Monday, September 29, 2014

Introducing the New Phrase, the Rochester Fallacy

Introducing the New Phrase, The Rochester Fallacy

By Warren Boroson

I’d like to introduce a new phrase into the English language.

The new phrase: The Rochester Fallacy.

It means focusing on the case rate and not the base rate. Focusing on what may be misleading exceptions rather than the broad historical picture. Seeing  black swans and ignoring all the white ones.

You see this a lot in the way people invest. They buy a hot stock—although it has an utterly abysmal long-term record. Okay, whatever’s happened recently may BE more important. Maybe a stock is more valuable now because a lawsuit has been settled, or the company’s idiot in chief has retired. Still, remember the old saying: Trees don’t grow to the sky. Hot stocks cool off. They regress to the mean.

Why Rochester?

When I was a kid—many years ago—people would say that blacks are poor. They don’t enjoy the financial benefits of living in rich America.

And I, along with the other kids, would scoff. “Hey, look at Jack Benny’s Rochester! He must make a ton of money! He must be a multi-millionaire! So, how can you claim that black people aren’t wealthy? And what about Joe Louis? And Paul Robeson?”

Well, Rochester belonged in the black (!) swan category. Blacks in general were much poorer than whites. They still are.

Today I told a group of people that young beautiful women generally don’t amount to much. They get praise and attention and rewards in general just by looking so pretty. They don’t have to become famous writers or famous scientists. (I’ve actually seen a study that claimed to prove this.)

Nonsense! replied one woman. Hedy Lamarr was beautiful and invented something or other! Madame Curie was smart as well as good-looking! (Well, I would venture to say, not quite in the same class as Hedy.)

Well, I replied, something should be considered true, at least tentatively, if it’s true at least 60% of the time. That means it’s statistically significant—statisticians tell me.  In giving me these unusual cases of good-looking women who have achieved something, you’ve fallen victim to the Rochester Fallacy…. No, I didn’t actually say that. I hadn’t invented the phrase, the Rochester Fallacy, yet.

A few years ago, I wrote an article urging people to have lawyers on call, and in choosing a lawyer to look for a large firm, not a solo practitioner—other things being equal. One reason: You want other lawyers looking over the solo practitioner’s shoulder.

A bunch dumbass solo lawyers then came down on me like a ton of pricks. (That’s not a typo.) All of them knew this poor schlub who consulted a big law firm and got into trouble—when a solo would have been so helpful. The Rochester Fallacy.
 
I’ll actually name one dumbass lawyer: Carolyn Elefant of Washington, D.C.  I’ll single her out because 1. she used “who” instead of “whom” in her email, 2. she misspelled my name, and 3. she keeps posting and re-posting her reply, so that it’s high up whenever anyone checks out my name.
     By the way, I’ll bet that she’s not good-looking.


Monday, September 22, 2014

Boroson on Music
September 2014

What You Never Knew
About Giuseppe Verdi

By Warren Boroson

There’s an easy-to-read, informative book about Giuseppe Verdi just out, full of forthright opinions and possibly some surprises, even for Verdi aficionados.
   What might people not have known about Verdi?
    According to the book, he was a non-believer. He was, “quite exceptionally for a nineteenth century Italian, an atheist,” the book’s author, Victor Lederer, writes. (“Verdi: The Operas and Choral Works,” Amadeus Press, 2014.) Apparently, like his Iago, he didn’t even believe in an afterlife. As he wrote to a friend, “But after all, in life isn’t everything death? What else exists?”
   What else might surprise? Although our impression may be that he was a generous, good-natured fellow, “he behaved tyrannically at home with his second wife, Giuseppina, and their servants.”
   When he applied for admission to the Milan Conservatory, his application was turned down.
     His early opera, “Giovanna d’Arco,” has Joan of Arc die—but not be burned at the stake.
    He was thinking of writing an opera based on Shakespeare’s “King Lear,” but never wrote music for the libretto he had commissioned.
     He may have had an affair with a Czech soprano, Teresa Stolz, who sang Aida in the Italian premiere. Certainly his wife, Peppina, was jealous.
    “Aida” has been criticized for its militarism. Lederer finds fault with it because, he argues, only Amneris comes fully to life. “Radames is flat,” and “Aida somehow remains pallid.”
   As for “Rigoletto,” Gilda—besides being (in my opinion) the dumbest bimbo in all of opera--makes a “pointless sacrifice” of her life for that of the loathesome Duke of Mantua.
  Leverer admires “Il Trovatore,” despite his acknowledgement that much of the opera seems ridiculous. I myself tell people that I have days when I, too, am so discombobulated that, like Azucena, I throw the wrong damn baby into the fire. (“Jeez, did I do that again?”)
   Verdi held a grudge against Arrigo Boito, the composer/librettist, because of articles Boito had written seemingly critical of Verdi. (Boito wrote the fine opera, “Mefistofele.” But as a composer, Lederer writes, “he’s good, not great.”)
     I agree with Lederer’s claim that “La Traviata” is the best-loved of Verdi’s operas. I even admire the Franco Zeffirelli production, where Violetta is NOT visited by Alfredo and his father on her deathbed. She only hallucinates their visit.  (Watch his filmed version of the opera; she dies alone.)

