Your "Never to be Sung Again" selections

[Alan Howe]

I have no problem with negative criticism in our politically correct age. The points I would make are these:
1. All such criticism is acceptable as long as reasons are given. The mere expression of dislike is unhelpful; if it is followed by a reasoned justification (however brief), it suddenly becomes interesting. Thus "I can't understand why anyone can like X" is hardly worth posting and could easily give offence; however, "I really dislike X because..." is the beginning of an interesting debate.
2. All criticism should avoid at all costs attacks on the taste of another contributor. Ad hominem remarks get us nowhere and can lead to angry exchanges (which are not acceptable here). If an opinion cannot be aired without recourse to attacking another poster for holding a different point of view, then it should not be aired at all.

So: do continue - but remember: civility is the bottom line here...!

[Mark Thomas]

Words of wisdom, Ilja.

[Josh]

I'd like to point out that this entire thread is totally worth it if for nothing else than this poetic gem by Mark Thomas:

"that great flat featureless plain of Fürtwanglerisms traipses past me"

(Not because it involves Fürtwangler; I've never heard any of his music.)

[Mark Thomas]

I'd forgotten that I'd written that, Josh ;-)

[eschiss1]

(whereas for me the finale of the Furtwangler 2nd in Barenboim's recording, for reasons I shall not attempt to explain nor convince the irritated doubters of , is probably the most often played track on my iPod the last few years. Personal taste is what it is! )

[jerfilm]

Well said, Semloh.  I've said this more than once before, but one of the real strengths of this forum is that I can express my deep seated dislike for the non-tonal offerings of the 20th century without half a dozen experts jumping me, pounding my body and limbs shouting, "You are truly some kind of old fashioned idiot.....If you can't understand the music of your time and age, you must be a true low life low brow.....etc. ad infinitum"

Like you, I find it interesting to see what others like and dislike.  And sometimes I find something new out of the discussion that appeals to me that does not appeal to someone else.  It's what makes life interesting.

Jerry

[Steve B]

alan, can u please define what you mean by "our politically correct age"?
Politically correct, in its TRUE, originally PURPOSED meaning, meant equality for everyone, regardless of race, class, sexual orientation,gender, Hiv status, disability, religion(apologies if I have forgotten anyone!); it did NOT mean (parts of) the media's attack on what was seen as "politically correct"{note the quotation marks}, ie HERE politically correct was used perjoratively to indicate, eg, money being spent by the Greater London Council, on lesbian community centres; which were, in reality, just about re-dressing inequalities of access to services.

This phrase-"politically correct"/politically correct has now really lost its original meaning, unless it is given additional clarification. I am sure you are in support of equality for everyone; but it is a contentious way to start a posting and needs clarification. You probably just meant it in sense (correct me if I am wrong)of there being no SET, laid-down way of posting on a forum; or not inhibiting positive OR negative (musical) opinions/preferences, as long as they are made impersonally, with no personal attacks. But from a psycho-social and political point of view, the sense it is usually used, in its TRUE sense AND in its perjorative sense,  has complex referrents.

If i didnt LIVE in a politically correct world, in the true intended sense of equality , i , as a gay man,in the UK, would never have received the same legal status/rights of any heterosexual or acting-as-heterosexual subject/citizen. i think, even though you might say this is a forum about music, the usage of the phrase needs to be explained and clarified; you have, presumably inadvertently,made a political point! And I should just like to point out, probably and hopefully unnecessarily, that homophobia is illegal now in this country(UK) and rightly so: what you call "political correctness" has achieved great benefits(for people from ethnic minorities, disabled people too, for example)

By the way Garafalo is awful but fun (thanks Ilja!:))but i like it; and , as regulars of yore might remember ,i revere Paderewski's epic Symphony:).As Markniew indicated, Paderewski  TOO was fighting for equality for much-invaded Poland;so political correctness, in its true sense of equality for everyone, and integrity of nation-states borders, was a necessity to redress political(and therefore) personal inequalities.
Steve Benson

[Delicious Manager]

Politically correct, in its TRUE, originally PURPOSED meaning, meant equality for everyone, regardless of race, class, sexual orientation,gender, Hiv status, disability, religion(apologies if I have forgotten anyone!); it did NOT mean (parts of) the media's attack on what was seen as "politically correct"{note the quotation marks}, ie HERE politically correct was used perjoratively to indicate, eg, money being spent by the Greater London Council, on lesbian community centres; which were, in reality, just about re-dressing inequalities of access to services.

