[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
GG: Gould on Richter
Hello everybody,
A few days ago someone mentioned Bruno Monsaingeon's documentary on
the Soviet(-Russian) pianist Sviatoslav Richter. The documentary was
shown on the Finnish television in the early spring, in two parts.
Unfortunately I only saw the second one, which concentrated on
Richter's 'international career' from 1961 on till his death (in
August 1997 if I member aright; Richter was only allowed abroad at
the age of 45 or so, when it was no longer possible for the Soviet
authorities to keep him home. Not that Richter himself was terribly
keen on travelling abroad, e.g. his concert tour to the USA (in 1961
or so) seems to have made him terribly unhappy.)
What makes the document of interest to persons subscribing to this
list is - as someone mentioned - that Glenn Gould features in it,
telling about his relation to Richter and about his first encounter
with the soviet pianist in Moscow, May 1957. (BTW, this is definitely
not the only thing that is of interest; in general, the documentary is
among the very best I've ever seen about performing artists. It's
simply great to see and hear the legendary Richter talking and
playing).
As there probably are many of you who haven't seen the program, I
thought I might as well try to summarize Gould's 'contribution' - a
rather short comment on Richter in particular and the art of
performing in general. I don't know when it was made but judging from
Gould's appearance, a reasonable guess might be the late 60s or very
early 70s, though I may be here grossly mistaken. If anyone should
know better, please correct me.
Anyway, Gould begins saying that he believes that performing artists
can be divided into two categories: those that seek to exploit their
instrument and those that do not. Examples of the first category are
Liszt and Paganini as well as any number of "allegedly demonic
virtuosi of more recent vintage". Musicians of this category are
determined to make the listener aware of their relationship with
their instrument, and they allow that instrument to become the focus
of attention. In the second category we find artists who try to
"bypass the whole question of performing mechanism" to create an
illusion - this, I believe, was the word Gould used - of a direct
link with the musical score. A musician of this kind helps the
listener to achieve a sense of involvement, not with the performer
but with the music. Having said this, Gould adds that "in our time
there's no better example of a musician of the second category than
Sviatoslav Richter".
What is special about Richter, according to Gould, is that he puts
his enormously powerful personality between the listener & the
musical score thereby creating the impression that we (i.e. the
listeners) are discovering the piece anew (and regularly from a
perspective different from what we are accustomed to).
To substantiate this, Gould tells about his first encounter with S.
Richter, which took place in Moscow, May 1957. Gould attended a
recital by Richter, who began the program with Schubert's last Piano
Sonata in B flat major. Gould says that it is one of the longest
sonata ever written (whether this is literary true or not obviously
does not matter) and Richter played it at a very slow tempo, making
it even longer. Next, Gould says: "Heretical though it may be, I'm
not really addicted to most of Schubert's music. I find myself
usually unable to come to terms with the repetitive structures
involved."
What then happened at the Moscow Conservatory? Gould says that for
the next our he was in a state that he can obly compare to a
"hypnotic trance". All his prejudices about Schubert were forgotten.
Musical details which he had previously considered to be ornamental
became organic elements of the piece. In the concert, Richter
combined, says Gould, two supposedly irreconcilable qualities: intense
analytical calculation revealed through spontaneity equivalent to
improvisation (these are as close to Gould's own words as I was able
to decipher).
At that moment, he goes on, and on many subsequent occasions, Gould
realised that he was "in the presence of one of the most powerful
musical communicators the world of music has produced in our time".
Richter's comment on all this was that he had heard that Gould had
liked his performance but that he doesn't know whether, as a result,
he changed his opinion about Schubert.
Sorry for the longish message. Hope it's of some interest to some of
you.
Anssi Korhonen