Friday Quickie: Comparison wasn't not apt

Making an analogy, or even a direct comparison, can be an illuminating device when talking about abstract concepts. Of course, some people use them in place of an actual point, but Richard Nilsen has a point...just not a good comparison.

Symphony review: Singer Addis punks out on Mahler songs
Richard Nilsen, Arizona Republic, Apr. 22, 2011

“Punks out”?

…

Okay, how did Addis punk out on Mahler?

Phillip Addis wasn't no Sinatra.

Wait. Phillip Addis was not no Sinatra?

So… Phillip Addis is Sinatra?

The baritone sang Gustav Mahler's "Songs of a Wayfarer" with the Phoenix Symphony this week…

Wait…the singer who's not no Sinatra sang Mahler?

How’d he do?

…and the performance was a major letdown.

Well, Sinatra wasn’t known for his Mahler performances.

Sometimes you wait a whole season for a particular concert, because the music scheduled isn't merely beautiful or entertaining, but promises emotional transport.

I wish I had something clever to say here, but really, this is something unique that a symphony orchestra has the power to do but so rarely does. And this seems especially true since they rely so consistently upon the same pieces that have already emotionally transported me many times before.

After all, that is why we who love classical music persist in a love for a dying art form: It can take us out of ourselves and leave us feeling the radiance of the universe.

The art form isn’t dying, it’s just that people always insist on performing pieces that people already know they love.

The classical music universe is definitely not expanding the way most orchestras program.

It is almost a drug and we crave it.

Exactly. But we digress.

So, I’m assuming you love the Mahler “Songs of a Wayfarer” and you wished Sinatra were singing them? …

And when something like the Mahler sits there on the calendar all year, beckoning us to wait for its April date, we hope once again for that emotional and spiritual fix.

Oh, come on, Mahler’s on the calendar every year. But, I guess I know what you mean.

Well, perhaps you can expect too much.

If you expected Sinatra to sing your Mahler, perhaps you did expect too much.

It wasn't that Addis sang badly.

Oh. Was his diction good?

Certainly his diction was good.

Good. Music is all about diction.

As if music were about diction.

Wait? Music’s not about diction?

But the Sinatra comparison is dead on:…

Are you sure, because I can’t even begin to imagine why you’d compare this singer to Sinatra.

…When you heard Frank Sinatra sing, you knew - or felt you knew - that he had lived every word of the song he sang.

And there’s never been a classical singer who you felt this about before? Perhaps even someone who has sang the Mahler before?

The emotional intelligence he brought to lyrics meant that even as his voice declined, his ability to put across a song never wavered.

Exactly. Like when he sang:
Come fly with me, let's float down to Peru
In llama land there's a one-man band
And he'll toot his flute for you

I totally feel like he’s been to Peru, in a way no other artist could.

And the emotional content in lyrics like:
She'll have no crap games with sharpies and frauds
And she won't go to Harlem in Lincolns or Fords
And she won't dish the dirt with the rest of the broads
That's why the lady is a tramp

When he sang that, I could feel that this woman really eschewed the cultured, high-society conventions of her day...like not driving domestic automobiles.

It was what was missing from Addis' performance: He never convinced us - never even tried to convince us - that the words actually mean anything.

This seems fair. But did you really need Sinatra to make this point?

The styles of singing (and the songs themselves) really don't have a lot in common.

He sang as if he had memorized the words, not internalized them. It is at such times that you realize that mere musicality isn't enough: Great art isn't about pretty.

Couldn’t agree with this more… Wait, are you saying Sinatra wasn’t a good singer?

[snip]

But you're making what I would a consider a valid and important observation about the performance...are you sure there isn't a more apt comparison you could provide to help us understand your argument?

If you have ever heard Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau sing these songs, you know how far we have fallen.

Thank you.

See, I don’t know that recording, but this seems like a much better comparison. You've now created a workable reference point for people who know the Mahler songs. Plus, I’m actually likely to seek out this recording to understand better your frame of reference.

Maybe it's just me, but I find this far more illustrative.

Migh Gud Tidel

Coming up with titles is like waiting in a long line for the restroom: you have to go—immediately!—but there’s no relief in sight. So, embarrassingly, you’re forced to...

From Mozart to Mahler, it was a bounteous year for classical recordings

...you’re forced to favor alliteration over accuracy.

