※The following is something I wrote in my twenties. Reading it back now, it is rather embarrassing — the inexperience shows in all sorts of ways — but it is part of the AUDIO STYLE record, so I am leaving it here.
Come to think of it, when I buy music CDs or records, I almost never actually refer to the reviews written by professional music critics in magazines or elsewhere. This is partly because I already have my own established set of values when it comes to music and performance — something entirely intuitive, but more or less unshakeable — and partly because I can build up a collection of records and CDs I love entirely on my own judgement, without needing to consult anyone else’s opinion. (Strictly limited to classical music, mind you.)
So, for example, CD reviews in music magazines, things posted online, or user reviews of CDs and concerts on shopping sites — I almost never read any of them. Though thinking about it more carefully, there is another reason behind this: the flip side is that reading them occasionally, not infrequently (mysterious), leaves me feeling rather unpleasant.
I am well aware that there are many accurate and wonderful reviews out there, but if one or two excessively critical, condescending reviews are mixed in among them, they catch my attention and linger in my mind long after I have finished reading. This is because when I read a review not only as a “listener” but also from the position of a “performer”, certain pieces of criticism can give me a strange sense of disconnection, as though the whole world has been turned upside down. In particular, when a performance or recording that I found genuinely wonderful is written off in a needlessly scathing way, it does put me in rather a bad mood. Opinions are free, and in the end everyone is entitled to their own, I know — but even so, the perspective of a performer seems to kick in unbidden, and I find I cannot maintain any emotional detachment.
ポチップ
Writing about music is genuinely difficult, I think. Even I am no exception — one may believe one is discussing quality and merit, yet to others it reads as nothing more than a matter of personal taste, of likes and dislikes. To begin with, in order to criticise music properly, one would need, to put it in the extreme, a level of musical insight at least equal to that of the music’s creator. Without that, there is simply no way to accurately judge what is good or bad; and the judgements of someone lacking it are nothing more than an amateur’s assumptions — shallow, arbitrary, and little better than prejudiced nonsense. And yet, for some reason, in the world of music criticism (classical music in particular?), there are people who deliver arrogant, high-handed attacks as though they owned the place. Could it be that writing in an authoritative, overbearing manner is somehow perceived as more critic-like… more elevated?
In my own case, having played the piano for twenty-five years, immersed in music every day and involved in it in all sorts of ways, the thing I have come to realise is this:
“I truly know very little about music.”
That is the reality. And because of it, I am frankly too afraid to pass careless judgement on other people’s performances. Of course I have personal likes and dislikes when it comes to performances and performers — but setting aside purely surface-level matters like technical execution, when it comes to expression, to what is right or wrong at the level of artistry and inner meaning, that is simply not something someone like me has any business pronouncing upon. When one catches even a glimpse of the depth of thought that musicians of the first rank bring to their music — the subtlety of their thinking, the philosophical reflection — one cannot help but come to know that there is a world one cannot understand, not unless one has reached that level oneself, both technically and as a human being. For someone who has not arrived there to start levelling grand criticisms at such a performer, without ever having sought their teaching, is, no matter how one looks at it, presumptuous and entirely back to front.
Seen from this angle, to go beyond the modest “impressions” of an ordinary individual and deliver a proper critical verdict based on judgements of good and bad, one would have to be either a critic of breathtaking ignorance, or a genius surpassing the very musician being reviewed. Well, if someone said to me: watching a baseball game and chipping in with everyone’s opinions, and writing performance reviews of classical CDs, are basically the same thing — don’t overthink it — I suppose they might have a point.
Even so, regardless of whether the criticism has any validity, seeing someone subjected to a one-sided drubbing is simply not a pleasant thing to witness. And when the real substance of it turns out to be nothing more than a subjective evaluation — unconsciously skewed by personal likes and dislikes, yet dressed up in the objective language of authority — then it all amounts, in the end, to seeking agreement for a negative personal opinion while demanding that everyone accept the absolute correctness of the reviewer’s judgement. It leads to a rather sad set of values, and at that point, honestly, I am not sure what more there is to say.
There have been many times when I recommended a CD or concert I loved and the other person simply did not feel the same way, and equally there are people who have lavished praise on recordings or performances I found flat and lifeless. One’s own sense of what is good or bad only goes so far, and in the end everyone perceives things differently. When one must evaluate something as subjective and sensory as music, I sometimes think the only thing that really makes sense is to gather the positive responses — from those who felt “it was wonderful”, “it was interesting”, “it moved me”. “It was wonderful.” “It was fascinating.” “It moved me.” An opinion whose essential conclusion is simply “it was bad” — even if it is correct — leaves a residue of unpleasantness in people’s hearts, ultimately serves no one, and one false step and it becomes nothing but the seed of conflict. Truly good music will naturally rise in esteem as positive responses accumulate around it, and anything else, I believe, will simply fade away unnoticed if left alone.
ポチップ
I am not quite sure what point I was trying to make anymore, but I suppose it comes down to this: when listening to classical music, I would like people to approach it in a more relaxed, open spirit if they can. I do not want people wielding knowledge in a rigid, critic-like way, turning it over and over, or straining to present themselves as intellectually sophisticated. Performers generally do not want to be listened to in that stiff, laboured fashion, and being treated as a plaything for someone’s self-regard — peered at from some lofty vantage point — is, frankly, a nuisance. Rather than approaching music with the intention of delivering a withering verdict from on high, please — everyone — love music a little more. And that concludes this rather self-indulgent monologue from the AUDIO STYLE author, who was irritated for the first time in a while after reading a certain classical music review online.
