Schumannology

Schumannology

I am going through an intensive Schumann phase and I don't know why. I have never, never been a Schumann fan, from my earliest days learning the piano. (I do not recall him at all in the days before that, in my single digits, when I was reading the lives of "the composers" and listening to their music.) With the exception of op. 21 (the Novelletten, perhaps his least played major work for piano), I just never felt the connection that piano players are supposed to feel for this music. Thanks to Pletnev, however, I discovered a heart for the op. 99 pieces. Thanks to Richter, for the op. 7 Toccata. And now my mind is filling with the sounds of op. 20 (the Humoreske for piano), the op. 38 1st Symphony, and the op. 41 string quartets. Mind: I don't expect ever to have anything like fellow feeling with the op. 26 (Faschingsschwank aus Wien) or the Papillons or Album für die Jugend, but I've opened up my head.

Opus Posthumous

And herewith we round out the set:

Samson François

Artur Rubinstein

Christian Ihle Hadland

So there it is. Next we'll go into op. 10 no. 1, that arpeggiated, C-majorated delight, more fun in the playing than the listening really. But that's to come tomorrow. Also, I will lay out the full list of piano players listened to and considered for this list. (It's long so I don't want to tack it on here.) Please feel free to let me know the error of my ways or how you'd do it differently.

I'm not as big a fan of order as Erica is (at least I try not to be), but fugues are irresistible. I mean, unless you're John Cage (with whom I once discussed this topic), how you gonna resist a fugue? Go on and tell me how.

Fascinating texturals. I'm not sure this is its ultimate realization, but fine introduction to a composer unknown to me. I assume the performer is Thomas Bjørnseth, although I could be wrong about this. My applause in any event for decoding a difficult text. (I love the video methodology of following the score, brilliant.)

atonalitydotnet:

SCIARRINO Piano Sonata no.5

Complete playlist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDVL6FopD_E&feature=PlayList&p=EE0742EFCB8874F4&playnext_from=PL&index=0&playnext=1

Some Relevance

I believe this quotation has some relevance to my previous post:

His [Pogorelich's] recordings from the 1980s are too extreme to be classics, but they hold up if you're in a mood to hear Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit bristle with extraordinarily menacing energy.

"Too extreme to be classics." I suppose that says it all.

Listen: something either works or it doesn't. Even if it doesn't, it may have value beyond its mere candidacy for classicism. If it works in your mind, why shouldn't it enter the hall of fame?

Source: Philadelphia Enquirer 4/29/2010

Vladimir Feltsman plays with an admirable sense of pianistic touch and clarity. He has what was once described to me (with regard to another player, I think Weissenberg) as "steely fingers". And of course if you prefer your counterpoint detaché, he's right in the zone. Why then is his Bach so boring?

I'm not sure I have the answer. I don't know if my view is shared in any way that could provide insight. All I know is: he is throwing in all kinds of extra-Johann variations and improvisations, which is lovely and fine and wonderfully impure, and he's clipping away with his steely technique, and it's boring beyond belief. I don't mean to say it's unlistenable, it's not banal exactly, but the pieces, the positives, don't add up. It's the damnedest thing. Terrific soporific.

(Note: the Courante is provided for example only. I find the above true for all his Bach, and truth be told almost everything else too. But I encourage you to try him for yourself, I hope my experience isn't true for you.)