[Sonnova]

On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 09:24:33 -0700, Jenn wrote
(in article ):

In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:


His orchestral arrangements/recordings of JS Bach's Toccata & Fugue
in D minor, and Debussy's 'Engulfed Cathedral' are guilty pleasures
of mine.

There's no doubt that "Stokie" was a fine musician, as well as a supreme
egotist and control freak, even for conductors of his generation, which
is REALLY going a ways!

The question of his arrangements is always a popular subject when
discussing his work. In my view (which is fairly common), there's
nothing wrong with arranging the work of a master, as long as it is
stated that it's an arrangement (or "edition"). With the Bach, he did
so state. With others, he didn't, which is too bad. For example, when
he first performed and composed some works by Percy Grainger, he didn't
state that they were arrangements, which really shocked the composer, of
course. After heated discussion, Grainger went along with LS's
arrangements, but demanded that they were identified in program notes
and liner notes that they were indeed arrangements.


I certainly have no problem with musicians "arranging" the works of the
masters as long as you have no problem with me exercising my right to reject
them. I prefer, in most cases, to hear the composer's intentions (to the
extent possible in any performing art) as opposed to someone who chooses to
second-guess the composer by actually changing what the composer wrote.
Conductors have enough latitude with regard to tempi and dynamics to express
their interpretations of a work without having to resort to actually
physically changing them. Just my opinion, you understand. This subject is
largely a matter of taste and I'm certainly not dogmatic about it.