Tuesday, August 31, 2021

Exemplar of Tucker's Law of Musical Performance #2: Rattle's Vixen - 96 years

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGxhzDyH5zc&list=OLAK5uy_l05kod5LkedDpfIasjmRpmGKvgYvWEqas&fbclid=IwAR0whVFBI3oIfMuEfgLxrF1KMOg_bs0EhcG33dOsOBhG0wvrWqQD86zkpR4


Here is my favorite 20th century work as we have never, ever, EVER heard it - idiomatically played and sung with security, freshness, and freedom as it never even has by any Czech forces, and only thus far approximated only by Rattle's own earlier recording in English. There will never be a greater performance of this eternal work (audio, that doesn't count Walter Felsenstein's visual miracle). Just the very act of putting on the new recording by the conductor of my old favorite recorded performance breaks the obvious Wagner fever I've had for the past month since watching Kirill Petrenko's new Tristan.
My Wagner obsession is is a diseased fascination with a musical black hole. I can't imagine that Wagner is not the world's vastest creative genius, bar none. His art is far too sublime to ignore, but far too loveless to love. I claim this for none but myself, but Wagner's is a sublimity which gifts me neither joy nor tears, merely awe. But Janacek, rather, is always a seven letter word for joy and grants instant 'black dog relief.'
And I don't give a shit what anybody else thinks, I know a maestro when I hear one and however flawed he is, maestro has no meaning if Simon Rattle is not just that. Like Leonard Bernstein before him, he is of a different and newer worldview than many of his peers; one much more in keeping with the globalized direction of today's world in which breath of repertoire and programming from concert to concert matters more than any one interpretation.
It's not that Rattle hasn't achieved lots of amazing performances, he most certainly has, but they're not usually in the 'standard' repertoire in which conductors are most judged. Like Bernstein but to an even greater extent, if you're to judge Rattle by his Beethoven symphonies he seems above average but nothing extraordinary and the attention he garners is surely maddening if those are the recordings upon which people focus... But whereas we find Bernstein's greatness in larger-than-life environs of Mahler and similarly extravagant works, Rattle's greatness is generally to be found on a slightly more human scale. Like Bernstein, he does 'the giant stuff' magnificently. The only Mahler symphony he doesn't do wonderfully is 2, the one he's famous for... but otherwise, his true fach is 'modern classics': Jeux, Sibelius 5 and 7, Schoenberg's Five Pieces and Pierrot, L'Enfant et les sortileges and Mother Goose, Symphonies of Wind Instruments and Apollo, King Roger, etc... he has so internalized the world of 20th century repertoire that he brings to it a gloriously romantic, 19th century freedom, and a lot of people don't know how to deal with that kind of weird hybridization. Surely, if people can appreciate the Wagnerized Mozart of Beecham and Davis, they can appreciate the Wagnerized Ravel of Sir Simon. Rattle's great gift is finding the 19th century within the 20th century.
Obviously though, what matters as much as the conductor is the orchestra. Vixen is so full of pauses with no singing, and Rattle's LSO matches Mackerras in Vienna character for character, oddity for oddity. Mackerras, being Mackerras, will of course be more incisive and tidy. He will make more of the odd sounds, but Mackerras's strict classicism never permits him an indulgent enough hand to lay into the aching poignance of Janacek's melodies and harmonies the way Rattle or Kubelik do. No one will ever excel Mackerras in Kata or the Glagolitic Mass (note from 2025 for the GM: Tennstedt!), but Vixen now belongs to Rattle forever.
Obviously, Lucy Crowe is not going to be able to keep up with the virtuosity and native phonetics of Lucia Popp, but the Vixen is in many ways more a master of ceremonies (or a maitre d'...) than a star turn. It's a thankless part, whose singer has to convincingly act like an animal far more than she ever gets to sing. Both the gamekeeper and the poacher get to strut their stuff far more than the Vixen or fox ever do, and of course, Gerald Finley doesn't disappoint. But listen to all the character singers around her: listen to the comic relish with which Peter Hoare tears into the Rooster or Jan Martinik into the Badger - that is the kind of singing that truly makes this opera come alive.
Why, why, oh why, is Rattle leaving the LSO? This is the best thing he's done since... I don't know if he's ever done anything on this level. The Berlin Philharmonic would never be satisfied with anything but a Furtwangler zombie (maybe they should have voted Danny...), and it is extraordinary how close-to-well it worked out considering the odds against Rattle there. Now he's going to Munich, where he might be similarly pummeled for the tragedy of not being Mariss Jansons. I understand Brexit is a nightmare, but having heard them live, the LSO commit to Rattle as orchestras allow themselves just a few times every generation. It is yet another would be golden age over before it began in the sad history of orchestral performance.
Perhaps golden ages, in arts, politics, science, or sports, are great because they are rare, but it does not make their paucity any less sad. Recordings like this one come to us as a reminder of how wonderful life could be, and yet, look at the subject matter of Vixen - we would not know what to do with a life better than the ones we have. Life is meant to be bittersweet, and moments like this one arrive to remind us of how beautiful life can be amid its sadness.

Monday, August 30, 2021

Performers as "Major Artists"

 I obviously think of Edward Said as a political thinker with searing contempt, but as a cultural thinker he is extremely different from 'his children' who clearly use his ideology as a cudgel to dismiss the entire canon with no love or even knowledge of it. His ideas about literature were genuinely destructive, but one cannot deny that he formulated them out of extraordinarily deep knowledge and love of the canon and the not entirely mistake conceit that there was no place in it for people with little Western bloodline. And as a classical music critic, he was better still, and his writings in The Nation are nearly without parallel in my lifetime (UCM's dear and valued Tim Page being one of his major rivals and equals of course).

