Few years ago Daniel Barenboim had performed a wonderful recital in Warsaw, therefore there were high expectation raised before his concert this evening. Alas, busy with his conducting career, this great musician is seemingly unable to maintain the pianistic shape. His great artistic personality surrendered to the difficulties of Chopin’s works.
Unfortunately, the number of inaccuracies – missed notes, slips to neighbouring keys, rhythmic changes up to the violation of time – was over this critical value, below which those accidental imperfections are regarded as natural element, though undesirable, of a concert performance. But tonight there were just too many of them, they were disturbing, they created the unwelcome tension during recurring phrases: would he get them right this time?
The struggle with the text affected all aspects of performance, sound was no exception. Barenboim was able to play very beautifully, the bass register was clear, dark and rounded in tone. But even when he created a marvellous atmosphere, he destroyed the whole effect with one uncontrolled hit in the keys, as in Waltz in C sharp minor Op. 64 No. 2, when he hammered the keyboard with such a sudden strike the one could think he was afraid that his meditative creation has made his audience asleep, and so he was about to awake them. Such a lack of control was unexpected from the artist of this calibre.
We have appreciated more than once that performers are able to expose motives hidden within the texture. But Chopin was not a polyphonic composer. It is not that there is all of the time, in any bar, any moment something to show. For example, there is nothing to show in Nocturne in D flat major Op. 27 No. 2. Barenboim chosen to underline some pitches in left hand part, thus creating a quasi-melody, but the only effect of that was the impression of uneven playing. There was no time-keeping in that fragment, in neither of parts. Despite that, Nocturne and Waltz were both the highlights of the evening, as was the Trio section of Marche funèbre. Berceuse was also a success. In general, whenever the tempo allowed for the greater control, there were certain moments of charm.
We dare to think that no one would like to remember the Polonaise, so let us be merciful and just talk about the Sonata. According to Schumann, it consists of “four most indocile of Chopin’s children”. The work is conceived around the central movement, the Marche funèbre. The work that is difficult in form and substance.
The first part was non-existing one. Let us make our point this way: the sonata form without a repetition is not a sonata form. Period. The repeat sign is exactly the same music sign as note or rest: that means it has to be performed. To ignore the repeat sign means to ignore the musical form and the plan of work as conceived by the composer.
As there was no first movement, there was no cycle as well and so it is here where we stop. Barenboim did not succeed in the Sonata tonight.
We would like to point out to some pianistic mannerism that is thoroughly disturbing and at the same time common among today’s pianists. What we have in mind is an execution of a rest. For the execution of a rest keeping hands out of the keyboard is just not enough, if at the same time the right pedal is engaged. If dumpers do not stop the piano strings from vibration, then the rest is just not there as the sound continues. And if a general pause is executed this way, the formal aspect of the work is once more questionable.
Daniel Barenboim is an excellent conductor; he is a great artist and a charming man. His stage behaviour, his attitude towards the audience was winsome. However, the sole personality, as great as it may be, a Nocturne, a Waltz and a Trio from March were just a little bit too less to satisfy.
Krzysztof Komarnicki
