Re: GG listeners/Helfgott-Gould

["Robert C. Kunath" <kunath@hilltop.ic.edu>]

Dear F-Minors,

	I'm running late on this thread (for which I apologize), but I just wanted
to say that I think there is a certain Gould/Helfgott connection. 
Audiences respond to David Helfgott not primarily because they think he is
a great virtuoso (though many may think that too).  They respond to
Helfgott because they saw "Shine," and they think of him as a person they
know, who has overcome a terrible disability, and whose piano playing is a
victory of the human spirit.

	That may all be bosh, and I am quite sure that if you want first-rate
Rachmaninov or Chopin you're well-advised to avoid David Helfgott.  But I
must admit (non-musician as I am) that I don't listen to Glenn Gould
records because I think he has absolutely the most authentic versions of
the pieces he plays.  I listen to him because I am moved by his
performances, and a lot of that comes from the sense I have of him as a
person who paid a high price for what he accomplished.  That may be bosh
too--Gould does invite a certain romanticization as "the last Puritan,"
etc.  I liked Glenn Gould's piano playing before I knew anything about him,
but I must admit that I didn't become a serious fan until after he died,
and I read things about and by him, and I listen to his recordings in part
to connect with *him*, and not just Bach or Gibbons or Haydn.  I am quite
interested in the impressive musical analyses on F-Minor of how Gould
serves or fails to serve the composers whose works he plays.  But in
another sense, for me, the issue is only partly relevant.  There's
something fascinating about Glenn Gould--the man and the artist--and that
subjective dimension is a large part of my response to his artistry.  In
that way, I suspect I'm not so different from people who feel that David
Helfgott means something to them, and who are moved by his artistry because
of the associations it evokes.

Robert
----------
> From: Neil <neil@thump.org>
> To: 'f_minor@email.rutgers.edu'
> Subject: Re: GG listeners
> Date: Thursday, January 28, 1999 4:13 PM
> 
> On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 00:21:17 -0000, you wrote:
> 
> >Although I don't
> >like to compare Gould (undoubtedly a genius) to such a, frankly, poor
> >pianist as Helfgott I was wondering whether Gould's eccentricities and
the
> >resulting publicity had/have a similar influence on the non-musicians
and
> >caused his popularity among them.
> 
> Helfgott's success was in opening classical music to a new audience. I
remember
> seeing people in the shops buying Rach 3 (alas his travesty of a
recording not a
> good one). But that's nice that films and stories such as his open up new
worlds
> for people.
> 
> > I hope someone will tell me I am wrong to
> >suggest so, but I find it curious that other geniuses such as Claudio
Arrau
> >(to name but one example) has never acheived a similar 'cult' following,
> >despite great respect from musicians. 
> 
> Arrau would not count in my genius list.  A great alternative to sleeping
pills
> though.
> 
> I remember my flatmate's comments about hearing a CD I was playing. He
wondered
> who was playing and what the music was because something caught his ear -
a form
> of communication was taking place which was new to him - and yes it was
GG's
> Goldbergs.
> 
> Great geniuses such as GG and Sokolov have an magical ability to transmit
their
> feelings about music, a joy for life, and a cerebral ecstasy. Why is
Tolstoy a
> genius - because reading Anna for example brings floods of one's own
inner
> experiences to the surface. 
> 
> (sokolov played in london on monday. I've never witnessed such silence,
> anticipation or collective breath holding at a piano recital before. he
was
> electrifyingly intense. Cheers & Bravos after early Beethoven, then
standing
> ovation - 55 min concert !!! Quite an event...)
> 
> Music stirs up moods and emotions. Non musicans maybe don't have the
ability to
> grasp exactly what is happening to them but the underlying forces are
> communicative. 
> 
> What makes a great actor ? Same answer I think.
> 
> I'm cogitating on this whole business because I think its one way to try
and
> analyse and/or define genius.
> 
> Neil
> --------------------------------
> _?_ (at home)    ICQ# - 11875525  
>