🙂
One great insight Said had is when he spoke about how certain performers are 'major artists'. Whatever they play, you look forward to hearing it because you know that they will have unforgettable and unpredictable insights that add to the storehouse of what you know about a piece of music. Obviously, his list is quite different from mine. I acknowledge the general brilliance of guys like Pollini and Barenboim and Gould, and each of them have staggering achievements, but I think their approach is brought to music rather than individual composers and pieces.
Like Said himself, they have a generalized, perhaps even ideological, approach which they bring to everything they do. So once you've heard a few performances by them, you can pretty well guess how they'll play everything, and therefore, when one hears them, one is really hearing the performer rather than the music - and ths goes for far more literalist performers like Toscanini and Boulez who are supposedly far more self-effacing. There is, of course, genuine value in what they all do, but that value is sometimes destructive.
On the other hand, there are certain artists in every generation whom one turns to because their insights, however subtler, are never predictable, and unique from composer to work to performance. Everybody's list of 'major artists' would be different, but I'm thinking obsessively about mine: conductors, pianists, singers, violinists, and other.... The 'list' is 'life':

Friday, August 27, 2021

Underrated Classical Musicians: Anatole Klein

 Courtesy of the Piano Files FB group comes more great Chopin from that interwar period when great Polish Jewish pianists were like fruit growing on the trees who somehow played Chopin as though it was natural as breathing.

Gramophone had a relatively recent list of the top 10 Chopin pianists, and I realize that the industry has to promote new product that sells, but it's a tragedy to not introduce readers to the truly great Chopin out there. Sviatoslav Richter may be the greatest pianist of the 20th century, but he was a terrible Chopin player who distended Chopin's natural elegance to Busonian proportions. Pollini's metalic tone and rigid phrasing manages to make Chopin sound like Prokofiev, and when thinking of Murray Perahia I'm always reminded of TS Eliot's line about Henry James: 'a mind so fine no idea has ever invaded it.'
It's not just Rubinstein who does Chopin like second nature, wonderful as he is: it's Josef Hoffman, Ignaz Friedman, Raoul Koczalski, Mieszyslaw Horszowski, Moritz Rosenthal - I'm sure there are plenty I'm not remembering, but put any of them on and listen to the freedom with which they play this music - freedom of expression, fingers, time and space. Their understanding of Chopin is so innate that they're making it up as they go along. The rubato is so casual and natural that you know in your bones that they do it differently each time and they're barely even aware of it as they do it. It is pianism unlike any on earth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62uiSe3qrco

Thursday, August 26, 2021

Jochum vs. Furtwangler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAWbybozvpQ


Long as (the royal) we are going though another bout of Wagner fever, let me just sing the praises for a moment of another musical figure who is only relatively underrated.

Eugen Jochum is a better conductor than Wilhelm Furtwangler. Period. I'll stay on this hill however many decades I have to until the opinion of the dozen remaining people who care comes around to me. Furtwangler's music making is without light or joy, without fun or good humor. Music under Furtwangler is a thing of awe, often revelatory, often spiritual, but anti-humanist. It is music making for those who want music imposed upon them so they can worship at its altar, not for those who view music as something here to be partaken by us on earth to increase the quality of our lives.
Like Furtwangler, Jochum is full of the sublimity of German romanticism, but it is 'lower-case r' romanticism. A romanticism for humans like us rather than gods. Jochum is nearly everything Furtwangler is, but along with storming the heavens comes the beauties of life on earth. All the same rubato and imposing dynamism, in all the same places, but not as excessive, and with room left over for other qualities than metaphyisical vision: beauty, fun, serenity.
To take perhaps the most obvious example to my mind: In an opera like The Marriage of Figaro, Furtwangler's performance is an embarrassment - Teutonic banging in a table full of delicate classical antiques. Jochum, on the other hand, gave us one of the very great Cosi fan Tutte's, not just beautiful like Böhm but fun, funny, and unafraid to be indelicate where appropriate.
Furtwangler's Ring is magnificent, particularly in La Scala, but I have always found that famous Tristan to be one of the most infuriatingly overvalued recordings of all time. Perhaps the problem is me, but the problem's very simple: Furtwangler takes Tristan so much more seriously than I do. It's just an opera... It has a masterpiece of a score, but as philosophy it is garbage, and evil garbage to boot - even when talking about love, Wagner advocates a philosophy that is totalitarian to the marrow in which love can only be proven through the worship of death. When a conductor lingers on every single note of Tristan for maximum ethereality and pomp, you know this musician believes in its philosophy very very deeply.
Is Jochum's Tristan one of the greatest Tristan readings? I have no idea... Being a Tristan skeptic, I suppose I don't even have much right to declare what a great Tristan is, but on its own terms it is a thing of true beauty. Like Furtwangler, Jochum takes an approach that is certainly romantic and metaphysical; he lingers on every diminished chord with hushed, reverent pianissimos, but then, to an extent Furtwangler does not in the studio, he presses forward with enormous energy expended in the extraverted noise between verklarungs. Because Jochum is not so married to the great metaphysics of Tristan's odious ideas about love, he makes me believe in the opera's mystical qualities to an extent Furtwangler never could.

Monday, August 23, 2021

Underrated Classical Musicians: Michael Morgan

 Michael Morgan was probably the first conductor I ever saw live, at a BSO 'tiny tots' concert for kids aged 4-6 when he was an assistant either in Baltimore or Washington - I forget which. To this day I remember him very well. But all the sudden, he was gone. Georg Solti seemed to call him up the big time and he became assistant conductor at the Chicago Symphony for seven years. It was the highest profile job he was ever to have.

He did not become a celebrity musician, but he became a kind of legend in the Bay Area, conducing the Oakland Symphony for thirty-five years and doing all the things conductors should be doing - community outreach, conducting the youth orchestra as well as the professional, and the Gateway Music Festival, sitting on boards of other musical orgaizations, featuring a full symphony orchestra comprised entirely of professional black musicians.
Like any field, the best musicians don't think of themselves. They think of the community and how they can assist, and perhaps I'm a sentimentalist in this regard but I think the decency comes out in their music making.
Morgan was finally being taken with sufficient seriousness and going to make his subscription debut at the San Francisco Symphony this year. It's nothing short of a tragedy that at the moment African-American musicians are finally given a real profile, the highest profile African-American classical musician of the mature generation dies, completely unexpectedly.
Here's him performing the Negro Folk Symphony of William Dawson, a masterpiece of American music already featured here and much beloved of me. Let him be remembered as the pioneer he shouldn't have had to be.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxHfHT9TFpE&fbclid=IwAR3YVJNSGXVE2wR3FhJwftoCHH4SPDNdbp44FkrgIG3jdyd86XI8vWmgEe4

Sunday, August 22, 2021

Wagner: Asahina vs. Fischer

 Somebody posted an Asahina Ring Cycle. After the first hour of Götterdämerung, it is as to be expected. It's slow, but the orchestra seems exemplary if perhaps a little small, and even the singing - however small-voiced is wonderful by the cow-mooed standards already in place by the 1980s. You will never hear chording, blending, and balance this skillfully applied. Every moment is full of overtones.

Asahina's Ring Cycle is a miracle in its way, but it's not 'my' Wagner. It glows as few if any versions ever have, but Wagner flows more than he glows, and there is something a little bit creepy about such a loving approach that makes every detail of Wagner glow with affection.
I've always had a particular interest in what Jewish conductors make of Wagner and if one can detect any difference in approach to our forbidden fruit (objectively unlikely I know).
Purely as conducting, Adam Fischer's Bayreuth run in 2002 has become my favorite (the Brünnhilde and Siegfried are just plain not good, the Wotan is not much better...). I can't explain the difference to any other version except to say that the drama is all there without the bombast, the beauty is all there without over-refinement, the paragraphs are long and winding with plenty of rubato but never excessive. It flows as no other conductor has ever made it in a river of apposite darkness. For all the beautiful orchestration, Wagner's glow is entirely superficial... at the level of the soul Wagner is as dark as pitch. Not even Keilberth understands it this well. Fischer makes Wagner sound like a composer without pretension - Wagner suddenly sounds inclusive and all-embracing like Brahms and Mahler.

Asahina: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUGp0gxLLh4

Fischer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1RkhxxY56o&list=PLoasmABcHZdHuVcV0NnAQ6UB1JxPqOAzJ&index=7

Saturday, August 21, 2021

Exemplar of Tucker's Law of Musical Performance #1: The Keilberth Ring - 79 years


(note: this is a game-like speculation, not in any way to be construed as hard-and-fast truth).
Truly great works require a full lifetime to understand - technically, intellectually, emotionally, spiritually, historically, and philosophically. The greatest performances of the greatest music are generally somewhere between 60-90 years after the premiere. After a lifetime of performance in which performers try everything from extreme excess to the severest self-effacement, there arrives a golden mean somewhere between 39 and 61% intervention which brings out the work's best qualities. But then, the works become overfamiliar and performances verge into decadent concepts as interpretations are imposed that have little to do with the music.
The Keilberth Ring is the finale in the first generation flowering of Neue Bayreuth, when Germany finally glimpsed the full destructive power of Wagner's works in sets that looked designed by Albert Speer and vocal actors rather than merely great singers, which could not help but remind Germany of their past - both its cover of glory and the inner psyche who led them to such horrific ignominy. After '55, there was a gradual replacement as Knappertsbusch and Böhm oversaw the new complacency in excessively slow and fast tempi that stayed extraordinarily metric in Wagner's constantly shifting harmonic motion, Hotter lost his voice, Nilsson gradually became a trumpet (Kedem Frühling Horowitz Berger is right, it's true...), Windgassen yo-yo'd between greatness and boredom, and Wieland Wagner passed away all too early to be replaced by his unimaginative musical politician of a brother.
Oh to have heard the front-line Germans at Bayreuth, but those who were there: the K's - Karajan, Keilberth, Krauss (sorry Kedem but it's true), perhaps Kempe, and I guess occasionally that other one... brought out what was truly great in the music in an orchestra who played with a Wagnerian idiomaticity which no orchestra has equalled before or since. There are other ways to play Wagner greatly, but when I'm being honest with myself, there's no more meaningful Wagner than this.
Three years after Keilberth comes decadence - Solti's sonic spectacular. It's not bad, especially compared to the moo-like singing that comes later (we won't mention any names), but it's nowhere near what people say it is, and it chooses shallow visceral effects over meaning.
So much later Wagner no longer Wagner, it is either something added on top of Wagner, or boringly unadulterated. There are later high moments: much as I dislike them both generally, Boulez and Barenboim have the intellectual heft to 'get' the Ring, and Adam Fischer is just such a magnificent and underrated musician. All three add something particularly worthwhile, and the singing isn't all that bad - at least for the two B's... But then....
...So here it is, the Ring we probably have to listen to if we truly want to understand the Ring. I'm not a Wagner fan, and yet I listen to him constantly. If you want to understand how the 20th century happened as it did, you have to listen to Wagner as much as you have to read Nietzsche, Darwin, and Marx.

Friday, August 20, 2021

Why I Oppose The Withdrawal


So here's what bothers me about the Afghanistan withdrawal. It would be justifiable if it's a decent political move, but even by the standards of conducting American policy realistically, this is such colossally terrible political strategy - even if I'm the only person who sees it, I know what I see. It is literally giving the Republicans all the ammunition they need in 2024. This is not Benghazi (BENGHAZI!!!!!!!!!!!... sorry...), this is about to be real case of mass murder and possibly genocide/democide, that will probably lead to a civil war that dwarfs whatever happened during our involvement. Republicans will use it to trump a false charge of mass neglect, and the world will hemorrhage footage of these grisly murders just like in Rwanda, and Republicans will manipulate it to seem as though Democrats, not they, are the real threat to world peace. Meanwhile, what was previously unthinkable has happened: Iran and the Taliban have now achieved an alliance while the Taliban has all sorts of American equipment and economic stimulus, and Iran is apparently weeks away from developing the "bomb," (according to Israeli intelligence, which admittedly may be an Israeli exaggeration) Whether or not Iran uses it, this is a bargaining chip that both Iran and Afghanistan can use to extract all kinds of funding. However much they hate each other, this is too good an opportunity for them both. and Putin and Xi can use it too, who are dancing with delight right now at their new ability to sponsor still more chaos. This is an issue Obama understood that Biden didn't. Whatever Biden thinks, I doubt Biden would have made this a high priority if he didn't want an easy accomplishment he can point to that will satisfy the Left while congress whittles down his domestic ambitions. And all the while he's negotiating with congress about domestic policy, but now that Biden is politically radioactive, our entire domestic agenda is in jeopardy. We're all so bloody sick of Afghanistan, but we've been in Korea for seventy years, Germany and Japan for seventy-five. You don't achieve peace by letting things fall as they may, because if you don't interfere, some other power world ambitions will, and they do it by more war and murder, not less. You achieve peace with vigilance and ONLY with vigilance. 3,500 troops, even 15,000, is not that high a price to pay for soldiers for a mission that at this point is little different from UN peacekeeping troops. It's not forever war, it prevents forever war.
We may have rehabilitated Carter just in time to relive the Carter years....

