"Music, Sense and Nonsense: Collected Essays and Lectures", por Alfred Brendel.

Capítulo: “Conversations - Talking to Brendel with Jeremy

Ya casi llegamos al final de este maravilloso libro. En esta sección, Brendel comparte varias entrevistas. La primera de ellas fue en 1972 con Jeremy Siepmann, músico, locutor, articulista y autor de varios libros sobre música.
Si bien después de 377 hojas ya tenemos una buena idea sobre las opiniones de de Brendel sobre la música y el quehacer musical, en esta entrevista revela varios puntos de vista.
Sobre si disfruta interpretar música, Brendel responde que sí, sobre todo en los últimos años, “when I’ve had the impression that much of what I do comes across. Of course, one very rarely knows if the right things come across)”.
Sobre si los intérpretes existen para vincular al compositor con el público, Brendel afirma que le interesa más la relación del intérprete con el compositor que con el público: “What fascinates me is to make sense of a piece of music while it sounds”.
Sobre si el intérprete debería “educar” a su público, Brendel considera que se debe hacer clarificar la pieza lo más posible. Pero si el público siente que el intérprete quiere educarlo, el caso está perdido. Si se quiere educar al público, este no debe siquiera darse cuenta.
Sobre si el análisis musical tiene algún valor al intérprete, si bien es necesario tener un sólido conocimiento musical, el intérprete no debe considerar el análisis musical como la llave al tipo de intuición que permite una gran interpretación.
“It was Schoenberg who said, in a letter, that formal analysis is often overrated because it shows how something is done, not what is done. This, from one of the supreme analysts, is something valuable, I think”.
Sobre si la música grabada y en vivo requieren ser escuchadas distintamente, Brendel considera que si bien existen ciertas diferencias básicas, en su caso mientras más progresaba en sus grabaciones, más trataba de tocar como si estuviera en un concierto ante un público.
“Many more concerts should be recorded and issued on disc, with all their imperfections and coughing and so on. As far as piano recordings are concerned, the over-refinement of our tools nowadays seems sometimes to be a disadvantage.”
Sobre si la gesticulación al interpretar tiene alguna función musical, Brendel considera sí la tiene. Cuando se vio en televisión por primera vez, se dio cuenta que sus gestos contradecían completamente lo que hacía y lo que quería hacer musicalmente.
“I then had a mirror made, a big standing mirror, which I put beside the piano, not really making me visible all the time, but always there; unconsciously, one noticed things. It helped me to co-ordinate what I wanted to suggest with my movements with what really come out”.
Sobre la relación con sus grabaciones, Brendel considera que son “a kind of offspring of which one can’t, unfortunately, say that one has to nurse them until they grow up and then forget them as soon as possible and let them lead their own live…
They lead their own lives at once, and are scarcely ever grown up! There’s always something infantile about a record, al least as far as the artist is concerned. Records are interesting to learn from but not always to enjoy”.
Sobre el escribir sobre música, Brendel considera que no se debe ser arrogante: “That may seem very irrelevant, but I think it’s very important. If one decides to talk about something as elusive as music…
… something which is so difficult to grasp in words without talking nonsense all the time and being imprecise to an enormous degree, and personal to a degree which is no use to anyone, then one has to be modest about it”.
Sobre intérpretes que intentan ser originales distorsionando lo que el compositor indica en la partitura, Brendel considera que es una tontería. “If one sheds new light on music, it should be the outcome of an effort, not the input!”
Sobre si ha considerado dirigir, si bien Brendel se interesa por la dirección y sus técnicas, e incluso se imagina a sí mismo dirigiendo, nunca lo haría: “I think I would be too shy to attempt to impose something on an orchestra without being completely professional”.
Sobre si pudiera cambiar algo en su vida profesional: "I don't know. So far I don't feel at all exploited. I play a lot, though not as much as some other people, but I play because I like it. I have a lot of other interests, of course for which time will always be too short".
@threadreaderapp unroll

More from Music

Open Question to fellow investors tracking Music Industry.

A business like Universal which controls more than 1/3rd of all published music globally is selling for less than 6x FY20 Sales.

Why are Indian businesses like Saregama / Tips selling for 11x, 20x their sales?

If I include all of the revenue generated by entire firm, its selling for ~4.5x FY20 Sales


Universal Listing Market Cap ~ 40 Billion USD
FY 20 Revenues ~ 8.87 B USD or 7.4B EUR

Catalogue of Music includes every international artist you can possibly name

Either Universal is grossly undervalued or Saregama/Tips are grossly overvalued.

https://t.co/aHzWSYtcUt


https://t.co/v0EMoCuYKX

You May Also Like

Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel was previously CEO of bioMerieux in France from 07-10.

Alain Merieux, who owns bioMerieux, was instrumental in the creation of the Wuhan Institute of Virology P4 Lab.

The same people who helped create the virus, also helped to create the vaccines...


Moderna partnered with French Pasteur Institute in 2015 to develop mRNA vaccine technology.

Pasteur Institute partnered with the Wuhan P4 Laboratory in 2017 along with the Merieux Foundation to study emerging viruses...
https://t.co/yFsHwrNYaK
https://t.co/9M5lydBKhM


Nobel prize winning scientist Luc Montagnier asserts that Sars-Cov-2 is man-made and originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Montagnier did extensive work with the Pasteur Institute in France which was partnered with the Wuhan P4.

Merieux Foundation & the Chinese government have worked together since 1965, and partnered to study emerging pathogens in Africa in 2015.

Their research included "PATHOGENS CARRIED BY BATS" that provoke respiratory diseases.

🚨🚨🚨
https://t.co/gVwpT0ssqI
So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.


The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.

This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.

The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."

This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.