Opera, Golf, 19th Century Germany and Mr. Mucci

[JakaB]

In February 1900 Gustuv Mahler caused a printed explanation of his retouchings of Beethoven's symphonies - and specifically the Ninth - to be distributed among the Vienna Philharmonic audience after he had been severely criticized for attempting to improve Beetoven. In it he said:

"Because of his total deafness, Beethoven had lost the essential intimate contact with the reality of physical sound in the world just at the time in his creative development when a very powerful increase in understanding urged him to find new ways of expression and towards hitherto unthought of drastic treatment of orchestration.
   Just as well known as this fact is the other, namely, that the nature of the brass instrruments of his time excluded the proper formation of succeeding notes which are needed for the formation of a melody.  Just this very lack of perfection led to the improvement in the manufacture of these instruments and it would be a crime not to use them to give a more perfect rendering of Beetoven's works."

I find how this statement relates to GCA in relation to the impovements in the manufacture of golf instruments to be quite revealing....how can the design of a classic course be as pure as the ninth symphony as written by Beethoven...the improvements in the instruments of golf have far exceeded the improvements of musical instruments but still we question the modern architects when they improve upon the classics in golf so we can see the intent of the masters as the designs relate to the modern game.

Sadly Gustav Mahler was not loved by the critics of his day and the following quote may remind many of us of the great Golf Course Architects of our day:

"Those who are born after such great spirits as Beethoven and Wagner, the epigones, have no easy task.  For the harvest is already gathered in, and there remain only a few solitary ears of corn to glean.
   In forty of fifty years, they will play my symphonies at orchistral concerts as they now play Beethoven's."

Gustuv Mahler died in 1911 and did not win critical aclaim again until 1960....Lets not let our masters of today fall to the same fate due to the same type of inaccuracies and distortions that can be created by people with the sparsest of acquaintance with the orginal architects intent or the product as it stands today.

[RJ_Daley]

JK,

That certainly is food for thought.  I don't have a deep enough understanding of music to take a firm stand on the validity of your comparison.   For that matter, I am not a virtuoso of the playing of the game of golf either.  So I only have questions.  

Do you think that the changing of the quality and playability of the brass instruments after the masters of the greatest compositions of their times had passed away precludes the full measure of appreciation or full range of executing their music when played today with the newest instruments?  Is that really like golf?  Do new instruments in golf bring out more of the old master's brilliance or expose them as shallow ignorant designs, not able to keep up interesting play on courses built before the new instruments were manufactured, and after they had passed away?  Are the dead architects the Beethovens of their times, and Rees Jones types the Gustav Mahlers, reworking the scores to accomodate the new instruments.  Did Francis Scott Key want new instrumentation to end up presenting the SSB to its full or evolved "potential" of greater instrumentation as Hendrix played it.   Would MacKenzie have liked to seen Tiger and his tools have a go at Augusta at his original length and design?   :-/

[Dan King]

There is a big difference. Mahler did nothing to destroy Beethoven's work. He just supplied his own interpretation of Beethoven. Anyone could compare Mahler's interpretation to the original whenever they wanted.

We've also come along way in painting techniques in the last few centuries. Should someone take the Mona Lisa and repaint over it, destorying the original?  How about some arms (and whatnot) for David?  

"The poetic temperament is the worst for golf. It dreams of brilliant drives, iron shots laid dead, and long putts holed, while in real golf success waits for him who takes care of the foozles and leaves the fine shots to take care of themselves."
  --Sir Walter Simpson  (The Art of Golf)

[Ward Peyronnin]

Patrick,

One can always replace the sheet of music on the stand and play the original score.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

If you don't know how to properly interpret the music, how do you ever expect to play it right?

How many people have you heard play Chopsticks with a style and grace of a Librace'?

If yourplaying the piano, Interpretation revolves around holding or pushing the keys down and the precise moments. Otherwise it sounds just like a beginner is playing it.

