Segovia criticism - secrets people don't want you to know

[Dillan_S]

Ever seen and witnessed that above-human aura that many people place on Segovia?
That act of elevating him to the pedestal of untouchable genius god master of the guitar.

When I started playing the guitar I was initiated into it.
"Go listen to Segovia records. Play like Segovia. Segovia is the best. He's the Maestro. Do the Segovia scales."
Even encyclopedias name Segovia. Noad's book mentions him. etc. etc.

Of course I had him in high standing.


But recently I've come across some really revealing bits of information, that thankfully make Segovia more human. Nay it's information that makes me worry, why it's not known more widely!
Information that others probably want to withhold from you, because it's so controversial!!!

+I was amazed to learn that Yehudi Menuhin dislikes Segovia's version of the Chaconne.
+That John William (whom people told me plays like Segovia and is his prodige), actually thinks Segovia is a limited musician.
+That Segovia's rubato, that people often swoon about, is often used by Segovia simply to cover up technical difficulties (and slow down "graciously").
+That there are "propagandistic claims" about Segovia which "had the effect of creating a Segovianic sub-culture"
+That Segovia's teaching is negatively viewed.
+That Segovia had controversial political views

Pretty interesting and important in my opinion.

I got it from here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... ng_Segovia
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... 2#Teaching
It's from an old page on wikipedia, which people don't want you to see!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Andr%E9s_Segovia
It's a shame that people feel that you should not know these things, and keep them secret.

I feel rather betrayed - not by Segovia - but by the people who propagated that image of Segovia, the master god wizard genius to follow. I copied his interpretations, solely because of all the good things people were saying about him. Don't get this wrong: I really like some of his playing, but I always had a strange feeling about some things.
It's refreshing to know that he's full-blown flesh and blood and very very human.

[mattv]

I'm not a great Segovia fan, I have a few of his cds that I almost never listen to, but i do have a lot of respect for him and what he did for GC. Overall I'm at most luke warm about him.

However, I'm not sure I find the criticisms you mentioned all that controversial or particularly important. As you say he is human and had flaws. That's no reason to think less of him as a musician.

"+I was amazed to learn that Yehudi Menuhin dislikes Segovia's version of the Chaconne." - Why does this matter? So an incredible violinist did not agree with an incredible guitar players interpretation of one song? Why is this a big deal?

"+That Segovia's rubato, that people often swoon about, is often used by Segovia simply to cover up technical difficulties (and slow down "graciously")." - I think this is a very import skill to have. This is part of segovia's genius not a flaw. He is able to turn his flaw into an asset. He uses rubato creatively to make a song enjoyable to listen to instead of stumbling through the rough spots.

I don't think anyone is keeping this information secret. I just think most people feel this stuff is not relevant.

[Les Backshall]

Not sure who would be keeping this quiet, or why? It's all been pretty much common knowledge for a long time in classical guitar circles.

Les

[Kent]

Part of it is the natural progression of the instrument. As Classical Guitar grew, so did the diversity of players, teachers and students.
Segovia deserves most of the credit for the growth in popularity of classical guitar in the twentieth century. I probably would be playing steel string guitar and learning Neil Young songs right now if he never existed. ( not a bad thing ).
Sure he had flaws, and I never did worship him. But he did such a vast amount for the guitar, I over look the "secrets" you talk about, and feel very grateful he came along. I picture him battling with crummy gut strings when he could get them, and moving the guitar from the backroom to the stage.
You have to admire his dedication to the guitar.

[LVR]

Well, Dillan, one can understand feeling betrayed when ones idol turns out to be imperfect in some way. However, most people are imperfect. The information and opinions are not secret, and not new. Perhaps you should search the Forum for this topic, for it has come up again and again.

If you need a flawless idol, I recommend Julian Bream. Now, he's perfect, or at least so funny and expressive that you might easily think so.

[Alan Green]

John Williams is quite open about how he reckons he learned more from Alirio Diaz at Segovia's summer schools than he did from Segovia himself.

Like the others, whilst we've moved on from Segovia's level of technical proficiency, I think we have to hold him in the highest regard for the exposure and repertoire he generated for our beloved box with strings.

[Dillan_S]

Matanya Ophee has written: "For better of for worse, the major force which determined the fortunes of the guitar in this century was the Spanish guitarist Andres Segovia. Until quite recently, our image of this man was formed by a blind belief in the powerful symbolism of his claims to have created the guitar, single-handedly, in his own image, and to have finally placed it on the “first level” as the violin and piano. The propagandistic falsehoods of these claims had the effect of creating a Segovianic sub-culture among guitarists, with often quasi-religious overtones. "

This pretty much smashes the claim that Segovia placed the guitar on the same level as violin and piano.
Let's not forget about Miguel Llobet, Alirio Diaz, Julian Bream, Luise Walker and numerous other important guitarists. Why should only Segovia get recognition? I agree with Ophee on this.

[Les Backshall]

Matanya Ophee has written: "For better of for worse, the major force which determined the fortunes of the guitar in this century was the Spanish guitarist Andres Segovia. Until quite recently, our image of this man was formed by a blind belief in the powerful symbolism of his claims to have created the guitar, single-handedly, in his own image, and to have finally placed it on the “first level” as the violin and piano. The propagandistic falsehoods of these claims had the effect of creating a Segovianic sub-culture among guitarists, with often quasi-religious overtones. "

This pretty much smashes the claim that Segovia placed the guitar on the same level as violin and piano...