     A wonderful present accompanying the book is a disk containing Verdi arias sung by some glorious voices from the past: Rosa Ponselle, Claudia Muzio, Boris Christoff, Meta Seinemeyer, Mattia Battistini, Edmond Clement, Enrico Caruso, and Ernestine Schumann-Heink. But I missed arias sung Elisabeth Rethberg, about whom a critic wrote that he didn’t know that such beautiful sounds could come out of the human throat.

Monday, September 15, 2014

Almost Everyone Underestimates Donizetti

Almost Everyone Underestimates Donizetti

By Warren Boroson

Franz Schubert and Gaetano Donizetti had a good deal in common—even though the first is famous for his symphonies, the second for his operas.
   To begin, both were born in 1797. Second, they were geniuses at creating magnificent melodies. Here’s an example of a memorable aria in Donizetti’s opera, “Lucrezia Borgia”:
Il segreto per esser felici, Sigrid Onegin,1928 & 1921
            Then too, as composers they were overshadowed by one of their contemporaries: Beethoven in Schubert’s case, Rossini (and perhaps Bellini) in Donozetti’s case.  
          Both composers were marvelously prolific. Schubert wrote so much music of  different kinds that I recently heard a Schubert scholar say that he was “unclassifiable.”  As for Donizetti, the better-known of his 70 or so operas include “Anna Bolena,” “L’Elisir,” “Lucrezia Borgia,” “Maria Stuarda,” “Lucia de Lammermoor” (perhaps his best), “Roberto Devereux,” “Daughter of the Regiment,” “La Favorite,” and “Don Pasquale.” He also wrote church music, string quartets, and orchestral pieces. Oh, and 16 symphonies, 19 string quartets, 193 songs, 45 duets, 3 oratorios, 28 cantatas, instrumental concertos, sonatas, and other chamber pieces. Once, told that Rossini had written an opera in a mere two weeks, Donizetti said, well, he was always lazy.
    One possible reason both men were so prolific: Both were ill and perhaps were racing against time to record their music.
     Their chief illness, as it happens, was the same. Syphilis.
                                                            ***
     Among great composers Donizetti has been shamefully neglected. During his time, and for many years thereafter, he was looked down upon because he was so prolific. The composer Hector Berlioz even lambasted him because his operas dominated the opera houses of Paris. (He wrote about Donizetti: “… [he] is a tall, handsome young man, but cold and without a shred of talent….”)
    Even Donizetti’s father, a workingman, was dubious about his son, telling him, “It is impossible that you will ever compose, that you will go to Naples, that you will go to Vienna.” Gaetano did compose, he went to Naples, he went to Vienna, he even went to Paris.
Another reason Donizetti is neglected, I believe, is that his life was so tragic. And the media, understandably, would rather not remind people of what a miserable life Donizetti led by writing about him. His three children died soon after birth. His wife died at 28. He himself went stark raving mad. Various opera singers came to visit him late in his life, and sang his lovely arias to him. He usually showed absolutely no recognition. Though at one point he went over to a piano and tried to play—but his fingers were too gnarled.
    There’s also the myth that Donizetti wrote only a few good operas—“Lucia” and “Daughter of the Regiment.” Actually, his lesser-known operas seem always to be rediscovered and revived. The author of a superb biography of Donizetti, William Ashbrook, who taught at Indiana University, believes that the composer’s best opera may be “Don Sebastien,” which hardly anyone knows.
            My own favorite aria by Donizetti is from the last act of “Lucia,” here sung by the Irish tenor John McCormack:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYqlXXcDn78&list=PLFE635AC47151E30D
            *****
Donizetti lived from to 1797 to 1848. It was the era of Rossini and Bellini, and while Donizetti was an admirer of his two rivals, Bellini was positively paranoid about Donizetti.
     The musical scene in the early 19th century was very different.
     It was the heyday of “bel canto”: florid singing, lots of very high notes, lots of ornaments.
   There were no operas played year after year—there was no “repertory.” When an opera opened, it might never be performed again. So it had to be immediately successful for the composer to make money. Things changed with Rossini, whose operas were so popular that they WERE revived, launching a true repertory.
    Musical pirates abounded.  They would copy the opera scores, then  put on the operas themselves—without paying the composer anything. Two musicians in Donizetti orchestra were caught copying the scores.
    Composers were generally looked down on. Famous singers, like Pasta and Rubini, were paid maybe ten times more, and they felt they were even entitled to alter the score. Some singers interpolated arias written by other composers into the operas they were singing!
   Even so, opera was a key part of life in 19th-century Italy and France—and Donizetti might be carried back to his hotel by grateful opera-goers after a popular new opera of his, and the singers, chorus, and orchestra might serenade him under his window. But if the audience didn’t like an opera, or part of an opera, they would WHISTLE. Berlioz, the French composer, penned nasty reviews of Donizetti operas. So Donizetti wrote about Berlioz that audiences were always whistling at his music—which is why, Donizetti wrote, he could understood why he was so critical of Donizetti’s own ever-popular music.
In those days, illness delayed many an opera. No one knew why illnesses were a c constant threat. Singers from all over the world came together to perform, and naturally they exchanged germs—which people knew nothing about. (Daniel Defoe, author of “A Journal of the Plague Year,” thought it absurd that some people actually thought that invisible creatures caused disease. Today we know them as bacteria and viruses.)
 It was a time when sometimes an opera wasn’t well attended simply because so many people had left for the country because of fear of contracting cholera.
