Reviewing who? |
But if I'm going to post a public review, I either keep those preferences hidden or casually state them. I have no qualms telling readers I've gotten tired of the 1812 Overture, any more than I'd rave about my obsession with the Britten War Requiem. But in either case, my rating will be based entirely on the performance. Yet I'm familiar with a handful of reviewers who will give unfavorable ratings to well known works over some quibble about the composition. Frankly, I find such writing useless. I don't need anyone telling me why they don't like the Bartok Second Violin Concerto, for instance. If the reviewer has a personal dislike for the work, just steer clear of it. It's not too different from conductors recording works they don't admire. If you're not in sync with the music, don't try to judge it.
The exception? If the music is either new or almost completely neglected, anyone who reads your review will want to know what you think of the music itself. In that case, if the music is nothing special, a neutral or unfavorable rating would make sense. Otherwise, it only makes sense to stick to reviewing the interpretation. And if you happen to abhor the music, don't try to stick your fingers in the mix to review, at least not in a serious sense. I grant room for comedic relief.
And thankfully, I've been blessed with ears that love almost all Classical music. But perhaps that's because I've determined to enjoy everything and try it young?
No comments:
Post a Comment