What's wrong with Rattle?

[BorisG]

Well!  She's much more beautiful than Magdalena Kozena.  I never heard Farrar sing, but my grandmother adored her.  She had all of her recordings, went to the opera whenever she could get tickets to hear her, and actually named my aunt "Geraldine" after her. 

That "mushroom cloud" in Miss Farrar's hair is different.

[Bunny]

That "mushroom cloud" in Miss Farrar's hair is different.

Styles change!  A plumper figure was preferred then as well.  I have no doubt that the corsetting so popular at that time probably kept her posture better as well.  Here she is as Manon; imagine singing while wearing a corset!  I wonder how much better she would have sounded unbound.

[BorisG]

Styles change!  A plumper figure was preferred then as well.  I have no doubt that the corsetting so popular at that time probably kept her posture better as well.  Here she is as Manon; imagine singing while wearing a corset!  I wonder how much better she would have sounded unbound.

Don't get me started on corsets, "Ladies and gentlemen, Miss Dita von Teese!"

[MISHUGINA]

Don't get me started on corsets, "Ladies and gentlemen, Miss Dita von Teese!"

Holy ****, I don't believe a waistline can look THAT slim. I bet it's photoshopping.

[Daedalus]

Holy ****, I don't believe a waistline can look THAT slim. I bet it's photoshopping.

Whatever it is, edited or not edited, it looks horrible.

Top half is alright though 

Think we might have gone a bit off topic...? 

D.

[Bonehelm]

So when did a discussion about a 60 year old Englishman with ADD become a picture exchange of over-breasted chicks?

[toledobass]

So when did a discussion about a 60 year old Englishman with ADD become a picture exchange of over-breasted chicks?

Who cares

Allan

[tab]

According to what I'm reading here now, I guess my first encounter with him (May, 1st) (Stravinsky - Symphony in 3 Movements, Beethoven 7th) will not be great. 

[Renfield]

According to what I'm reading here now, I guess my first encounter with him (May, 1st) (Stravinsky - Symphony in 3 Movements, Beethoven 7th) will not be great. 

I'll play M forever's usual role here, and ask: why? The majority of people to vote on him voted positively, and there have been positive comments as well as negative ones on his conducting and general artistry.

Looking at your observation, I can't help but wonder if it might not be a priori judgement calls like this one making things harder for difficult or individual conductors, far more than their actual artistic leverage.

"Karajan is an evil autocrat who demolishes good music into a homogenous soup." Oh, I guess he'll disappoint me. "Klemperer is a stodgy old conductor whose music is turgid, and plods." And so on... Please, listen for yourself first!

[Bunny]

Who cares

Allan

You won't know until you go.  There are some things he does well.  The biggest problem with Rattle is his unevenness.  For me he's like a slot machine; I keep loading the quarters hoping for a jackpot -- as in DLVE.  I get the rare big-win and enough small rewards to keep me interested, but most of the time I end up the loser.

[MISHUGINA]

So when did a discussion about a 60 year old Englishman with ADD become a picture exchange of over-breasted chicks?

that can only happen in GMG 

[Don]

So when did a discussion about a 60 year old Englishman with ADD become a picture exchange of over-breasted chicks?

Breasts can be tiny, average, large or gigantic - but there's no such thing as over-breasted.

[Renfield]

Because he found the anti-rattle camp is more cultivated, sensible, suave and debonair than the pro-rattle gang?

Is it? I wouldn't know, I'm a Karajanist deep inside.

He has made no a-priori judgement.  He has expressed concern, based on the reports of people who have heard Rattle, that his up-coming Stravinsky concert might be disappointing.

He made an a priori judgement call, saying he "guessed" he would not enjoy it. That's not concern, that's expectation, and directly implies he's already formed an opinion (rather, a prejudice) on what he has not listened to. That's my gripe.

Rattle represents generations of people (i.e. baby boomers & younger) who have been raised on the Beatles, not Mozart, on celebrity, not talent, on trendiness, not personality, on decadence, not the Renaissance.  And their understanding of Mozart (or Jane Austen, or Rembrandt) and ability to penetrate them have been diminished by the bad start.

Oh! I seem to be quite older than I thought, by your infallible historical and sociopolitical yardstick.

At least you may claim the prize for a priori judgement calls from tab.

(My point being, your argument does not have any evidence whatsoever to back it up; moreover, it is another example of why I'll stand with Simon Rattle on this "he destroys our tradition!" versus "he's trying something different" debate.)

[Renfield]

Not that there is anything in them to convince me to cease preferring reliably good conductors, to the quirkily ineffective Simon Rattle-my-ears... 

