panapp

Masterpiece review, I’m listening to the tracks on YouTube and I am nothing short of stunned because IT BRINGS BACK EVERYTHING.

Waiting for the reviews of "Songs from the West Coast" and "Peachtree Road."

@stupidgirl09: the issue is not whether Benedetti Michelangeli betrayed the score or not, since he CERTAINLY did; the problem lies in the fact that from 1 to the CD, because the performer (an appropriate term) made a modification, slightly altering an artwork that is expressively worth 100%, technically 100%, and philologically 99%. I hope I have made myself DEFINITELY clear. Goodbye and thank you. @kosmogabri: of course, this recording has been printed by Warner Classics on several occasions. Searching through my collection of CDs, I also found the edition for Deutsche Grammophon that Benedetti Michelangeli recorded in the early '80s, and listening to it again, I realized that the mistake is not there: evidently the pianist knew it very well and in the new performance, he was more meticulous. I would like to highlight that the edition that Warner has is the one performed for RAI and therefore not originally intended to be recorded, while the Deutsche one was indeed meant to be recorded and thus performed to absolute perfection. As with all things, if you want the best, you have to spend more money, so I advise stupidgirl09 to save up 16 €, go to Feltrinelli, and buy the definitive edition instead of spending 5 € on a CD from the clearly budget series (that is, Apex) and still expect to have the Holy Grail in hand. A simple example: if I want the perfect duck à l'orange, I go to La Tour d'Argent in Paris where I spend a lot, but it’s worth it; if instead I go to the trattoria across from the Bois de Boulogne, I spend less but I can’t expect perfection. It’s unfortunate, but that’s how it is.

@stupidgirl09: have you finished inventing assumptions about me? I repeat that you don't know me, so I would appreciate it if you stopped making potentially offensive conjectures (in the sense of being useful for building an offense on top of them). I don’t even know where Piazza Euclide is because I live 287 km from Rome, on the other side of the Apennines, at the other end of the Via Salaria, namely Ascoli Piceno. I didn’t call you a "pariolina," but I wrote that you have "spocchia pariolina": NO noun, YES adjective. Your stance is simply ridiculous: how do you expect to be the first one to notice that Benedetti Michelangeli has slightly modified the score? Who do you think you are? Do you think that in the last 40-plus years no one has noticed that there is a variant in that piece compared to the original score? Of course they have, obviously, and yet this performance continues inexorably to be printed, sold, and recommended as the recommended performance for this composer. I'm glad you have, as I suspect, a diploma in piano, but that doesn’t automatically allow you to pontificate on recordings that people much, much more qualified than you, and certainly not acting in bad faith, have considered to be of high quality. I have a degree in architecture: does that automatically allow me to disparage Antonio da Sangallo because I think his capitals in Palazzo Farnese are not quite the same as those of the Temple of Saturn in the Forums? You have a view of res that is nothing short of static and ironclad (I wouldn’t want to use the term "academic" because anyway the 99% of the greatest artists have come from academies), exactly like that of another user who claimed that among the avant-gardes of the twentieth century there was no contact since they had different names. Try to soften up and listen to music as it is and not as it should be (in your brain); you might discover that it’s even more beautiful: Debussy is not Bach, his music is not calculation.

@The Punisher: yes, so?

A really well-done and intriguing review for a book I've always heard about, but unfortunately, I have never read yet. What edition do you have, from which publisher?

@The Punisher: a) I was referring to the drawings b) I specified that I was speaking in an "excessively simplistic manner": obviously I don't think that all of his drawings are the same, nor do I think the same about his paintings.

@The Punisher: oh, you would definitely win because I wouldn't even bother searching for information about this specific work online; it would be a waste of time because I already know I would find little to nothing. But in fact, my comment was not a criticism at all, I hope it wasn't received that way: what I meant to say is that this review (which I rated 3, not 1 or 2!) can be likened to all of Schiele's other works as they are very, very, very homogeneous among themselves. In any case, luckily, there are still books to refer to apart from the Internet. ;)

@The Punisher: uhm, you are also right because usually Schiele's drawings are commented "as a whole" (to put it overly simplistically but fundamentally correctly: seen one, seen them all) and not one by one, so I imagine that describing a single drawing wasn't that simple. However, it is true that they are all relatable.

Not a badly written review, huh, but any art history book would say more and better.