I just discovered a new music blog, courtesy of Jason Heath’s Arts Advocate blog, called Mahler Owes Me Ten Bucks. It’s written by Chantal Incandela, a double bass player who has changed her career from being primarily a performer to writing as a classical music critic for NUVO, an alternative print publication in Indianapolis. The latest post caught my eye, as it deals with her thoughts about the direction the ISO is going with their relatively new music director Mario Vengazo.
Here’s the passage that she talks about in the printed review:
The only section that seemed hesitant about this journey however are the cellos. They sounded (and even looked) unable to handle Nielsen’s difficult parts.
Now, here’s what she had to say on her blog, which I assume was filling in the large blanks left in her print review by the editing process.
Here’s the deal, plain and simple: this orchestra is progressing in amazing leaps and bounds under Mario’s direction. However, one section is not at all: the cellos. My review was edited quite a bit (I think–and hope–more for space than anything else) because I also pointed out that the cellos choked during a prominent soli section in the Nielsen, and I also said what I stated above, that they are NOT progressing with everyone else. In fact, I said they were holding the orchestra back.
Take a look at the print review here, and the blog entry here.
While I wouldn’t want to be on the receiving end of such criticism, it is actually refreshing to read. I don’t get a sense that Ms. Incandela is trying to aggrandize herself at the expense of the musicians of the orchestra, but is frustrated by the uneven pace of improvement in the orchestra and feels that it is affecting the overall artistic level of the ensemble.
It’s true that this is one person’s opinion (as all criticism is and must be), and that there might be differing points of view from the city’s other classical music critics with familiarity with the orchestra and its history. But still, it seems that critics today seem more intent upon demonstrating their knowledge of music history than in telling their readers (a pool of prospective audience members) how the opening night’s concert went, and whether they should go to one of the remaining performances.
I find myself longing for an more activist reviewers – someone who has an agenda and both the keen ears and sharp writing skills to advance that agenda. Of course, at this point my devil’s advocate side is telling me to be careful what I wish for!
4 replies on “aren’t critics supposed to be critical?”
Many thanks for the link! My post came out of frustration and concern and appreciation for the ISO (whom I’ve been listening for close to 15 years now). My reviews are often short and sweet, so I have no time to ramble on about my knowledge of music history–I have to call things like I hear them, and state what I loved, and what I didn’t. I’m glad some people appreciated it!
I read the blog and also found a post where she tried recently to become a bass sub in the ISO. She says the cellos can’t play with the bass section. Curious if that changes your perspective on these reviews.
It certainly might, though my interest was more in the actual content of the review, as in a nuts-and-bolts approach to what was good and what was not, at the concerts.
The advantage of a critic with a blog (and one that is revealing) is that you can judge the context of their reviews. The average reader of the print version of the paper would not have that advantage, and therefore might not know what the context of the review is/was (as with almost all print reviewers, unless you’ve got the background “poop” on them).
So the old admonition to take all reviews with a grain of salt still holds, I’d say.
I’m slightly (well, quite) late on this, but since someone addressed something in my blog that might affect how I review something (or how someone views my reviews), I should probably follow up….
I have commented on the bad cello section way before I took the ISO sub audition, and have always held on to the opinion that the cello section is the ISOs weakest, and that has not changed in quite a while. The sub audition and my comments on the cello section have nothing to do with each other, whatsoever, in any way, shape or form.