Thursday, August 19, 2021

An Outright 'Statement' About Afghanistan

I just can't keep my arms folded here... I want to but I can't... Maybe it's a crisis of political conscience or maybe I'm having a political nervous breakdown, but this is my red line. The Jewish people were not butchered in dictatorship after war just to stay silent when it's 99% likely to happen, even to people who hate us. Nobody needs to care what I think and probably shouldn't, but if solidarity means anything at all, then what you're justifying right now in the name of anti-colonialism will be remembered forever as an abomination.
Crimea 1918-22. Khronstadt 1921. Holomodor 1932-33. Moscow and Siberia 1936-38 and again in '48 and '52. Beijing 1948, and again in '58-'62. Budapest, 1956. Prague, 1968. Beirut 1975-90. Tehran, 1979. Kurdistan, 1991. Aleppo 2011 and Damascus 2008-????, Pyongyang 1949-god alone knows and so many dozens of times in Africa that it would be impossible to list. And you just blamed it all on Western imperialism in a single sentence and never thought about it again. How many millions of innocents died for your dogmas? How many thousands were forced into heroism and died a senseless martyr's death that to this day, you've never recognized?
Human rights has never been the Left's concern. Just like right-wing Christians (which is how so many of them were raised...), the only real concern was the way of life they wish to impose on an unwilling world - the very sort of imperialism it claims to squelch, and the vanity which comes from believing they've solved the question of human ethics.
Yes, it's true, modern liberalism has sometimes wished to impose democracy on unwilling peoples - but those projects are the exception, and for better or worse, there will always be inevitable clashes of imposition between people who see the world differently. But in progressivism, socialism, intersectionality, imposition of their worldview on the rest of humanity is the whole point, and what they want is a much more demanding system than mere democracy. And to their astonishment, it causes a billion dangerously immature and entitled conservatives to retrench into their outmoded value systems and grow ever more dangerous. The left dream of human projects that are literally impossible and causes the very escalation of reactionary tyranny they mean to overthrow. The end result of this eternal escalation may in a few decades may be a civil war at the very moment when the world is literally burning and we have to rescue billions, but no American liberal 'calls them out' for what they are.
If there is not a third way between ersatz conservatism and ersatz progressivism, at least 20% of the planet is doomed.
Kabul, 2021.

Hofmann and Petrenko

I just keep going back to this recital, over and over again. It is the most extraordinary examplar of instrumental musicianship I've ever heard. Abram Chasins said that this recording is an abomination of what he was just a few year previously that never should have been released what must he have been at his absolute prime?!? Hofmann distrusted recordings deeply, so we have just a small piece of his repertoire. I so wish we had more examples of Hofmann's superhuman musicianship, of which I wonder if there's any equivalent on any instrument at all. Until recently...
When I hear Kirill Petrenko, there is such deep thought and meaning, control over the orchestra, expressive sincerity, that I wonder if there is no equivalent figure in podium history and you have to think of Josef Hofmann to find any performing musician in any capacity at all. Petrenko is not yet fifty, and is now facing the most overrated, difficult, unconductable orchestra on earth whose self-regard ruined a large part of the gifts of Abbado and Rattle. When they rebel from his rigor, and they will... there is plenty of time for his gifts to curdle into insincere mannerisms, but for the moment, there is no equivalent in conducting history. Like Hofmann, he is a musical singularity.
PS: I linked to the wrong Hofmann recital.... because of course I did. meant the Golden Jubilee Met Opera recital. Like Joe Biden I have unfathomable gaffes.
Shows you how much I know what I'm talking about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yk9hz-JfdLs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVkZL8mcx04&list=PLNSPbKyOeokcvKfbG1ZGdmjf73wSLZk1H&index=3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4ifu1KYUKc&list=PLNSPbKyOeokcvKfbG1ZGdmjf73wSLZk1H&index=11&fbclid=IwAR3WxgeKwlEOBB_Zvi_9UZNqL2pTwaWL1IWnsl8HdaUDj_M7xxGHkOPUeOA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqPN4gXy834

Wednesday, August 18, 2021

Yet Another Brief Comment on Afghanistan

This is a political crisis so far beyond what we're prepared for. Even if it's not Biden's fault, we just gave Republicans a battle cry for 2024 that sounds completely rational and legitimate, even if their claim about a botched leaving isn't true (and no matter what those bloodhounds yell, the fact is, maybe we should have just stayed...). The shock that America is narcissistic about foreign affairs is something progressives are always completely unprepared for. Lo and behold, there are places around the world, many of them, which suffer in ways we can't possibly fathom. One day, maybe relatively soon, we may get a taste of what that's like, and we'll get it because we didn't have the stomach to concentrate on anything but the small potatoes issues you have when you live as a superpower, all the while there's a whole world at your doorstep of 7 1/2 billion people, soon to be 9 billion, all of whom, for whatever reason, are jealous of us.
So my dear fellow liberals, if you haven't figured it out yet, I will spell it out:
This is exactly what happens when liberalism gets so far into bed with social justice that they start believing social justice rhetoric, and it is far far from the first time in history this happened. Withdrawal from forever war became such a high priority that even Joe Biden, the 'foreign policy Senator,' forgot how easily foreign affairs dissolve into chaos. So congratulations are due to all my SJW friends. You so convinced Joe Biden, for half a century a moderate's moderate, that peace and justice are the way we can run the world that he clearly started to believe our country could live in the world without keeping our hands dirty. Well, now instead of dirt we're about to get more blood on our hands in the next year than we have in the last twenty.
And even the lives of a hundred thousand innocents would be worthwhile if it spares billions. But the Republican party is literally the most dangerous political movement on earth. Not even the Chinese Central Committee has the power to wreak the havoc an authoritarian Republican administration can over the entire planet. If they are in power when it comes time to react to Global Warming, there will be a century of ramifications, just like after World War I. Only this time, it will be truly global, and with a world population that is 4 times what it was a century ago.
So even if Republicans' current reaction to our withdrawal is completely irrational, we have just given them the most rational battle cry for 2024 they could ever dream of having. If we play it right, it will only be a million moderates who just went over to Republicans for the next four years. If 3,500 troops actually and truly prevented a Taliban takeover, it honestly wasn't that high a price to pay...
The lesson here is not that we should never have been in Afghanistan. Imagine 9/11 going unanswered, we'd have seen January 6th twenty years sooner, probably much worse.
We should and could have killed bin Laden by 2003 and gotten out, but the Bush administration found it useful to keep him alive in Pakistan as a way of justifying the Iraq invasion, so Pervez Musharraf gave him asylum the whole time and the Bush administration pretended not to know.
Afghanistan was never going to be a democracy, and 90% of Americans knew it, including the Bush administration. What we hoped for is that we could find a corrupt kleptocrat like Karzai who would at least be competent - like Hosni Mubarak was in Egypt, or, believe it or not... Tayyip Erdogan is in Turkey (remember when he was a US ally?), who could glove varying degrees of liberal tolerance over a fist of blood and iron. Whatever the future of Afghanistan or 100 other countries in the world, that is still the very best they can ever hope for in my lifetime.
There is only one lesson here: if Biden or any Democrat wants to win in 2024, we're probably going back into Afghanistan by the end of the year, and possibly with ten times the number of troops or more. America is a very broken place. It may be different by next week, but it seems right now as though Biden will probably have to admit he made a colossal mistake and put the troops back in. And a lot of people on the left are going to be furious. If we give them some version of a Green New Deal and revamp Obamacare, they should be ameliorated for now.
But how... how are we going to get 9 billion people on earth to live together on a burning planet without billions getting killed?