Now, it’s not a horrible title, as these things go. We’ve seen much worse, especially atop year-end, top-ten type articles like this. But give it a gander once more and think about what it means to go from Mozart to Mahler.

Is the title suggesting that the music chronologically ranges from Mozart (b.1756) to Mahler (b.1860)? No. That would be silly; it’s only 104 years. Even if we expand the range by using Mahler’s death year (1911), that leaves only a 155 year window. I hardly expect experienced critic John von Rhein to be so narrow. If that’s not it, then what is?

Figure 1. Continuing with the classy toilet humor. Only $29.99!

Perhaps the title suggests that all the composers fall within the alphabetical space, between Mahler and Mozart? Hmm. There are some big M-boppers:

Marin Marais
Frank Martin
Bohuslav Martinu
Jules Massenet
Felix Mendelssohn
Gian Carlo Menotti
Olivier Messiaen
Giacomo Meyerbeer
Darius Milhaud
Claudio Monteverdi

That’s still pretty silly, a top ten list with music by composers whose last names begin Ma-Mo. That can’t be it. Is it a stylistic thing? Seems unlikely.

I know! Let’s go to the text for answers.

1 Mahler: "Symphony No. 9." Royal Stockholm Philharmonic Orchestra, Alan Gilbert, conductor (BIS). : With Gilbert at the helm, the New York Philharmonic could be in for an exciting new era. His final concerts as chief conductor of the Stockholm orchestra inspired a studio recording of Mahler's sublime valedictory that strikes a wonderful balance between desolation and acceptance, with luminous sonics to match.

2 Mozart...

Or perhaps the editor didn’t bother to read about the other eight recordings?
-

Titles for Sale

And without further ado, here’s the title in question found atop a recent piece by David Patrick Stearns:

Itzhak Perlman a winner at Resorts

Figure 1. Foreshadowing the premise that the house always has the advantage

There are several things we should keep in mind as we go along which will be helpful in order to assess the efficacy of today’s title:

1) The Resorts is a casino-hotel in Atlantic City (A classical casino concert?)
2) Itzhak Perlman wins something (What did he win?)
3) He wins it at Resorts (Presumably, as opposed to somewhere else)

Fantastic! Now we can look at the review, which is pretty okay, not that there aren’t issues.

Musically, he played a medium-weight program - Leclair, Beethoven, Stravinsky - little different from what you'd hear at the Kimmel Center.

No kidding! I took it upon myself to check out the program for the next Philadelphia Orchestra concert and, well, there’s certainly some similarity: Brahms D minor Piano Concerto; Franck D minor Symphony; and Claude Vivier Orion. I don’t know what this says about the integrity of the orchestra’s programming, since casinos are essentially scams. But, hell, someone is doing it right.

Preconcert Muzak was Brahms' Symphony No. 1.

Muzaked Brahms? Wonderful beyond description. Ugh.

The big leap for Atlantic City, however, wasn't pop vs. classical, but singer vs. instrumentalist. Headliners are almost always singers (even if the voice happens to belong to Joan Jett). Nobody could recall a purely instrumental artist headlining recently in Atlantic City.

Why bring Joan Jett into question? This seems more like an unnecessary value judgment, to me. Is she less of a singer somehow?

More pressing, however, what is the Resorts up to? Why bring in someone who doesn’t fit the previous model for success?

So who was there? As I learned from chatting up those around me, many were from the immediate area: a local music teacher who has loved Perlman for years...

Also known as: someone who has never stepped inside a casino before. (Just a guess, but local music teachers probably don’t have a large amount of disposable income).

...a small-business owner who had caught [Perlman] on PBS...

PBS watchers aren’t generally attracted to bright lights and shiny things, or are they?

...and people who applauded between movements, suggesting a crossover/fringe crowd, but one that was ultimately more attentive than your typical concert audience.

Newbies, diversity, and attention: Hooray! It’s a veritable melting pot of fresh money!

The idea, according to casino officials, was to attract a different clientele, and what arrived was people who probably would have been just as happy to hear Perlman at, say, the Glassboro Center for the Performing Arts.

How’d the Resorts lure them in, then?

The difference is that this fringe audience probably wouldn't have known about the Atlantic City event without Resorts' marketing - and all its billboards.

Okay. It’s not like our symphonies don’t spend a bigillion on advertising, right? This is the norm. However, the catch was:

The net had to be cast wide to fill a theater with listeners willing to pay up to $125 for any violinist, and indeed, I talked to those who had driven in from Montgomery County.

