I should preface that I haven't yet listened to how it sounds – and therefore I am "in the wrong."
However, I have already read some comments on the video. But I could have also spared myself the reading, as they were so predictable in their pro or con stances, and even in their arguments.
I only notice that some pros suggest: "try listening without watching." This seems like a completely misleading suggestion to me: the aesthetic, cultural, and moral (and ultimately even political) meaning of this interpretation is also given, or perhaps especially, by "watching and listening" together – and by the tremendous dissonance between what is seen and what is heard.
Or what should be heard (given that I haven't been able to listen yet).
Dear Red . . . it took me a few seconds before clicking and opening the topic you proposed. I was trying to intuit what substance lay behind your title. And I guessed right!
Well, don't blame me, I am listening without looking, and the first two movements do not displease me at all.
All my sympathy to those poor souls who were at the concert accompanied by a wife or girlfriend ... They must have listened with their eyes closed.
Maybe when he tested the acoustics of the hall, he realized that the air conditioning system wasn't working. Anyway, I don't think she lacks the money to have a suit made with a slit on the left side... but instead no: slit on the right. Public side! Just look . . .
If I were Andras Schiff, I would show up at Carnegie Hall with a nice pair of very comfortable Birkenstocks (at the very least)
Even at Santa Cecilia in early June, she came practically naked, subsequently demonstrating exceptional talent in the performance of the two Ravel concertos (solo and left hand).
Luca, I was alone, so I kept both my eyes and ears wide open!
G
giovannip
Member
Reply 4 by giovannip
Posts
553
Beautiful and talented, there is nothing to say. She certainly travels on planes with only carry-on luggage
Finally an idea to suggest more appropriate clothing to Massimo Anfossi for the next concert at the Beethoven Haus!
Anyway, in the other topic recommended by Frank up here, Ada Merini's poem is beautiful!
(pity Ada! I would have gladly listened to you barefoot... a mixture of genres... neither good nor bad.... if we were all beautiful.. but that's not how it is and she - who is talented - could easily cover up).
G
giovannip
Member
Reply 7 by giovannip
Posts
553
I hope Massimo Anfossi's biceps are up to the task :lol:. As for Ada, I cannot help but share the beauty of this poem....
True that it doesn't reach the poetry of other productions, but come on, it's not bad.... Massimo? A little olive oil like the ancient athletes, a laurel wreath, and away we go!
I should preface that I haven't yet listened to how it sounds – and therefore I am "in the wrong."
However, I have already read some comments on the video. But I could have also spared myself the reading, as they were so predictable in their pro or con stances, and even in their arguments.
I only note that some pros suggest: "try listening without watching." This seems to me a completely misleading suggestion: the aesthetic, cultural, and moral significance (and ultimately even political) of this interpretation is also given, or perhaps especially, by "watching and listening" together – and by the tremendous dissonance between what is seen and what is heard.
Or what one should hear (given that I haven't been able to listen yet).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itLAlTJt8cs
Speaking of what is discussed elsewhere in the forum regarding piano pieces suitable for picking up people, from all this it can be deduced that it is much more likely that a woman picks up a man by playing than ... vice versa.
... and anyway she seems truly excellent in interpreting Opus 106.
The future of Western classical music is in the hands of the East, and I have had proof of this also during these two weeks in Imola where, on the occasion of the Imola Summer Festival organized by the Accademia pianistica di Imola, the Chinese and the Japanese completely dominated the scene.
A Chinese boy only 13 years old, Wen Ruogu, was the winner. Keep this name in mind .... we will certainly hear more about him.
Regarding what is being discussed elsewhere on the forum about piano pieces suitable for picking up women, from all this one can deduce that it is much more likely that a woman picks up a man by playing than ... vice versa.
in effect, I think so too... and that was what I meant in my (non-explicit) post on February 16th in that topic, in which I was saying precisely that to win over the woman I have in mind, Nocturne op. 9 no. 2 wouldn't even be necessary even if I played like Rubinstein
(although, I must say, it wasn't Yuja Wang I was alluding to)
the aesthetic, cultural and moral meaning (and ultimately even political) of this interpretation is also given or perhaps especially by "looking and listening" together – and by the tremendous dissonance between what is seen and what is heard.
hi Red
No rush... could you expand on the above? I think it's interesting.
