|
This morning, I found a
moment to chat with John Giordano, chairman of the Cliburn jury
since 1973.
How have you seen the competition change
during your tenure here?
It's become one of the top competitions in the world.
This year, we heard 132 recitals all over the world and had to
choose 30 pianists. So many players now are technically superb.
Everyone we brought to the competition is technically superb. These
kids now are playing works that a few generations before some of
the finest artists didn't learn until much later in their
careers.
What do you think is the task of the
jury?
We're not judging pianists, we're judging artistry. We
are 13 people, each with his own perception of great artistry. But
certain things people will agree on. All performers are recreators
unless they're playing jazz. That means they should not play Mozart
like Strauss or Liszt. People talk a lot about how subjective music
is, but there's no great mystery to certain elements of music. Do
they understand phrases? Do they understand the harmonic
implications of a passage? It would be like an actor emphasizing
the wrong word or syllable in a line: It changes the meaning of the
sentence.
So what are some of the more subjective or
difficult elements to judge?
The most elusive aspect is similar to what makes
someone a great statesman or actor. A certain electricity or
charisma. You don't have to be physically glamorous, like a movie
star, but it's a talent for a kind of communication that brings you
to tears because it's so beautiful. I'm not opposed to gestures
that are sincere. Sometimes gestures conceal or distract from the
music. Even if the audience responds to this at first, eventually
the musical quality will be noticed by the audience. A person's
musicmaking reflects who they are. In a way, we're judging
character.
The people here are so skilled, inevitably it becomes
about the personal taste of the jurors. But those players who can
reach everyone and speak to everyone regardless of their personal
tastes will end up winning.
How do you respond to the criticism that
jurors with students competing should not be allowed to
participate?
The top teachers in the world attract the best
students. It's a fact. If you eliminate the top teachers as jurors,
then you risk losing some of the best students. The best teachers
in the world are also incredibly skilled as judges of the
repertoire. They hear hundreds of people auditioning for their
institutions, and they become very good at selecting for talent.
Who better to make these judgments than the best teachers in the
world? We also have a broad range of jurors. We have
conductors, pianists, teachers, and a music critic. There's no way
that any one juror could unduly influence all the others. We're all
too opinionated. And of course there is no discussion among jurors.
There's just the voting process.
| 
