#Steven Petrarca

[badmovieihave]

Bad movie I have When Trumpets Fade 1998

[lesser-known-composers]

Jacques Arcadelt (c. 1507–1568) - Three Motets Texts by Francesco Petrarca

Solo e penoso

L'aere gravato

Tutto 'l di piango

The Hilliard Ensemble, David James - Countertenor Rogers Covey-Crump - Tenor Steven Harrold - Tenor Gordon Jones - Baritone

[kwebtv]

Jonathan Frakes, Stephanie Faracy, Steven Petrarca, Linda Cardellini, Francois Giroday, Sara Botsford and Perry Stevens in “The Lot”

[dcbicki]

Here’s to Peter Dinklage, Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, Lena Headey, Emilia Clarke, Kit Harington, Sophie Turner, Maisie Williams, Isaac Hempstead Wright, John Bradley, Liam Cunningham, Alfie Allen, Gwendoline Christie, Jacob Anderson, Nathalie Emmanuel, Ian Glen, Conleth Hill, Hannah Murray, Joe Dempsie, Carice van Houten, Rory McCann, Kristofer Hivju, Jerome Flynn, Pilou Asbæk, Richard Dormer, Gemma Whelan, Daniel Portman, Ben Crompton, Bella Ramsey, Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson, and Vladimir Furdik, Sean Bean, Michelle Fairley, Mark Addy, Richard Madden, Art Parkinson, Charles Dance, Natalie Dormer, Finn Jones, Diana Rigg, Aidan Gillen, Rose Leslie, Jason Momoa, Michiel Huisman, Jack Gleeson, Harry Lloyd, Peter Vaughan, Kristian Nairn, Natalia Tena, Joseph Mawle, Aisling Franciosi, Dean-Charles Chapman, Stephen Dillane, Kerry Ingram, Thomas Brodie-Sangster, Ellie Kendrick, Paul Kaye, Kate Dickie, Tobias Menzies, Clive Russell, Ian McShane, Donald Sumpter, Tom Wlachicha, Oona Chaplin, Ron Donachie, Esmé Bianco, David Bradley, Iwan Rheon, Michael McElhatton, Miltos Yerolemou, Julian Glover, Ian McElhinney, Tara Fitzgerald, Lino Facioli, Gethin Anthony, Wilko Johnson, Eugene Simon, Ben Hawkey, Jim Broadbent, Jonathan Pryce, Hannah Waddingham, Amrita Acharia, Noah Taylor, Anton Lesser, Rupert Vansittart, Josef Altin, Mark Stanley, Owen Teale, Pedro Pascal, Indira Varma, Richard Rycroft, Staz Nair, Ciarán Hinds, James Cosmo, Patrick Malahide, Will Tudor, Mackenzie Crook, Marc Rissman, Megan Parkinson, James Faulkner, Tom Hopper, Jessica Henwick, Keisha Castle-Hughes, Rosabell Laurenti Sellers, Nell Tiger Free, Max von Sydow, Brenock O’Connor, Philip McGinley, Harry Grasby, Elyes Gabel, Richard Brake, Tom Brooke, Tim Plester, Joel Fry, Sibel Kekilli, Ian Beattie, Susan Brown, Mark Gatiss, Faye Marsay, Marc Rissman, Hannah John-Kamen, Ed Skrein, Margaret John, Ross Mullan, Ian Whyte, Ralph Ineson, Charlotte Hope, Elizabeth Webster, Nonso Anozie, Ian Hanmore, Steven Cole, Roger Ashton-Griffiths, Eros Vlahos, DeObia Oparei, Ian Gelder, Essie Davis, Bart the Bear II, Lucian Msamati, Birgitte Hjort Sørensen, Brian Fortune, Michael Condron, Robert Aramayo, Alexander Siddig, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Enzo Cilenti, Toby Sebastian, Luke Roberts, Richard E. Grant, Eline Powell, Kevin Eldon, Dean Jagger, Tim McInnerny, Sean Blowers, David Rintoul, Kae Alexander, and more. Here’s to the actors who gave their all.

Here’s to David Nutter, Michael Slovis, Mark Mylod, Alex Graves, Alan Taylor, Jeremy Podeswa, Alik Sakharov, Neil Marshall, Matt Shakman, Brian Kirk, Michelle MacLaren, Daniel Minahan, Timothy Van Patten, David Petrarca, Jack Bender, Daniel Sackheim, and Miguel Sapochnik. Here’s to Dave Hill, Ethan J. Antonucci, Jane Espenson, Gursimran Sandhu, Vanessa Taylor, and Bryan Cogman. Here’s to Ramin Djawadi. Here’s to the visionaries and the storytellers.

Here’s to HBO. Here’s to David Benioff and D.B. Weiss. Here’s to the producers and the casting department. Here’s to the second unit directors and the whole production crew. Here’s to the stunt guys, body doubles, and the choreographers. Here’s to the location scouts and the transportation department. Here’s to the sound editors, and the visual effects team. Here’s to the camera crew. Here’s to the cinematographers and editors. Here’s to the production and art departments. Here’s to the set designers, costume designers, and the makeup department. Here’s to those who made a whole world come to life.

Here’s to the Starks, the Lannisters, the Targaryens, the Baratheons, the Greyjoys, the Tullys, the Arryns, the Martells, the Mormonts, the Tyrells. Here’s to all the other houses. Here’s to the bastards: the Snows and the Sands and the Waters. Here’s to the direwolves: Grey Wind, Lady, Nymeria, Summer, Shaggydog, and Ghost. Here’s to the dragons: Drogon, Rhaegal, and Viserion. Here’s to the Seven, the Drowned Gods, the Old Gods and the New. Here’s to the Red Priestesses. Here’s to the Brotherhood Without Banners. Here’s to the Faceless Men. Here’s to the Maesters. Here’s to the Knight’s Watch. Here’s to the Free Folk. Here’s to those who became wights. Here’s to the wargs and the Children of the Forest. Here’s to the giants. Here’s to the Bravosi, the Dothraki, and Unsullied. Here’s to the Knights of the Vale. Here’s to all the soldiers. Here’s to the fighters. Here’s to those we loved, and those we lost along the way.

Here’s to George R.R. Martin. Here’s to A Song of Ice and Fire. Here’s to Game of Thrones. Here’s to the fandom and the friends we made along the way. Here’s to you.

[erikmaza]

Best of Wmag.com: 17 from ‘17

Friday was my last day at W magazine. Today, I join Town & Country as its new Style Features Director. The last day was not at all as I had planned it. Instead of being in the office, I was in Pittsburgh, where my flight to New York from L.A. had been rerouted a day earlier because of the bomb cyclone. By the time I landed and got to One World Trade, it was already mid afternoon, and I didn’t have time to appreciate that it had been nearly two and a half years since I joined the magazine. In a way, it’s a perfectly fitting ending—working on the internet doesn’t leave a whole lot of time for reflection. You move fast, for long periods of time, make snap decisions, some that you regret in hindsight, others that proved prescient, and you do this ad nauseam, somehow ideally calibrating the magazine’s values with the internet’s appetites, hoping that along the way you publish good stories that will make people pause and enjoy a good piece of writing or a beautiful image. As I look back on my tenure there, it’s remarkable that in such a short period of time we grew the site’s modest audience to its size today, and that we did it, for the most part, with pride. That’s a testament to a great and tireless team of writers, editors, social media and visual wizards—some of whom I recruited from as far away as Miami!—who were dream colleagues—collaborative, funny and smart as hell. Picking my favorite pieces from the last year was not easy, but it was a reminder that all the hard work paid off.

What it Feels Like for a Woman, and James Comey—By Nell Scovell

The Women of the Women's March—Words by Katherine Cusumano, Video produced by Karine Benzaria, images by Driely S, Victoria Stevens, Hannah Sider, and Tyra Mitchell. 

Paris Hilton Invented Everything You’re Doing in 2017, and She Knows It—Words by Emilia Petrarca, images by Mayan Toledano, styling by Caroline Grosso, visuals by Biel Parklee, video by Kelly Bales. 

How the Whitney's Riskiest, Most Political Survey in Decades Came Together—By Fan Zhong

The 14 Types of Street Style Stars You Meet in Paris—By Mike Albo, short by Aaaron Christian. 

