Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner The piano and homosexuality

I was going to reference that! Nice first post by the way...and welcome, if you're new.
Xxx

This is a salient point.

Thus far we have discussed four principal hypothoses for the apparent proponderance of gay master pianists:

1. Those that are gay feel more comfortable being in the arts and out in the arts and/or felt attracted to the piano.

2. Because they are flamboyant or because it is unusual for pianists to be homosexual we develop a false perceptional bias that there is a preponderance.

3. The psycho-social challenges of growing up gay make some take to piano practice as a refuge or to later avoid confrontation and troubles in many discriminatory professions and to avoid becoming a priest, hairdresser or flower arranger.

4. The unique, psycho-social adversity of growing up gay makes some precociously consciously aware and sensitive which translates into longer term advantage in playing the piano.

A fifth reason may be:

5. There are physical differences in the makeup of homosexual men ('s brains) which provide them with long term advantage in going far with the piano.

We know that there are differences between male and female brains:



We also know that -- as an integrative art -- successful piano performance requires a unique integration of ratio and emotio and integration within the brain and between the brain and the body. Young males who start early piano practice tend to grow a larger corpus collosum, while females, who already have larger ones, tend to achieve less marked differentiation from piano study.
http://www.musicianbrain.com/papers/Hyde_MusicTraining_BrainPlasticity_nyas_04852.pdf

We also know from research of the Dutch neuroscientist Dick Swaab that there are physical differences between the brains of homosexual men and heterosexual men, and these differences are formed already in the uterus.


http://www.pnas.org/content/105/30/10273.full

How many other differences there may be of which we are not aware is unknown. However, this one would not seem to be trivial given the fact that musical performance is a temporal art form where micro timing differences can make all the difference in the world:

That's too good.

I'd agree with that.

Which country would that be?

Well, what I will say is that -- despite the depressing dearth -- some of my favorite master pianists are indeed women...

Here, as opposed to there.

If, that is, you reside in the same country as zapper.

Ditto.

Check out our Eric Satie, themed recital! Can you spot the 2 gays lol

http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/1993720/1/Erik%20Satie%20Themed%20Recital.html

We all had the same amount of time to learn our pieces, and are all at different levels

Stephen Hough is gay? Who would have thought? He doesn't act gay on stage. For that matter, Horowitz didn't act gay, and I sat about 15 feet away from him on stage for one of his concerts. Neither did Richter, but that was way back in the 60s and maybe I was too young or innocent to notice.

Perhaps if they put a sign on stage that said GAY PERFORMER, that would clarify these things. It might have helped when Richter, Gilels and Berman came over to the US if they had a sign that said CAUTION: COMMUNIST ON STAGE. Everyone would have known where these men stood politically. Or would we? They could have walked off stage and asked for political asylum, and some Soviet artists did. Sometimes, putting labels on artists doesn't help things.

Does anyone else feel this whole thread is getting silly? Do people honestly go to concerts by pianists and spend their time thinking about the sexual orientation of the performer? Even if a gay artist has suffered from a lifetime of repression, and is expressing that emotion in his playing, how are you, the listener, going to know this? All of us receive the emotional content of great music and notable performances in different ways, pertinent to our own lives, and only secondarily if at all do we think about the life of the performer (as in the case of someone like Geoffrey Helfgott). Probably the gayest pianist of them all, Liberace, understood this. As camped up as his costumes were, when it came to playing the piano, he made people forget about all that and just enjoy the music. I think it would be best all around if we just enjoyed the music of the many excellent pianists performing today, and not spend our time wondering what they are doing in their private lives.

How is Liberace the gayest pianist of them all?

It's just discussion...it does no harm and, as such, can only be a good thing..right? Besides...when I hear music that fills me with love I may very well just happen to love the performer; I'm interested in those I love and can find even the dullest fact satisfying...so...um...would it be best if I just didn't think about those I love?

I think he just meant ''most flamboyant'' which is definitely true.

Indeed. Those pesky gays should go crawl back into their holes or step back into the darkness of their closet. Only if they have a trophy wife on their arm should they have the nerve to rub our noses in the details of their private lives.

Wonder why for centuries and still today that there is such a lively market in (auto)biographies from Josquin to Lang Lang if no one is really interested in the lives of great artists?

Since when is Liberace considered a classical master pianist? It is like putting another Las Vegas performer such as Tom Jones on the same list as Pavarotti...

There are several threads in the archives about Liberace, in which his technical and artistic skills are discussed. It will always be a matter of opinion as to how good a pianist he was.

Liberace was a hugely talented classical pianist actually. He just became famous for doing something else.

only little people are interested in someone else closet life...

Correct; it is the prurient fixation with things that are of no concern.