Re: [F_minor] doubts

[paul wiener <pwiener@ms.cc.sunysb.edu>]

I think Gould's greatness lay in who he was and what he did (not 
forgetting his personal magnetism) - ONE of the things he did was be 
a great pianist (but an even greater musician).

As to proficiency,  many pianists who have equaled him -  Marc-Andre 
Hamelin being only the most obvious. Or Schnabl, for that matter. 
There is no one thing that makes a pianist "the greatest."



At 03:20 PM 12/7/2008, Kpapademas wrote:
> Doubts??!!!?? Doubts on Glenn Gould?????? I would not have thought 
> to see these comments here (although this is a forum to discuss Glenn Gould).
> Interestingly, if you watch the Richter the Enigma video - did I see 
> sheet music in front of his face?? and was he reading from it???
> Also, there are those of us who do go to Gould to hear anything and 
> everything he played, including Mozart, Schoenberg, and Webern. And 
> do I/we (f-minor members) care?  Well I do.
> I have a specific playlist of Glenn's performances of all the 
> "modern composers" such as Sibelius, Webern, Schoenberg, Hindemith, 
> and Berg. I have playlists on Glenn Gould Bach, Beethoven, Brahms 
> and Mozart (under the et cetera category) performances. Do I like 
> his (superb) interpretations of these composers (and of course all 
> others)? An emphatic yes!
> Are there other pianists of the intellectual caliber and genius 
> level of Glenn Gould? Name one! Are there good pianists? Yes, of 
> course there are (Ashkenazy, Serkin, Cliburn, Horowitz, Rubenstein 
> to name a few, and yes Richter, when they all play the usual 
> repertoire). Glenn Gould has been called the greatest pianist of the 
> twentieth century. We are now well into the twenty-first century and 
> I haven't heard any one yet equal to his brilliance.
> Thanks for everyone's time.
> Katherine
>
>
>
> In a message dated 12/07/08 13:23:46 Central Standard Time, 
> mmacelletti@sbcglobal.net writes:
> listening to richter one realizes what an amazing pianist he was. 
> everything he plays is great. --listening to gould lately i have 
> doubts. sure the first goldberg and inventions are wonderful. but, 
> honestly, some of the other interpretations. ????    the mozart and 
> beethoven are ridiculous, the brahms dreary, chopin ? well i don't 
> have to go there./   schoenberg and webern ? who knows how they 
> should go ( and frankly , who cares ) sure, we've heard some strange 
> new pieces. but really, when you need the uplift of mozart can you 
> really go to gould.      mike
> _______________________________________________
> F_minor mailing list
> F_minor@email.rutgers.edu
> https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor
> _______________________________________________
> F_minor mailing list
> F_minor@email.rutgers.edu
> https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor

_______________________________________________
F_minor mailing list
F_minor@email.rutgers.edu
https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor