Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner You've probably read it before, but I just love this quote

OOOH AHHH CANTONA, OH AH CANTONA !

Eric Cantona was such a star!

I think it's very possible that without Gould here himself to explain exactly what he meant by that kind of vague remark, that those who disagree may have simply misinterpretted the meaning of the quote.

I think I know what he's really getting at it and would be happy to share my interpretation if anyone would like to hear it.

I read the quote for the first time and I liked it. It was a bit verbose and slightly affected in my opinion, but I liked the way it rolled off of my tongue.

Then I read everyone else's posts and opinions, and mulled over them for a bit.

Now I am at a loss.

I play many different things. Sometimes my music is like honey flowing from my fingertips, a sweet prayer floating on the breath of life to heaven. Other times it is like the scream of a suicide jumper when they realize that they actually jumped and now nothing is going to save them from the inevitable force of gravity.

Sometimes it is happy and light, others it is desperate and searching. Other times it is dark and lonely.

My playing, however, is always an in the moment, emotionally charged, plain and simple adrenaline rush. The complicated light trills of my happiest pieces and the dark harmonies of my darkest pieces all have stemmed from some outpouring of emotion that left me drained emotionally and physically. Exhausted in that wonderful way you get when you finally managed that three mile run you've been working for.

And peaceful. Serene. Full of wonder at the thing I've created.

That is what I play for. That contentment, that peace that comes with mastering a complicated section or completing the piece you've been stuck on for weeks. The wonder and awe of the great masterpieces and the pride that comes from the completion of something of your own, whether it be masterful or just a piece of your heart on the grand staff. The peace that you gain from putting that anger, that sadness that is almost unbearable into a language that transcends the spoken word.

Maybe Gould was being adolescent, tongue-in-cheek, and unecessarily verbose. Who knows? Perhaps, however, his words do contain a bit of truth for some people, however they were spoken. The purpose of art varies from artist to artist. Some may play for the adrenaline, some for the fame, some for the money, and some for the beauty of it all. The fact that Gould was simply saying these things because he wanted to impress does not discount the validity of the words, simply the motivation behind what was spoken.

Just a thought.

This is being analyzed to an extreme extent. There really isn't to much reading between the lines to be done here. I don't know the context of this particular quote, but it's obvious that Gould is simply referring to the fact that art is a lifelong journey. To disagree with what he's saying is quite litigious. After all, who doesn't agree that art is a life enriching thing. It's over dramatic, but I always did love the way Gould could articulate his thought so eloquently, even if they were sometimes strange.

Thank you, this is exactly what I wanted to say before (about the quote and about Gould), but I couldn't find the right words.

So sue me.

Sorry, but gould is saying art is one thing to the exclusion of another thing, and - the fact is - it's a lot of things.

there's nothing wrong with analyzing or scrutinizing what an artist says about art.

Good one.

So sue me.

Sorry, but gould is saying art is one thing to the exclusion of another thing, and - the fact is - it's a lot of things.

there's nothing wrong with analyzing or scrutinizing what an artist says about art. [/QB][/QUOTE]

First of all, I don't think glenn was trying to capture the entire meaning of music in this statement.

Second, you're absolutely correct, there's nothing wrong with analyzing things, but insinuating that Gould is COMMANDING you to think of art as a lifelong quest and not a fleeting experience is argumentative and akin to picking fly sh*t out of a pile of pepper.

I was in no way trying to aim my statements at you or defend Glenn Gould; I was simply anlyzing the over analyzing .

Did you read the post right below it, Copper? (I defined love, "Gould" style.) :p

There is a certain crude symmetry to that definition.