And why, after so long, have so few performers followed his lead but instead wandered after his side interest, Bach? Were scientists the same, they'd now be spending most of their efforts on Newton's alchemy instead of his calculus.

  • 1
    Is it really possible to answer this question? How should we know why people long dead did what they did? – Neil Meyer Sep 15 '15 at 10:44
  • I think we need more information on how Gould preferred these composers to Bach. Did this question come from something he wrote or an interview, for example? My impression was he was a lifelong Bach fanatic, though he obviously recorded other things too. – Andy Sep 15 '15 at 11:00
  • 1
    Leibnitz , not Newton, you rotten rotten! And Archimedes beat them both to it sciencenews.org/article/prayer-archimedes – Carl Witthoft Sep 15 '15 at 11:12
  • 2
    Gould's tastes were idiosyncratic: he liked certain of the Elizabethans/Jacobeans, but didn't cover some of the more significant keyboard composers (Bull, Farnaby) and did include (not entirely unreasonably, considering his closeness to the English) a Dutch composer (Sweelinck). However, he did produce more recordings of Schoenberg and Hindemith than any of these composers combined. Looking to Gould (to anyone, really) for confirmation of your own evaluations is perhaps a waste of time. – Patrx2 Sep 15 '15 at 17:22

Although he mentions the Elizabethans in many interviews, broadcasts, and essays, his discography turns out to include only one recording of them (CBS, S 72988). That is sufficient explanation for why others haven't continued much in his direction.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.