A music that in itself has – or could have – something still incomprehensible, and an interpretation in which there is no room for mystery. The effect is almost Dadaist. In its own way brilliant, and at the same time nerve-wracking. As brilliant and at the same time nerve-wracking is the temptation to resolve every doubt about the residual meaning of this music with the eye rather than with the ear, actually forcing you to separate what should be united (the ear and the eye, indeed).
V
Viola
Member
Reply 17 by Viola
Posts
191
RedScharlach wrote:
Music that in itself has – or could have – something still incomprehensible, and an interpretation in which there is no room for mystery. The effect is almost Dadaist. In its own way brilliant, and at the same time nerve-wracking. As brilliant and at the same time nerve-wracking is the temptation to resolve every doubt about the residual meaning of this music with the eye rather than with the ear, actually forcing you to separate what should be united (the ear and the eye, precisely).
It is certainly exhibitionism, but not pure exhibitionism as it might be, say, with a Hungarian Rhapsody by Liszt, or as perhaps it was – in a different way, certainly – in the Ravel Concertos. It is a somewhat more complex kind of exhibitionism and, precisely because of its gratuitous and inconclusive complexity, fascinating in itself. He chooses op. 106 because it is notoriously problematic, because within it there are several points that are truly difficult to understand, and several moments in which I wouldn't say one seeks the ugly or the extravagant (as in Ravel), but certainly moments in which beauty is the last thing one worries about, in the face of much more urgent matters. All of this is glossed over: there is no problem nor any mystery. Therefore, it is not Beethoven's Sonata that fascinates, nor she directly: what fascinates – and by fascinate I mean to present as simple and direct something that is difficult to decipher, or perhaps, who can tell, impossible to decipher – is the exhibitionism itself exhibited as such. A bit like how circus acrobats might fascinate (whom, to tell the truth, I have never loved all that much).
V
Viola
Member
Reply 19 by Viola
Posts
191
RedScharlach wrote:
It is certainly showmanship, but not pure showmanship as it might be, let's say, with a Hungarian Rhapsody by Liszt, or as perhaps it was – in a different way, certainly – in the Ravel Concertos. It is a somewhat more complex kind of showmanship and, precisely because of its gratuitous and inconclusive complexity, fascinating in itself. He chooses op. 106 because it is notoriously problematic, because within it there are several points that are truly difficult to understand, and several moments in which I wouldn't say that one seeks the ugly or the extravagant (as in Ravel), but certainly moments in which beauty is the last thing one worries about, in the face of much more urgent matters. All this is glossed over: there is no problem nor any mystery. Therefore, it is not Beethoven's Sonata that fascinates, nor her directly: what fascinates – and by fascinate I mean presenting as simple and direct something that is difficult to decipher, or perhaps, who can tell, impossible to decipher – is the showmanship itself exhibited as such. A bit like how circus acrobats might fascinate (whom, to tell the truth, I have never loved all that much).
Your interpretation is fascinating, because it is poetic and where there is poetry, there is beauty.
The pianist's "scenic" performance holds no interest for me and does not induce any reflection in me.
From a musician, I only ask to play. I ask nothing else, I want nothing else.
Goodnight.
T
Talentuoso
Member
Reply 20 by Talentuoso
Posts
206
Viola wrote:
To a musician, I only ask to play. I ask for nothing else, I want nothing else.
Even Beethoven would ask it, but regardless, in 2016 one cannot go around wearing a sack. It would be out of place... it's as if I wore a big white wig to play. Come on.
Then again, he can afford it, so as was being said in the 'other topic', it is part of the job and of being contemporary... even in clothing.
