Re: [F_MINOR] Glenn Gould's own preferences

[Barbara Stagno <bstagno@OPTONLINE.NET>]

I don't recall anything about preferences but I know that he didn't like
his recording of the Bach Partita no. 5 (G major). He claimed it
exemplified everything that's wrong with virtuoso piano performance. He
felt it was a poor recording because it had been made during the years
that he frequently performed the work in concert and consequently
acquired various exhibitionistic qualities. Specifically he cited
exaggerated tempos, excessive use of diminuendi and crescendi, and
"balcony pleasing tricks" that detracted from the musical structure.
When you hear it, it does stand apart from the recordings he made of the
other 6 Partitas. I actually like Glenn's performance of the partita no.
5 (to a point) because it's quite dazzling. However, I have to agree
with Glenn that it's really not Bach.

Barbara Stagno

-----Original Message-----
From: F_Minor [mailto:F_MINOR@EMAIL.RUTGERS.EDU] On Behalf Of Kate
Clunies-Ross
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 5:33 AM
To: F_MINOR@EMAIL.RUTGERS.EDU
Subject: [F_MINOR] Glenn Gould's own preferences

We all, no doubt, have our favourites (and not-so-favourites!) among
GG's
recordings. Some may create such an emotional response in us that we
would
not wish to be without them, in fact we might value them so much that
life
would seem diminished without the experienceof such music. However, we
might
be less than ecstatic about other recordings...Perhaps what he was
trying to
do was interesting, but we feel he failed to achieve his aims; perhaps
we
simply  think  a particular interpretation didn't work or (gasp!) was
not
very good!

But did Gould himself have any favourites among his lifetime's output?
He
very rarely recorded anything twice; does that mean he was on the whole
satisfied with his work? An obviousexception to this was the Goldberg
Variations;  but at the time he made his second studio  recording in
1981 he
did give his reasons for doing this. It is interesting that he did not
only
cite the technical advances in recording that had occurred since the
original 1955 version; he also spoke disparagingly about his own
youthful
playing. And this was about what is no doubt his most famous recording!

But of course he left us plenty of other work. He lavished great care
and
attention on each effort, not only on the performance itself, but on the
technical aspects of the recording process, so he evidently had very
high
standards and expectations about the finished result. But were these
satisfied? He doesn't seem to have been  a vain man, so I doubt he
regarded
everything he did as an unqualified success. And he did remark that he
rarerly listened to his own recordings, he simply did not find this
particularly pleasurable. But did he ever say which recordings he was
particular proud of, or regarded fondly  -   and which did _not_ satisfy
him, or in  which he failed to achieve his aims?

**************************************************
Signoff instructions, and user preference interface:
http://email.rutgers.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=f_minor&A=1

F_minor Website (with early archive):
http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~mwatts/glenn
**************************************************

**************************************************
Signoff instructions, and user preference interface:
http://email.rutgers.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=f_minor&A=1

F_minor Website (with early archive):
http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~mwatts/glenn
**************************************************