Classic New York Times tautology
mainThe Times headline on a report of the death of Georges Pretre:
Georges Prêtre, French Conductor Known for Interpretation, Dies at 92
Now what else would he be known for – the colour of his socks?
Apart from that, Michael Cooper’s prompt report is faultless.
I hope your house is made of really solid glass…
You’d think it would be obvious that a conductor would be “known for interpretation.” However, we all know that conductors can be more famous for other things. For example, here is the NY Times obituary for Karajan: http://tinyurl.com/zdfvvj8
Funny you should ask. To answer, here are the NYT’s previous obituary headlines for famous conductors:
– “Herbert von Karajan … Musical Perfectionist”
– “Leonard Bernstein…Music’s Monarch”
– “Carlos Kleiber … Music’s Perfectionist Recluse”
– “Claudio Abbado … Conductor With a Global Reach”
– “Pierre Boulez, Music’s Uncompromising Modernist”
– “Neville Marriner, a Prolific Musician and Acclaimed Conductor”
Voilà, what else besides interpretation a conductor could be known for.
When the NYT first published their announcement of Boulez’s death, the headline referred to him as an eminent composer. (They did change it to include conductor.)
And yet that epithet for Kleiber was wrong anyway; he maintained a wide circle of friends, either by phone or correspondence, until the day before he died.
I don’t think the headline is as meaningless as some; it’s just incomplete. He was known for his unusual interpretation of standard repertoire. The Times understandably shortened the headline.