Gould listeners

[Allan MacLeod <allan.macleod@usask.ca>]

I actaully find A. Thayer's question rather insulting and certainly
condescending.  I am an extreme non-musician in his sense, but my
ability to appreciate a performance is not thereby impaired.  As the
saying goes, you don't have to be a cobbler to assess the quality or
fitness of a pair of shoes.  You don't have to be a pastry chef to
appreciate a great cake.
I have been working on a rather lengthy message to f-minor about the
current debate over Gould's orthodoxy.  In it, one of the claims I make
is that Gould is not a pianist's or musician's pianist; he is a poet's
or writer's pianist.  Gould did not like professional musicians for
exactly the reasons that the great debate of recent days illustrates.
He enjoyed sharing enthusiasms with people who were interested in ideas
and not questions of technique or performance style.  Hence his total
indifference to the question of instrument. He had a sound in mind and
whether is was authentic or orthodox or not mattered not at all to him.
As one of our correspondents recently put it, stop burying Gould beneath
norms.
Why am I attracted to Gould?  For many reasons.  For one thing I was
raised in Toronto and knew the Toronto that Gould did; I too liked the
zoo and the Islands and , living near the old CBC complex on Jarvis, I
would sometimes see him.  Gould was simply part of Toronto.  He would
write pieces for The Globe and Mail; he would act as a radio host.  I
too, like him, lived through Toronto's emergence from its
Presbyterian/Methodist image of Toronto the Good to its vibrant modern
complex self.
Gould's incredible digital dexterity, his ability to make each part or
line in a contrapuntal work sing independently and distinctly, the
ability to bring out the inner voices, also attracted me.  His
performances were virually visual in their ability to make you see as
well as hear the independent voices at play.  Bach made sense , the
greatness of his skill was apparent, when you listended to his playing.
There are also the conversations, many transcribed into print.  When CBS
released the 81 Goldbergs it included a second disc of a lengthy
interview with Gould about this performance.  The sheer brilliance and
daring of the conception as he described it added immeasurably to the
enjoyment a performance that was alrteady outstanding.
Third, there are his writings.  I can think of no pianist except for
Rosen and to a much lesser extent  Brendel who is articulate in
expressing the ideas behind his performance.  This, of course, must make
performances by artists like this much more pleasurable and enlightening
than by those who feel they have no obligation to explain themselves.  I
should also include Kuerti in my list.  I heard him perform the
Beethoven sonatas at Hart House in 1974-75 and each performance was
preceded by a lengthy, illuminating lecture.  These were later expanded
upon in his notes for the recordings.
Fourthly, he could be very funny.  The liner notes to the Hindemith
sonatas as well as his Grieg performances were gems as well as the
"conversation" with Ken Haslem(?) about his Wagner performances.  What's
wrong with being humorous and excelling at more than  one medium?  Why
should this diminish the validity of his appeal to non-musicians?  And,
of course, his fantasy shows us what he thought of critics and
musicologists.
And yes, he was a complex, contradictory and infuriating man.  He was
interesting.  But that would only explain big sales in biographies and
not an interest in his music.  His records sell because anyone can tell
these are magnificent recordings.  I trust the professionals who tell me
that they are also unorthodox and I can hear that for myself.  That is
why I tell my friends to buy Gould but also buy a performance by Brendel
or Perahia or Uchida or Argerich of the same work.
In the era of CDs with so many superb orthodox pianists it is refreshing
to listen to an imagination at play in a performance.  Ultimately, it
will be we extreme non-musicians who keep classical music alive.  We can
recognize talent.  We do not need to hear about their private lives on
ET or whatever.  Many of us have extensive record collections.  We can
detect differences, recognize satisfying performances, and we can read.
So, don't look down at us.  Without us, classical music is dead.  And if
sometimes a little gossip helps to sell a record, then maybe it's a good
thing.
        Allan