A time when censorshp was so strict (in Italy, especially) that royalty had always to be treated with profound respect. Ashbrook writes: The Neopolitan censors of the 1820s and 1830s wanted to protect royal sensibilities and suppress plots dealing with conspiracies or religious characters. “They sincerely believed that plots should be morally uplifting, and that the depiction of violence on stage was detrimental to the public welfare.” The censors also preferred happy endings, now called Hollywood endings; “…[they believed they affirmed the status quo….”
    The first performance of Donzetti’s opera, “Maria Stuarda,” was actually cancelled because of its use of the word “bastardo”—Mary, Queen of Scots called Elizabeth that because Elizabeth was the daughter of Anne Boleyn, whom Henry XIII had divorced. Lucrezia Borgia ran into trouble because Lucrezia was related to some important people, including a pope. It was because of this wacko censorship that Donizetti began writing for French opera houses, disillusioned as he was by Italian opera houses.
   Another example of silly censorship: He wrote an opera, “Maria Padilla,” for La Scala, an opera in which the heroine commits suicide. The censors wanted the ending changed. Suicide, they had decided, “was not an edifying spectacle and that the herone should…die of joy! “ Donizetti was disgusted but  he had to go along.
*****
Why did Donizetti have such an unfortunate life? Syphilis or the pox. It  was considered shameful ever since it debuted in the late 15th century—until 1943, when doctors began treating it with penicillin. Its progress could be slowed but the disease was never cured. Mercury or quicksilver was considered the best treatment—even though it had nasty side-effects.
There are three stages of syphilis. The first stage: lesions. The second stage: pain, severe depression. The final stage: headaches, changes of mood, usually concluding with paralysis, dementia, rages.
Some victims of sylphis waste away gradually, like Frederick Delius; some die quickly, before the onset of insanity, like Franz Schubert. And some go insane, like Nietzsche, Schumann, Hugo Wolf, and…Donizetti.
 The people with syphilis who died before they went insane were fortunate. “Franz Schubert was one of the lucky ones,” a music scholar has written. He died at only 31.               
                                                ****
Donizetti was born in Bergamo, a province of Lombardy. He came from a poor family; they lived in a basement apartment with no windows. His father discouraged him from being a composer,  telling him, “It is impossible that you will ever compose, that you will go to Naples, that you will go to Vienna.” Gaetano did compose, he went to Naples, he went to Vienna, he went to Paris.
     As a youth he was fortunate to have acquired a gifted music teacher, Simon Mayr, who took him under his wing and helped him for the remainder of his life.
He had written 30 operas before one of his them met with success: “Anna Bolena.” One reason: It had a very good libretto. Here’s what he wrote to his wife after the sensational opening of “Anna Bolena”: “I am pleased to announce to you that the new opera by your beloved and famous husband has had a reception that could not possibly be improved on.
 “Success, triumph, delirium; it seemed that the public had gone mad. Everyone says that they cannot remember ever having been present at such a triumph.
            “I was so happy that I started to weep, just think! And my heart turned toward you, and I thought of your joy had you been present….
          “Even though I had faith in a favorable reception…I was suspended between heaven and hell during the first quarter hour …. Now I am in heaven and I cannot express my happiness to you. I lack only a kiss from my Virginia, which I shall come to collect at the first opportunity…..”
As a young man, growing up in Italy, he had developed syphilis—before his marriage to Virginia. They had three infants, none of whom lived.  Ashbrook writes that a “regrettable conclusion seems unavoidable: that Gaetano infected Virginia, as her difficult pregnancy and the premature birth of their deformed child who lived not two weeks would seem to bear out. Tragic as these circumstances were, it is only fair to point out that because Donizetti suffered from syphilis he was not necessarily any more of a libertine than a man of his time, his disposition, his profession, his opportunities might be expected to be.”
He fell madly in love with his future wife, Virginia, writing about her: “She is the daughter of excellent parents, educated as a lady, one who without making an issue of it knows how to adapt herself to every situation, one who has never got herself talked about, one who respects me and loves me both when I am far and near.”
Donizetti thought she had died of measles. Ashbrook writes: “Distasteful as the suggestion may seem, it is difficult to rule out the possibility … in the face of what evidence survives, that instead of measles she succumbed to severe syphilitis infection.”
       Donizetti was grieved by her death. He remained in bed for several days, unable to rise. From then on he didn’t want anyone to mention that he was a widower. He would never speak or write Virginia’s name again. He closed the door to her bedroom and never reopened it.
Later in life, he became more and more demented. He would stop in midsentence, having lost track of his thought, and just stare,  He might explode in a rage. Eventually he had trouble just holding up his head. He had delusions, insisting that he had been poisoned. “He would drink a bowl of soup,” someone wrote, “which he lapped up like an animal.” His friends and relatives tried to keep Donizetti’s dementia a secret, but word got out. Famous singers came to sing his music to him, but he was usually unresponsive. Even Verdi, much influenced by Donizetti’s music, paid him a visit.
      Ashbrook sums up his take on Donizetti: “[He] emerges from the cumulative evidence of his time as an admirable person, in some ways even noble, and in all ways intensely human.”
     After he died, he was buried where he had been born, in Bergamo, in front of a Donizetti monument.
       There’s a Donizetti Society today, and not surprisingly the Society has doubts that he ever suffered from syphilis.
                                    ###
Joseph Schmidt, “Una furtiva lagrima”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FD-yzw7ExY4