Plus, Chameleons of Frieze New York—By Mike Albo, short by Aaaron Christian. 

Why is Fashion So Obsessed with Space?—Words and illustrations by Marisa Acocella. 

Plus, What Happens at Ralph Lauren's Polo Bar After Dark?—Words and illustrations by Marisa Acocella. 

Glenn O'Brien Could Do Everything Except Live Forever—By Linda Yablonsky

Plus, insightful remembrances of Jim Walrod (by Diego Hadis) and Liz Smith (by Michael Musto.

How Eckhaus Latta Finally Got Mainstream Fashion’s Attention—By Stephanie Eckardt

Inside the Surreal Scene at Donald J. Trump's Inauguration—By Dan Duray, images by Benedict Evans.

Plus, Kyle Munzenrieder on Ivanka Trump; Brooke Marine on Rosie O’Donnell; and Stephanie Eckardt on New Yorkers Against Trump, with images by Matt Bernstein. 

Queen Elizabeth Plots Some Twists For the Next Season of the Royal Family, TV's Longest-Running Soap Opera—By Heather Cocks and Jessica Morgan

Things Vetements is Over—By Kyle Munzenrieder

Life Ball 2017: A First-Hand Account of the World's Most Explosively Decadent, Supermodel and Drag Queen-Packed Charity Gala—By Isaac Oliver

Plus, the best RuPaul’s Drag Race recaps in the biz, by Kyle Munzenrieder. 

Meredith Hagner, Search Party's Favorite Narcissistic Millennial, Explains How to Be a Successful Social Media Stalker—By Brooke Marine, video by Rebecca Scolnick and Karine Benzaria

Troian Bellisario On Life After “Pretty Little Liars”—By Lauren McCarthy

Why Renata is the Real Star of Big Little Lies, According to Renata—By R. Eric Thomas

Plus, Marisa Meltzer on Celeste, Miriam Bale on Jane, Maud Deitch on Bonnie, Allyson Shiffman on Madeline, and Brooke Marine on the year in TV. (We really, really loved BLL.) 

Don't Look Like Vladimir Putin—By Horacio Silva

What I Learned About Love From My 80-Year-Old Dad—By Bob Morris, illustration by Jonny Ruzzo

[ermalmeta]

i was tagged by @willevince​, thanks!!

RULES: answer the 11 questions. Make 11 of your own and tag 11 people!

(okay i’m like halfways through the questions and sto scrivendo la divina commedia so i’ll put this under a cut)

1. If you could change one thing in your life, what would it be and why? as shitty as it might sound, i would want my father to be away from me. i don’t want him dead, just away from me.

2. If you were given three wishes, what would you ask for and why? good question. 1, to be in the point of my transition i want to be in now. which means be on testosterone and have had top surgery. might seem like a shallow wish, but other trans people would understand that it’s not just a matter of how you look. dysphoria upsets me greatly and if i could already be transitioning, i would be a happier, healthier person. 2, to live near my boyfriend. not sure if with my boyfriend, maybe we’re both not ready for that, but at least like... not live on opposite parts of the world. because as much as i believe in long distance relationship and our relationship is great, it’d be so much better if i could be physically near him whenever we both want and need to be. 3, for all my mental health issues to be... not gonna say cured because i’m not sure i want that. i just want my mental illnesses under control. i want to not be so affected by them. i want to be sure i won’t end up in the hospital with tubes in my stomach or whatever again after a moment of weakness (or courage, honestly not sure), you know.

3. Imagine you found out the world is gonna end in one hour, what would be the last things you do? realistically speaking, i would probably just be really quiet, hug my cat if i were able to do that and do whatever the people around me told me to do. i’m not good with endings, i don’t know what to do when i have to say goodbye, i would just suck at like... doing what i would want to do, because i wouldn’t know what that’d be.

4. What is the one artist/band/actor/whatever that touched you the most/changed your life? How did they do it? honestly, this is a hard question to answer, because i have to pick just one. i’ve had various people be that one person (or people, whatever) in different times in my life. pippo inzaghi, marco mengoni, fernando torres, doors, heath ledger, muse, petrarca (shut up i know i’m lame), twenty one pilots... a lot. i’ve kinda always needed someone to be my reason to go on, my reason to be strong, all that. BUT okay i need to answer the question. i can’t pick one though because it’s 2 people and they both changed my life. so, first: steven gerrard. he honestly was, is and always will be my hero. i’ve been a liverpool fan for 10 years and although the very first reason why i started watching lfc games wasn’t stevie (that’s how i call him, that’s how we fans call him so i’ll call him that from now on), he was a huge factor in why i stayed with this club. and believe me, i stayed through really tough times. now, you might think, what could a football player possibly do to change your life so much that he ends up being in this answer? the thing is, it’s not one thing stevie did, it’s just the way he is. the person he is. because that’s what is most important about him to me, although he also is my favorite football player ever, it’s him as a human being. he wasn’t afraid of showing his weaknesses, but at the same time, being a leader of his team, of being strong for himself and for others. he was always the one to metterci la faccia (idk how to translate, the one who stands up for something?). he deals (or dealt, mostly, i think) with anxiety and it was known among fans of english football, journalists, everyone, he seeked help for his mental health issues. that meant so much to me especially some years ago when i first heard about this, because i myself struggled (i still do) a lot but couldn’t talk about it with anyone. now i’m gonna tell you about a really personal thing, also trigger warning for self harm ahead, but i think it really shows how much stevie has helped me. so, i’ve struggled with self harm for 5 years now. but the first time i wanted to hurt myself was more than 5 years ago. i was laying in my bed and i just couldn’t stop thinking about it, i couldn’t move, i couldn’t cry, anything. then i looked up at my wall and saw a picture of steven gerrard that i had there. i still couldn’t move or do anything, but i remember i was like, no, no, no. don’t do it. he wouldn’t want you to. after a bit it was my cat who came to me and managed to make me come out of that state completely, i hugged her and felt better. after that, thinking about him has saved me from hurting myself countless times. i did eventually, as i said, give in. but still, even now, he helps with not relapsing sometimes. he’s just so important to me, i want to write a million things but i already wrote too much. sorry about that. and since i already wrote too much, i won’t talk about the second person, i mean you all know how much he means to me and if you wanna know more, shoot me an ask. it’s ermal meta obviously. seriously, if i start talking about him i will never shut up. so i’ll save you all from it.

5. Imagine you were given the power to rule over your country singlehandedly, what would you change first and why? god do you know how fucked up italy is, how am i supposed to choose, what the fuck. i think i would simply put in positions of power people who actually care about the citizens and actually know what they’re doing, because i’m not the right person to rule over a country. but also first i would just finally fucking give lgbt+ people fucking equal rights because come the fuck on we EXIST

6. Do you think it’s more important to love or to be loved? Why? i think in a healthy relationship of any kind, you need to have both. you need to love and be loved. but i think that when you’re growing up, when you’re a kid, it’s more important to be loved. especially by your parents or guardians. because if those people don’t love you, it’s gonna fuck you up long term.

7. If you could have one and any super power (mind reading, flying, teleporting, laser beams shooting out of your eyes…) which would you choose and why? turning invisible because i wouldn’t have to worry about how other people see me and my body, i could take a bus without my mind screaming at me “see, no one here sees you as a man so you’re clearly Not Trans Enough” and shit like that. also i could probably sneak into some places like concerts... but i would feel too guilty to do that honestly dfjsjk

8. What is your favorite movie and why? What does it mean to you? i don’t think i have one DEFINITIVE favorite movie, but right now it’s moonlight. because it tells an important story and it tells it in a brilliant way, with amazing cinematography and acting. it’s not really about me because i’m white and the characters being black is a core part of the movie, but i’m a gay man and it means a lot to me to see stories about gay people. (and black gay people need stories like this one)

9. Imagine for one night everything is legal (woo, Purge!), what would you do, if anything? Why? i would vandalize salvini’s house with the gayest shit i could think of i would do more serious damage to him because he deserves the worst but i’m not a violent person like i literally would not be able to and i would do the same to fontana’s house and every single homophobic, racist, fascist piece of shit in this fucking country. why? i mean, do i need to explain?

