I would guess that few pianists have generated such a wide variance of opinion of their playing (from supreme genius to almost a joke). So what's your opinion of him?

I have only listened to about 5 of his CD's(Goldberg Variations, Bach Concerti, the one with all the Pavannes and Galliards, Beethoven Sonatas). If you think he is a great Bach player, what are your reasons(ability to bring out voices. new way of articulation i.e. detatched etc.)?? What about what many consider to be his extreme tempos(very fast or very slow)? I was listening to his early Beethoven sonatas and thought the CD player had stopped during his performance of the slow movement of the first C major sonata(Op. 2 #3?). I did not even recognise the first few measures of the first sonata in f minor.

I like hearing him hum in the background...

Glenn Gould was the type of pianist that most people either loved or hated. Descriptions of his playing have ranged from "unsurpassed technical clarity," to "the brutal insensitivity of a demented sewing machine."
He was definitely an interesting character in the piano world. Initially his affectations - low chair, singing and conducting along with the music, extreme tempos - created a sensation, and might have even helped his career, according to some critics.
He had a unique musical mind that some people regarded as genius, while others thought was nothing more than annoying precociousness.
He retired from the concert stage at around 1964 to record and write articles. Some of the articles had to do with the unnatural environment and experience of live performances, and his philosophy against them. Some people see these articles as nothing more than psychobabble intended to rationalize his extreme case of stage fright.
Although he is far from my favorite, Gould was an important artist because of his uniquely linear approach to music, and the fact that he took some repertoire (WTC, Inventions and Synfonias) out of the practice room and into the concert halls (or record shelves).

While Gould's playing of Bach is not technically "correct" (in the sense that he skips repeats at will, plays fast, plays on piano, etc.), his playing is wonderfully musical. By that, I suppose, I mean it moves me as being somehow "right". It sings (aside from the vocal obligato). It dances. I have been unmoved by much Bach playing by others. For example, I really wanted to like the recent Periah Goldberg performance, but it just paled in comparison to Gould's. I will not attempt to defend his playing of Mozart or Beethoven. However, I think Gould's extraordinary rhythmic vitality and expressive lyrical line work marvelously on Bach.

Best,

-Steve O.

His 1955 Goldberg would be my choice as the only CD I could bring on a desert island.

Someone told me they suspect Gould may have had autism or rather Asperger's disorder.

http://www.ont-autism.uoguelph.ca/types_of_autism.shtml



People with Asperger's may have an exceptional talent or skill with which they are preoccupied. It is conjectured that several people of remarkable genius may have had Asperger's--including Albert Einstein, Vladimir Nabokov, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Bela Bartok and Andy Warhol. Of Canadian interest is a front-page story in The Globe and Mail (1 February 2000) entitled "Was Glenn Gould autistic?" The possibility that Asperger's Syndrome could explain Gould's social deficiencies, obsessive perfectionism and intolerance of change was raised in the 1996 biography by psychiatrist Peter Oswald, Glenn Gould: The Ecstasy and Tragedy of Genius, and is now elaborated by the musicologist Timothy Maloney. Gould was acutely sensitive to light, sound and temperature, and had a phobia about shaking hands as well as a limited range of preferred foods. His bizarre mannerisms as a concert performer could be understood as uncontrollable expressions of Asperger's.

Emmanuel Ax was on TV recently, and he mentioned that one work that he always wanted to learn but never did is the Goldberg Variations - he can't/won't learn it because of Gould's staggering recording(s).

I wonder who many listeners he blessed, and pianists he damned with that recording. I know I count myself among the latter group.

Ironically, I can't live without GG's '82 recording of the GV, but I know I can't learn it, because I would just be imitating him. (ultimately)

kenny, I have asperger's and it doesn't cause stuff like that.

I'm sorry if I offended, I just was doing some surfing and came accross several items that spoke of Gould and autism.
If anything I am pointing to his great accomplishment.

I think he was just an individual in both life and art - and good on him for it !

