I never said just sung. I said they are to be sung. Singing must have feeling, emotion and relevance to the words. All of which Janowitz's performance has. In my opinion, to talk of interpreting and 'disembodied purity' is highfalutin. I also think that such views are a barrier to classical music and contributes its decline.
Well that's me put in my place, though I'm afraid I can't quite see how explaining my preferences and impressions of a performance is "highfalutin" and "a barrier to classical music", which is contributing to its decline. Of course the songs are to be sung, but your assertion implies, pardon me if I misunderstand, that interpretation should be avoided; that a singer should just sing the notes, observing expression marks, but not worrying too much about
why they are there, or what they might mean. But any performance involves the performer interpreting what is on the printed page and trying to understand the composer's or the writer's intentions. That is why two performances of the same piece can vary so much.
Now when it comes to Janowitz's performance of the Strauss songs, I find I like it less now than I used to do because I don't hear the "feeling, emotion and relevance to the words" you do. For me it is beautiful but marmoreal. A lot of people like marble. Nothing wrong with that. You may disagree with me. We all have different ears after all, but I see nothing wrong with discussing our impressions of different performances or our preferences, and lovers of classical singing will discuss their preferences and impressions of different
interpretations ad infinitum. I don't see how doing so contributes to the decline in classical music.