10. What do you desire the most and why? freedom. freedom from my father, freedom to be myself, freedom from my “demons”. just freedom. because i’ve felt trapped for as long as i can remember and for as long as i can remember when i thought about what i wanted all i could think of was ‘to be free’. i’ve tried to be free in ways that were just bad for myself. but i’m still not free. perché la libertà è sacra come il pane.

11. Is there anything you need to get off your chest right now? ... don’t get me started. i feel like no one cares about me and how i feel, to sum it up

MY QUESTIONS:

what’s the most important lesson you’ve learned in your life so far?

would you rather learn and be fluent in a language in one day or learn how to play an instrument perfectly in one day?

what’s your favorite movie genre? why?

one of my favorite lyrics is “in una spiaggia resta unico ogni granello di sabbia” (“in a beach every grain of sand remains unique”). what do you think about it?

what’s your biggest regret?

if you could tell the person or people who’s hurt you the most in your life everything you want or have always wanted to tell them, what would you say to them?

what’s a book that you couldn’t stop thinking about for hours after you read it and why?

do you have any song lyrics tattooed? if so, which one(s)? if not, would you like to someday?

are you a person who cries a lot? do you think there can be strength in crying?

what’s the best purchase you’ve ever made?

think about this last year. have you changed? how so? and do you like that you’ve changed?

i tag @biziometa, @italiangorilla, @tanhaiyaan, @the-infamous-wine-bottle, @kseniazhuk, @f-michielin, @carometamoro, @ermal-metal, @etalambda, @gentlepluck and @pensierieforme

[apfelesser1]

Season 2

This season expands the whole universe of the show vastly. In a geographical sense, we get to see the most western, eastern and northern part of the world of Game of Thrones being the Iron Islands, Quarth and the Frostfangs respectively. On the other hand, we get to know several new characters which enrich the world even further. Mostly Stannis Baratheon, brilliantly portrayed by Steven Dillane, and Ygritte, brought alive by Rose Leslie, shake up the world of our already loved characters. Many others accompany them and fill the world with life and believable characters. At the same time the acting of the younger cast members has improved greatly, making the world all the more immersive.

The writing has improved, too. Several episodes do deliver a great amount of wit all while never being out of character, the dialogue has become even more memorable and the addition of Vanessa Taylor to the screenwriters ensemble did result in one of the most well crafted episodes of the series yet, “The Old Gods and the New”.

Overall the production value of the second season has increased by a huge amount. The set paintings introducing us to new locations like for example Harrenhall or Quarth are beautiful, new sets and real life settings for  all the scenes up north, an even more realistic set design and costumes that look like they have been in this world for years before the director shouted ‘action’, all improve the authenticity of the show. This all culminates in the 9th episode, where the whole series increases its scope with a truly huge battle sequence.

After doing such a great job in season one Alan Taylor is back for season two. This time he even got 4 episodes to direct (1,2,8 and 10). Since he was the guy who really set the style for this show this decision did make a lot of sense. His episodes again show how capable he is in directing the actors to their best. He always seems to know exactly how and when a scene transition from one place to another should take place. This ranges from some match cuts, some pans over the meteor in the sky, to some nicely planned out camera moves which get cited later or introduce the next scene seamlessly. 

Next we get to see Alik Sakharov’s, Taylors former DP, directorial debut in this series. It is not that surprising that the strengths of his episode are the visuals and the story conveyed by what we see and how everything is staged. All of his scenes transport a feeling of strength and importance, which can’t really be pinned down to a certain aspect of the production, but much more on just how well everything comes together in this episode. Perhaps I can be a little more precise after I have seen more than only one episode of his work.

Episodes 4 and 5 are directed by David Petrarca and though the acting of the cast has become better between the seasons, it is visible that part of the cast still needs a strong hand in directing, in which Petrarca falls a little short after the power duo Taylor and Sakharov. Nonetheless, he did a really good job incorporating some of the more complicated cgi and crafted two solid episodes.

Next up is David Nutter and he instantly delivers the best episode up to this point. His episodes have an insane power. The acting, the music, the editing, everything comes together just perfect. The pinnacle of his episodes is the execution of Rodrick Cassel and boy do I get goosebumps when I see that scene. Continuing the trend season one started, having a big bang in episode 9, Neil Marshall had the job to film the biggest battle sequence of the series so far… at night… on ships… and land… with huge explosions… hundreds of extras… and tons of fire everywhere……. ON A SMALL BUDGET! This man did the impossible. Although the episode has some flaws in its more silent moments I can not and should not complain at all. This man set the scope of the series and has an amazing eye for action sequences. 

Off to the writing and the story as a whole:

In comparison to the first season the writing got a little more well rounded. The amount of useless sex has decreased a little and the introduction of some characters and story threads is build way better into the story. Vanessa Taylor in particular did a great job of merging exposition, wit and character development into the overarching story. The plot itself has some great moments, all distributed very evenly throughout the season, making for an even more engaging watch than season one. Though the absolute highlights at the end can't quite reach the excitement I had after season one, they still are amazing and again propel the story while at the same time delivering closure for the narrative of season two. This season also delivers a lot of character moments and development, serving the later seasons and help us invest in the characters who get fleshed out more and more.

In conclusion season 2 improved the production value by a lot, delivers some very important character development and does one often unrecognized job: Serving the greater good of the series by a lot.

Ratings of Season 2 (Season 1):

Average Execution….6.2 (3.3)

Overall Story………….6.6 (6.7)

Overall Highlights……5.7 (4.8)

Stand out Execution:

David Nutter as director of episode 6 (and 7)

Vanessa Taylor as screenwriter of episode 6 (and 4)

D&D as showrunners

Ramin Djawadi as composer

Highlights (Spoiler):

Battle of Blackwater Bay

Ser Rodricks Execution

The Army of the Dead

Brans and Rickons faked Death

The House of the Undying

Kings Landing Riot

Jon vs. Qhorin

The Faceless Man

The Shadow Assasin

[apexart-journal]

Photo Mnguni-NYC-Day 1

Day one of my challenges

I met Abbie face to face in the morning yesterday at 10:00 hrs, for the first time. Very lovely, warm welcoming lady. She took me around the block of my apartment to show me what facilities are there and to get me registered and all set to use the facilities! Quite exciting as l love swimming and l get to use the indoor pool, gym, sonar and the like!

Abbie then left me my programme, and my first challenge was to make my way to apeaxart offices using the Sub way, which l did, but need l say ! I did get lost and eventually found the offices as Abbie met me just one block away from them . Here is where l met the rest of the team at apeaxart including meeting and being treated to a lovely lunch meal by the exercutive Director and Founder of apeaxart, Steven Rand and Abbie Hebein, Programs Director. Absolutely humbling and a pleasure to meet him, and have lunch with then both, while they filled me in with the background and purpose of the organisation , which was really educational and well executed for artist to have that time for continuous professional development ( this is my recycled wording of what l understand of it and what it means to me). It is in the challenges set out for me as a fellow that will stretch me and develop my critical thinking and therefore enable a broader sense of viewing the 'workd ' l am a part of , which in turn will certainly influence the development of my future work. While l am on the programme, l am not to refere to myself as an artist, this is to defuse the idea of , 'us' and 'them, and really quite a challenge in itself , as normally one goes on auto pilot, when introducing themselves!

Following the lovely lunch, l then went to see my therapist, an hour' session which is a safe space to talk about whatever l choose to talk about ! The programme is so intense and therefore great to have this space to just vent out, or express oneself.

I then had to take the 1 train to uptown 103 street, and make my way to the ' New Jewish Home, for New York Cares orientation , this is where l joined a group of volunteers to hear about this organisation and the various ways one can get involved by volunteering . It was really interesting, although l must say having flew in the day before, and straight into the deep-end, l was now feeling rather tired and had to strain myself to keep awake! I however look forward to ' folding up my sleeves ' and getting involved giving back and contributing to a good cause !

I then had to follow instructions on getting myself back to my apartment, which l did. Did miss my stop but with eyes, ears, and a mouth, l believe it's next to impossible to get really lost ! So l found my way back on the Sub way! By this time, my bed was calling!

