance itself.

What is not to be expected, however, is the failure shown by the NYT 
reviewer (and some others) to give even an accurate, articulate account 
of the surface aspects of the performance, such as how people moved 
on stage, whether or not voices projected and words could be distinguished, 
whether the notes sung or played were on pitch or not, orchestral balances, 
and whether or not the conductor's choice of tempi effectively followed 
the directions in the score.  I would have presumed that these things 
were fairly objective, and would be recognized by anyone in the audience 
with a reasonable ear and musical background.

	- Greg Paley