Glenn Gould

Well, if you have, you should have severe problems to understand body language, communication with other people and especially "everything that is in between the lines" and you would take everything literally, be focused on just certain special areas in which you are very skilled, anti-social, bad emotional and especially no empathy for other people. Who said it? A doctor? If not, ignore it.

 

Yeah, it wasn't a doctor. It was a person I know who I guess had read about it, and he said I had signs of it - extreme OCD, extremely anti-social (I don't guess you can tell since I find it much easier to be sociable online in written form - in real life, I'm very anti-social), and I do tend to get super-lost in my interests/skills, which would be music/literature, and most of my obsession with those tends to be in a loner sort of way, either at my digital piano with headphones, or at my computer with headphones. I don't really take everything literally, though - I'm not the best with hints, but I can pick up on them every now and then.

 

My son is now diagnosed HFA which means High Function Autism and there is small differences between that and Asperger's syndrome so I know what I am talking about. If you just feel lucky about your life, you shouldn't bother too much.

 

Dear Piano enthousiasts,

Here are my 2 cents....

I realy don't know what it is about Glenn Gould that people always come to analyse his strangeness. I for my part find what he did whit the piano not strange at all. In fact, his piano technique as well as his interpretation make a lot of sense. Let me confine my remarks to the technique:

- compared with other pianists, his technique comes by far the closest to the natural "grasping" function of the hand, enabling him to play with great security.
- related to this is his bodily posture that makes sense from a physical viewpoint as he makes excellent use of gravity.
- his singing, humming and even his swinging is nowadays often advised as a relaxation technique.

I realy don't understand why his example is not followed more often until now. I am quite sure, that by the time his excentricities are forgotten, his example will be followed more often since it makes great sense!

Greetings from Peter

 

My teacher has been trying to modify my own eccentricities at the piano. She says that performing is an athletic event and that I have to be in proper form. I tend to sway a lot unconsciously as I play, and she will put her hands on my back to keep me still, or just coach while I'm playing - "Move nothing but your arms!" My non-pedal foot, I often keep underneath me, and put a lot of my weight on it. I sort of use it like a brace (against what, I'm not sure - it's just something I do). She'll grab my leg and place my left foot somewhere up by the pedals. My old teacher did the same thing with my pedal foot, because when I was playing a piece where I didn't use it at all (like a Bach invention or something) I would keep both of my feet underneath me, so he would constantly have to remind me to keep my pedal foot in position. At least he didn't worry about my left foot. :lol:

 

Hmmm......I know I should just shut up because I don't want you to doubt your teacher, since I'm sure she is telling you what she believes just because she may not have done any recent readings, and certainly not to harm you. And I don't wish to argue with anyone at PS here who thinks otherwise, but........moving only your arms is now an old-fashioned way of playing because it has proven to be the surest way to get strain in the back and everywhere else. In my opinion and based on my own experience and on lots of reading, the best way to play is often the way that comes natural, and that is to sway freely from your torso -- both leaning forward (ie.head further forward than hips are) and freely swaying from side to side, essentially so that your sternum (chest) ends up centred over the area of the keyboard your hands are at. And as far as your left foot tucked under you and you digging into the ground, that is very much recommended in some readings. It is hard to explain and I am currently on only a 15-min. break from teaching so hope I am making sense in a rush, but by left foot being on ground and not just resting lightly there either, it allows the energy of your thigh quadricep muscles to be transferred up to your torso, which is where the energy then goes to arms and eventually fingertips. Again, not my crazy logic, but based on what I've read. Don't ask me the exact authors or book titles because I've read about a dozen books from the local library on correct body position, so wouldn't know where to begin looking, but I hope this info is helpful anyway.

 

lol...by all means, question anything and everything. I know she's going to have a really hard time breaking me of my natural position, because I've always played that way. She'll probably give up eventually. :lol:

That's why I like it, I think - like, if I do it that way, I feel like I have not only gravity but also my body weight to contribute. It's not always in use, but it's potential force at my disposal for when I need it.

 

I almost never use the una corda pedal. Which is probably a good thing, because I think I still have a long way to go on mastery of the sustain pedal. I like to think that I enjoy the challenge of making soft passages sing without it, but that might just be one of those things I tell myself. :lol:

By the way, Monica...I noticed you wondering a while back if Gould played Chopin, and though you might have already looked it up, Wikipedia quotes him saying that he played Chopin once or twice a year, "for himself", but that it "didn't convince" him. I can certainly understand his appreciation of the things in Bach that are absent in Chopin, namely strict counterpoint. With Chopin, counterpoint is rarely so strictly defined - rather, it's implicit, with the way that Chopin voices his chords (usually quite perfectly). As much as we love Chopin, much of what he wrote can be easily used as an accompaniment to yet another melody that intertwines perfectly with both the existing melody(-ies) and the chord voicing. Even a simple mind like mine could probably easily come up with something beautiful and profound that would move through those gaps, with what is already written acting like the banks of a river.

I've actually thought about doing that, with the concertos. Not sure if I've mentioned that before, but it's something I've been thinking about a lot with this recent renaissance of love for the concertos I've experienced. I wouldn't change the slightest bit about the piano part. Chopin was in his element writing for the piano. But it's pretty obvious that he didn't really put a whole lot of love into the orchestrations. The harmony is perfect, and there several submelodies that have his name clearly written on them, but he didn't get too adventurous with it. So I get to thinking, wouldn't it be cool if I could transcribe, and embellish, the orchestral parts for a string quartet? That would turn the concertos into quintet sonatas, but I think it could be awesome...Chopin was certainly capable of doing such a thing for himself, but he wrote these concertos at a very young age, and I think he probably used them as a part of his purchase into the music scene. Keyboard music was not at that time nearly as popular as the larger-scale sort of music, and chamber quintets don't quite hack it either. Chopin made his name known fairly quickly, and then essentially retired from the stage and made a good bit of money teaching piano lessons. The wealthy youth in Paris and the surrounding area were I'm sure quite willing to pay exorbitant prices for his guidance, and there were probably quite a few talented ones, too.

So, no more torturous orchestral scoring projects. I can imagine Chopin being so tortured with having had to do it the first time around that he didn't want to touch it again to try to make something else out of it. :lol:

 

I think Gould did not like Chopin's music much and says in one interview regarding making recordings. "If they say I should make a sugary Chopin recording, I would simply refuse."

On the other hand, a recording of Chopin's op.10 no.2 was found in his private archive and I have that on a DVD at home. It is really incredible how fast, distinct and clear he plays it. Absolutely crazy! Anyone else heard it?

 

Even if there would be a recording of GG playing Chopin, I would not be interested in.

I really do admire the technical ability Glenn Gould had, and his manner to phrase different voices for contrapunctual stuff. Also he not only could play very dynamically, but foremost he articulated much. That means, no endless legato playing, instead all shades of articulation from legato to staccato. That is what fits so well in my opinion especially for the music of the high baroque time, especially Bach.

What I don't like in his playing is that his articulation and dynamics are kind of arbitrary in the sense that I often can't draw a connection of his articulation to the musical content. It sounds like "now I like to play softer and softer" and that he does perfectly. I never experience that how he plays comes from the stomach, or that the musical expression is driven by feelings.
Of course he is in perfect control of how he plays, flawless in every direction, but anyhow it all sounds kind of cold and steril. Can't describe it better, but me (and my wife too) cannot listen to more than a couple of WTC items from him.

So instead having a feeling of getting undressed by his playing (what Monica describes) I get more a feeling of taking an addional pullover because I feel chilly because of the cold playing. Now you know why I am not interested to hear Chopin played by GG...

 

I did, and it is stunning how he could play in such a neat and detached way at that speed. Yet, it sounds awfully like some Czerny thingies. By the way, Gould recorded Chopin's Third Sonata for a CBC broadcast. Very interesting in some parts, but utterly unidiomatic.

 

I'd like to hear Bach play Chopin. Yeah, that's right. On a piano with a sustain pedal and everything! :shock:

 

Hello pianolady,

There is a CD recording of chopins third piano sonata by GG. I have it. It is not what one would expect from a normal Chopin interpretation. Apart from some passages that have an extraordinary beauty, I think it shows in total that Glenn did not appreciate Chopin.

