Herr Polarius,
Barry, I'm not German, as you know. Strictly speaking I'm not even Indo-European.
By and large, both David and myself have been pretty supportive of Boulez's Mahler. I like most of them. I had some real issues with the DG studio release of M2, but I felt that the "live" performance issued on DVD addressed all those issues (especially the organ). David was probably the first critic to be supportive of his M4 with Cleveland, which was - up to then - receiving luke warm reviews at best. Now everyone seems to think that it's pretty good. I've always been a big fan of his M6 from Vienna.
That's all fine and dandy; but I thought we were talking about DLvdE in general and then I was referring to Boulez' recording of it.
You seem to keep coming on to this notion of European vs. American critics (maybe it's just David you're after).
Sorry, what?? I was not, nor am interested in, talking about anything else here except DLvdE as a composition, and by extension the Boulez recording of it. I think you may have misattributed an earlier post by DH where he brought up this issue of how "Europeans" this and "Europeans" that, in a discussion on Abbado IIRC.
Well, let me make a generalization that seems to apply to many critics in general, regardless of where they come from. Many critics say that such-and-such artist is great; therefore, everything that he or she have recorded must also be great. Both David and myself attempt to evaluate every recording on its on merits, regardless of who the performers are. You may not get that impression, but take a look at some of the reviews that David has written for Boulez's Mahler cycle - most of them are quite positive.
Again, that's really great if it really works that way, and likewise if people get something out of Boulez' Mahler, but I'm not sure what the specific issue is that you have in mind here.
My aim was to try and start talking about the peculiar nature of this very composition and the kind of expectations it sets for the performers and especially the conductor. Those two only; not what DH may have written about Mahler elsewhere (it's really irrelevant for me). I think it's useful to start from the nature of the work itself when assessing the different interpretations. It's also a more constructive approach than the "bores me to death"/"not exciting enough" type of dismissals made when we feel jaded and something doesn't conform to preformed expectation patterns: one is then forced to focus more on the "meaning" of the work and people's successes in letting that meaning or significance come through, in contrast to mere lists of whom one does and doesn't like in a long list of CD titles (which can of course also be fine and is certainly always fun, but then let's keep the rhetorics clear about that, too). I like the way many people here post in precisely this fashion, "positively" so to speak, as for instance Todd above who made what I thought was a valid and illuminating point, something worth elaborating on in my view.
As for myself, I believe that I addressed your question as objectively as I can, without repurchasing the Boulez "DLvdE" (no way is that happening) to comb through it point by point. You asked the question, I provided my answer. It would be an adaquate "DLvdE", if we lived in a world of few choices. But as with all of the works by Mahler these days, there are tons of choices to comb through. I'm wondering if you're familiar with Bertini's "DLvdE" (?)...
That's fine, and I didn't mean by "objections are faulty, not the performance" point be meant to be taken without a little smile. I do disagree, there's nothing wrong in that, right?
I haven't heard the Bertini yet. I'm piqued to hear him but am hesitating a bit due to the feedback he's gotten in some (wow, got to use that suspect word) European press; there is simply so much good music left that I haven't gotten time to focus on but is more than worth exploring, and I'm no longer unconditionally willing to invest my time and effort in listening to everything out there any more. That said, I think I'd hear the Bertini if I had a chance. Here's a suggestion: I'm perfectly willing to swap the Klemp B8 that you "owe" me to the Bertini DLvdE, if you think it's more worth hearing.
Singers do matter in this work, and I feel that "der Abschied" should not be treated as an extended operatic aria.
That's of course all true; and nor should the composition as a whole be treated as a series of ballads or as orchestral Lieder.
The question as to whether Urmana is the right kind of voice for "der Abschied" or not, is greatly compounded by her having been recorded too closely. I find it uncomfortable to listen to, and that has nothing to do with which speakers, or which headphones I'm using.
I can't put my finger on this since we hear her pretty differently here. Could it be her clearer-than-normal phrasing (combined with clearer-than-normal articulation of the rest of the score) that gives the impression of the voice's being "too close for comfort"?
-PT