Auto Translated by CS4.6
List of comments （3）
トラックバックさせていただきました。
この記事にはなかなか考えさせられました。
僕はまったく正反対の意見ですが、自分にはない視点があり大変興味深く、また勉強になりました。
どうもです。
damepoxxxさんはじめまして(^^)。
ロックという違うジャンルの方が読んで下さるとは思ってもみなかったです。
アレな内容なので消そうと思ってたのですが、レスが付いてしまいましたので残すことにします…。
今回のこれは、けっこう限定的な内容で日記的に書き殴ったもので、
私自身の批評活動に対して、自戒の意を込めて書いた部分が多く、
思い当たる節があって不快に思われたり、グサッとくる方もいらっしゃりそうですね(滝汗)。
私が(他人がこれを書いたとして)読んだらもろにグサッと来ますから……。
というより、書きながら、これって自分で自分の批判じゃん…とグサッと来ますので(^^)ゝ
ですので、直ぐ日記をトップページから下げたのですが、ブログはやっぱり観られてますねー(^^;
日記に書いた内容は、
私が好きなある演奏家の演奏に対してのア○ゾンの特定の酷評レビューを読んで、
カチンと来て感情的に…。書いたものです。ですので、当然全てのレビューに当てはまっている訳ではなく、
その意味で、客観的に捉えてしまうと半分は正しくて半分は間違っていると思います。
レビューを書かれる人々の多くは、音楽に愛があって、
その愛情によって評価したり苦言を呈したりしていますので、
そういった気持ちの伝わるおおかたのレビューについて文句を言った訳ではありません。
そうではなく、たぶん音楽でも”クラシック”という分野で特に強いものだと思うのですが、
“権威主義的な思い込み”というか、何かとっても偉そうで高飛車な態度(文章)で
否定的な意見を述べられるケースが、時折無防備な意識に飛び込んできて、
鼻に付くことがあるんです。場合によってそういった偏った批判が、
権威的口調の効果で良く知らない人達を信じ込ませてしまい、
実際の演奏を個人個人がどう感じたかではなく、”自分が偉いと思っている誰かさん”による、
言葉のバイアス評価(しかも－評価)が世論として一人歩きをしてしまうような事が、
クラシックの世界では往々にしてありがちだと感じている事を言いたかったのです。
音楽を大海の深さを知れば知る程、”自分は何も知らない””けっこう間違える”という事を、
否応なしにより鮮明に深く自覚させられると感じる私としては、
音楽に触れれば触れる程…結果的に考え方が慎重・謙虚に成らざるを得ません。
これ自体がそもそも私の主観的な発想なのかも知れませんが…・。
そうは感じていない御仁…音楽を知ることで逆に一端の気取り屋になってしまう人というのは、
(まぁ、本当に初心者さんの場合は頬笑ましく見られますが)その方がどういう視点から
音楽を捉えられているかは分かりませんが、きっと酷評された演奏家以上に洞察力のある天才か、
さもなくば思い上がりの勘違い御仁か、どっちかではないでしょうか？と疑問に思うのです。
…自分の過去を振り返った場合でも、”思い上がりの勘違い”によるいい加減な論評を、
さもそれっぽく吹聴したことが多々ありますし＿|￣|○
クラシック音楽がある部分難解な音楽であり、それ故に、聴き手がどうしても、
ワインを選ぶ際のソムリエ的な指標・羅針盤となり得る”権威ある導き手”を欲しているのも事実です。
ただ、そのアドバイザーによるバイアスのかかった権威主義的評価、あるいはマーケティングが、
音楽ではなく言葉として一人歩きすることで、ある特定の演奏家だけが過大に評価されたり、
有名でない演奏家の素晴らしい音楽に日が当たらなくなってしまったりするのが、一音楽ファンとして
なんとも歯がゆいというか、悲しくて”いや、そうじゃないんだ！”と叫びたくなる時があるんです。
（考えてみるとオーディオのブランド評価でもそうですね…・）
本当のところ、音楽に言葉は要らないといいますか、そもそも、ブログで私自身が、
オーディオ機器やレコードのレビューを書くこと自体がバイアスを生み出す元凶であり、
言葉だけが一人歩きして(実物に触れていない人・或いは自分の耳に自信のない人々)の
評価を左右してしまう事に成りかねない…と解っていながら確信犯でやっている部分があります。
だから、こんな無責任な事をしているヤツがそもそも偉そうなことを言えた筋合いではないのです。
深く考えすぎると禅問答みたいになってしまいますが…（´Д｀；）
その点も含めて、自分自身への自戒を込め、より謙虚で、より愛情ある目で…
読み手に少しでも役に立てるような情報の送り手でありたい、
情報の主観的な正しさ、善し悪しを伝えること以上に、”音楽への愛情”というもっと大切な事、
これが皆さんに伝わるような書き手でありたい、
こんな思いから先のような日記を書いてしまった次第です。
はじめましてです。
やはり立ち位置の違う方の意見は勉強になります。
青臭いことをぐだぐだ言っている自分が少々恥ずかしいです。
ここに書こうとしたコメントが長すぎて投稿できないようなので、あとで文章を修正して自分のブログに載せておこうと思います。
気が向いたら見てください。
それでは。