Abbie and l at the Sub Way, Union Square, on the left .

Steven Rand, Abbie, and l, at the Petrarca Cucina E Vino restaurant, Manhattan. Great service and l had the Burrata for my meal, mortzarela cheese with ham ! Delicious and New to me !

[asesferas]

“O poeta e o social: 40 teses seguidas de exercício (para mestres e mestrandos)”

1. o poeta pergunta, mesmo quando responde. 2. o social responde, mesmo quando pergunta. 3. quando o social é a ideologia, o poeta é utopia. 4. quando o social é a utopia, o poeta é a ideologia 5. o social trabalha para os outros, o poeta não tem os outros em conta 6. o poeta trabalha para hoje, o social só para amanhã 7. quando o social se retira, o poeta mostra-se 8. quando o social começa a mostrar-se, o poeta retira-se 9. se o social é certeza, o poeta é dúvida 10. quando o social tem dúvidas, o poeta começa a ter certezas. 11. quando o social possui designação exata, o poeta encontra a falta de sentido 12. quando o social é a falta de sentido, o poeta conhece a designação exata 13. o social tem objetivos obscuros, mesmo quando parece claro 14. o poeta tem objetivos claros, mesmo quando parece obscuro 15. o social organiza visitas, o poeta procura encontros 16. quando o social organiza encontros, o poeta recebe visitas 17. quando o social instala espelhos, o poeta serve-se de um caleidoscópio 18. quando o social é um caleidoscópio, o poeta organiza espelhos 19. quando o social fala, o poeta escuta 20. quando o social escuta, o poeta não fala 21. quando o social se opõe, o poeta mistura-se 22. quando o social se mistura, o poeta opõe-se 23. quando o social é fanático, o poeta é cético 24. quando o social é cético, o poeta é fanático 25. o que o social junta, o poeta separa 26. o que o social separa, o poeta junta 27. quando o social cuida das suas estruturas, o poeta pensa com a sua imaginação. 28. quando o social cuida da sua imaginação, o poeta pensa nas suas estruturas. 29. quando o social faz itinerários, o poeta lança-se à aventura 30. quando o social lança-se à aventuras, o poeta traça itinerários 31. se o social chegou à fase adulta, o poeta ficou na infância 32. se o social não passou da infância, o poeta tornou-se adulto 33. quando o social mostra medo, o poeta sente angústia 34. quando o social mostra angústia, o poeta sente medo 35. quando o social é o estável efêmero, o poeta é o instável eterno. 36. quando o social é o instável eterno, o poeta é o estável efêmero. 37. o social as vezes sopra, então o poeta percute. 38. o social as vezes percute, então o poeta sopra. 39. quando o social renasce das cinzas, já o poeta morreu com a sua chama. 40. quando já morreu a chama do social, o poeta renasce das próprias cinzas.

O exercício consiste em atribuir a cada uma dessas teses o respectivo poeta (e a respectiva sociedade), a escolher da lista que segue:

Artmann Bashô Baudelaire Beckett Blake Brossa Catulo Chavée Coleridge Dante Desnos Emmett Garrett Gomringer Haroldo Havel Heidsieck Homero Maiakóvsky Mao Monari Ovídio Pasolini Pastior Perec Pessoa Petrarca Pound Rimbaud Ronsard Roth Ruchet Rühm Schulthess Shakespeare Stéfan Stevens Vergílio Villa Whitman

[poema de Alberto Pimenta, publicado na Revista Crítica de Ciência Sociais, n. 47, 1997]

[pangeanews]

David Jones è il poeta epico più grande del ’900, parola di W. H. Auden. Eppure, chi lo conosce?

È andata così, in modo del tutto casuale. Stavo leggendo un libro di Norman O. Brown, s’intitola Apocalisse e/o Metamorfosi lo ha pubblicato l��editore Irradiazioni dieci anni fa, è di vertiginosa bellezza. A un certo punto viene citato un poeta. David Jones. Non lo conosco. Norman O. Brown parla spesso di filosofi, ma nei suoi scritti, di solito, trae filosofia dai poeti. I suoi maestri sono William Blake e Rilke, Thomas S. Eliot, Ezra Pound, Petrarca, Wallace Stevens, Robert Frost, Coleridge. E David Jones. Faccio una gita nella mia testa – di solito abito altrove. David Jones. Chi cavolo è David Jones?

*

David Jones, rullo di tamburi, è uno dei grandi poeti inglesi del Novecento. Quando, nel 1937, dopo aver pubblicato la prima grande opera, In Parenthesis, David Jones ottenne l’Hawthornden Prize – vinto, tra gli altri, da Robert Graves, Evelyn Waugh, V.S. Naipaul e Bruce Chatwin – fu William B. Yeats a fare gli onori, “mi inchino e dico: ‘Salute all’autore di In Parenthesis”. Wystan H. Auden, poco propenso agli inchini, scrisse che Jones “è il massimo autore epico di questo secolo”, Thomas S. Eliot rimarcò, “Quando In Parenthesis sarà conosciuto in modo abbastanza largo sarà sottoposto senza dubbio allo stesso tipo di analisi minuziosa e di esegesi toccato alle ultime opere di James Joyce e ai Cantos di Ezra Pound”.

*

Di genia gallese, artista di genio, incisore, illustratore – alla Tate potete leggere il suo profilo – nel 1928 David Jones comincia a scrivere In Parenthesis, poema modernista sulla Prima guerra. Thomas S. Eliot, che ha fiuto, fiuta odore di grande opera. Nel settembre del 1936 il poeta scrive alla Faber che quel poema “affatto affascinante” va “preso in seria considerazione” per la pubblicazione. Il libro, in effetti, viene pubblicato. “Questo libro è una epopea, questo libro è uno dei più strani dei più cupi e dei più eccitanti che ci sia capitato di pubblicare”, è inciso nella ‘quarta’ della prima edizione di In Parenthesis. Il libro, francamente inatteso e inclassificabile, seduce un po’ tutti. Anche Dylan Thomas. Che nel 1946 realizza per la BBC una lettura di In Parenthesis.

*

In previsione del centenario dalla fine della Grande Guerra, nel 2016, il Royal Opera House ha messo in scena l’opera di Iain Bell tratta da In Parenthesis di David Jones, ritenuto uno dei reperti letterari più importanti di quel tempo bronzeo e terribile. Quest’anno Mondadori, grazie a Fabio Pedone, ha tradotto il poema come Tra parentesi: è il primo grande testo di David Jones – che è morto nel 1974 – pubblicato come si deve. Il libro, tra ritmo jazz e ballata attorno al fuoco, mescola materiali alti e remoti – i miti gallesi, l’epica medioevale – a effetti gergali, grevi. “Alcuni di voi sono nati con la camicia/ scelti fortunati e privilegiati/ dalla razza di quelli salvati dal fuoco/ e il tesoro mio dal corno d’unicorno con solo un momento ancora, la cui balia girava l’occhio superstizioso per vedere la sua costellazione fausta da dietro i vetri”. Tra parentesi mi pare l’evento editoriale dell’anno. Non mi pare si siano strappati le vesti, quelli delle ‘terze’.

*

C’è, però, un però. Anzi, due. Il primo è un’opera. Il secondo è una manfrina politica. Il primo ha un nome: The Anathemata. Il poema più grande e difficile di David Jones, pubblicato nel 1952 da Faber, giudicato da Auden “probabilmente il più raffinato poema inglese scritto in questo secolo” – e lui ne sapeva qualcosa, leggetevi L’età dell’ansia di W.H., anzi no, non si trova più in libreria, ovvio… Perché nessuno si è preso la briga di pubblicarlo? Troppo difficile. Vero. Lo scriveva anche il Telegraph parecchi anni fa – era il 2002, impugna la penna Michael Symmons, il pezzo s’intitola Poetry’s invisible genius. “The Anathemata fa di David Jones, insieme a James Joyce, Ezra Pound e Eliot il maestro del modernismo. Quando Igor Stravinsky fece la sua ultima visita in Inghilterra disse di essere venuto fin qui soprattutto per omaggiare David Jones. Tra molti poeti egli è riconosciuto come un genio del XX secolo. Eppure, perché è così poco famoso rispetto alla grandezza della sua opera?”. Già. Perché? I Cantos e Finnegans Wake, per dire, opere ardue, impossibili, a tratti illeggibili, in Italia sono tradotte. David Jones manca.

