This Stinks

I never much liked it when the otherwise great Andrew Porter reviewed performances that either used his translations or, in the case of John Eaton's lousy Tempest, featured his own libretto. (And surprise! He gave it a favorable review!) But he was Andrew Porter, and I suppose that was part of the price one paid for the benefit of his wisdom.

Jay Nordlinger, music critic for The New Criterion, is no Andrew Porter, and his shameless report on Salzburg makes for disturbing reading. Nordlinger not only attended the summer festival as a member of the press. He also conducted public interviews, sponsored by the Festival, of the performers. So, unless I've missed something, he was on the Festival's payroll. That should disqualify him from reporting on it, no?

You will not be surprised to find that all his interviewees were wonderful. Tenor Michael Schade, we learn, is "Wunderlichian." Ferrucio Furlanetto "is one of the great King Philips in history." Who knew? Perhaps most risible is Nordlinger's characterization of a response from Valery Gergiev:

"Valery Gergiev, the Russian conductor, was in Salzburg, conducting Benvenuto Cellini, the Berlioz opera. He was an interviewee, too, and I questioned him about Cellini: 'Is it a great opera, a good opera, an okay opera?' Gergiev’s answer demonstrated his integrity, certainly his honesty."

I'm stopping here, because I want you to fully appreciate the "integrity" and "honesty" of Gergiev's response. Ready? Here it is: "It is an interesting opera, an unusual opera, an imaginative opera." Wow! What a bold thing to say! Well, I suppose someone who reports on a festival that pays him would know all about "integrity."

It doesn't help that Nordlinger bathes his reactions and pronouncements in an orotund style. Try to figure out the vocal qualities of Anna Samuil, the soprano who sang Tatiana in Eugene Onegin:

"She has a most interesting voice, Samuil: It is darkish, as you can expect from the East, but it is also changeable, adaptable, and beautiful. Even more than beautiful, it is interesting (as I’ve said). And it is alive, always alive. As for technique, that was 100 percent secure, on the night I attended. And Samuil’s musical and dramatic instincts were faultless—faultless. This is a mightily intelligent singer. You can go five, ten, fifteen seasons without hearing a Tatiana so right."

OK, but what made it so right? Can you give us any details? This is the kind of writing that C. S. Lewis warned his pupil, Kenneth Tynan, about when he told Tynan that a critique should "distinguish (and not merely praise)." Throwing a bunch of words at Anna Samuil tells us nothing about her voice ("darkish"?--is that even a word? And what "East" are we talking about here?).

Such is what passes for music criticism these days.