That’s an expensive meatball.

And rather than traveling through suburban byways, you simply had to navigate the dense thickets of King Kong Cash slot machines between the parking garage and the theater.

Figure 2. “Twas Beast that bankrupted your future”

What David forgets to mention is that on byways you aren’t tempted to risk your kid’s college fund. He also doesn’t mention that the distance from the garage to the theater is roughly one-quarter of a mile—and the dense thickets of slot machines, which are designed to funnel you past places the casino wants you to pass, is akin to McDonald’s saying, “Yeah, the hamburgers are bad for you, but that’s why we have salads.”

So with the right marketing, most any fine classical artist,

Whoa there, partner: “most any fine classical artist”? Not terrible, just yuck.

So with the right marketing, most any fine classical artist, in theory, could work here. But I wonder if anyone else (perhaps cellist Yo-Yo Ma?) could truly fill the place.

I think that’s a good question, delving into issues about the relationship between marketing and the perceived quality of the product. But I thought this was a review?

Perlman's public identification level is unique among non-operatic classical figures. Though his visibility is nothing close to what it was, the name still has marketing power.

The violinist has long had a particular magnetism that makes audiences meet him more than halfway. Whether he's having a good night or a bad one - he's 64, an age when violinists are well into the winding-down phase - audiences listen to him more closely than they do other violinists, and thus take in more of the music at hand.

He’s still a moneymaker: check. He’s past his prime: check. He played a concert and I wrote a review about it: blank.

And Perlman had a very good night.

He...

He won a good night?! Though past his prime, he had a good night?! No senior moments? No medical scares? Please clear this up, David.

His playing has been through some bad patches in recent years, but technically speaking, he was secure and fluent.

Technically speaking, sure. But interpretive?

The first half pleasantly consisted of Leclair's Violin Sonata in D major and Beethoven's Violin Sonata No. 7 (Op. 30 No. 2), and though Perlman's cultivated musical responses didn't feel so fresh, the ever-engaged pianist Rohan De Silva kept your ears constantly pricked.

...but the pianist played well.

Later, Perlman recalled his own glory days in Stravinsky's Suite Italienne (from the composer's quasi-baroque ballet Pulcinella); his gleaming tone with the light sandpaper-ish tang was back in full during Stravinsky's most lyrical sections. His most inspired moments involved expressive fingerslides, usually the province of violinists from the old, old days. Good for him! Fine with me.

Meh. I don’t have any problems with the concert assessment, even though it received a disproportionate amount of space. But it’s the disproportionate amount of space that raises questions.

To me, this reads like a plain-faced plug (see Comedy of Errata), but worse. Recall the title: “Perlman a winner at Resorts.” Really? Was he a winner? Did the past-his-prime, old, old school violinist really emerge as triumphant winner from this endeavor?

Perlman left with his integrity intact.

He also left with a nice paycheck. But it’s not exactly glowing, is it? If anything, he won the right to leave with his integrity. That’s all. It’s printed right there in the review.

The audience left the near-full 1,300-seat Superstar Theater seemingly thrilled [...]

So, maybe the audience won, then?

Or did the Resorts come out the victor? They filled a large venue, probably made a nice little profit. But more than that, they got 1,300 local people into the casino, people who otherwise might not have been tempted to go, filtered them through the slots and other entertainments, and said, “Go!”.

Figure 3. Sure it pays out 35:1, but you have a 2.63% of hitting it, or 38:1 chance of making your money back

Rx for...Good Luck!

So, you’re the chief wellness officer of the Wellness Institute at the Cleveland Clinic, huh?

Okay, then. Shoot.

“Listening to finer music...

Hold on. Because you’re presumably someone with a scientific background, I’d like to ask you one quick question: How did you go about defining “finer” as it pertains to music? See, the reason I ask is because without a proper definition, i.e., some quantifiable differences between types (styles, aesthetics, philosophies?) of music, whatever you say next will be inherently flawed.

Hello?

“Listening to finer music and attending concerts on a consistent basis...

The same goes for the terms “attendance,” “concerts” and “consistent.”

...makes your real age about four years younger,” Dr. Michael F. Roizen — the chief wellness officer of the Wellness Institute at the Cleveland Clinic, said recently.