*

David Jones, carattere schivo, va detto – “Forse eccentrico, sicuramente difficile, Jones visse ritirato nell’ultima parte della sua esistenza, in ristrettezze, ma non – come si è creduto – isolato; continuava a incontrare giovani lettori; sopravvivono i suoi carteggi con amici scrittori e artisti”, scrive Pedone – si converte al cattolicesimo nel 1922; The Anathemata, sinteticamente, è una specie di visione plurima accaduta a un uomo durante la Messa. “Jones non guadagnò mai abbastanza da potersi permettere una vita diversa dalla frugalità a cui lo avevano costretto i lunghi anni di privazione dopo la scomparsa dei genitori. Viveva in una piccola stanza in affitto e, per tirare a campare, più volte dovette appellarsi alla generosità degli amici. Il cappotto sdrucito che indossava per tutto l’anno, indipendentemente dalla stagione e dalla temperatura, era l’eloquente riflesso di una povertà vissuta con estrema serenità e gaiezza, lontana dagli eccessi rancorosi di un Baron Corvo. Prima di morire, si schierò con quei cattolici inglesi – e furono molti – ostili alle riforme promosse dal Concilio Vaticano II”, scrive Luca Fumagalli, tra i pochi a essersi occupati di Jones in Italia. Nel 1971 c’è anche il suo nome – tra quelli di Agatha Christie e Vladimir Askenazi, di Cecil Day Lewis e Robert Graves, di Graham Greene e di Iris Murdoch – nella lista di scrittori e intellettuali inglesi che chiesero – e ottennero – da papa Paolo VI la possibilità di celebrare messa ‘alla tridentina’ in UK e Galles.

*

Il poeta cattolico per giunta ‘difficile’ per altro poco simpatico, dà fastidio? Forse. Intanto, festeggiamo la prima pubblicazione italiana – senza testo a fronte, però – e peroriamo la causa di The Anathemata pubblicando parte di un lungo saggio scritto da W.H. Auden sul The New York Review of Books. Titolo originale: Adam as a Welshman. Era il primo febbraio del 1963, per la cronaca. (d.b.)

***

Anathemata può essere descritto come l’epopea di due Adamo. Forse può essere utile al lettore, per approcciare quello che è decisamente un poema difficile, immaginare, mentre legge, che è seduto sui banchi di una chiesa cattolica, mentre si celebra Messa. Ciò che accade sull’altare inaugura un treno di pensieri e di memorie, la mente si dimentica dove è, finché un suono o la vista di qualcosa non la richiama alla coscienza, poi inizia un nuovo percorso del pensiero, e così via. Ciò che il prete fa a metà del XX secolo – e lo fa ogni giorno, esattamente allo stesso modo, da molti secoli, ed è sempre stato fatto così – è l’anamnesi di qualcosa che è accaduto una volta, e non accadrà più…

La difficoltà della traduzione implicita in ogni comunicazione personale, soprattutto nella poesia, si manifesta in modo insolitamente forte in Anathemata. Sarebbe interessante fare un confronto tra David Jones e Saint-John Perse, le cui poesie sono anch’esse epiche in riferimento al Primo Adamo (ma non al Secondo). Se il lettore ha padronanza con la lingua francese, Saint-John Perse gli sembrerà più facile perché non usa nomi propri. Particolarità e concretezza ci sono, ma si tratta sostanzialmente di azioni e funzioni; si pensi ai cataloghi che elencano le curiose occupazioni degli uomini, sotto la dizione “colui che”. Queste azioni non avvengono in nessun luogo o tempo particolari: l’universo poetico di Saint-John Perse è privo di calendari o di atlanti. Nell’universo di David Jones, invece, nomi propri, calendari e atlanti sono i caratteri più appariscenti e dobbiamo ammettere che le note copiose fornite dal poeta sono necessarie per comprendere pienamente la sua poesia. Io stesso ho letto molte volte questo poema, da quando è apparso la prima volta, dieci anni fa, e ci sono alcuni passaggi che non ho ancora compreso. Eppure, l’immagine di umanità proposta da Saint-John Perse è necessariamente, perché aliena allo spazio e al tempo, priva di senso e di motivazioni davvero umane; il suo Adamo non ha storia, ma è proprio la storia di Adamo a interessare David Jones. L’Adamo di Anathemata è un uomo abbastanza vecchio da aver combattuto la Prima guerra mondiale, un convertito al cattolicesimo, interessato alle arti (Jones è pittore e scrittore), all’archeologia, alla mitologia, alla liturgia, a cui il piccolo Malory e il Mabinogion evidentemente parlano, e sulla cui scrittura ha chiara influenza James Joyce… Certamente nessun lettore potrà penetrare l’‘ora presente’ di Jones se non dopo grandi problemi e molte riletture di Anathemata, e se qualcuno dice, “Mi spiace, David Jones mi chiede troppo, non ho né tempo né pazienza da dedicare a questo poema”, io non ho argomenti per convincerlo del contrario. Posso soltanto far parlare la mia esperienza personale: ho trovato il tempo, e sono infinitamente grato ai problemi che Anathemata mi ha posto.

Wystan H. Auden

L'articolo David Jones è il poeta epico più grande del ’900, parola di W. H. Auden. Eppure, chi lo conosce? proviene da Pangea.

from pangea.news https://ift.tt/2SV5jRe

[semelocciditbrevislux]

“Meme”

ok, this is for the clever and nice @mizstorge who tagged me

1. Relationship status: none :) Between happy loner and Petrarca’s XXXV sonnet 2. Lipstick or chapstick: neither. I didn’t know the word chapstick. 3. Three favorite foods: milk, bread, honey 4. Song stuck in your head: Cat Stevens’ Father and Son (recently, Death Cab For Cutie’s Summer Skin) 5. Last movie you watched: at the cinema? The Happy Prince by Rupert Everett . At home, Tarkovsky’s Ivan’s Childhood (again!) 6. Top three shows: difficult to choose...Doctor Who,  Scott & Bailey, Dexter 1,2,3  Montalbano 7. Books I’m currently reading: Pessoa’s Book of Disquiet, Randall Munroe’s What if?: Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions, Pasolini’s Ragazzi di vita, Maxime Rovere’s Le Clan Spinoza 8. Last thing I googled: chapstick. Luneburg’s Heaths 9. Time: and relative dimension in space? It doesn’t exists? is it what the soul determines? never enough?  I wasted time, and now doth time waste me? ...I usually don’t even know what day it is. 10. Dream trip:Cape Canaveral? I would love to go and see the launch of a shuttle or a big rocket 11. Anything you want: to live free from conditionings and inhibitions

[kwebtv]

The Lot  -  AMC  -  August 19, 1999 - April 22, 2001

Comedy Drama (17 episodes)

Running Time:  30 minutes

Stars:

Sara Botsford as Norma St. Claire

Allen Garfield as Harry Sylver (season 1)

Linda Cardellini as June Parker (season 1)

Steven Petrarca as Charlie Patterson

Stephanie Faracy as Mary Parker

Francois Giroday as Fabian

Holland Taylor as Letitia DeVine

Perry Stevens as Jack Sweeney

Jonathan Frakes as Roland White

Rue McClanahan  as Priscilla Tremaine 

[darrenstein]

Platinum blonde with Steven Petrarca, Jamie Kennedy and DP Rodney Taylor on the set of my first feature "Sparkler" in 1997.

