jwilzewske: Kevin Kenner: Contract between Human Virtuoso and Virtuosic Instrument

T here is an urbane, worldly aspect to Chopin’s style that partly accounts for his immense popularity. It has also given him a bad name among amateurs who take their music earnestly. Chopin’s urbanity has two strongly contrasting facets: (1) a virtuoso ‘glitter’—above all, the use of fast, brilliant passage work in the upper reaches of the piano; and (2) a fashionable sentimentality, employed directly and openly, without humor—there is, in fact, irony and wit but no trace of humor in Chopin’s music; neither the diabolical humor of Liszt, nor the ambiguous poetic humor of Schumann.”
— Charles Rosen, The Romantic Generation, p. 383.

P ianist Kevin Kenner’s performance last night was dramatic and graceful.

Chopin: Andante spianato, Op. 22
Chopin: Scherzo No. 1 in B minor, Op. 20
Chopin: Scherzo No. 2 in B-flat minor, Op. 31
Chopin: Scherzo No. 3 in C-sharp minor, Op. 39
Chopin: Scherzo No. 4 in E major, Op. 54
Schumann: Carnaval, Op. 9
Chopin: Variations in A major ‘Souvenir de Paganini’, B. 37 (encore)

K enner ardently addresses himself to the piano, much like we imagine Chopin might have done: his poetic disposition is not ‘contemplative’ so much as ‘speculative’ or ‘fanciful’; not ‘tender’ so much as ‘intimate’; not ‘impulsive’ so much as resolvedly ‘intent’ upon eliciting a specific response.

I n other words, not ‘sentimental’ but ‘romantic’.

H ow often do I tell my piano all that I should like to impart to you! ... How much more will my piano have to weep?”
— Frederick Chopin, 1829, letter to lover (quoted in Niecks).

T hese pieces, I think, reveal the capabilities of the new Steinway instrument that Friends of Chamber Music has recently acquired, as much as they reveal the powers of the executant (Kenner). The program in fact offered an extended opportunity to reflect on romantic piano idioms, and on the nature of a performer’s rapport with genre and instrument.

J ust as Kallberg (link below) some years ago noted that there is an implied ‘contract’ between the performer and the listener, there (inevitably?) is an implied ‘contract’ between the performer/composer and the instrument: the performer agrees to use certain conventions, patterns, and gestures, and the instrument consents to render them under an agreed set of terms and conditions—generously accomodating some aspects of them; withholding others—in a way that is consistent with the genre and aesthetic intent of the performer.

B oth Kenner and the instrument admirably fulfilled their bargain* with each other last night. Bravo!

(*The ‘agreement’ is, of course, not just one agreement, nor is it executed in advance. In fact, it is a chain of ongoing, inter-related agreements and renewals and codasils, negotiated and renegotiated on a tens-of-milliseconds time-scale.)

[50-sec clip, Kevin Kenner, Frederick Chopin, ‘Scherzo No. 3 in C-sharp minor, Op. 39’, 1.6MB MP3]

I n Kenner’s passages of prodigious Chopinian speed, you can hear the piano ‘speak’. In the case of Chopin Scherzos, the piano doubtless speaks Polish, admonishing the performer of more dangerous ‘curves’ ahead.

C hopin’s sadism is usually more subtle than that of his contemporaries, and in most of his work actual pain is associated with emotional violence... the moment of greatest emotional tension is generally the one that stretches the hand most painfully, so that the muscular sensation becomes—even without the piano’s sound—a mimesis of passion.”
— Charles Rosen, The Romantic Generation, p. 382.

jwilzewske

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Kevin Kenner: Contract between Human Virtuoso and Virtuosic Instrument

No comments:

Post a Comment