From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Glass meets Clive Barker response
Date: 17 Oct 92 03:18:17 GMT
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Oct16.185917.10816@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Joseph.J.Marcheso.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (Joseph J. Marcheso Jr.) writes:
>In article <1992Oct16.044701.18994@Princeton.EDU>
>roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig) writes:

>> >Anyway I didn't mean to impugn changes of style. Deliberate style
>> >change itself is not something bad IF its for purely artistic reasons
>> >however if its because the first style gets bad press...

>> Yes, go on...  (see Die Feen, das Liebesverbot, Rienzi, etc.)

>Curiously you picked three of his earliest works. Do you honestly think
>That Wagner was headed in the direction of Die Feen and Liebesverbot
>and popular opinion changed his mind. 

When he composed them, he was *obviously* headed in that direction.

And, yes, if either one had been a big hit, he'd have written several
more just like them.  He wasn't *crazy*, you know.

As for "headed in that direction," do you honestly think that composers
are genius-robots who are moved by some spirit toward the Platonic form
of their art?  Don't you think it's more likely that they make thousands
of artistic choices?

>Funny I never thought popular
>opinion held much weight with Wagner (Consider his obstinance for the
>Paris Tannhauser)

That was 1861, not 1840.  By then he had learned to manipulate popular
opinion far better, not least through his writings.  Popular opinion was
*extremely* important to him, not in the sense of wanting to be liked, 
but in the sense of wanting to be thought a genius, with all the freedom
that gave him.  

>[Wagner's] reading of Schopenhauer and the consequent reworking of his
>entire
>philosophy of drama.

>Since when did this qualify as changing because of bad press?

Listen pal, learn to post a bit better or *you'll* start getting some
big-league bad press!  That's *my* line, not yours; and you -- for the 
tenth time -- took it or one like it out of context.  I was referring
to Wagner's *conscious* change of style -- which that clearly was.

>>I'd say that the change after the Big Three of the 50's was more than
>>just one more step in a steady evolution.  Moving toward grand opera
>>was definitely a decision Verdi made in the choice of his libretti,
>>etc.

>I don't know quite what you mean. Do mean Grand opera in terms of plot
>and spectacle? or in type of music. Verdi's music in Aida does not show
>a deliberate conscious attempt to change his style of composition. If
>you would look after the "Big Three" you will also see Un Ballo, Simon,
>etc. along with the Grand operas. Also you have to take in to account
>the commisions had a lot to do with the type of opera composed. For
>example writing Music for the Paris Opera Had to include a sense of
>spectacle. The Khedive probably wouldn't have been too happy with an
>intimate drama. Verdi composed both kinds of opera never abandoning one
>because it wouldn't sell. DIdn't He end up with two very "personal"
>operas?

Of course.  What has this to do with my argument?  Did I say he could
only change once?  You seem to reject the idea that a composer could make a 
conscious choice about the general direction of his art -- for whatever
reason, including popularity -- and I find that to be romantic twaddle.

>>Seriously--since you're still trying to hang this around Glass's neck,
>>perhaps you could provide us with a shred of evidence.  It's not as 
>>though we hadn't asked.

>Besides bad reviews, 

And many good ones -- enough to get him more commissions

>bored concertgoers, 

And many fascinated ones -- enough to sell out halls and get him
more commissions

>talking to talented musicians
>and listening to his music and stating that Einstein was more
>revolutionary than Aknaten because of Glass's unique musical sense came
>out far more in the former (Reminiscent of Leoncavallo?) I don't know
>what else you want? Perhaps if I made blind positive comments I
>wouldn't be accused of this.

No, if you *stopped* making blind comments you'd do better.  Do you *remember*
the premiere of Akhnaten?  Did you read the reviews?  Can you cite any?
Check out what the European papers said at the time.

Now, even if the things you claimed were rue, would that imply that
this was necessarily the cause of his change?  Given the time it takes 
to get a n opera produced, how do you know the style change hadn't 
come *before* any reviews appeared?  What do you know of Glass's
chronology in the first place?  

>P.S. Notice that most people who defend Glass always start out saying
>"I am  not a Glass fan but...?"

Oh, stuff it.  For one thing, lots of people *don't* say that, and
you know it; start with half the people in this discussion.  This is
the cheapest sort of ad hominem bullshit.  

For another, so what? You haven't made any sense so far, and as far
as I can tell haven't thought about the issues in the simplistic
comparisons you've made.

From our conversations in email, I know you can do better than this.

Roger