Actually it doesn't, it's only Ophee's opinion and I'm sure he has his own agenda - propaganda about Segovia can get pretty extreme both ways. Anyway, the quote has to be at least twelve years old (you could provide a reference) and things have moved on a lot since then.

Les

[David_Norton]

Segovia was a human being who, like the rest of us, was doing what he could to make his way in the world. It wasn't until he was in his mid-60s that he attained Living Legend status and could feel fully comfortable in his career choice. The fact that he remains a highly-visible and still-controversial benchmark for CG players even 25 years after his death pretty much sums up the degree of influence, for good or for bad.

[60moo]

Somehow I cannot imagine Segovia not feeling fully comfortable with his career choice until he was in his mid-60s!

In spite of his flaws, I think future history will regard him less negatively than is currently the case. We're still too close to his legacy, and my guess is that all the negativism (no matter how true) is simply a necessary reaction to the god-like status he attained during his life.

[Richard Christie]

At one stage, a few years ago, the Wikipedia Segovia article was almost entirely rewritten and attended to for months by an editor with an irrational aversion to anything Segovia represented, an aversion bordering on pathological hatred.
It's all in the History tabs. I don't think it wise' to rely on that source to inform your opinion on Segovia.

[Dofpic]

David norton is spot on. Also Wikipedia is written by humans therefore it is also "Imperfect" It is only as good as the writer and their own hidden agendas. Often a great source yet the data is far from perfect.

[Pete Morrison]

For better of for worse, the major force which determined the fortunes of the guitar in this century was the Spanish guitarist Andres Segovia. Until quite recently, our image of this man was formed by a blind belief in the powerful symbolism of his claims to have created the guitar, single-handedly, in his own image, and to have finally placed it on the “first level” as the violin and piano.

The propagandistic falsehoods of these claims had the effect of creating a Segovianic sub-culture among guitarists, with often quasi-religious overtones. "[/color][/i]

This pretty much smashes the claim that Segovia placed the guitar on the same level as violin and piano.
Let's not forget about Miguel Llobet, Alirio Diaz, Julian Bream, Luise Walker and numerous other important guitarists. Why should only Segovia get recognition? I agree with Ophee on this.

Hi Dillan_S. Im not a particularly huge fan of Segovia but i do love to hear him play. For what its worth, heres my take on this. It goes on a bit so i hope you will forgive me, but for the sake of active debate ...

I think Ophee is misinterpereting the true nature of the Segovian movement that ironically he actually very well summarises in the quote above whilst rejecting it in the same text. Apart from his obviously declared anti-Segovian stance on this, the incorrect rejection (which is i'm sure an honest opinion on his part) is that his uses of the words propaganda and religion in this case automatically imply a negative aspect to what is in fact nothing more sinister than a deep level of appreciation by certain people and so such negativity is not really well qualified or more importanty, justified.

To expand;
Bearing in mind the undeniably high profile part Segovia played in the flowering of the CG garden during his earlier days it is only human and quite natural that many people of the time were deeply impressed by the innovation, committment and artistic genius he so ably demonstrated and made accessible to many. The result of this undeniable brilliance to his audience would indeed be the creation of a movement of admirers who's appreciation would express itself as devotion. Such devotion would naturally progress amongst followers with the passage of time and the availablity of new information relevant to his life and work into an ongoing active appreciation by more contemporary adherents including the more passionate or "Segovanic sub-culture" Ophee refers to (a member of which you appear to have originally been yourself until your recent discoveries). Of course he was human and made mistakes/had limits but with the burden of these (as do all exceptional men and women) he found ways to turn them to his technical/performance advantage as has been pointed out earlier. I think the bulk of the "sub-culture" is not unaware of this side to their hero/mentor but nevertheless in general accept this as an additional and admirable trait/twist to the legend that Segovia has become. Many guitarists will revere him as a hero for what his contribution has achieved for the CG movement and many sub-culturists with more passionate views will continue to revere him also even if only for the natural joy of being able to do so. This is human nature.

My own view is that Segovias claim to have as you quote "created the guitar, single-handedly, in his own image, and to have finally placed it on the “first level” as the violin and piano" was probably true as far as Segovia himself was concerned. He set out to acheive that musical aim and he felt that within the possibilties and constraints of the influence on his environment of his contemporaries, he had acheived that. It seems like a decent self objective, well executed to me and the fact that he said the above grand statement simply an understandable urge to tell people about what he felt was a great personal achievment.

Dont feel betrayed, It Is not worth the anguish. Just be happy that we were able to know and learn from him

[riffmeister]

Andres Segovia was an influential guitarist during his lifetime......we all stand on his shoulders to some degree. The extreme views about him are all just.......silliness, IMO. Guitar and guitar music are much bigger than any one individual.

[Vlad Kosulin]

Let's face it, Segovia influenced the CG world much more than anybody else in the 20th century. He built the CG world the way he saw it. There were many brilliant players and composers, but is this his fault that he was the only one with guts to push for the goal?
There is no need to build a cult of Segovia, but at the same time he deserves the pedestal he have got. Contemporaries can not objectively assess their great coevals; his true value will become clear only with time. And let's not mix Segovia as CG player and Segovia as personality.
P.S. While I admire Bream a lot, he is not without his own idiosyncrasies and drawbacks.