Interesting...Just switched on the radio, and heard Strauss's Don Quixote. I listened & thought: "I agree with much of what this cellist does. It's not me, tho'; I play it differently. Who can it be?' I looked it up; it was- me + @mn_orchestra /De Waart in 1990! Does one change?
-
-
Interesting discussion, but with great works I don't believe that we can ever get sufficiently close that only tiny details are left. Even after Newton had solved many of the mysteries of the universe, he said he still felt like a child playing on the seashore.
-
A crucial point, though, is that we are not alone in our struggle to solve the problems that confront us. We humans learn from each other, and tend to preserve, study, and build on the breakthroughs of our predecessors. Wisdom accumulates. We have come a long way since Newton.
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I hasten to add that I do not intend these remarks as the expression of my own personal convictions. I am simply trying to convey what I understand of the thinking of those who embrace an ideal, Platonic conception of a work of art, and of the role and goal of its interpreter.
-
I do note, however, that in my experience, the difference between a transcendent interpretation and a mundane one does indeed lie in its treatment of the tiniest of details.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Funny - it just doesn't work that way in music, though. The paradox is that the more closely the interpreters follow the composer's markings, the more different their interpretations sound.
-
Precisely, years of lecturing (Anthropology mainly) have taught me that in the weeks/months after a seemingly deep insight, the referent seems to get slightly and mysteriously skewed. That's why I'm an HMP (Hermeneutical Meta Platonist), our club is called The Turn.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.