Bernstein - good for Mahler but nothing else.

Dr Brodsky - thank you for the reply. I prefer the Bernstein of Mahler 4 and Mahler 9 (both DG, both with the Concertgebouw). There is something magical (although completely at odds with the composer's intentions) about using a boy for the last movement of the 4th. It just works, in terms of the performance and the words sung. It is a whole performance - not the best but whole. I would be sad not to have it, but also sad if it was my only recording.

The 9th is for me an extraordinary performance, caught live. Here we have an orchestra that know Mahler inside out being led towards a new view. I cannot think of another performance that captures the chaos of the Rondo-Burleske. I suspect that the tempo was not so much intended as inspired that eveing - there is a point at which I think Bernstein gets the orchestra playing on the edge of their technique. In a sense he reaches for the 'event horizon' (the point at which bodies can sustain orbit before being sucked into the black hole). To stretch the metaphor Bernstein's conception of the rondo is based upon the same idea as his understanding of the first moevment of the 6th; Mahler as predictor of the horrors of the twentieth century. I don't agree with Bernstein but his conviction is persuasive enough for me to suspend disbelief. As I wrote before, the whole is illuminated in such a way to stand the test of time.

Please don't take this the wrong way but I too used to think Bernstein 'was Mahler'. However, over time my feelings have changed. Surely Klemperer and Walter should be more 'Mahler' give they worked with him at the height of his powers? One reason why I do not believe the recent trend of downgrading Mahler is because his works, like all the finest works, permit differing interpretations that are equally valid. I wonder how Alban Berg heard Mahler in his head? Perhaps like Bruno Maderna, Pierre Boulez or maybe Guiseppi Sinopoli? Mahler's music is just too great to permit one right answer - to do so is to ignore the ambiguities that are so essential to the works.

Ah, Beethoven and the piano sonata! Now again I disagree - while I understand the greatness of Richter I would say Gilels is his equal as an advocate of Beethoven. But then neither captures the Beethoven I hear in Gulda or Kempff. And then you have Pollini's final sonatas and performance by others such as Brendel and Brautigam (whose wonderful recordings represent a paradigm shift in thinking, given the fortepiano sound. While will nobody try an Erard?).

And that I suspect is the point - Walter and Klemperer both heard Mahler and worked with him and yet as disciples they preach a different gospel. It just goes to show nobody has a monopoly on any music, except possibly in the view of the one-eyed critic.

While I understand your feelings regarding Gilels (my own blind spots include Maazel, Tarantino post 'Jackie Brown' and 'Wuthering Heights') I would offer by way of evidence of Gilels special qualities the youtube clip of him playing the Bach/Siloti transcription. mesmerising.

I wonder if many others share my disappointment and concern at the pervading tone of negativity on this forum recently.   Music/composers you dislike/hate; conductors/performers who don't make your grade; inferior interpretations; other poster's comments/views/preferences disparaged.

Just what is the point?   This is music, not politics or philosophy.   Music is for enjoyment, for the betterment of the human condition, to reflect and enhance our humanity, for goodness sake!

Why not focus on what we like, what we find positive, what we recommend? 

If I have strong feelings about the differences between Radu Lupu and Lang Lang (I don't), what possible good does it do point up the perceived deficiencies of the one rather than analyse the qualities of the other?   Other than to vent spleen/frustration, try to establish some sense of superiority, and to denigrate the values or views of others?

There are plenty of composers and musical styles that I don't enjoy but I put it down to a lack of understanding (or something) on my part not to inferiority on theirs.   This because I know there are others who find enjoyment in them and it is not up to me to question their preferences or judgement.

In the end it comes down to tolerance and respect for others. 

A change of tone and emphasis would be most welcome to this reader.

Vic.

Your wilful misinterpretation of my point, your disingenuous and prejudiced analogy, and your simple bigotry are beneath contempt sir.

"In the end it comes down to tolerance and respect for others." 

Vic.

Yes, I agree with Vic. How disappointing - this discussion has taken a wrong turn.

Discussions about artists and their output are obviously always a personal affair and listeners of classical music will never agree about the particular qualities of any one artist. While there are "objective rights and wrongs" the reaction to music is entirely personal, one artist for the right or wrong reasons will speak to any one of us more than another.

The outset of this discussion - was Bernstein an artist "good" for one composer alone (Mahler) or not is - I think - fairly unanimoulsy answered with a "no". He had a layer of personality which we may not all share, but in the end his contribution as a musician was phenomenal in terms of education (his TV lectures for example) and in terms of pure music recordings. Many of his "middle period" recordings (70s) are very interesting at the very least, bringing out things which one hadn't heard at the time and bringing a new perspective to things. I am no devoted follower of his, but I see his outstanding contribution. His closeness to Mahler undoubtedly roots in his own duality between the roles of composer and conductor, something he could never really divide himself between, much like Mahler. His late Mahler recordings are excellent, no doubt, but so are many others of his recordings. If I now mention any one I know half the forum will fall over me and argue that their favourite musician did that particular work much better, so I'm not going into that.

Let's keep any personal attacks (or other semi-intellectual attempts of categorising people) away from the forum. I read these forums to learn what others think and while I may not share every view I still find it fascinating to read the reactions.

Anyways, that's my penny's worth of contribution...