Last night Angela Hewitt played Book I of the WTC in Zankel Hall as
part of her world tour of the WTC. Tomorrow she will play Book II.

We live in an age where the expression of big, sincere emotions is
considered unseemly - irony is called for. I just received the
Gramophone issue of the year's awards. Simon Rattle's Brahms
German Requiem with the Berlin Phil got an award and there was a track
on the attached CD from it of "All Flesh is Grass." I could not
believe my ears. I normally would have considered this risible garbage
- this is a big Romantic work that calls for big gestures. It was
played like a chamber cantata, small, dainty, like a minuet - but no
doubt this was intentional. So much of what is considered authentic
today is just the taste of out times.

In that context I perceived Hewitt's approach - intimate, understated,
elegant, refined, restrained. Her articulation is breathtaking - every
legato, staccato, tenuto & portato was clearly executed. The degree
she raised her fingers (when she did) to hit the keys was under
perfect control and accurate. She had a clear sense of the shape of a
phrase and made the Fazioli piano sing (the sound of the Fazioli is
beginning to grow on me.) She made the lines swell and contract
bringing out all the colors of the piano, all within a consistent
frame of the kind of understated emotional display I referred to
above. In addition to her articulation her pedaling was spare and
accurate.

However, I heard other appraisals of her performance, some glowing and
some quite disparaging, all by people with extensive piano background.
I don't think the official reviews will be flattering. But then, I
don't trust the opinion of people who are paid to write a review. This
is the 3rd performance of the WTC that I have attended in NY this
year. The first was Barenboim's in Carnegie hall. He gave the finger
to the authentic performance movement and to the taste of out times
and shamelessly employed every trick in the book of virtuoso pianists
who specialize in the Romantic repertoire - it was a show and I
enjoyed every minute of it (completely different from his studio
recording - he really let go in Carnegie!) The second was Konstantin
Lifschitz' performance in Town Hall. The reactions from friends and
reviewers that these performances elicited ran the gamut from delight
to loathing, all from people who are either musicians, professional
reviewers or experienced concert goers - so how can you appraise a
piano recital?

Frankly, if I had to review a performance by how much I liked it or
not (in piano recital), I'd say the most honest thing I can write is
that today I liked it or not, tomorrow I may like it less or more and
a year or ten years from now I will hear it completely differently.
That's why I say just give me the facts, but for that you really have
to hear everything and really concentrate. It's much easier to stretch
a few observations into a review by filling in with general appraisals
that are worthless. The only kind of assessment that has any validity
is that of multiple of reports from different points of view, like on
amazon.

Simonel

Archived from group: rec>music>classical>performing