About your wrist problem. I believe very strongly that every pianist has to develop his own physical approach towards the instrument. You cannot simply adopt a physical approach form someone else (like your teacher or anyone else) and make it your own. And for finding your own approach you have to do a lot of experimenting. And i think Glenn Gould is a great example of where such experimenting can lead to. He developed a physical approach towards the instrument that was so completely in line with his own physical and mental characteristics, that it allowed him to play the most difficult pieces in an almost flawless manner. That makes great sense to me. And i believe that many of the solution he found will prove to be of value for many pianists, as they have been to me.

I understand your fascination with Glenn's interpretation of the Goldberg variations. On Youtube you have seen his latest interpration. The one he recorded only one or two years before he died. That one is not only fabulous in it's technique. It is pure genius in it's music. I must have heard it some 30 times by now. And it never fails to amaze me. To me, the Goldberg variations are, as a composition, in itself a momument of human artistry. Played by Glenn Gould, the monument comes to live and shines with a livelyhood and warmth and is testimony to what human culture can achieve.

By the way, i will post my interpretation of the French Overture of Bach in a few weeks from now. I recorded it a few weeks ago in the medieval townhall of the city of Naarden, here in Holland. Currently i am in the process of producing a DVD about it (on Comenius, Bach and the city of Naarden). I consider it my revival as a pianist (since i negelected the piano for almost 15 years). I just have to discuss some copyright matters before being able to upload it to the piano society in some form or the other.

Greetings from Peter

 

Yes, I watched both the Barenboim and GG video of the aria, and after that almost all GG videos on Youtube. Undoubtly GG was a great artist and kind of reinventor to find the beauty in articulation in polyphonic pieces. And I agree that the aria is played by GG with extraordinary beauty. I like the Barenboim take too, but I prefer the GG version. GG plays it very slow, and very, very soft but nevertheless great voicing. That shows great technique with unbelievable key control. But playing very soft + delicate and playing romantically are still different things to me (anyhow there is no need to play Bach in a romantic manner for me, or to play Chopin in baroque manner ...). I agree, that aria cannot be called cold playing from GG (because it is very soft and not that staccato played), but exeptions prove the rule.

Maybe I have more of a romantic nature, however the longer I do play Bach on organ or piano, the longer I try to long for strictly different interpretations whether it is Bach or Chopin e.g.
For a Bach fugue (many of the preludes are polyphonic pieces too) it is necessary to show the beauty in the different voices in parallel. The "tools" I see in different dynamics combined with strong articulation. The articulation especially but also the melody bows well choosen in connection to the rhythmic metrum of the piece. But in difference to the romantic manner not so in sound revelling, pedaled legato playing, or rubato, or melody bows neglecting the rhythmic structure.

I think the main difference of the high baroque music and romantic music is that the one has polyphonic character, the other homophonic character (there are expections of course, only as a rule of thumb), so the interpretation style should act accordingly.

Yeah, but much more I wish we could hear how Chopin played Chopin, and how Bach played Bach. Or even more, how they improvised in their own style ...

 

I must jump in here again (seems like everyone has something to say about Gould) and add that what I believe Gould foremost gave the world were interpretations which are crystal clear. Every note is always perfectly audible and given equal significance (the reason he was able to do so was his very individual technique). The result of every note being audible is a new dimension in music and most important, in Bach's music and we have never heard it like that before. Not only are all keys audible, he also succeeds creating an enormous tension in the music because he plays very hard, bony and detached. My mind always want something more after I have listened to Gould and that is why I always go back and listen over and over again. In direct opposite to Olaf, I can listen endlessly to any of his Bach music (he recorded all Bach's keyboard music and I have it all). It touches me so deeply and I have never heard anyone played Bach more beautifully.

For you Monica, I have recorded his Chopin 10/2 from the DVD I have but you have to stand the talking in the middle of it. As we discussed before, it is crazy fast and for example Pollini ends up at 1:20 from that he hits the first key to the last, Gould is under 0:55 !!! :shock: