Can K. 457 be interpreted fairly today?

[jerry and judy <jerbidoc@zianet.com>]

>How can you dismiss Glenn's assessment of later Mozart being peppered with
>such comments as "there are no development sections because there is nothing
>to develop", "all from the same cookie cutter", "I much prefer him in his
>youth when he was obviously patterning himself after Haydyn", and, of course,
>"how these are counted among the greatest works of civilization is something I
>could never comprehend"? GG was very outspoken about his dislike for that
>period of WAM, and I don' think we need read anything into that except that he
>didn't like the music, so when it came time to play the stuff, he did so with
>disregard for it.

Well. I just listened afresh to K 457 by GG and I still don't know.  In the
first movement he might be engaging in the worst (most obvious) kind of
putdown from our century down to Mozart's.  He plays most clearly and
articulately, but decidedly against the atmosphere of the movement.  When I
play the movement I try to keep a legato "effect" (but not too much!) so
that the listener gets an unconscious sense of the long lines that are only
implied(?).  In my mind, the power of the piece depends on it!  Gould has
no interest in this, he stabs and plunges from one related phrase to the
next, in effect pulling apart the clever and deliberately contrasting ideas
that in toto, are meant to make Mozart's point (on the small scale
atleast).  Glenn also adds his own gouldian fragment of melody (to all the
movements) that tends to shock the well initiated, and that's probably his
aim!  Where does this come from, is he trying to enhance and extend a
stunted expressivity?  Apparently!  But is it valid?  There again, this
view (GG's) was not valid (to this extreme) two hundred years ago, but
maybe "we" (in this century) expect too much from Mozart?

The remaining two movements are revelations.  The slow movement is played
as if by an angel!  His understatement and "meaningful" restraint are a
study in themselves.  This is truly what Mozart was going for, it surpasses
even late Beethoven for me!  This kind of playing can't be learned, it has
to be second nature, and in my opinion, it's unable to long coexist with
disdain...

The third movement is not played at breakneck speed, but respectfully!  A
fitting choice for such a short masterpiece.  I wish I could even think
about playing so evenly regulated!  When I first heard this I thought that
it was a little fast, but it's only the intensity that makes it seem so!
But then he can't resist twisting the 'a piacere' (piu lento) into an
other-worldly episode (maybe he was thinking of Schoenberg here?), and
adding his own tasteless appoggiatura on Dmajor, but I have to admit that
for many preceding measures he prepares us for his intended improprieties.
;-)

If GG is trying to expose the weaknesses of, in my opinion, for so many
reasons, one of the efficientally greatest sonatas of all time, by an
eccentric approach then he must have known that it could only backfire.
I've said before that I'm happier that he gave us this view rather than a
quick, absolutive, unconsidered run-through of material that he probably
considered, since his youth, to be unremarkable.

Jerry