Try listening to Aaron Copeland's Appalacian Spring and tell me that the person doing the flute solo towards the end isn't feeling the music, just as Copeland intended.
(It's a breath-taking part where if one listens closely, and if it is being played properly, you can hear the pads of the flute keys hitting up and down, along with the hearty breath it takes to play it.)

Andres Segovia had the same touch with guitar, as does his protege' John Williams. (the acclaimed classical gutiarist, not the composer) Listen to his version of "Magdelena" sometime and tell me that someone could play it more dramatically, and filled with passion then him.

I think it takes the heart of the artist to truely feel music, and project it to the listener, regardless of being on tape or live in a concert hall.

I don't doubt for one second that it isn't the same for GREAT architects.

[redanman (Guest)]

Some modern architects should leave their "interpretations" of classic architecture limited to "playing interpretations".  Especially when they don't acknowledge the existence of a classic style.  How does one interpret what doesn't exist in one's world?

Paging Wittgenstein, calling Dr. Wittgenstein.....

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Yes, Redanman, You are so correct!

It is here that some architects should just plainly limit their playing of music in confines of their own home, with no one having to listen. Expect the neighbors to call the police though.

Proof of that for me was seen yesterday while driving past a new David Rainville/Gary Bye course in Yucaipa, California. I was with a certain architect (who will go unmentioned here to protect the innocent) and he refused to look over at this course for fear of being infected by such ilk.

I looked at it, in the same way one listens to the house band in some Tijuana want-to-hump-hump bar. It's sort of like running ones finger nails over a chalk board, wanting the whole world to listen. These hills were alive with the sound of musak one fears he'll have to spend an eternity listening to.

Was it Classic?

I'm sure the architects thought so.

[RJ_Daley]

Maybe there is another way of looking at JakaB's analogy, even though he didn't say as much.  That being the improvement in the instruments to care for the golf course, not reshape it.  With modern instrumentation of mowing and grooming, and application of better chemicals, that aspect of instrumentation also changes the score.  In the case of music (if I understand the effect of the improved manufacture in the brass instrumentation) the newer horns were able to transistion from note to note more fluidly, allowing for a more slick playing of a harder edged notation originally concieved by the old masters because they didn't know that the changes could be accomplished in a more subtle manner.  Perhaps that is like adding speed to the green by the new equipment, taking the hard edged breaks to places that they weren't intended to go...  So a fellow remodels an old classic and takes some of the contour out of an old master's green.  Sure, they don't have to cut them to such blinding speeds, just like the musician can choose not to play them so silky and interpret the piece as the old master had heard or conceived it.  But would the public accept the older style of harder notes or slower greens?  I don't think JakaB was talking about new courses in his original comment above.

[Patrick_Mucci]

JakaB,

There are several material differences in your example.

The original product is NOT DISFIGURED OR DESTROYED, and can be played at any time in its ORIGINAL FORM.

The same is not true of disfigured, redesigned golf courses, they are LOST FOREVER.

Certainly you understand the difference between being
IRREVOCABLY LOST, and TEMPORARILY shelved.

Your example is not a trend or an accepted practice, merely a blip over all of the centuries,   Compare that to the number of golf courses altered in the last 50 years.

I'm not sure, but last night I might have heard the worst version of the SSB yet, on the HBO fight, a hip-hop/rap version that even the crowd booed at length.  
Did I misinterpret the song ?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

No Pat, It is quite obivous that the Gangsta that was singing it did.

If you read it closely, we are saying the same thing.

Another way of seeing it, is Sting. Have any of you ever heard his different versions of Roxanne or Eric Clapton's electric and acoustic versions of Layla? Here is a perfect example of different style, but same interpretation. (Hence, by the same artists that made each of the versions popular)

In a Classical music sense, listen to Neville Mariner conducting the Academy Of St. Martin Of The Field's interpretation of Antonio Vivaldi's The Four Seasons I think that you will more then find that style and substance are connected, and that each is its very own art.