Tuesday, August 17, 2021

Musical Ideals: Flow and Glow


A nebulous musical post indeed... Perhaps this is synesthetic...
There are two ideals I think for music. I could use pretentious Greek or Kabbalistic terminology, but it comes down to two qualities: flow and glow.
People are going to be what they're going to be. You can't force a disorganized type of person to be fastidious any more than you can compel a fastidious person to let out of place things go, and ultimately, when it comes to problem solving, you're either the kind of person whose instinct is to take care of it or the type to move on.
But you can note those who turn their personality type into a religion, and cannot tolerate the idea of letting people be what they are. If they are type A, they can either be the type who creates spaces that let people be themselves, or the repressive type who aims to form people into little automatons who carry out their wishes. I don't claim to know what people are personally, just in art. And when I hear the military-lke organization of a Wagner's musical religion or Prokofiev musical gymnastics, the terrified orchestral precision of Toscanini or Reiner, the mechanical tension of a Michelangeli's porcelain or Pollini's bronze, I know an authoritarian personality when I hear it... These composers are more interested in assaulting the ear than in communicating with it, and these performers repress in the name of self-effacement. They are mechanics, not musicians.
Similarly, among the type B's are the types who either become their surroundings, and appreciate the ebb and flow of life, or insist on bending life's entire experience to their personalities. When I hear the hollow effects disguised as intellectual pretension of Liszt and Richard Strauss, the faux-deep narcissism of Celibidache and pomposity of Barenboim, the neurotic inability of Horowitz not let a musical phrase pass without exaggerations that are strangely pedantic for an artist known for his visceral excitement, I know that there's something deeply inauthentic about their approach. So often this approach is shallowness disguising itself as depth, a pose that has nothing to do with real self-expression in an approach which should do nothing better than enabling an authentic self to emerge. There is neither glow or flow to be found here, just hollow posing.
Exaggeration does have it's virtues. When you hear a Capital S search, it certainly has its virtues, but it does not have that special flow. Gesualdo, Schoenberg, Richter, Gilels, Sokolov, Furtwängler, Scherchen.... These are astonishingly truthful artists in their various ways, but they do not communicate a love of life equal to its pain. They flow, but they're not rivers, they're whirlpools. You cannot listen to them without being pulled into a musical event horizon where the truths are too dark to be life's whole story. Where there could be hope and flow/glow, all is darkness: it can be wonderful, but it also sounds a bit like musical nihilism. When you hear the self-effacing understatement of Haitink or Backhaus, that's real self-effacement, even if the level of unadorned musical logic is almost oppressive, there's real musical truth there. Bernstein and Rattle, for all their exaggerations, still have the flow. They accelerate as often as they slow down, Bernstein has the incision of precise rhythm whenever the music calls for it, and Rattle has accelerandi which can sound like nothing short of tsunamis. Tennstedt, for all his variability of tempo, still has that glow. In fact perhaps he has it more than any conductor save Jansons and Klemperer - that sense that every note every player plays is important and valued. Arrau has a similar luminosity among pianists, but his deep burnish from within is obviously a very different, almost opposite sort of glow from the very light proportions of a Casadesus - which is almost more of a glitter (ditto Ravel...). On the other hand, both Solomon and Curzon generally quite consistent in their tempi, yet no one flowed better, each note melting into the next like a wave. There are musicians whose perfection and severity, like Haitink and Backhaus, borders at times upon the impersonal and mechanical (I'm thinking mostly of Dohnanyi and E. Kleiber, which in the past I called an ideal but now I wonder...), but there are still moments of such magic that the 'glow' is something you can't deny them. There are similarly 'flow' artists who go into all kinds of excess that verges on the too dark for life (Mitropoulos, Hess). They flow, but they overflow the banks quite often. And then there are the 'glow' artists which glow in a way that is more sensuous than warm and reassuring (Haydn, Beecham, Rubinstein). There are other conductors whom I thought including in 'flow', like de Sabata and Kondrashn, but if they flow, they flow continuously like rapids.
And then you have the artists who are so talented that it's simply too much for their own good - so much technique and intelligence that they can't help but become mannered in a way that's divorced from real expresson: Carlos Kleiber is the most obvious example. Koscis and Levit are like that on the piano. It is much more difficult to say that of a composer - genius is genius, but if there were one or two of whom it could be said, I suppose it would be Stravinsky and Hindemith, whose chameleon ability to write in any style disguised their true identities their whole careers long.
If I can define "Glow" more generally, I suppose it means the ability to let things stand on their own with trust and security. It is usually achieved by seeing music from the outside in - letting the music's perfection of form come through. The glow can be many things - a warm suntan in the heat like Verdi and Faure, a pure immersion in a place where light and dark are clearly defined like Bach, or a sunset against a grey sky like Brahms. It often depends on the security of knowing that every voice will get a space to speak what it has to say, but glow can also be achieved by simply letting the music speak of itself. I doubt anyone would call Vaughan Williams one of form's greatest masters, but in Vaughan Williams, but what other composers achieve by formal security, Vaughan Williams achieves by the simple humanity of letting every detail register.
And if Vaughan Williams was not quite a master of form, Ives is in the bottom third... And yet his music, even at its most hyperactive, is stationary, tied to very specific places as all the motion moves around it. It glows with everything from New England midst to the most chaotic brassy iridescence, but it always stays put, and the beauty comes to the place rather than searching for the beauty.
Debussy on the other hand, is one of form's ultimate masters. Not a note out of place, and yet everything flow. Whether gentle or darting quickly, everything is motion. Perhaps Debussy is, like Mozart, one of the only masters who has mastered both flow and glow, but surely Mozart deserves a spot by himself, glowing from the top of the mountain even as he eases down it by rivulet.
"Flow", rather, is the delight that comes from unpredictability. It's a different, and perhaps more difficult kind of light to generate, because it generally depends on a kind of risk taking the 'glowers' generally don't take to find things in music which are not integrated into the form. It generates security and trust, but does so with unpredictability. If the 'glow-ers' seem to emulate life as it would be lived ideally, the 'flow-ers' emulate life as it is, an ebb and flow. 'Life is what happens when you're making other plans', but the flowers show us that even if life works out differently, it can still be lived with all the same security, humanity, warmth, and compassion.
...Maybe you all understand what I'm talking about because I sure as hell don't....
20 Flow Composers:
Monteverdi
Handel
Late Beethoven
Schubert (the co-ultimate flow-er)
Schumann
Smetana
Mussorgsky (the co-ultimate flow-er)
Dvorak (the co-ultimate flow-er)
Rimsky-Korsakov
Mahler
Janacek
Nielsen
Ives
Cowell
Shostakovich
Messiaen
Berio
Schnittke
Golijov
MacMillan
20 Glow Composers:
Tallis
Byrd
Palestrina
Schütz
Bach
Haydn
Middle Beethoven
Mendelssohn
Chopin
Verdi
Bruckner
Brahms (the co-ultimate glow-er)
Faure
Sibelius (the co-ultimate glow-er)
Koechlin
Vaughan Williams
Bloch
Bartok
Ligeti
Tormis
...Mozart is all things.... Debussy, Chopin, Schubert, and Bartok all have many properties of both.
15 Flow Conductors:
Koussevitzky
Coates
Munch
Mitropoulos
Barbirolli (co 2nd place)
Jochum (co 2nd place)
Kubelik (the ultimate flow-er)
Fricsay
Bernstein
Maag
Pretre
Harnoncourt
Rattle
Honeck
15 Glow Conductors:
Beecham
Klemperer (co-second place)
E. Kleiber
Steinberg
Horenstein
Giulini
Sawallisch
Skrowaczewski
Tennstedt (co-second place)
Masur
Blomstedt
Dohnanyi
Rozhdestvensky
Jansons (the ultimate glow-er)
I. Fischer
...Monteux is all things.... So nearly were Walter and Fricsay and Ivan Fischer today. We will see about Kirill Petrenko... who may well be a Monteux but could ultimately also be a Carlos Kleiber... talk about blessing with faint criticism...
15 Flow Pianists:
Cortot
Schnabel
Friedman
Gieseking (the co-ultimate flow-er)
Solomon (the co-ultimate flow-er)
Grinburg
Curzon
Francois
de Larrocha
Haebler
Moravec
Kovacevich
Argerich
Lupu
Hough
15 Glow Pianists:
Rubinstein
Kempff (the ultimate glow-er)
Hess
Casadesus
Arrau
Cherkassky
Lipatti (honorable mention)
Badura-Skoda
Gulda
Brendel
Ogdon
Ashkenazy
Schiff
Zimerman
Lewis
...Hofmann and Rachmaninov are all things.... de Larrocha, Curzon, Firkusny, and Badura-Skoda too have that dual magic ability.