I prefer Angela Hewitt's WTC to his, because of her superb variety of touch. However, I prefer home made electronic arrangements of the WTC to anybody at all playing it so therefore my opinion is probably less than insightful.

I'm happy someone commented on this I thought I was loosing my mind when listening to some of his pieces.

I love gould despite his excentricities.

Gould is not my absolute favorite for Bach ( Feltsman is). BUT: Gould showed the world that Bach can be done on piano. For this, we pianists owe him a great debt.
My favorite thing about his playing is a lot of his articulation. It is very clean and unique...much of it I wouldn't use, but I have taken ideas and put them into my playing.

I had not heard that there is a debate whether Gould had Aspergers or was autistic. From waht I know of either - having recently completed a course in teaching special needs students and my wife, a practising speech pathologist- I doubt that he was nothing other than an eccentric genius with an immeasurable I.Q..

My personal preference are his interpretations of 20th Century composers such as Schoenberg, Webern and Hindemith. I owe a great debt to Gould as I attribute his CBC TV specials during the 1970's as my introduction and appreciation for the genre of 20th Century piano music. After digesting his programs explaining and playing the music I began to comprehend the musical beauty which had alluded me earlier.

Renauda is quite right. If not for Gould many of us here (in Canada) might not have been exposed to good classical piano. He was the first to use television as his stage, and I remember this.

I can't stand listening to his non-Bach recordings.

And I loathe his interpretation of Scriabin's 3rd Sonata. To each their own.

I won't comment on his playing because I haven't heard enough. But I will say that having seen him on video he looks like he's in complete agony when he plays. All hunched up almost like a hunchback. Looks very uncomfortable.

Classical player,

Try his Haydn recordings. I am currently working on a the C major Sonata, and his recording of this work is quite good--suprisingly orthodox, I might add.

Best,

-Steve O.

I am very surprised at most of you .

Glenn Gould is one of the very very greatest players of the instrument in my humble opinion.

I do find it a little guiling when we use the word 'great' about art .

During the last century there are many who are 'great ' players'

Maybe I have a problem with the definition .

For me it is about people who make you sit up , startle you into taking note , make you really examine yourself , your playing and your inner self.

There are few people who MAKE you change .

I don't beieve there can a be pianists like myself , mid forties, who cannot have been forced to re-examine their art by Glenn Gould.

Even if you don not like his playing he certainly made you listen and WANT to do it maybe another way .

The alledged GREATS the Rubensteins Richters etc. ARE geat interpreters and maybe magical performers on the night .

Gould is a different animal altogether - a great musician and thinker AT the piano.

I have heard many many great players but they have not shown me any thing fundamentally different from what I knew and grew up with , they could , to be blunt, do it better than I could , and I have learned from that

Glenn Gould actually brought the greatest composer of all to the masses .

Glen Gould hits you like a train

If one talks about technique too . I know all those others are great players BUT nobody can trill like Glenn Gould, his technique is so individual it's almost like when one talks of a voice - a Sinatra , a Pavorotti, a Nat King Cole , utterly unique - irreplaceable.

He may have been in your face but God did you listen , the clarity ( therefore voicing and logic of the music ) of playing is simply unheard of before or since . If anybody can name me another pianist of this clarity and ease of playing - I'm all ears

In my view he is underated , underestimated and later generations will truly put him in a rank on his own .

I STILL think people are frightened of him and his attitude to it all

I am not dengrating all the 'greats here' of course they have their rightful highest places but hardly any of them ggive me a new slant on a composers music , make me want to really listen and play the music the way Glen Gould did/does .

I can tell the younger ones here when people of my day 1960's 70/80's, heard him, he was castigated beyond belief for his humming and eccentric ways , but for many of us he kicked down the doors and actually changed attitudes towards music and was a hero for many of us on the 'wrong side of the tracks' so to speak

A God of the instrument in my book .

I might add that I do not always play Bach in his style either , sometimes maybe , but Gould makes me think about almost every little piece of it when I do play .

I never think like that about any other music .