That is a view that Sarkosian, who very much adores the third person, has expressed that I find very reasonable indeed: it is not me (or should it be "it is not Renfield", imperial plural?) that will decide what you prefer.

But you are very correct in that I am not going to refrain from expressing my opinion in an open message board, concerning the topic at hand (which, incidentally, is "what's wrong with/do you like Rattle", rather than "describe Simon Rattle"), and about which I merely urged a suspension of prejudice, rather than any specific conclusion.


Furthermore, and finally for me in this exchange as I detest derailing threads, if your capacity for argumentation goes no further than politicising the views of others and assigning them to a "grand narrative" of your choice, I've nothing to add.

However, bear in mind that I was not the one to "rehash [...] stale and outdated" views, and "[slander] alternative opinions as retrograde and dogmatic". That was you, and if you would scroll up you might notice I merely prompted the person to "listen for yourself first", rather than propose unfounded social theories to support my personal view, as you did.


Edit: And before you mention it, "I can't help but wonder" (see my above post) is not a phrase I know to be used in introducing a positive statement and/or theory. Whereas "Rattle represents", "Renfield is", etc. are all positive statements, incidentally.

[tab]

I'll play M forever's usual role here, and ask: why? The majority of people to vote on him voted positively, and there have been positive comments as well as negative ones on his conducting and general artistry.

Looking at your observation, I can't help but wonder if it might not be a priori judgement calls like this one making things harder for difficult or individual conductors, far more than their actual artistic leverage.

"Karajan is an evil autocrat who demolishes good music into a homogenous soup." Oh, I guess he'll disappoint me. "Klemperer is a stodgy old conductor whose music is turgid, and plods." And so on... Please, listen for yourself first!

I've just remembered what this "a-priori judgement" is based on. I've seen and liked a popular video of Gruppen with Rattle among other conductors and since then he has been associated with "modern music" subconsciously. So the only thing that really bothers me is the potential way of Beethoven's performance (with a great Beethovenian orchestra - BPO). Top class orchestras visit us once a year and of course I don't want my potentially greatest expirience of the year to be ruined by a "wrong" conductor. 

I always listen to myself first, but this is a special situation.

[Renfield]

I've just remembered what this "a-priori judgement" is based on. I've seen and liked a popular video of Gruppen with Rattle among other conductors and since then he has been associated with "modern music" subconsciously. So the only thing that really bothers me is the potential way of Beethoven's performance (with a great Beethovenian orchestra - BPO). Top class orchestras visit us once a year and of course I don't want my potentially greatest expirience of the year to be ruined by a "wrong" conductor. 

That is more than fair enough.

In fact, it's entirely understandable from my point of view, as I'm (hopefully) going to be attending at least the second Berlin Philharmonic's Prom appearance this year, and it's my beloved Brahms 3rd; so I was worried too, much for the same reason.

Although after having heard the German Requiem by the Rattle/BPO partnership, I admit I'm much more optimistic about it.

[Daedalus]

Looking at your observation, I can't help but wonder if it might not be a priori judgement calls like this one making things harder for difficult or individual conductors, far more than their actual artistic leverage.

Please, listen for yourself first!

I was going to write a message to the same effect.
I couldn't agree more with this. There is no right or wrong opinion - some like Rattle, some don't.

I would guess that most of the people judging him on here know a lot less about musical tradition and erudition than he does - just remember that. 

D.

[eyeresist]

Simon Rattle is more likely to move those who have been raised on the Beatles, than on Mozart.  And that is the problem with him.

Sorry, are you saying Rattle performs Mozart in the style of the Beatles? 

[Daedalus]

Sorry, are you saying Rattle performs Mozart in the style of the Beatles? 

[Renfield]

Where in the hell did I ever say we when stating my opinions?  Nowhere in hell, and nowhere on this site, either.  It is indeed a bad habit of yours to misrepresent and smear the individual stating his opinions, instead of discussing the opinion.

That is my bad, as for some reason I exchanged the terms 'third person" and "imperial plural", above. I apologise.

As a matter of fact, the topic of this thread is "What's wrong with Rattle," not "what's wrong with/do you like Rattle."  But the thread's author, Wanderer I believe he is, being rather more liberal than you, has not protested your attempts at highjacking it toward a "what's right with Rattle" homily.

Re-read the title of the poll.


Otherwise, "unfounded" to me is anything presented without sufficient evidence to back it. And not "sufficient existing evidence", but evidence referenced in the same context as the statement, which you only now offered; finally.

I can't say I agree with you, as I don't. But at least you now present a view that's more than just an axiomatic "f is a fact".

So I'm covered, and will be annoying you no longer; however, I still stand by not wanting to derail threads, rather than not wanting to discuss the matter with you. If you want a discussion on social progress, feel free to create the appropriate thread.