Do we need thousands of interpretations of the WTC, all promoting their own unique vision ? I'm not sure.
Ideally, yes. That's what makes listening to musical performance interesting, when people approach it without being terrified about being "correct" (as if anyone really knew what that was beyond, say, correct notes and rhythm and, to a limited extent, score markings). And with a genius as deep as Bach's, there really are practically an infinite number of things to say.
Do we need my interpretations ? Certainly not, but alas that does not deter me.
Sure! And I enjoy listening to them despite my lengthy technical nitpicking
Do we need your interpretations ? You tell me.
I like to think so.
I interpret Bach in a more solid, serious manner as you have often noted, sometimes a bit derisively, in your comments. That may differ markedly from your conception and that's fine. It also doesn't mean that I haven't often used your comments to improve, expand, or temper my own take on the music.
Should we amateurs actually bother to record music that generations of pianists have played better and more uniquely than we ever could ? The question does not bear thinking about. This is why I enjoy presenting unknown fluff.
I don't believe this is true. First of all, the line between amateur and professional is not black and white in a qualitative sense. There may be a general level of evenness and accuracy that is expected of professionals, but I've heard what is, to my ears, mediocre professional playing in both such regards before (professional only meaning what one is paid to do, so I admit I was wrong to ever bring that word up in the past). I've also heard what is, to my ears, fantastic amateur playing in most respects. Second, there is no such thing as "more unique." Unique means one of a kind and therefore does not admit of qualification. That is, to me, part of what makes listening to others so interesting. I may have my preference and could argue why, in my limited opinion, one performance is better than another, but that particular issue would just be my argument and would attempt to be without reference to what any other performer did. As for playing works by lesser-known composers, I would say that's fine as long as you're doing it for the right reasons. If you honestly think it's original music that's worthy of a listen or has been neglected, then all the power to you, but if it's to hide from criticism or because you think everything's been said about, say, Bach, Chopin, or Schubert, then I would beg to differ. About Marc Andre-Hamelin's music (and playing), I can only say yuck.