Maybe the closest is Dinu Luipatti with his Chopin

1. But what about all the great Bach players before Gould (like Fischer and Feinberg to name just two)? Didn't they all show that Bach can be done on the piano?

2. I agree that Gould's articulation is unique, but is it correct or reasonable? I can't judge his articulation in Bach but some of his articulation on the Beethoven Sonatas seems very inappropriate to me.

Classical Player, please, wait a minute. I can easily say the same thing, but then I would be dismissing his rendition of Brahm's first piano concerto. Have you ever heard the recording w/Bernstein and New York Philharmonic? You might take back what you stated. That is just my humble opinion, though. Let me state, that I totally respect your opinion.
Sincerely,
Kenney

The "inappropriate" part is what baffles me. Not to single-out a particular word, but I don't understand why pianists are required to stick closely to a work that wasn't even invented with a piano that is--today--most publicly used. If Garth Brooks performs "Shameless", differently than Billy Joel, is that inappropriate? I wonder. Please enlighten me. I mean that from the bottom of my heart. I don't intend sarcasm or condescension, rather offering a topic of discussion.

Sincerely,
Kenney

Yes, it was HORRIBLE. Stupid rednecks shouldn't touch people's works like that.

When you perform a Beethoven Sonata you should follows all of Beethoven's indications in the score i.e. tempo, phrasing dynamics etc. There isn't as much leeway in performing classical music as there is inpop music.

How many people have heard of Fischer?
And then, how many have heard of Gould?

If my facts are right, Gould performed on television. He made Bach accesible to the public, and the public responded. This, in my opinion, showed that Bach could be done on the piano, because this is what most people know.

I can understand where you are coming from when you use the word "inappropriate" when discussing his Beethoven. There are certain boundaries, especially historical ones, in the interpretation of Beethoven, and he crossed a few of them.
I think Gould was always experimenting. Even if he DID cross boundaries that were not meant to be crossed, he was always trying something new. He never settled for the usual. I am not saying this was always best, but it was creative.He was rule-breaker. I like that.

P.S. Where's Zelda????????

Re: Renauda - Does anyone actually have an idea of what Gould's IQ was?

-Elliott

I think you are confusing making Bach popular for a larger audience with showing Bach can be done on the piano (which was clearly done before Gould). Saying he crossed a few lines in his playing of non Baroque music is a big understement IMHO.

Superb posting GflaT

gflat,

I don't know why you are surprised at the posters here. Glenn Gould was a fairly controversial pianist. His interpretations were definitely outside the norm, so naturally there were and are different opinions about him.
I don't know if he was a "great" pianist. Like you, I am not 100% comfortable with that word. In my post I describe him as an important artist because of the uniqueness of hise style of playing, and the fact that his popularity in the '50s and '60s challenged pianists and audiences perceptions of what repertoire and playing could and should be.

Before we give Gould too much credit for showing that Bach can be played on the piano - and, as pointed out above, others were proving it before Gould - remember that he must have somewhat disliked Bach on a modern grand because he had his Steinway "prepped" in such a way that it lost much of its characteristic timbre. I don't recall precisely what was done to his piano - perhaps someone else has knowledge of this - but I do recall that it was made to sound like no modern Steinway any of us would recognize, and it (the prepped Steinway) became somewhat of a curiosity piece.

Regards,

Glenn Gould is overrated, IMO. I mean, yeah, he did have his effect, rescued some lost works, broke some traditions and forced some thinking to take place, but that's about it. Talking about him like he's some God that changed the whole world forever just irritates me to no end. Maybe he gets a bit more attention due to all his eccentric habits, but he was just another pianist.

It seems to me that the attention on him isn't really due to his playing, but rather his whole philosophy. He seems to have become nothing more than a symbol for breaking rules and doing things differently. Which isn't a totally bad thing, but you have to realise there are limits, and beyond these, things just get ugly.

And I was never "forced" to listen to him. I was always forced to turn off the CD player. What it is about his playing that is so attractive to millions is something I do not and probably will not ever understand. The sound he makes is so horrible to my ears.