ecarroll

Brilliant :)

Thanks,
EC

bagmangood

I don't know if anyone read it,
but the new york times had an article in response to the blog post this morning.
Apparently that london symphony recording sells very well
and that means its musically valid...

__________________
Bb: Courtois 305 "Elite"
C: Bach C180-239 (Akwright conversion),
Cornet: Conn Wonder (1900)
Picc: Selmer Paris, ~1971

ecarroll

Bag,

Does it? Would you mind sharing more of your thoughts on this?

Best as always,
EC

ecarroll

bill benzon

I'm not sure what I think. I didn't hear the performance, nor have I heard any of Kaplan's recordings. So I simply don't have any direct experience of his work. While my bias is with Finlayson, the fact is, it seems to me that this is the sort of issue where committed people might well over-play their position.

I've read the New York Times article, I've read Finlayson's post, and I've read many of the comments on his post. I'd say that most of the comments lined up with him, but there were some cautioning "don't bite the hand that feeds you" and there were some more or less in-between. Those were the most interesting ones.

I'd say, howover, that I find Kaplan's obsession with Mahler 2 a bit suspect. Yes, it is a fabulous piece of music; I have no trouble understanding why he likes it or wants to conduct it - I'd like to get a crack at the principle trumpet part on Mahler 1 (especially the last movement) one day. That he should devote all his energy to that one piece, that I find bothersome.

So, I was thinking those thoughts and, in turn, managed to think my way around to my experience in upstate New York, playing with a community symphony in Bennington, Vermont, in the early 1980s. It was conducted by Lou Calabro, who was a composer on the faculty of Bennington College. Some of the members of the symphony were New York pros who traveled to Bennington to teach there - I'm thinking specifically of some cellists. Some were pre-teen kids getting their first experience with a symphony. And then everything else in-between.

Our programs consisted of REAL MUSIC. Yes, Beethoven 5 and the like. And Ives Theme and Variations on America, some Ruggles piece whose name I forget, but, man, parsing those rhythms was quite an adventure, and we premiered Calabro's triple cello concerto (for those NY cellists). It was a lot of fun.

So, I'm wondering how Kaplan would do conducting an organization like that. I'm guessing: not very well. There the conductor really has to lead and teach. A conductor who can't maintain the beat isn't not going to get saved by his orchestra. A rich man putting time, money, and energy into that kind of organzation - man, that would be fabulous. A rich man beating a stick before the world's finest orchestras and feeling the glory - bah, humbug!

bagmangood

Sorry, sarcasm doesn't carry well over the internets
I was meaning that people often assume if something is popular then it is good or great. That bothers me (ye olde lemming metaphor).
Overall, I can understand why he does what he does, but I wish that he wouldn't take it out on music, its going to have enough troubles without further misrepresenting what a conductor does
James Conlon recently came to my school and spoke on his thoughts on conducting, the most striking of which was that a conductor is "the most overrated and underrated member of the orchestra." I think is a case where what the conductor is underrated for is being ignored.

__________________
Bb: Courtois 305 "Elite"
C: Bach C180-239 (Akwright conversion),
Cornet: Conn Wonder (1900)
Picc: Selmer Paris, ~1971

ecarroll

Bag,

Wonderful line and I agree 100%. JC was music director for most of my time in Rotterdam, by the way. He's a friend and has my total respect on and off the podium.

Best,
EC

bagmangood

He definitely seemed to know his stuff (and shared how he got to conducting, very interesting if long story)

__________________
Bb: Courtois 305 "Elite"
C: Bach C180-239 (Akwright conversion),
Cornet: Conn Wonder (1900)
Picc: Selmer Paris, ~1971

JJ

I think we're probably a little harsh on Mr. Kaplan. He may very well be insufferable (men of his considerable financial means often are), but his enthusiasm for the second symphony, and Mahler in general, is unquestionable. Keep in mind that he has produced numerous materials, including a new critical edition of the score and a facsimile of the original (which he owns), as well as recordings of all of Mahler's piano rolls (with and without vocal "accompaniment") and the reminiscences of musicians from the NYPH (!) who actually played under Mahler himself. Incidentally, a few years ago, he also recorded the Adagietto of the fifth symphony at the faster tempo that has since become the norm, but was still controversial at the time. Talent being the limiting factor here, it wasn't very successful, but the intent was certainly commendable.

So, it's not at all surprising that Kaplan, many years ago, should want to learn how to actually conduct the second symphony himself, and, egged on by glowing reviews from critics and the general public, do so with increasing frequency all around the world. Whether an amateur should be conducting the NYPH is, in my view, an entirely different question; I can certainly understand DF's frustration with the experience, but don't think we should judge Kaplan too harshly for giving it a try.

JJ

Richard Oliver

Ed, what do you mean?



These sentences caught my eye from the blog:

All artists must educate their audiences and their managements. We have failed to convince the powers that be how important it is always to put the most qualified conductors on the rostrum. If this had been clear to the managements of symphony orchestras, this man, regardless of how much money he is willing to throw at our feet, would never have taken a step on what should be hallowed ground. We owe it to ourselves, our public, and in this case, Mr. Mahler.

If artists educate management; powers that be would bar Kaplan from conducting --regardless of money. And, if artists education audiences, etc . . ..

Really?