Talk:Norman Lebrecht

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Journalism  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Re assertion: "Lebrecht’s predictions on the decline of the classical music industry have been generally vindicated"[edit]

See the following counter arguments:

  • What a bum note, Norman. "Norman Lebrecht's Maestros, Masterpieces and Madness launches a strident attack on classical music. Alas, it drops the baton, says Adam Mars-Jones". The Observer, April 15, 2007. [2]
  • Can classical music escape the noose? "Doomsayers claim that classical recording has a death wish. Neil Fisher argues it’s not over till the small labels sing". The Times, April 27, 2007. [3]
  • A Scavenger Of Classical Music. Review of Norman Lebrecht: The Life and Death of Classical Music. By Benjamin Ivry, The New York Sun, April 19, 2007. [5]
  • The day the music died? (Review of Maestros, Masterpieces and Madness) By Susan Tomes, The Independent, April 6, 2007.[6]
  • Curtain call for the classics (Review of Maestros, Masterpieces and Madness) By Michael White, The Sunday Times. April 8, 2007. [7]

Voceditenore 11:29, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Sokolov + other facets to note about Lebrecht[edit]

For anyone foolish or lazy enough to cite Lebrecht on Wikipedia without going to proper primary sources that aren't gossip blogs, you need to know some things about Lebrecht and his modus operandi:

  • When he posts something about a "Maestro move", very often, even though he claims to be "first" or "breaking", he is counting on English speakers not bothering to find earlier sources that are not originally in English. In other words, announcements in the original non-English languages were first.
  • He is known for not retracting or apologising for erroneous speculations on his blog. One case in point: there was a delay in the final signing of Jonathan Nott's contract as chief conductor of the Orchestre de la Suisse Romande. Lebrecht then said that the Nott/OSR contract was in jeopardy. Nott then signed the contract, and is now ensconced as the OSR's chief conductor. Did Lebrecht apologise or retract? No, of course he didn't.
  • Lebrecht hates New York City. He really hates New York City. He really, really hates New York City. (Have I mentioned that he hates New York City?) That is to say: Lebrecht will deliberately amplify any unpleasant story that involves a New York City musical figure, or donor. A NYC socialite donor's divorce, or a suicide of a NYC resident? You'll find him posting about them on his blog, his gloating and glee scarcely concealed.
  • Lebrecht is a narcissist par excellence, where among other features, he'll use the affectation "We have heard of" in his posts. Or, for example, when he mentioned being near where István Kertész sadly drowned, his post starts by saying essentially that 'I'm standing near the place where István Kertész drowned'. In other words, his post isn't about István Kertész; it's all about him.
  • His casual ignorance of facts is already noted in the main article (e.g. the state capital of Ohio is Columbus, not Cincinnati). But on Sokolov, for example, Lebrecht made a cruel and casual comment about Sokolov's late wife which Sokolov angrily rebutted, here. The writer Gavin Dixon comments on it here (which also refers back to the 2nd bullet point).

In short, anyone who cites Lebrecht (and only Lebrecht) as a 'reference', to the exclusion of other sources that actually bother to check facts, is, to put it kindly, lazy. (The more honest term is idiotic.) DJRafe (talk) 22:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)