My strongly negative comments about Lutoslawski's Cello Concerto on last week's San Francisco Symphony program were quoted by Lisa Irontongue in a post contrasting them with the favorable review in the Chronicle. (He's not a very good reviewer; most of us on my journal's staff roll their eyes when his name is mentioned.)
But the post, after one commenter who heard the ugly noise that I did, has attracted a slew of responses from Lutoslawski fans. Well, of course it did; those are the kind of people who read Lisa's posts. It's hardly a neutral polling result.
And, in fact, I'm such a person myself. I like a lot of difficult and tendentious modern music, which I think gives me the right to speak out firmly when, in my judgment, a work or a performance is trash. I'm not dumping on the genre wholesale, but using trained and experienced discrimination.
Which is not to say that others can't disagree; tastes do vary; but sometimes I wonder ...
Look, I've had problems with reactions to my own tastes. I'll never forget the time I remarked that the vast majority of jazz does nothing for me, and was accused of lying about my own musical tastes. Aesthetic disputes don't get weirder than that.
But that doesn't mean nobody ever puts on a show. If someone responds to a review that complains of "a soapy, unresonant, and frankly unpleasant tone" by writing, "it makes me really regret missing this piece," that's just playing a game of épater le bourgeois. It's not a serious contribution to discourse.
Chacun à son gout!
ReplyDeleteI know enough Lutoslawski to be pretty sure I'd like this piece. Both your description and Joshua's sounded similar to how I would describe his Violin Concerto, which I loved when Tetzlaff played it a few years ago at SFS. I suspect that is where my commenter was coming from as well.
Truly astounding that someone would accuse you of lying because "the vast majority of jazz does nothing for [you]." That's a completely out of line comment.