A Briefer Comment on Afghanistan

 I don't agree (for the moment) with putting this on Biden. You cant put something on someone in office for eight months after three Presidents spent their whole tenures doubling down on making withdrawal as awful as possible. But I do agree with putting this on absolutely everybody else. You didn't care. If you're a Democrat you bought the old Soviet lie that all Western foreign policy is imperialism without even the Soviet Union to feed it to you. If you're a Republican, there wasn't a single malpractice you weren't willing to excuse in the name of a fight for freedom abroad that you did everything in your power to stop within in your own country. Before 9/11 was even five years ago, you'd all forgotten that the rest of the world exists. Why? Because we're Amurrikans damnit and even the ones of you who are ultra-critical of America don't give a shit about anywhere else. An Arab Spring couldn't make you look elsewhere, neither could a ten year war in Syria with three million refugees that involved the very people who interfered in our election. Global warming certainly can't do it, and the only people who cared about the world economy opposed the Trans-Pacific Partnership and put 5 trillion dollars into the Chinese dictatorship's pocket. Hell, even Russian interference in an election can't make you think about anything but whatever side you take in a futile battle to change masculinity..., even a virus from halfway across the world that's going to kill more than a million of us can't make you stop thinking about whatever side you take in a futile battle to change law enforcement.... In the bubble of your privilege you got to pretend small issues were large, you read slogans and political memes when you should be reading policy briefs. And now, the chess pieces are all in place for war everywhere, genocide everywhere, dictatorship everywhere, and all it takes is one natural disaster to light the whole world on fire. So now we all get to watch a genocide for which we are responsible, a genocide which may well be a pre-echo of what's coming for billions - including us. Billions of dollars of equipment and economic stimulus get to benefit the very people who sponsored 9/11. If you're feeling sick right now, good. Don't get angry, get nauseous. Whatever you see in Afghanistan, that could be us.