[quynhchan]

hay

When Mily Balakïrev composed his oriental fantasy Islamey in 1869, it was declared by many to be unplayable. Still, after its premiere by Nikolai Rubinstein, many tried... Alexander Scriabin even crippled his right hand in a fanatical attempt to master it (meaning we have Balakïrev to thank for Scriabin’s switching to composition). Today, Islamey is standard fare at piano competitions, and concert pianists play it faster, louder and cleaner than ever before. And there are more of them out there – a surfeit of fleet-fingered virtuosi, churned out every year by conservatoriums from Beijing to Belfast. But if everyone can play Islamey, what are the pianistic heights to which musicians must aspire? Clearly, it’s not just a matter of technique. That is why we set out in search of pianists who have set the standard with performances that are not only technically, but also musically, exceptional. Rather than choose our favourites, we asked more than 100 leading pianists to name the pianist who has inspired them most. As the answers flowed in, ten masters of the instrument emerged. But one legendary musician outstripped all others (by a healthy margin). If the piano is the king of instruments, this pianist is the king of kings. But who is he? 10. ARTUR SCHNABEL (1882-1951) Who was he? An Austrian pianist who specialised in core German composers and made the first complete recording of the Beethoven sonatas. What makes him great? A commitment to plumbing the intellectual and spiritual depths of a work, while eschewing displays of technical bravura. Essential recordings BEETHOVEN Piano Sonatas Nos 1-32 (Complete) EMI 7637652 SCHUBERT 4 Impromptus, D899; 4 Impromptus, D935; Allegretto in C minor, D915 EMI 5868332 Jonathan Biss On Schnabel’s living sound “If I was asked which pianist I loved the most, I’d never be able to answer -– too many possibilities! But if it’s a question of who has inspired me, that’s easy: Artur Schnabel. My first exposure to his recordings of the Beethoven Sonatas came in my early teens, and quickly led to an obsession with those works which I expect to last for the rest of my life. I could not understand how he could convey so much meaning – spirituality, even – between two notes, or how he managed to produce from this instrument of keys and hammers a sound which was so buoyant, resistant to gravity, alive. Those two aims – to make a sound that lives, and to find music not only in the notes, but around them – are still primary for me, nearly two decades later. When I went to study with Leon Fleisher, I was touched to hear him speak of Schnabel, his own teacher, with the same kind of awe. Fleisher’s own ideas about music are compelling, and he is matchlessly eloquent in expressing them, but it was often that he would simply tell us what Schnabel had told him about this piece or that, in a tone of voice which suggested that there was no greater authority. I like to think I may have learned something through this lineage, and each and every day I try to bring to my music something of the devotion, understanding and, above all, love, which emanates from every note the man played.” Also chosen by András Schiff, Ronald Brautigam, Garrick Ohlsson… 9. Wilhelm Kempff (1895-1991) Who was he? A German pianist who focused on the greats of German music and played concerts well into his eighties. What makes him great? Rhythmic inventiveness and a talent for bringing out the lyricism, charm and spontaneity in music, particularly in intimate pieces or passages. Essential recordings LISZT From Années de Pèlerinage: Sposalizio; Il penseroso, Canzonetta del Salvator Rosa; Sonetto 47 del Petrarca; Sonetto 104 del Petrarca, Sonetto 123 del Petrarca. Gondoliera, S162 No 1 (from Venezia e Napoli). Two Legendes for piano, S175 DG 4779374 BEETHOVEN Piano Sonatas Nos 8 in C minor, Op 13 Pathétique; 14 in C sharp minor, Op 27 No 2 Moonlight; 21 in C major, Op 53 Waldstein; 23 in F minor, Op 57 Appassionata DG 4474042 Cyprien Latsaris On Kempff in concert “I first heard Kempff live in Paris when I was about 13 years old and then I bought some Beethoven and Brahms recordings of his. He did not have the greatest pianistic technique, but he was very special. He created some sublime, divine musical moments that transported us towards the heavens. I am sure he would have been just as successful in concert today, because the most important factor for a musician is to have a very special personality, and he had that characteristic. He has also influenced what I do at the piano by getting me to put myself in a second state, a spiritual state, before playing. There are so many recordings of his that I treasure, as Kempff excels in Beethoven, Brahms, Schumann, Schubert and Bach. But, in particular, I would name the Klavierstücke of Brahms, the Beethoven middle sonatas and Concertos Nos 2 & 4, the Bach transcriptions, and the Schubert Klavierstücke.” Also chosen by Michael Endres, David Fray, Eldar Nebolsin 8. Alfred Brendel (born 1931) Who is he? An Austrian pianist and teacher now based in London, who has recorded four complete sets of the Beethoven sonatas. What makes him great? Rigorous adherence to the score without ever sounding dry or academic, and a knack for finding unexpected moments of humour, particularly in Classical repertoire. Essential recordings BEETHOVEN The Five Piano Concertos Vienna Philharmonic/Rattle Philips 4627812 SCHUBERT Complete impromptus Philips 4560612 Paul Lewis On studying with Brendel “I had lessons with Alfred Brendel in the 1990s, and he has been a great inspiration. He would talk about music and I would think, “Yeah, that really makes sense”. And then he would sit down and demonstrate things, and that’s when the light bulb really went off. The first time I met him was when I was 20 at the Guildhall School of Music. I remember feeling very nervous and intimidated. Seeing the silhouette of the glasses and the hair coming through the hall, I remember thinking, ‘Oh my god, it’s him!’ I played a Haydn sonata for him and it was clear from the very start that he was interested only in the music. That’s all that matters. You may feel worried about yourself but that’s not the important thing because he’s not the least bit worried about anything but what you’re playing. That tallied with the impression I’d had of him before I met him, from his concerts and recordings – that of an incredibly serious-minded musician. It was a great inspiration and privilege to work with him over those years.” Also chosen by Steven Osborne, Imogen Cooper, Till Fellner… 7. Glenn Gould (1932-1982) Who was he? A highly eccentric Canadian pianist who, after a stellar concert career, shunned the stage at the age of 31 to focus on recordings and experimental projects. What makes him great? A prodigious ability to sculpt the multiple lines of polyphonic music, such as Bach’s, with unsurpassed clarity. And a seeming incapacity for technical error. Essential recordings BACH Goldberg Variations, BWV988 (1981 recording) Sony 88697148532 BACH The Well-Tempered Clavier, Books 1 and 2 Sony SM2K52600, Sony SM2K52603 BACH, MOZART, SWEELINCK Schoenberg Salzburg Recital (1959) Sony SMK53474 Pascal Rogé On Gould the recreator “I first heard Gould play rather late, since in my youth at the Paris Conservatory he was completely unknown. None of my colleagues or teachers ever mentioned his name – until in 1966 I met Bruno Monsaingeon, who revealed Gould to me and the French audience through his marvellous documentaries. It is hard to say what makes Gould’s playing so special, since everything in his playing is special. One can mention the touch, the phrasing, the articulation… But most important is the conception, the architecture, the personal and ‘creative’ approach to every single piece he plays. He is a creator, much more than an interpreter: each time you hear a piece played by Gould, you discover the piece for the first time. I always refer to his line: ‘If you are not convinced you can play a piece in a completely new and unique way, don’t play it.’ It’s an extreme affirmation, but so full of truth! A case in point is his two recordings of the Goldberg Variations, an example of Gould’s genius in even being able to ‘re-create’ himself. They are both masterpieces, and his legacy for all musicians of the world. I am always blown away when pianists dare play (or even touch) this piece after Gould. Are they totally unconscious or utterly pretentious? In Bach he is completely unmatched. In fact, I am unable to hear, accept or conceive any other interpretation of Bach than his. I’d like to say he has been an influence on me, but no one is deranged enough to try and imitate Gould’s playing! Still, I remember when I recorded for French TV the complete First Book of Bach’s Well-Tempered Clavier. It was a project conceived for him by Monsaingeon, but Gould died before he could film it… And I was the one chosen to ‘replace’ him. Can you imagine the pressure? I think the legacy of Gould for any artist is ‘the freedom of creation’ towards any composer, but at the same time respecting the logic of the music and the spirit of the composer – a very challenging equation!” Also chosen by Vladimir Ashkenazy, Fazil Say, Jean-Efflam Bavouzet 6. Alfred Cortot (1877-1962) Who was he? A French pianist and professor at the Conservatoire de Paris. He was called a “poet of the piano” for his mastery of the lyrical works of Chopin, Schumann and Debussy, producing landmark recordings, and meticulous editions, of their music. What makes him great? A highly personal, subjective style that favours intuition and feeling over precise technique, resulting in performances of lush, transcendent musicality. Essential recordings CHOPIN 24 Preludes, Op 28; Prelude Op 45 in C sharp minor No 25; Prelude Op 28 No 15 in D flat major Raindrop; Berceuse in D flat major, Op 57; Tarantella in A flat major, Op 43; Impromptus Nos 1-4 EMI 3615412 CHOPIN, SCHUMANN Chopin: Piano Sonata No 2 in B flat minor, Op 35 Marche funèbre; Schumann: Kinderszenen, Op 15; The Prophet Bird Op 82 No 7; Carnaval Op 9 Naxos Historical Great Pianists 8.111327 FRANCK, RAVEL, SAINT-SAËNS Franck: Symphonic Variations for Piano & Orchestra, M46; Ravel: Piano Concerto in D major (for the left hand); Saint-Saëns: Piano Concerto No 4 in C minor, Op 44; Étude en forme de valse, Op 52 No 6 Naxos Historical Great Pianists 8110613 Stephen Hough On Cortot’s individuality “Cortot is sometimes remembered as the pianist who played lots of wrong notes. This is unfair – not just because he had a dazzling finger technique, but because he never allowed striving for accuracy to distract him from the bigger picture. His mistakes can sometimes be heard even in the first notes of pieces, but I find these fallible moments endearing: the pianist is consumed by spiritual inspiration and oblivious of the physical risks involved. Cortot was a great virtuoso, conscious of the power to excite and thrill that Romantic piano music has, but you never feel manipulated in his musical company. You feel that even his most extravagant interpretative choices come from complete inner honesty; he is not sitting in a spotlight forcing you to look at him, but rather holding a torch, leading you forward to enlightenment. I never tire of hearing his recordings, particularly those of Chopin and Schumann from the 1920s and ’30s. His combination of utter interpretative freedom (sometimes with a touch of eccentricity) and penetrating insight into the composer’s wishes is unique, in my view. There are artists who delight listeners with their wild and daring individuality, and there are others who uncover the written score for us with insight and reverence – but there are few who can do both. Cortot had a vision which saw beyond the academic or the theatrical to some wider horizon of creativity from whence the composers themselves might well have drawn inspiration.” Also chosen by Alfred Brendel, Benjamin Grosvenor, Stanislav Ioudenitch… Copyright Guardian News & Media Ltd 201 5. Emil Gilels (1916-1985) Who was he? An Odessa-born pianist who moved to Moscow in 1935, becoming, along with Richter, the leading Soviet pianist of his day. He and violinist David Oistrakh were among the first Soviet musicians allowed to concertise in the West. What makes him great? His “golden” sound – an ability to execute the most taxing passages without compromising his burnished tone or depth of feeling. Essential recordings BRAHMS Piano Concerto No 1 in D minor, Op 15; Piano Concerto No 2 in B flat major, Op 83; Fantasies (7 piano pieces), Op 116 Berliner Philharmoniker/Jochum DG Originals 4474462 LISZT, SCHUBERT Piano Sonata in B minor, S178; Piano Sonata No 17 in D major, D850 Sony 88697858242 BEETHOVEN Piano Sonata No 28 in A major, Op 101; Piano Sonata No 29 in B flat major, Op 106 Hammerklavier DG Originals 4636392 Cédric Tiberghie On the grandeur of Gilels “Gilels has this mixture of fantastic tone quality and an ability to make everything seem simple when you listen to him. Even when he plays a simple Bach prelude, or the Bach-Siloti Prelude in B minor, you think it’s simple to play, but then you buy the music and you’re like, ‘Oh my god, this is impossible!’ I first heard Gilels when I was eight or nine – his recording of the Brahms Second Concerto with the Berlin Philharmonic. I wasn’t aware it was Gilels – or even a Brahms concerto – just one of my dad’s huge collection of cassette tapes. But it was my favourite music, and still today I think it’s one of the most beautiful recordings ever made of a piano concerto. The quality of tone and line, the inspiration and the beauty of the sound – everything is so perfect. It’s actually quite intimidating when you have to play the concerto yourself. He plays the first movement so slowly, and you think, OK, I’m going to do the same – which is a big mistake because he’s Gilels and you’re not. You need that golden sound Gilels possessed – more than anyone in history – as well as a clear idea of the structure and direction; and for this you need a lifetime of experience. Also, if I compare my hand to his, his was probably twice as heavy as mine. It’s like Oistrakh on the violin, there’s that question of flesh, pure matter creating the sound. If you have extremely thin hands, the quality of tone will probably be clearer than Gilels’. So I don’t try to imitate an artist like him, but I try to keep in my head the grandeur of what he does. It’s something I always try to find, not artificially, but perhaps just to feel. So he’s a model for me in that respect.” Also chosen by Alice Sara Ott, Olli Mustonen, Lars Vogt… 4. Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982) Who was he? A Polish pianist who left Europe after WWI, settling in the US. What makes him great? His interpretations of the music of Chopin, to which he brought a glowing tone and endless variety of phrasing. Essential recordings CHOPIN Nocturnes Nos 1-19 Sony 88697690412 LIVE AT MOSCOW GREAT HALL DVD Medici Arts 3078548 CHOPIN, BRAHMS Chopin: Piano Concerto No 2 in F minor, B43 Op 21; Brahms: Piano Concerto No 2 in B flat major, Op 83 Altara 1021 Roger Woodward on sharing the legacy of Rubinstein “When I was studying at the Chopin National Academy in Warsaw, our class sometimes met Professor Drzewiecki’s illustrious friends, one of whom was Arthur Rubinstein. He played for us and some students had the privilege of playing for him. Everybody in the class knew his recordings, as they were the classical Chopin interpretations that Drzewiecki had taught us. Grace, poise and thorough research were the hallmarks of his art, one that showed mastery but also enormous modesty and, contrary to what some ‘authorities’ had to say, a flawless technique. Rubinstein’s critics, and there were many, tended to forget how thorough he was in researching the repertoire he played. Where others posed and only pretended they had researched their subject, Rubinstein’s performances reeked of integrity. The earliest of Rubinstein’s three complete Mazurka recordings provided a high point for us in our study of Chopin, although for me it was his performances of the Nocturnes that provided the key to all other Chopin. I remain eternally grateful to Rubinstein for his recordings and what he had to say about them. Rubinstein was not blessed with the sheer virtuosity of Rachmaninov or Horowitz, but he developed a mastery of legato cantabile and tempo rubato second to none. This is evident in such miraculous pre-war ‘live’ performances as his historic recording of the Chopin Piano Concertos with Sir John Barbirolli, although his performances of the same with Witold Rowicki were even more beautiful – completely unforgettable. I will never forget his kindness and generosity to our class, and his charm, modesty and scrupulous research. Although I remain a student all my life and continue to listen to his many wonderful recordings, I consider myself fortunate to share such rich experiences with my own students.” Also chosen by Simon Trpceski, Jayson Gillham, Margaret Fingerhut 3. Sviatoslav Richter (1915-1997) Who was he? A Russian pianist of German descent who became the USSR’s pre-eminent musician. What makes him great? Rock-solid technique combined with an astonishing variety of sound. Essential recordings THE SOFIA RECITAL Philips 464734 REDISCOVERED: CARNEGIE HALL RECITAL RCA Red Seal 09026 63844-2 PROKOFIEV Piano Sonata No 2 & 9; Visions fugitives Nos 6, 18 Melodiya MELCD1001677 Barry Douglas On the intensity of Richter “I heard Richter play many times in England, France and America and what I loved about him was that he was able to make the piano sound not like a piano – it sounded like an orchestra or sometimes like a choir. Also, anything he did at the instrument always seemed totally right. It didn’t seem like his ideas; it seemed like the only way to do it. Every artist should aim, if they’re serious, to remove themselves from the equation and go to the heart or the essence of the music. Very few artists can do that, but for Richter it was totally natural. He was also a very serious musician: after concerts he’d often decide he needed to practise, and would go home and practise for another two hours. He also insisted that each recital program contain at least one new piece. So his repertoire was vast. I don’t think his studio recordings were that successful: they didn’t really represent him. It’s the live recordings which are amazing. Everyone talks about the Sofia recital from 1958 where he plays Liszt’s Feux Follets and Mussorgsky’s Pictures at an Exhibition. Still, his recordings of the Beethoven sonatas are also second-to-none, not to mention the Russian repertoire – the little pieces of Tchaikovsky – and Prokofiev, who wrote his Seventh Sonata for him. When I was at the Tchaikovsky Competition in 1984 he sent messages to me through others saying how fantastic he thought I was, which was very sweet. I wish I’d had a chance to get to know him better. I will always look up to Richter. A performing artist mustn’t copy, but you can be inspired by the essence of what someone stood for, and that’s what I do with him. I know very deep inside myself I’m trying to grasp what Richter had, which is an amazing, fiery, burning intensity of passion for music – that’s what came across when he played. He was absolutely obsessed, and possessed, by music.” Also chosen by: Howard Shelley, Anna Goldsworthy, Piotr Anderszewski... 