Preliminary
Rounds
Day
3 Recital 3 (7.30 pm)
Sunday
26 May 2013
SARA
DANESHPOUR (USA)
is of Persian ancestry, so she probably does not qualify to be a NAALP (see the
earlier reference to Lindsay Garritson). Also of refined sensibilities, her
view of Schumann’s Abegg Variations
(Op.1) was simply gorgeous because of her feathery lightness and silky evenness
in the runs. Unfortunately, she ran into technical difficulties on the outset
of Chopin’s elusive Fourth Scherzo in
E major (Op.54) and that seemed to hang on like a dark cloud. Her selection of
five Rachmaninov Etudes-tableaux (three
from Op.39 and one from Op.33) - all in the minor key - was a good one which
displayed her obvious technical abilities. I particularly liked her brooding account of the A
minor number (Op.39 No.2), with its references to the Dies Irae, and which is sometimes nicknamed The Sea and Seagulls. I prefer to view it as an alternative Isle of the Dead. Standometer: *
My
view:
May not make it through, but I am still looking forward to her next recital.
GUSTAVO
MIRANDA-BERNALES (Chile) is the only competitor from South America, and it
is a tall order to stand under the large looming shadow of fellow-Chilean Claudio
Arrau. Anyway, Gustavo is very much his own man, and anyone who chooses
Schubert’s Impromptus Op.142 for a
competition had better something important to say about the music. His is a
somewhat wayward view, full of accents (misplaced or otherwise) and attempts to
make his mark felt in places where others do not suspect. He is a showman,
freely remonstrates with his hands and mugs for the camera with eyes of ecstasy
and pain. His sometimes clipped and hectoring sound on the keyboard, sometimes punctuated
with agogic pauses, is not for the faint-hearted. His Chopin Barcarolle is similarly broad and
extravagant. As intimated earlier, he plays for the grandstand (and for himself),
rather than for the jury. Standometer: **
My
view:
An interesting and unconventional pianist, but ultimately also-ran.
I am totally exhausted by the day’s
proceedings by the time JIE YUAN (China)
came on stage. I am still glad he did as he is the strongest of the evening’s
three pianists. As one would expect, a man’s view of Schumann’s Abegg Variations would differ from a
woman’s. His was less finely-hewn than Daneshpour’s, but more outwardly showy.
His Haydn Sonata in C major
(Hob.XVI:50, the same one as Luca Buratto’s) was characterised by lightness of
touch and not a little humour, and for its finale of wrong notes, his
exaggerations and surprise entries were more obvious. He just made sure that
the audience got the jokes. The last work was the seemingly interminable Three Movements from Petrushka by
Stravinsky. My sympathies for this show-horse have fallen so low that nothing
from it seems to pique me anymore. Having said that, I felt Yuan gave a more
interesting account than Taverna from the night before, and the audience also
seemed to agree. Standometer: ***
My
view:
The first pianist to play a recital of works which have been already played.
Does not fare badly in comparison, but let us see how his Chopin 24 Preludes go in the next round.
Wrap-up: An exhausting day
with a mixed bag of pianists. Mostly a good day for the Asians, less so for the
North and South Americans.
No comments:
Post a Comment