Uh-huh. So if I smoke four year’s worth of crack, but attend finer music concerts consistently, I’ll be my normal age? Sweet. [puff, puff]

-

Dr. Roizen is one of a number of [cough] experts, Matthew Gurewitsch of the NY Times quotes in his recent article, presumably titled by a junior high school yearbook editor:

Composing Concertos in the Key of Rx

It’s an interesting glance at the potential of specifically designed music to clinically heal certain health-related symptoms, such as hypertension.

While I think the ideas are worthwhile, their science is...hmm...wanting. Too bad Muzak filed for chapter 11, they might’ve been able to help.
-

Titles Are Meaningless

As titles go, some are pretty disconnected from the gist of the text, and since they aren’t always chosen by the author, it’s a double-edged sword, a "chicken or the egg?" question: who’s to blame? The author or the editor?

Take this gem from The Barre-Montpillier Times Argus:

Is new music cutting edge anymore?

Thinking to myself: Hmmm. That’s good question. Isn’t it? I suppose I have my opinion, but I’ll reserve that until I read the rest of the article. I’m reasonable, right? Right.

To all the Detritusites: Given the title, it would seem to follow that we’re about to read a piece about how new music is, or is not, pushing the boundaries. Are you on the same page with me?

Good. Let’s go.

It's been a long time since Vermont audiences have had to be conned into listening to contemporary music, particularly music from their own state.

Uh, two things. One, define “a long time,” please. Seems to me I remember a concert on November 15th, featuring Elliott Cater and Olivier Messiaen, another the 14th before that, and two more October 18th and 17th before that. And those just by the ensemble about whom this article was written.

Moreover, “conned?” If the title is any indicator, then it sounds like our author hasn’t been conned for a long while, the last time only because they featured a raffle for a brand new Sega Genesis.

But it was the Vermont Contemporary Music Ensemble, a group of central Vermont professional musicians, that broke the ice – beginning its crusade to bring today's music to today's audiences more than 20 years ago.

Huh. So really our author means, “Back in 1989, it had been a long time since Vermont audiences were conned.”

Or the title’s “cutting edge” refers to breaking the ice, somehow. I don’t know.

But what I do know is that the rest of the article is a neutral sort of puff piece, kindly describing the new pieces on the upcoming program, putting the performers under the spotlight, etc., etc.

So what gives? Is new music cutting edge? Hello? Did the editor actually read the piece? Or did the author decide to inject his opinion in the title and proceed to write some rather pleasant puffery?

Titles are meaningless.

-

One more “chicken or the egg?” gaffe:

Unlike the recent [Vermont Symphony Orchestra] program titled "Romance," there's no theme here.

But earlier:

Next weekend, the VCME will present "Enchanted," [...].
-

Title Fail

I’ve no problem with this review—Kyle MacMillan of the Denver Post is, as usual, on his game. But the editor, or whomever gave this piece a title was off in a seedy motel sucking down qualudes with vodka. To explicate, Kyle starts off thusly:

The Colorado Symphony and Friends of Chamber Music sometimes include unusual offerings on their lineups, but fans typically have to look to smaller niche organizations for large doses of such repertoire. [italics mine]

But the title giver gives us this gem:

An eclectic offering from chamber group

Did I miss the memo? Last I heard, “unusual” does not mean “eclectic.”

See, the performance included pieces such as Paul Hindemith's Kammermusik No. 1, Op. 24a, for 12 Solo Instruments (1922), Dmitri Shostakovich's Piano Quintet in G minor, Op. 57 (1940), and Philip Glass' String Quartet No. 2, "Company" (1984). Generally speaking, pieces written within 62 years of one another don’t necessarily make for an eclectic offering. That’s like saying, “The Philharmonic played an eclectic concert that included pieces by Beethoven, Schubert and Brahms.”

Whatever, this is more of a public service announcement: You should not take qualudes, especially if you plan on drinking copious amounts of vodka—it makes you forget how to interpret chronological timelines and it makes you write inappropriate synonyms. There are other, less damaging side effects, too. There is nothing wrong with seedy motels, however.

-

By the way, if you’re thinking that the title reflects the eclectic styles of the pieces, save your commentary, because I disagree. Beethoven to Schubert to Brahms would be very eclectic, too, then. I’d argue that their styles are just as normative as Hindemith, Shostakovich and Glass’ styles given a 62-year long, evolving Zeitgeist. Also, I take it back. Don’t go to seedy motels for any reason—most no longer honor frequent flyer miles, which could lead to qualudes and vodka. I speak from experience.
-