Hi there,
I, too just joined the list last week and have been thrilled
at the discussions that have been generated over a wide range of topics;
In response to your question, I find that with certain artists
like Glenn Gould, it's difficult to separate the artist from the music they
interpret... or bring to life. I remember as a child, I was more impressed
by his "eccentricities" and performance styles than anything
else. But now...?
I've come to appreciate and understand certain music like
Bach's, through Glenn Gould and how he has presented it. I'm not so sure
whether the same kind of understanding and enjoyment could've been derived
through other artists, for instance - if I had been exposed more to Perahia or
Schiff and their interpretations, whether I would regard Bach in the same way as
I do now (not that I don't recognize their own uniqueness; it's just a matter of
preference, I guess).
There are many aspects of Glenn Gould's personal life that I
do indeed find fascinating - regardless of whether they directly relate to his music or not. (I mean,
the inexplicable joy that comes from visiting his grave or eating at the diner
that he frequented ??!@#@). I'm not sure what I'm trying to say...
sometimes you only regard the artist or performer through their work; but then
there are times when aspects of their personality or life seem to interfere or
overshadow their work.. but does that necessarily change their work? or
does it merely change our perspective and level of appreciation? I mean,
people listen to von Karajan the Nazi sympathizer, read Nietzsche the
misogynist, etc etc...
I guess I'm not really answering your question, huh?
Well.. what are your opinions?
Kind regards,
Laura
P.S. just out of curiosity, what chamber concert
performance were you at when you heard of his death (if you can
remember)?
|