Sadly, it seems 'political correctness' has been hijacked by bleeding heart 'liberals' and faceless bureaucrats whose main task is to justify their own existence.

The sort of things that have turned me rabidly ANTI-PC are things like the supposition that non-Christians are somehow 'offended' by words like 'Christmas' and 'Easter'. I am not offended by 'Diwali', 'Ramadan' or 'Hannukah' and I don't know a single non-Christian person who spontaneously combusts at the mention of the religious festivals traditionally celebrated in ANY country (as an atheist, perhaps I should be offended by ALL of them!). I also hate the term 'older people'. Older than whom? Older than what? There is nothing derogatory in the proper, respectful use of the words 'elderly' or 'old'. My late father was both old and blind when he died and rigorously rejected any 'PC' labels that others might have tried to attach to him. And Americans really need to get to grips with how they refer to non-white-European-descended people in their country. And it is NOT racist to refer to a person's ethnic appearance (if used respectfully) or to disagree with Israel's actions in Palestine.

Who's to blame for all this nonsense?

[Alan Howe]

My reference to 'political correctness' was made in the context of a widely-felt anxiety about expressing any form of negative criticism on some issue or other.
With reference to the forum, all I was saying was that there is no need to be afraid of posting negative criticism providing that it is done in a civil fashion and reasons are given.
Following the excursus represented by the two previous postings, let us now return to the subject of this thread - but let us do so in a spirit of mutual respect.

[Alan Howe]

By the way Garafalo is awful but fun (thanks Ilja!:))but i like it;

Steve,
I'd like to know why you think Garofalo is "awful, but fun"...

[Alan Howe]

In light of the forthcoming release of Chailly's Beethoven symphonies cycle (which promises to take on board HIP - i.e. historically informed performance practice), I would like to know how many forum members share my dislike of wiry strings, breathless tempi, etc. in this repertoire (and much else besides). Having just discovered Christian Thielemann's very traditional set of Beethoven symphonies on Blu-ray with the Vienna Philharmonic and re-found my love for these pieces through them, am I actually a dinosaur, or has something gone missing in the rush to embrace HIP?

[eschiss1]

Speaking well beyond my portfolio but passing on others' opinions that make huge sense to me:
when HIP is a set of techniques, tools, and ideas applied with sense and knowledge and attention to detailed facts and to the sound, it can be and is wonderfully musical.
when HIP is an orthodoxy it is a shortcut for lazy minds. (even I can think of examples of both easily enough, despite the disclaimer above.)

[Alan Howe]

That much is pretty obvious, Eric. The question I am posing is whether this 'HIP orthodoxy' has gone too far...

[Ilja]

The problem with HIP is the premise that the creative part of music making rests largely, and sometimes solely, with the composer. It effectively ignores the performers' part, which in some cases stretches back for centuries. Music is heritage, and to only consider its origin and ignore its subsequent evolution takes away a big part of that. What doesn't help is that some (not all!) proponents of HIP tend to cast themselves as the exclusive torch-bearers of the composers, these poor vulnerable creative spirits that apparently are in need of protection.

Another problem with HIP is its inference that previous generations were NOT 'historically informed', which is blatant nonsense. There is a very good interview with Furtwängler, in which he talks about his reasons for not adhering to Beethoven's original orchestral dimensions; and Von Bülow wrote extensively on the subject. They made other choices, but they were certainly aware of the practices of previous generations.

Finally, if you're going to re-create an 'original' setting, go the whole way. My point is that the musical experience has two sides: players and audience. To have a HIP concert in a 2000+ seater hall takes away as much from the 'original' experience as playing it with a modern-sized orchestra. Use the venues and acoustics of the original period, with 100-200 listeners. But, of course, that wouldn't be commercially viable. In short: HIP doesn't exist. What is there is an amputated and very selective simulation.

[Alan Howe]

Thanks, Ilja - that is extremely insightful. I agree 100%.