SHAKESPEARE WROTE FOR MONEYThis title is undoubtedly a work of art, even if unfortunately it is not mine, but by Nick Hornby that has entitled its last book in this way. I have found it on a stall in a motorway cafeteria, and here the beloved Nick has obtained his first victory; to be purchased stimulating with four words my natural-born desire to discover the reasons of such a provocative affirmation.
The book I am speaking about is just the collection of some book reviews written by Hornby for an American literary magazine. Naturally the book reviews become a mean for the author to express his own opinions on the literary world in particular and the artistic one, in general. Speaking about Shakespeare, Hornby points out that, even if on a clearly different extent , as a writer he feels much luckier than his well-knows predecessor. Nowadays, if your are a writer as a job, you are able to make your living writing a book every two or three years, enjoying your life and putting you in front of your typewriter only when you have something to say. During Shakespeare era, on the contrary, one was forced to produce, to produce and to produce if you wanted to eat. Obviously this affected art, in my opinion, it is not possible to create on demand and authors like Hornby, not fond of literature, but professionals, have been compelled to read Shakespeare in whole. Obviously even the less important works of a writer like Shakespeare, are undoubtedly masterpieces, at least stylistically speaking. He is one of the greatest writers of all the times, with a huge talent, and as Simone rightly affirms "he worked his fingers to the bone" Being paid in order to produce art is not at all negative, indeed it has given to many great artist the possibility to make real masterpieces that we can still enjoy. Bach, Raffaello, Caravaggio,luckily the list is very long. But it is but also a double-edged weapon! Let me try to explain it better... I recognize that Einstein's relativity theory is one of the greatest discoveries of all times, and if you understand it until the extreme consequences, as Jakob says, it can change the way to see your life, but I don't believe it was possible thanks to the discoverer's wage . Thinking that he earned his own living with physics, made him a professional, if we consider his high leveled smartness as well, but this is not sufficient to explain the immense creative jump that his mind had to do to formulate such a theory. He was looking for something. This is the element making the difference. The artistic level of each one is directly connected with what we are deep inside; great art cannot be created by mean men , even if they own the best technique of the world. Using some practical examples, I speak about of musicians, being music the art I know better, but the point I wish to reach can be shared by everybody. Watch these two videos and then I will explain you my point of view…in case you still need it (Click on the images to watch the videos)
In the first case I believe nothing is left to say, if not "Simply Volodia".But let us we speak about the second one . The technique is excellent, he has a good acquaintance of the text, contrary to Horowitz he makes no mistake, not even in one note ; the sound is excellent, obviously here he looses as Volodia was simply unique; Chopin is ABSENT ! Even if you switch off the sound and I exort you to do it, you will notice the difference in the approach to music. Horowitz practically doesn't move, apart from laconic glances to the audience. In the close-ups he has the same expression of my grandfather playing cards. The people in front of him came to listen to Chopin and he plays in the best way he can, trying to respect the music interfering in the least way possible. He likes Chopin ! The other one, on the contrary is not interested in Chopin, what counts more is he himself, he loves himself a lot. He just looks around, winks, would wave and make also some movements, if only he could. There is no respect for the music he is playing, there is room for him only! Every time I watch him, I have the irresistible desire to tear all the hair of his beard (and not only this) one by one! An other example showing that one behave for what one is . (Click on the images to watch the video).
I think to have taken as example two absolute world masters,obviously each one in his own kind. Some time ago, while speaking with a friend musician, I heard him making this saying"As a pianist he is debatable to a certain extent , but surely a musician of the very fine intelligence".Surely some performances of Gould can be put in discussion but it is undeniable that he had an extraordinary witty musical intelligence. You are right, but my friend spoke about Barenboim!!! Ok, let's measure intelligence; as it seems that the obvious is not enough! As you surely know, the Canadian pianist Glenn Gould, gave up the stage in 1964, at the age of 31. There were mainly two reasons involved in this decisions : the concerts, in his opinion , are merely circus shows where music plays only a lower role , and above all it is not possible to reach the same level of concentration on the text as you would have in a silent and hermit recording studio compared that one in a concert hall with a large audience. Now, I do not fully agree with way he says. The recording of Horowitz is the absolute confirmation that when one is a great artist and has the desire and joy to play, he can make wonderful and meaningful performances , worthy to be listened to. But for a piece such as the "Goldberg Variations" I don' t dare to say that Gould is wrong. The Golberg are an architectonic frame full of complexity owning an absolute perfection. Therefore they require, in my opinion, the maximum concentration just listen to them, so imagine what it has to be to play them ! Every time I listen to the recording of Gould released in '81 I discover every time something different, as well as some new shades. This man of immense talent has dissected every note one by one, every voice, every variation, and he has sewn them again , trying to travel over the composition lines of the author until catching the truth; and, in my opinion, he has not gone too far away. I suggest you to listen to them all and even to buy the record , as it is even more beautiful. It is a mastodontic, monumental composition, and if you don't study it and you don't analyze it in depth, it collapses like a castle of cards. I believe that it is among one of the most difficult pieces to be performed in front of an audience. Here we can notice the musical intelligence of Barenboim. He faces this piece maybe after having read it just once! He has no head or tail, I would add that the tail is very long since he plays stuff that was not even written. But you see, I don't mind if he destroys the Golberg; I do not listen to him, and that's all. The problem is that he is considered a musician with "a very fine intelligence" and you will not believe but these are the reasons that induce me, Simone, and Jakob to wonder what is art and what it is not. I can say it is enough for this week, we will continue the next one. Could you possibly believe it was over ? See you soon Paul. I thank once again the encyclopedic portal Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and Youtube for the beautiful videos http://www.youtube.com/members?s=mv&t=w&g=5
|
   |
