Post by SilverfinPost by d***@aol.comPost by LJONo, she was a Republican
Renata Tebaldi did have an amusing interaction with an American
political party: the followers of Lyndon Larouche. Incredible as it
may seem, Larouche has policies concerning classical music. One plank
in his platform is the lowering of the diapason. Another is an
endorsement of a very influential branch of music theory developed by
Heinrich Schenker.
Now there's a name I haven't heard in years!
Memories of Schenkerian Analysis classes in the first year at
university. If I remember rightly I came top in my year, but I'd still
like someone to explain to me what actual use it is?
Silverfin
On the subject of possibly lesbian singers (didn't we have a long
thread about it on here not so long ago?), I think it's a shame that we
still have a situation where non-hetero performers often feel unable to
be open about their same-sex partners in the way that most hetero ones
are about their wives and husbands (in interviews, etc). It's *so* not
a big deal (to most intelligent people) these days, who a person
chooses to sleep with - and yet the press will make a meal of it.
I agree with you in principle, but, actually, I think the Press are lot
more accepting than swathes of the general public - eg I'm loving all
the media coverage of Elton John/David Furnish's wedding because I
think it's sending out such a powerful message. But there are far too
many bigots who believe they can impose their immorality on other
people eg those ghastly people protesting in Belfast on Monday who are
so filled with hatred and self-loathing they can't stand the fact that
other people are capable of loving and being loved, and they attempt to
use god to justify their hatred.
Eg the fact that whenever this or related subject crops up on an opera
newsgroup (and indeed, elsewhere) there's always people who come up
with some mealy-mouthed crap about is it necessary that we really know,
blah blah? Now I accept that there are people who are genuinely
entirely uninterested in the private lives of other people, but, IME,
in general, those who shout the loudest about not wanting to know
whether someone's gay are those that need to tell you about their
children, or project inappropriate/incorrect assumptions onto others.
And then there are those who insist it essential that we know, citing
numerous biographers of numerous people from various walks of life who
have posthumously unearthed previously unknown facts, and trying to
claim that speculation on a newsgroup is somehow equivalent to the
painstaking research and corroborated evidence from reliable sources
used by a reputable biographer.
There is the point of view that it is out of order to indulge in any
speculation about dead people because they can't answer back. In an
ideal world, it would not be seen as being any more inappropriate to
discuss Tebaldi's supposed (or not) homosexuality than it would be to
discuss, for example, Callas's relationship with Onassis. But we don't
live in that ideal world, and there are far too many people who will
accept heterosexuality as fact, but assume that any suggestions of
homosexuality are a matter of great shame.