Andres Segovia, (Whom I had the fond honor of once meeting) could take a Bach Concerto and turn it into magic on the classical guitar. It was his interpretation of Bach and to better understand it, Bach did these Concerto's with all sorts of instruments. Segovia interpreted it with one.

There is little doubt in my mind that Bach would have applauded Segovia for his efforts just as Carl Perkins would do for Elvis Presley and his Blue Suede Shoes.

[JakaB]

Patrick,

I do not believe it is so simple to play Beethoven now as it was played at the time of the original score as you think.  Even at a time closer to Beethoven's death...in the words of Gustuv Mahler..."Richard Wagner, who all his life by word and deed was passsionately trying to rescue Beethoven's works from abysmal performances which had become almost unbearable, in his article 'On the Correct Performance of Beethoven's Ninth' indicates how to conduct this work in the way Beethoven had intended it to be heard, and most conductors have followed Wagner's advice.  To say that we simply can play the original score if we choose to assumes the genius of Wagner to be commonplace.  Mahler goes on to say..."Nobody could possibly call this a re-orchestration or, still worse, an 'improvement' of Beethoven's composition.  I think this fits perfectly with the lengthening of the 18th at Augusta....this is not a re-design or an improvement of MacKenzie's composition....it is a way to 'balance' the volume of the sound created by new equipment and talent.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

John,
Once again, that is your and Tom Fazio's INTERPRETATION of it.

Who knows now how MacKenzie ever intended his composition to be played? It has been changed and rewritten so many times, that it is an entirely different song, and just not my taste in what I would call music or art.

Do we change the way Beethoven'sOde To Joy was written simply because we now have person that has a far superior equimpment and a well-trained ear to listen to it?

[Peter Galea]

Mahler's intent was to give the orchestra a larger "voice".
Beethovens's power and genius had become lost in the newer, larger halls.
In Beethoven's time, halls were small and "unacoustic".
He was also saddled with small orchestras. It was difficult to get a large group of players together due to piddling pay.
Mahler's greatest contribution to LVB's work was to increase the size of the horn and string sections (power). This enabled him to fill the symphony hall with the greatest music ever written.
Perhaps Beethoven's score was the course, and Mahler's re-write was the technological advancement of equipment.

[John_McMillan]

I read Maynard Solomon's recent biography of Beethoven over the summer.  Solomon goes into great depth on Beethoven's loss of hearing, emphasizing that the loss was gradual and sporadic - there were times when Beethoven had some limited hearing function through most of his life - so I don't even agree with the premise of the statement.  In addition, Beethoven wrote 1 opera - Fidelio, not the 9'th sympyony - and Mahler none, so the opera reference is also confusing.  Mahler did receive critical acclaim, but it was for his own work - not for his "retouching" of Beethoven's.  

Maybe a better parallel comes from Verdi and 19'th century Opera.  The performance of Opera in the 19'th Century was much more centered on vocal performers - who would frequently interrupt a production to repeat the performance of a popular aria.  It was not until the 20'th century and under the leadership of conducters like Toscannini or in modern times Ricardo Muti that the Operas were performed as they were originally written.

Let's hope that golf architects don't have to wait 100 years until their courses are actually played as they were designed.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Pete,
Completely understand what you are getting at, but don't you think that music should naturally Evolve?

In example--Emerson, Lake, & Palmer's version of Pictures At An Exhibition.  

While not an original works (Mussorgsky was the composer of this one) ELP had interpreted the piece live when they had first grouped. They liked the piece so much that they made it their third album, mind you a live version of it!

They also had their critics too: (From the ELP website)
For the interim, the band wanted to release its live recording of Pictures At An Exhibition. However, the band's US label, Atlantic refused to release it. "The label told the band it was a piece of shit and would damage their careers," remembers manager, Stewart Young. "We felt otherwise, and had released it in Europe, where it was a huge hit. The British import started to filter to US shops and eventually sold 50,000 copies.The next thing I know the label is on the phone telling me they'd like to put the album out. I told them to go to hell. Three days later the President of the label flew to London to try to get us to change our mind. Eventually, we put the deal together and the album came out. Ultimately, it was a multi-platinum hit."

