Re: GG Re: Speaking of Gould and Richter

[Anne Smith <smithqa@nexicom.net>]

>-Of course, the slow tempo would not, in principle, be a problem for Gould.
>Witness the Brahms concerti (to cite the most notorious example).   And now
>to digress completely (I can't resist), I don't mean to disparage Gould's
>Brahms.   I can't think of a more satisfying performance of the Intermezzi
>than Gould's for Columbia.  A benchmark.
-
>John Grant


>From the same article:

Given Gould's praise for Richter's interpretation, one wonders if it
directly influenced his own playing, for Gould too would become notorious as
one of music's great slow-tempo men (and fast-temp men, for that matter).
The intense analytical calculation that he observed in Richter's performance
can certainly be perceived in some of his own super-slow playing.

I don't agree with this statement.  Glenn Gould was 25 when he first met
Richter.  I think we can assume that his own style was set by then.   It is
possible to admire someone's playing without having it influence your own.

Anne  Smith