Caruso, Galli-Curci, et al. in the Sextet from “Lucia”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14tdvxUvxFU

Joan Sutherland, Mad Scene, “Lucia”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3_8wz_xNI0

Sunday, September 7, 2014

Cosima Wagner: "Just an Appallling Human Being"

Cosima Wagner (1837-1930):  “Just an Appalling Human Being”

She was the daughter of Franz Liszt, and while married to Hans von Bulow, a famous conductor, she began an affair with a much older man, Richard Wagner….

From Wikipedia…

 “Thus Cosima's anti-Semitism predates her association with Wagner, although Marek observes that he nurtured it in her, to the extent that derogatory references to Jews occur, on average, on every fourth page of her 5,000-page journal.

“The musicologist Eric Werner argues that Wagner's anti-Semitism derived in part from his initial revolutionary philosophy; as a disciple of Proudhon he saw Jewry as ‘the embodiment of possession, of monopoly capitalism.’ Cosima's had no such basis, and whereas Wagner retained an ability to revise his views on the basis of his experiences, Cosima's anti-Semitism was visceral and remained unchanged.

“Both he and Cosima were vehement anti-Semites; Hilmes conjectures that Cosima inherited this in her youth, from her father, from Carolyne zu Sayn-Wittgenstein, probably from Madame Patersi and, a little later, from Bülow, ‘an anti-Semite of the first order’. Thus Cosima's anti-Semitism predates her association with Wagner, although Marek observes that he nurtured it in her, to the extent that derogatory references to Jews occur, on average, on every fourth page of her 5,000-page journal. 

“Cosima expressed to [Felix} Weingartner the view that ‘between Aryan and Semite blood there could exist no bond whatever’. In accordance with this doctrine, she would not invite Gustav Mahler (born Jewish though a convert to Catholicism) to conduct at Bayreuth, although she frequently took his advice over artistic matters.

“The critic and one-time librettist Philip Hensher writes that ‘under the guidance of her repulsive racial-theorist son-in-law [Chamberlain]... Cosima tried to turn Bayreuth into a centre for the cult of German purity.’ Thus, he continues, ‘By the time she died, Wagner's reputation was ... at the forefront of a terrible political dynamism: antique stagings of his works were presented to audiences of Brownshirts.’ The close association of the festival with Hitler and the Nazis during the 1930s was much more the work of Winifred—an overt Hitler supporter—than of Cosima, though Hensher asserts that ‘Cosima was as much to blame as anyone’…
“In the immediate aftermath of Cosima's death, some writers heaped copious praise on her….. Hensher's judgement: "Wagner was a genius, but also a fairly appalling human being. Cosima was just an appalling human being."[