In 1994, ELP came out with their compliation disk of their works called, "Return of the Manticore" which featured a modern day remake of "Pictures At An Exhibition" only with more modern equimpment and which their talents had matured with experience. The result was the piece Evolved and was not better then the original, but just as enjoyable to listen to, knowing how far the group had matured as muscians. I still listen to both interpretations frequently, and ironically, the earlier live version compared to the more engineered late version is very interesting. (being that you can do a lot of engineering in the studio, but can't grasp the earnest of three musicians playing at the beginning of their prime years, with only the future to look forward to!)



Yes, the halls have gotten bigger and in many cases the musicians have sold out for even bigger financial rewards, thus the music live, lost a lot of feel.

None of us should ever lose "Feel."

Also note***ELP have done other interpretations like Ginestera's "Toccata." and Copeland's "Hoedown" from his composition, "Rodeo" and "Fanfare To The Common Man" which have both recieved wide praise from their composers.

(unfortunately, I can't find the magazine that had the quote from the great Aaron Copeland on ELP and their interpretations of his works. But it was nothing less then flattering.)

"Toccata" was Adapted from the fourth movement of Alberto Ginestera's First Piano Concerto. Keith Emerson personally flew to Geneva to meet Ginestera and ask his permission to use the piece on the LP, "Brain Salad Surgery."

Emerson was extremely nervous to be playing this interpretation for one his classicial heroes, but when the composer was amazed when he heard the tape, stating : "That is the way my music should be played !"

Make no bones about it, the difference in Interpretation is quite different from the original, but just like "Pictures" it evolved into something that pleased it's composer.

[Patrick_Mucci]

JakaB,

Are all the original notes intact ?

Is the original design of Augusta intact ?

How about GCGC ?

Is one forced/mandated to play these courses in their altered form for the rest of their existance, until they are altered again,  and deprived of any possibility of playing them in their original form ?

Now would you say that substantial, permanent changes been made to these courses and others, altering them forever,  whereas the centuries old music remains, to be played in its original form ?

[JakaB]

Patrick,

You overestimate the value of the notes...Mahler said.."The 'works' of this person or that...are the ephemeral and mortal part of him; but what a man makes of himself....what he becomes through the untiring effort to live and to be...is permanent...What we leave behind us is only the husk, the shell.  The Meistersinger, the Ninth, Faust....all of them are only the discarded husk!  No more, properly speaking, than our bodies are.  I don't mean that artistic creation is superfluous.  It is a necessity of men for growth and joy, which again is a question of health and creative energy.  But what actual need is there of notes?

When compared to GCA I see the original routing to be similar to the notes....so I say yes the original Augusta is intact in much the same way original scores are intact....there is no question MacKenzie would still recognize Augusta and in my opinion not see any of his original intent destroyed when played in a modern context....I even believe that if a member would choose he would be able to tee the ball in locations to play the course in an original state much like the musician can play an original score in any matter he chooses....

I do not know anything about GCGC but am sure you can find examples of courses that have been destroyed by architects...but I no more would want to turn back the time on modern golf architecture than I would want to return to poor achoustics of the past.

Tommy,

Get out your copy of "A Fifth of Beethoven" you Disco Queen you.

[Patrick_Mucci]

JakaB,

I maintain that without third party sources, a member could never visualize what was originally created in both the large scale and details at Augusta.

I could site courses like Metropolis, Montclair and others where holes have been disfigured beyond recognition.

And, these are not isolated instances.

An interesting study would be Gulph Mills, where Tom Paul has provided a wonderful historic recap of the numerous architectual changes to the course over the years.
Amendment after Amendment.  Where in music do you see
Rewrite after Rewrite ?  Does the music EVOLVE, or does it remain mostly static over time ?

Perhaps we see what we want to see.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

JakaB,
Going to put it on the CD as soon as I get in my vehicle!

Hope I don't exceed the speed limit!