The Girl With The Rose Tattoo plays Chopin

[Despina41]

Originally Posted by Philidor

I agree. I don't like the cult of the performer. I see a classical musician's job not to create "fans" or become a "star" or make vast amounts of money for themselves or a CD label, but to act as simple messenger, or translator, or guide, between composer and listener. I don't want a "big personality" getting in the way. It would be like reading a book which some wretched editor, without the author's permission, has bowdlerised. Or drinking water-down wine. Or eating heavily processed food.

I listen to very little recorded music (I'm fortunate to live in central London, the live classical music capital of the world) because I don't even want a recording engineer between me and the music - some Kevin twiddling his knobs. For me it's a huge, unique, pleasure to sit in a concert hall (or a Classical Revolution type venue) and, in the hands of a clever, expert mediator -- the musician or ensemble -- be exposed to the composer, quite often a man who's been dust for 400 years.

It's amazing, exciting, moving, exhausting, wonderful -- if the players get it right and avoid trying to upstage the composer or -- worst of all -- seek to "form a relationship with the audience."

No! Your job is to mediate the composer. That's the key relationship. I don't want a relationship with you. You're not important. Back off! Play the damn music! Get your ego out of my face. It's not about you.

I'm completely open minded on whether a man like Lang Lang does good or harm. I can't prove it with statistics but suspect that stories of him attracting thousands of young Chinese to take up piano are true. That's a good thing, no?

Unless they all seek to use classical music to become "stars" i.e. get too big for their boots. Someone needs to take them on one side and tell them they're servants not masters -- servants of the composer. They're postmen, nothing more.

This is so funny that you brought up this argument about the role of perfomer as "transmitter" or "interpreter" or "star," etc. I read an interview with Trifonov the other day who was saying exactly what you'd like your musicians to say...I'll try to translate the Russian...

This realm [of music] is such... I would say, mystical, certainly soulful and multidimensional. In the first place, everything already lies in the music; I don't add anything especially, don't "wring out" some special interpretation. For me the most optimal situation on stage is to be abstracted from everything external and to be lost in the music, surrender to it all your thoughts -- so that the music simply moves me. The pianist, it seems to me, must be a transmitter, must subtly feel and sensitively react to the music, "pass" it to the audience....

Come on, where are the Russky speakers around here? Someone want to give a nicer translation?

Of course, Trif (of all pianists) should do the next logical thing, what Richter did in old age: play in the dark with just the score lit up. I'm going to trust Wiki's Bruno Monsaingeon citation here with this Richter quote:

That's why I now play in the dark, to empty my head of all non-essential thoughts and allow the listener to concentrate on the music rather than on the performer. What's the point of watching a pianist's hands or face, when they only express the efforts being expended on the piece?"

Can one get away with that if one's not already been around the music world for 50 years?