Sunday, August 15, 2021

A Brief Comment on Afghanistan

I want to write extensively about Afghanistan, but oh my god it's so exhausting to think about.
All I'll say for now is that foreign affairs really, really, REALLY matter and people don't think about them. Rock ribbed liberals on American politics turn into libertarians abroad, and behold, the results. If only Republicans have actionable ideas about how to solve problems abroad, you don't get to complain when their solutions become predictable disasters. If you don't want foreign affairs to become domestic affairs, you get involved abroad before millions of refugees show up on your doorstep, and if you let them die before they get here, why would anybody else help us when it's our turn on the chopping block? And clearly, it may be our turn sooner than we know.
We are put on earth to help each other. Multilateral coalitions work, they're the ONLY thing that works. Nation-building is not imperialism, it's the only option and the problem of Afghanistan was that we went in alone with a small patina of international cooperation because the Bush Administration was convinced that American conservatives could run the world by themselves and the human rights concerns of other nations are destructively naïve. That IS imperialism, the results were predictable, and once the Bush administration screwed it up, there was no way to make things right without a forever presence because what other country in a position to help would ever trust our ability to collaborate on it?
The Taliban is totalitarianism, the thing we do everything to avoid; hell on earth as you count your days until you watch your loved ones die. The current American right-wing is really and truly advancing in that direction, and so is the right wing in every Western country, but everything we fear about how trends the leadership of authoritarians like Trump, Putin, Orban, Balsonaro, the Taliban already is. The Taliban really is Hitler, Stalin, Mao...
To this day, this is on Bush, and Republicans have no moral right to demand investigations and impeachments about an invasion they're solely responsible for screwing up, but everything Republicans are at home, Democrats have turned into abroad, and the results are fundamentalist religious takeovers all over the world, both Islamic and Christian. The Taliban is the most misogynistic movement on Earth, even Isil and Boko Haram take a back seat, and people who claim intersectional feminism turn into everything they claim to loathe just because it's Islam abroad, and pretend to be blind to the sufferings of women who endure trials so far beyond trials that woke feminism ever comprehends - and they could comprehend it, but they choose to ignore it because it's inconvenient to their beliefs. The woke claim to be concerned about the plight of people of color, yet they also claim we have no right to speak ou about what happens when injustice is perpetrated by people of color on themselves - but when you're murdered, it doesn't matter whether the person who killed you is white.
Some country is always going to lead the world, and if you think China or Russia would be better leaders than us, what the fuck did you go to college for to be that ignorant? The America-lead world is falling apart. It's a failure of the entirety of America, Republican and Democrat, right and left. If God calls us all to account for what we've done to the world, there is no one in the US who has a sufficient excuse to object.

Monday, August 9, 2021

Conductor Comment: Mariss Jansons

 


