
Murray Perahia was in his mid-twenties when he first explored
Beethoven’s Piano Sonata No. 29 in B flat Op. 106 “Hammerklavier”. While
the work’s enormous technical and physical challenges fell within his
grasp, its profound musical demands eluded him. He quietly dropped the
“Hammerklavier” from his repertoire, recognizing that he would need time
to fathom its cosmic depths. Over four decades passed before he felt
ready to program the piece in recital. Perahia finally revisited the
“Hammerklavier” three summers ago, working on the score for months and
testing ideas of interpretation in fine detail. “I started playing the
‘Hammerklavier’ in a few places,” he recalls. “The more I played it, the
more I began to think, ‘Yeah – maybe I’m ready to set down some
thoughts about it’.”
The New York Times, after a performance in May of 2016,
declared that the wait for Perahia’s “Hammerklavier” had been worth it.
The newspaper’s senior critic observed that his approach was “majestic
and stirring, with spacious passages where he gave clarity and lyricism
to the piece’s milky harmonies and mingling inner voices”, going on to
add that Perahia’s performance “exuded integrity and seemed the result
of decades of thought”.
The pianist embraced the opportunity to
record the most demanding of all Beethoven’s thirty-two piano sonatas
for Deutsche Grammophon. “I think it’s presumptuous of me to say whether
it’s ready or not,” he notes with characteristic humility. “But I’m
happy with the way the interpretation has evolved and, for the moment at
least, it seems to answer some of my questions about the piece.” Those
questions encompassed everything from the composer’s controversial
metronome markings, sometimes set as symbols of an unattainable ideal,
to considerations of the sound qualities Beethoven had in mind.
Perahia’s
recording, whose release coincides with the bicentenary of the
“Hammerklavier” sonata’s completion in 1818, captures the composition’s
grandeur and weight while revealing countless subtle tonal nuances,
dynamic contrasts and musical insights. “I think the challenge of this
music is still alive because one can get deeper and deeper into its
mysteries,” he comments. “The mysteries in a piece as complicated as the
‘Hammerklavier’ are endless. What did he mean, for instance, by this
G flat that comes from nowhere at the end of the first movement?
Everything is connected in Beethoven – there isn’t a random note. And
yet this feels improvisatory, entirely spontaneous. It’s just one of the
mysteries that will intrigue and occupy musicians forever.”
The
spirit of improvisation runs through Murray Perahia’s reading of the
“Hammerklavier” sonata’s Adagio sostenuto, among the most expansive of
all Beethoven’s slow movements. It also pervades his interpretation of
the Piano Sonata No. 14 in C sharp minor Op. 27 No. 2 “Moonlight”. The
pianist chose to pair the two works above all because of their
differences. As he notes, the “Moonlight” is more fantasy than sonata,
much freer in form than the four-movement “Hammerklavier”.
Perahia’s
understanding of the “Moonlight” deepened as he prepared a new edition
of the work for the German publishers Henle. He gathered additional
imaginative fuel from recent research suggesting that Beethoven may have
intended his sonata to emulate the Aeolian harp, hugely popular during
the composer’s lifetime, and is convinced that the harp-like arpeggios
of the “Moonlight” represent Beethoven’s vision of the Aeolian
instrument.
“I love all the Beethoven piano sonatas and my
favourites are perhaps the last few of them,” he concludes. “But the
‘Moonlight’ is one of the great sonatas. Its novelty is something that
shouldn’t be underestimated – there had never been a piece like this in
the Classical style that used pedalling to create such a new sound. It
was a freedom that I don’t think had been heard before, so innovative
and still so deeply moving.”
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario