Todd McComb wrote:
>I cannot resist making some more remarks on this subject. My
>apologies if they are getting tiresome.
I think this topic is fascinating, and I doubt I'm alone in thinking so. (I
do wonder, though, if we should also bring this up in rec.music.early.)
>First, I don't think there is any question that Ensemble Organum's
>interpretations are not "authentic" in many cases,
There's no question for those of us who follow early music closely enough to
be on this list, but I wonder about the broader public (which isn't all THAT
large, granted) which attends his concerts or listens to his recordings. I
don't know what research, if any, he has published in journals, but his
program notes for his records rarely explain how he comes to the conclusions
he does or what evidence he bases those conclusions on. With any given
program, he tends to simply state the basic assumption from which he
proceeds as if it were fact (not even really acknowledging that it is an
assumption) and carry blithely on from there.
[snip]
>That said, I must disagree at least partly with the point of Peter
>Niedermueller that "authenticity sells." Yes, the "authentic" (or
>"HIP" as we now say in English) performances are driving classical
>sales. But is it because they are proclaimed to be authentic? I
>think not. I suggest that it is because they are new, and that
>"authentic" has become a convenient label for "new in this way."
>When such things are no longer new, ah, then it gets interesting!
Very good point. However, I can't help thinking that HIP performance is
driving classical sales (in the relevant repertory, at least) in large part
because THE MUSIC SOUNDS BETTER THAT WAY. Personal preference, to be sure,
but a preference most members of this list probably share.
>
>Hence my remarks on Ensemble Organum jumping into this "post-authentic"
>phase early, although I am quite certain there will be much more of
>this....
If Peres gave any indication that HE thought of his work as
"post-authentic", I'd be thrilled. But so far as I can tell, he doesn't.
(Rather the opposite, I think.)
Can Todd or anyone else give any other examples of "post-authentic"
performance? Would Bimbetta qualify? The collaborations between Jan
Garbarek and the Hilliard Ensemble and between the Orlando Consort and
Perfect Houseplants? Female ensembles singing music generally considered
to have been written for men's voices and vocal ranges (Musica Secreta
singing Palestrina or Anonymous 4 singing the Monpellier Codex)? The
Mediaeval Baebes?
>A further set of remarks on "HIP" i.e. "Historically Informed
>Performance":
>
>We have taken to saying "HIP" so as to avoid the connotations of
>"authentic" and suggesting that other performance traditions are
>"inauthentic." There is perhaps an implication that, once "informed,"
>someone will proceed in a certain way, yes? I would suggest that
>Peres is "informed" and so is an example of a real divergence in
>the concepts of "HIP" and "authenticity" in a way perhaps not
>intended by the original substitution of terms.
The problem is that we're not really certain how informed our mad genius M.
Peres is -- and we can't tell from what he tells us.
Matthew Westphal
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|