I'm probably younger than most people in this group, and when I was coming of age musically in the Baltimore/DC area, there were three Soviet conductors doing a fair amount of work in the area: Yuri Temirkanov who was the Baltimore Symphony music director, Valery Gergiev who had a Kennedy Center residency, and Mariss Jansons, who would regularly come to the area - either as a guest in Baltimore, or with the Pittsburgh Symphony, or with a bigger name touring orchestra from Europe.
Musicians are a bit like athletes. They have peaks and slumps, and even the best only 'get a hit' one in three performances - everybody knows what it's like to hear a routine performance that's OK, it's perfectly decent, you leave the hall feeling glad you went, but it's forgotten the next day. But when you're in the presence of a 'hit', you immediately know it, and when you're in the presence of a 'home run', your life feels changed forever.
Back in the early 2000's, Gergiev was a better conductor than he is now. He was force of nature who risked literally everything on every performance; it was either a home run or a strikeout. I remember going to a concert expecting to hear him conduct Mahler 6, and at the last minute he'd substituted an all-Tchaikovsky program. The opening was Romeo and Juliet, and this piece the Mariinsky orchestra must have performed a thousand times in its history came so disastrously unglued in a fight section that I thought they'd have to start over, but at the end came the greatest Tchaikovsky 5 I've ever heard live to this day. Gergiev at his best is a literally awesome experience, but his best is getting less frequent as the years go on, and if anything, recordings make him sound like a much more reliable conductor than he is. Sadly, the fact that you never know if bad Gergiev will show up is part of his mystique.
Temirkanov is a different experience because he was no guest to my area, he was a community leader, and a terribly irresponsible one. Temirkanov in Baltimore was always a bittersweet experience: the true author of my hometown orchestra's problems, his absenteeism, his frequent cancellations, his insistence of firing seven of Zinman's core principals and then never being around for long enough to retrain the orchestra. He, not Marin Alsop, was the true disaster for Baltimore, and whatever conductor replaced him as Music Director would inherit the mountain of problems he left for them. On the other hand, while his Beethoven and Brahms weren't particularly special, in the Russian repertoire and certain other warhorse composers like Mahler, he was transcendence itself: a kind of poet-magician. He could be nearly as fiery as Gergiev (whom I believe was once his assistant), but Temirkanov had the heart and warmth of a musician with a much more generous spirit. But in generosity of spirit, even Temirkanov did not move the heart and tearducts the way Jansons did.
Gergiev is often improved by recording, which documents what's unique about him and airbrushes his technical shortcomings. Temirkanov on recording is a matter of taste: if you like his interventionist style you will thrill to him either recording or live, but live, Temirkanov's musicmaking obviously has an extra tangible vividness which will sell his musicality to skeptics who'd only know him from recording and video.
But to understand Mariss Jansons, you had to have heard him live. So many Jansons recordings make him sound generic, antiseptic, a master technician with little original to say and whose few 'outside the box' ideas seem elementary. In music whose intellectual content is not straightforward he often can seem lost, as though he tries to shoehorn Mahler and Strauss into sounding like Tchaikovsky. But so much from Jansons that seems generic on a stereo was magic in person.
The difference between Jansons and Temirkanov was partially a matter of technical approach. Temirkanov is a musician of great soul, but precision is something he seems almost to discourage. He doesn't wants the notes, he wants the spirit behind the notes - in a similar way perhaps to that Furtwangler or Bernstein did, or Barenboim does. Jansons's conception of making music is very very different: much less personal, but also in some senses deeper.
Temirkanov was a romantic, and while Jansons had the soul of a romantic, it was entirely contained within the discipline of a classicist, and that balance: romantic expression by classical means, created a luminous spirituality in his music making, a glow that was very rare: until Jansons, the master practitioner of this spiritual art was probably Klemperer.
For years, I never understood how Jansons did it. On the surface, it sounds as though it would be so boring, and yet it mesmerizes, drawing you into the music ever closer and closer, bar by bar. But today, I finally understood the reason: humility.
So many Toscanini-like conductors say that they don't impose their personal whims on the music, but the coldness with which they drill the orchestra is as large an imposition as anything in Mengelberg and Stokowski. When Reiner and Karajan and Szell and Leinsdorf and Solti are at their worst, it's not musicmaking, it's simply machines playing notes.
Aside from his father, Jansons's two great mentors are Karajan and Mravinsky, both of them expert technicians and cold fish. Perhaps that's not fair to Mravinsky, his musical personality was either ice cold or scorchingly hot, but rarely anything in between. But Karajan's ultramanicured sound is like an imitation of human warmth from a person who has none. Every note is deconstructed and reassembled for an exact shade of color, but Karajan seemed almost incapable of playing music as though he had anything to express within himself.
And yet from these two supertechnicians came a supertechnician who only used his technique toward the music's spirit. I suppose Kirill Petrenko has something of the same spirit, and is a far truer heir to the Jansons torch than Andris Nelsons, whose musicmaking is far more outwardly personalized.
There was very little in the spirit of a Jansons performance that felt personalized, and yet the spirit of the music was so enormous and genuinely felt. Whereas a Temirkanov (or Nelsons) will move you by guiding you to whatever in the music they wish to emphasize, Jansons never guided, he simply made sure that every single nuance in the work was allowed its chance to speak clearly. It was a kind of musical humility: as though he treated musical notes like human beings, each of whom requires respect and a space to be heard.
So those concerts I heard from Jansons in his American years were lifetime experiences. In those years, Jansons was reviewed as though he hit a home run at every concert, and people seemed to come out of every Jansons concert completely changed: speechless, cleansed, moved, electrified, and transported to unseen dimensions. Petrenko (the short one) seems to be having a similar effect on people these days, but in the years on either end of 2000, the three conductors who seemed to leave listeners speechless were Jansons, Gergiev, and Simon Rattle, and by 2010, none of the three seemed as compelling as they were ten years before when they were still working with less establishmentarian orchestras and expectations weren't nearly so high.
Once Jansons got to Munich and Amsterdam, something of the old spirit seemed to go out of him. He certainly still got to that exalted spiritual plane, particularly of course with the Bavarian Radio Symphony, but he could not make these orchestras into something other than the Karajan-influenced polished-stone instruments they are. To me, the truly great Jansons performances are generally not the impeccably played performances from the world's greatest orchestras recorded by the world's greatest radio engineers, but live broadcasts from Pittsburgh, Oslo, Cardiff, where he makes musicians in less distinguished orchestras understand what great music they're capable of making, and empowers them to be equal partners to both him and the composer. He makes them play not like a monarchy where they are mere servants to his will, but a real community in which everyone participant is crucial and valuable.
It would be easy to put together a playlist of Jansons greatest hits - Oslo Tchaikovsky, St. Petersburg Rachmaninov, Bavarian Radio Strauss, one of the Shostakovich recordings with the umpteen orchestras on that cycle, a New Year's Concert (and frankly, Jansons might have been the best of the New Year's conductors, even including Kleiber...) a Concertgebouw.... is there anything from his Concertgebouw period that people universally recommend? But that would not be representative of Jansons's greatest gifts, because his greatest gift is the way he empowered his musicians in concert, staying completely within the lines of discipline, and yet, expressing so passionately and sensitively with their whole souls. To do that, you'll need to listen to or watch some scratchy TV broadcasts of live concerts.
Greater, I think, than any more famous Tchaikovsky performance of his is this magnetizing performance of Tchaikovsky's Winter Daydreams from the BBC National Orchestra of Wales in 1986. Aside from this performance, the two best recordings in my experience are Temirkanov and Gergiev. But listen to the passion of this orchestral sound, which plays with their whole heart even as they play with execution which is just about ideal.
Jansons recorded a lot of Mahler toward the end, and the truth was, he was a pretty terrible Mahler conductor. I remember a Mahler 7 at Carnegie Hall, sadly my last Jansons concert, that sounded as though Jansons didn't understand the first thing about that elusive and underloved masterpiece. Jansons was much too earnest for Mahler's ironies and modernisms, but this performance of Mahler 1 from the Oslo Philharmonic on tour in Japan is magnificent, and recalls to me the broadcast I heard as a teenager of Jansons's inaugural Pittsburgh concert of Mahler 1 that so magnetized me even at that age. It has a generosity of spirit, a sincerity, that is rare in Mahler, and probably impossible to convey in later symphonies.
There are other, later performances worthy of mention - some of the Concertgebouw live radio recordings are quite wonderful: the Symphonie Fantastique and Brahms 1 (Jansons was a wonderful and underated Brahmsian and particularly in the first symphony) stand out in my memory. Along with (unexpectedly) their recording of Mozart's Requiem and their Strauss Metamorphosen - Jansons performed so much Strauss but his guileless heart generally went to waste in this most insincere of all composers, and his musical makeup only truly found a home in the late Strauss masterworks when the old master no longer had neither the time nor desire for merry pranks.
It was not in later music that Jansons shone, it was in the earnest straightforwardness of the most traditional repertoire, for which he gave very traditional performances. The more familiar the repertoire, the more he rose to it and made you think you could hear it another 10,000 times without ever getting tired of it. if you go through his BRSO Beethoven recordings, either cycle ,some of them like the Eroica, Pastoral, and Seventh really are extraordinary, and the same goes for the BRSO Brahms, or Firebird and Petrushka, or any of his 4000 performances of the Symphonie Fantastique or Dvorak 9 or Shostakovich 7 and 10.
Jansons was the last giant to die before the advent of COVID, and in retrospect it felt a bit like the end of an era - classical music itself as we've always understood it may have died with him. Jansons was born in hiding, a baby with a Jewish mother and a conductor for a father, born at the end of classical music's world dominance, and he may have died at the end of classical music's very existence as a reckoned with force upon the world's cultural scene, but if anybody wants to understand how powerful these experiences of live orchestral concerts were, sit them in front of a Jansons television broadcast. If their reaction is anything like the live audiences, they just might weep. 


Note from 2025: Now that we can't hear him anymore, I've warmed to many Jansons recordings over time. Any list of his best has to include:

Mozart Requiem Concertgebouw
Beethoven 3,6,7 BRSO, preferably live in Tokyo but either
Schubert 9 BRSO video
Symphonie Fantastique Concertgebouw broadcast or Europa Konzert 2000
Bruckner 6 and 9
Brahms 1 and 4 with the BRSO
Tchaikovsky cycle with BBCNOW, Tchaikovsky 5 with the BRSO
Dvorak 5 Oslo
Dvorak 9 Concertgebouw (his last concert with them)
Mahler 1 Oslo, Mahler 6 Concertgebouw, Mahler 7 Oslo
Strauss Metamorphosen Concertgebouw
Sibelius 1 Oslo
Stravinsky Firebird Suite and Petrushka BRSO
Shostakovich 7 St Petersburg, 10 and 11 Philadelphia