• Horowitz's attitude torwards Gould

    From trevor b@21:1/5 to Farhan Malik on Fri Mar 26 14:00:35 2021
    On Monday, October 3, 1994 at 9:05:54 PM UTC-4, Farhan Malik wrote:
    Eugene Shapiro <esha...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
    I recently heard that Horowitz disliked Gould. However, that is
    the extent of the complexity with which I understand their relationship. Could anybody expound on why Horowitz disliked Gould. Was it purely professinal? Was it personal?
    Horowitz did not think much of Gould's playing. There were very
    few pianists who's playing Horowitz admired so that really doesn't mean
    much. As for a personal dislike of Gould there is nothing on record to indicate it.
    On the other hand, Gould's dislike of Horowitz is well documented.
    Horowitz was the most famous pianist on the planet. He outsold, outdrew,
    and outgrossed everyone else. No other pianist could command the hype and hysteria associated with Horowitz. Gould was insanely jealous. Gould
    recorded the Scriabin 3rd and Prokofiev 7th sonatas in an attempt to show
    up Horowitz. A comparsion on the two's recordings shows how abysmally
    Gould failed. Gould also had a pet project in mind where he would make a record that was in effect a total mockery of Horowitz's "Historic Carnegie Hall Return" record. This project was never allowed by Columbia.
    Horowitz was their star. It would have been crazy for Columbia to allow
    one of their lesser pianists to make fun of their star.
    It is very unlikely that Horowitz cared enough about Gould to have
    a dislike. Gould was and is pretty insignificant compared to Horowitz.
    Here is a quote from Horowitz on Gould's playing:
    I heard a recording of the Wagner _Siegfried Idyll_ played by Glenn
    Gould. It was his arrangement. He played like a stupid ass.
    Farhan
    --------
    For information about this Usenet posting service, send mail to rema...@soda.berkeley.edu, with Subject: remailer-info.
    Please, don't throw knives.


    Please, sir, get your facts straight. I agree with you, wholeheartedly, that Gould was terribly jealous of Horowitz, and, to Gould's shame, said terrible and hurtful things about him. I lost a significant amount of respect for Gould over this --
    certainly not as a pianist/technician (particularly where it came to Bach), but as a person. Horowitz, in my opinion, handled this disdain like a true gentleman, never allowing himself to sink to Gould's childish level. Where we disagree is your
    portrayal of Horowitz as some sort of high-browed egomaniac who held admiration but for a meagre few other pianistic talents. This is either honest error on your part, or a blatant fabrication; either way, it's simply not true. Horowitz held in high
    esteem the playing of many pianists---Rubinstein, Serkin, Brendel, Richter, Agerich, Schnabel, Periah, Gilels, Pollini, Cortot, Hoffman, Kappel, Rachmaninov, Michelangeli (even certain jazz figures like the legendary Art Tatum whom he acknowledged as his
    technical superior!), and the list goes on---and considered some of the aforementioned classical stars, rightfully or wrongfully, his superior in certain aspects. True, Horowitz possessed an "unparalleled tension," sonority, and musical sensibility that
    possibly qualifies him as "the last Romantic." He could certainly, and did, set the piano (the whole damn stage and concert hall, even!) ablaze with controlled, demonic fury. But he was also humble enough of his gifts to desire that a piano competition
    be never named in his honor. In more than one way, indeed, he was legendary! So please do not portray him as anything but.

    You furthermore stated, "He outsold, outdrew, and outgrossed everyone else." Another fabrication. Do not confuse Horowitz's ability to "command the hype and hysteria" that legends are made of, with ticket sales or fame. The fact of the matter is that
    Rubinstein (post 1940s, anyway), partly due to his vast repertoire and interpretive prowess (accompanied by an astounding technique!), partly due to his unparalleled interpretations of Chopin, and partly due to his ebullient personality the brilliance of
    which is infused in his recordings, outranked and outclassed everyone in ticket sales, and was, up to the time of his death in 1982, the most famous classical pianist, if not musician, on the planet. His name was a virtual household word at the time.
    In the years following Rubinstein's death, particularly after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1989, Horowitz's name shared the spotlight with no other.

    I do not know whether your statements were made out of ignorance or zealousness for Horowitz. Indeed, I, too, am a deep admirer of his gifts and contributions. However, in the event that your statements were less than honest, let me admonish that is
    not necessary to distort the legacy of Horowitz, or to downplay the greatness, legacies or contributions of others, just to underscore how much of an a*hole Gould was to Horowitz. You do the latter no service in this regard.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)