2. Vladimir Horowitz (1903-1989) Who was he? A Russian-born pianist who left for the West at age 21, where he was described as a “tornado unleashed from the steppes”. Most famous for his performances of Romantic piano repertoire and, surprisingly, Scarlatti, he returned to Russia for a triumphant farewell recital in 1986. What makes him great? Sparkling virtuosity and extraordinary use of tone colour, combined with a talent for thrilling his audience, creating a furore at his live recitals. Essential recordings SCARLATTI Horowitz plays Scarlatti Sony 88697806402 LISZT, CHOPIN, SCHUMANN The London recordings 1932-1936 Archipel Records ARPCD0246 HOROWITZ IN MOSCOW DVD Sony SVD64545 Ingolf Wunder On the god-like gifts of Horowitz “Horowitz combined high-class pianism with a unique taste in music and interpretation. What made him unique was his ability to chisel his feelings and moods out of the structures and harmonic material of the score. I think I first heard Horowitz when I was 14. I was just astonished by his tone and the variety of colours he could produce. And he always played as his hand was built, never betraying his taste and his view of music. He was always himself, and everything he touched became his own. His playing is never mediocre, it either works or it doesn’t. But if it does work, it’s simply god-like – incomparable with anything you’ve ever heard. In a way, Horowitz is the product of a time that produced so many great pianists. I believe the way of thinking and our life has changed since then. Now musicians can go on the Internet and hear almost every recording of any piece; back then they were forced to think for themselves. Small things were given greater importance because it wasn’t possible to go anywhere instantly. It was not necessarily about who can play the fastest or any other competitive aspect, it was more about the music. There are still a few musicians that are like Horowitz and those old greats, and that’s the school we ought to come back to.” Also chosen by: Freddy Kempf, Gerard Willems, Konstantin Scherbakov 1. Sergei Rachmaninov (1873-1943) Who was he? A pianist and composer born in Russia, who graduated from the Moscow Conservatorium in the same class as composer Alexander Scriabin. Among his compositions is the Piano Concerto No 2, often voted the most popular piece of classical music of all time. He left Russia in 1917, embarking on a career as a touring pianist in order to support himself and his family. He became a US citizen shortly before his death. What makes him great? An almost superhumanly clean finger technique, which allowed him to maintain clarity even in the knottiest passages. This was partly due to his famously large hands, able to span 12 inches, or a 13th (C1 to A2) on the piano. He also had a beautifully singing tone, likened to that of violinist Fritz Kreisler, permitting him to wring infinite sweetness from a melody. Essential recordings CHOPIN•SCHUMANN Piano Sonata No 2; Ballade No 3, Carnaval Naxos Historical Great Pianists 8.112020 RACHMANINOV Concertos Nos 1-4; Rhapsody on a theme of Paganini RCA 09026616582 BEETHOVEN, GRIEG, SCHUBERT Violin Sonata No 8 in G major, Op 30 No 3; Violin Sonata No 3 in C minor, Op 45; Grand Duo for Violin and Piano in A Major, D574; Fritz Kreisler v Naxos Historical Great Pianists 8.110968 Leslie Howard on the greatest pianist ever to make a record “What’s remarkable about Rachmaninov’s playing is how honest it is. Nothing gets between his playing and his idea of why the piece of music was worth recording. His playing is never cluttered, it’s never fussy and there’s a complete absence of cheap tricks – quite unusual for the time he was recording. I think he’s the greatest pianist of his age and I’m sure he’s the best pianist who ever made a record. Of course, his technique is extraordinary, but the gift of all good technique is that you’re not aware of it when you’re listening to it. If you hear him play Si oiseau j’étais by Henselt, for instance, it sounds like the most charming salon piece. But if you’ve ever sat down to play it, you’ll know perfectly well it’s an absolute terror. Rachmaninov also has a way of dealing with rhythm which makes him instantly recognisable. Sometimes he does it by playing a rhythm that’s not exactly what’s in the score, but it comes out sounding like what should have been in the score. Take his recording with Fritz Kreisler of the Opus 30 No 3 Sonata of Beethoven, for example. You hear every single note and every single note is as important as every other, which is how Beethoven ought to be played, but seldom is. Being a composer, Rachmaninov also possessed a formidable musical mind. He dissected every piece before he put his hands on the keyboard. And he could do that because his compositional skills were so refined. I sometimes think when he plays his own music he’s less careful – almost as if he doesn’t quite think there should be so much fuss made about him. But when you hear how utterly unsloppy, in the emotional sense, his playing of his own music is, it discourages pianists from wallowing in it, as so many of them do. Then, if you want romantic playing he can do that too, and again I think of one of the recordings with Kreisler of the Grieg Sonata No 3. The second movement is heartrendingly marvellous and the way he plays the tune is completely different from the way Kreisler plays it. It makes the piece sound more eventful than it actually is – it’s a cracker of a recording! There’s a reason why Rachmaninov didn’t record more, and that’s because of the strained relations he had with the people at the Victor Talking Machine Company, who thought he was getting too much money for his recordings, and who turned down many of the things he offered to record. For instance, he was going to give a free recording of Beethoven’s First Piano Concerto, as long as they would let him record his orchestral Symphonic Dances, and they refused the offer. The reason why the recording we do have of him playing his Third Concerto is, to many ears, a bit inadequate is because he had to go back and record the first side again four months later. He put cuts in it at the last moment because the producer Charles Connell gave him grief, saying he couldn’t play the piano and couldn’t compose either. In short he made the whole thing deeply unpleasant for Rachmaninov. So we’ve got this Mr Connell to thank for not having the Liszt Sonata, the Hammerklavier Sonata, the Waldstein Sonata, and the Chopin B minor Sonata. Of the recordings we do have, it’s very difficult to choose a favourite, but I absolutely love his recording of Schumann’s Carnaval. I think that’s perfect piano-playing from start to finish.” Also chosen by Stephen Kovacevich, Denis Matsuev, Alexey Yemtsov... Why are there so Many great Russian Pianists? “From the 19th Century there has been very systematic children’s musical education in Russia, which started back with the foundation of the Moscow Imperial Conservatory. Rachmaninov came to study there at the age of 14. He lived at the home of Nikolai Zverev, who had created a boarding school for young students, who were required to practise six hours per day, apart from their school study. [Other boarders with Zverev were Scriabin and Siloti]. That school transformed into the Central Music School in the Soviet era, and the system expanded throughout the country. Today in Russia there is serious musical education for kids starting from when they’re big enough to reach the keys. Vladimir Ashkenazy, Grigory Sokolov and Mikhail Pletnev are products of this rather strict Soviet school. So children study for seven or eight years at a special music school, then at 15 they go to music college for three years. And that’s all before they enrol in the Conservatorium. So if a kid is talented, by the age of 16 they can play basically everything. That means when Russian students come to the Conservatory, they are already professional pianists. They have almost no technical boundaries to overcome, and can just focus on becoming an artist. So it’s not like just having piano lessons with a teacher – it’s systematic and totally free musical education. Geniuses are born everywhere, but only in Russia are they nurtured in this way.” Elena Kuznetsova Dean of piano, Moscow Conservator - See more at: http://www.limelightmagazine.com.au/features/greatest-10-pianists-all-time#sthash.IghNbRez.dpuf

[techinthedark]

Look at Jack go.