Russian pianists at Van Cliburn lash out at Moscow
NewsRussian contestants at the Van Cliburn Competition have made statements to the New York Times criticising Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Anna Geniushene said she is now living in Lithuania. Ilya Shmukler said: ‘The key words for me are shame and responsibility.’
Arseniy Gusev, who’s going to Yale, said: ‘I cannot say I belong to this contemporary Russia anymore.’
Sergey Tanin, from Siberia, warned: ‘We shouldn’t be forced to have political discussions before concerts or competitions.’
He’s right. Requiring young artists to toe a political line is verges on Stalinism.
Canceling performances of Tchaikovsky, Shostakovich, et al, was equivalent to not eating at Chick-fil-A.
Not really – because Popeye’s is better.
I’ll take “missed the point” for $200, Alex!
“Ilya Shmukler said: ‘The key words for me are shame and responsibility.’”
Good. The more that speak up like this, the better.
She shouldn’t be ashamed nor she is responsible. You are not responsible of someone else’s crime. That’s why I hate this kind of false statements.
I agree with Sergey Tanin and NL that young artists should not be “forced to have political discussions” nor required to “toe a political line”, especially during a competition. However, there is nothing in the NY Times article to suggest that he was, nor that Geniushene, Shmukler, Linnik, Gusev, or the Ukrainian pianist Dmytro Choni were forced to do so. In each case except Tanin’s, their words and actions say otherwise, forte.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine clearly weighs on all of them, as well as their fellow contestants and much of the audience in Fort Worth and beyond. How the Cliburn has been affected by its decision to include Russians – a decision I endorse – is no less newsworthy or relevant than SD’s coverage of other young Russian artists like Alexander Malofeev. I think Javier Hernández’s article explores their situation thoroughly and fairly.
Unless I misread the NYT article, it is the NYT that asked for the statements, not the Cliburn Competition. The NYT approached the pianists, as far as I understood, to get the statements. One of those RU passport holders quoted in the article has been living in the US for at least 5 years, another one since 2021. The war started on Feb 24, why wait till the Cliburn in June? To force them to make a political statement when they are already in the competition? The best I know a couple of other quoted pianists do not live in Russia either, but in European countries. Frankly, the thing to do under the circumstances would have been simply to leave these young people alone to concentrate on their performances.
“The war started on Feb 24, why wait till the Cliburn in June?”
Because the fact that these young pianists are in the Cliburn is the only thing that makes their particular opinions newsworthy.
That was sarcasm. Forcing young performers who live in the US or Europe to give political opinions during the competition is what Norman said it was. Dictatorships demand that of its people. The NYT article leaves an unpleasant aftertaste.
The New York Times article should of read “ Brilliant Pianist Kate Liu missed her shot at the Cliburn Gold because her style and performances are reminiscent of the golden era of romantic pianism”
The politics are in play with these kinds of articles. If a Russian wins it’s politics, if the Ukrainian wins its politics! Of course you can’t perform the Beethoven Sonata opus 110 or the Brahms Sonata and win the Gold! I discussed Kate Liu and her Beethoven performance with top pianists and then compared her live performance with 10 recordings of the most recognized pianists and she met the comparison on a equal basis. Bravo! I can’t imagine any of the Jurors performing the Beethoven 110 on her level. Then what is going on at the Cliburn?
Firstly, Even if Rubinstein appeared as a contestant he would be passed over as well as Horowitz! Maybe it was the jury pool or it’s not good enough to perform Beethoven like a master but you have excite the jury and audience with miniature virtuoso pieces that show off technic!
There were real comparisons with Kate’s Prokofiev Sonata and the Wang performance in recordings. Kate showed the real beauty and romantic side while throwing fire into her rendition. It was nothing short of sheer brilliance! Maybe it’s Kate’s unassuming visual style that is questioned! I believe it’s time that the jurors be placed in a private room with only audio to listen to and removing the visual distraction. Kate would certainly walk away with the Gold. If the Cliburn now wants acrobatics and very young kids showing off their technic then that’s what the competition has turned into. Pyrotechnic performances minus boring Beethoven, Brahms, Chopin and Schubert! Who picked the jurors! Let’s let them perform!
In the end Kate Liu wins the Gold every time you listen to her performances. Bravo
We all have our preferences and biases. Opinions of others might be just as strong. Comparing one’s performance to Wang’s is a dubious compliment.
I fully agree with your last statement.
I share your estimation of Kate Liu’s superb Beethoven and Prokofiev, Patrick – the Hough was also nicely done, and from memory – and I too was disappointed not to find her among the finalists. I doubt very much that the judges omitted her because of her originality in those three performances, though – there were serious flaws in other of her other pieces, alas. Sections in both her Schubert Allegretto and the Franck Prélude, Choral et Fugue seemed to aim for a timeless spaciousness – an inclination I’ve heard overdone in other Liu recitals – but were just too damn slow and didn’t work here. In particular, her attempt to bring things near a standstill preceding the climax of the Franck took the wind right out of the piece, and even gave the impression she’d gotten a bit lost. I appreciate what she was trying to do, but felt it missed the mark, even though the last pages were stirring. Some judges may well have been like some informed listeners I know, growing irritated when an artist conflates adagio and largo.
“I discussed Kate Liu and her Beethoven performance with top pianists and then compared her live performance with 10 recordings of the most recognized pianists and she met the comparison on a equal basis”. I wonder who reached the conclusion that Kate Liu has met the comparison – you or” the most recognized pianists” with whom you discussed her performance.
This is why we have a jury of the Cliburn competition – so that the decisions not be made based on discussions with questionable experts or, worse yet, on comparisons with recordings. The contestants are not expected to compare to recordings. The Cliburn is looking for personalities. Kate definitely has one, she is a big talent. I am sure she has a lot coming up for her in he future, But her performance of Franck’s Prélude, Choral et Fugue simply had multiple wrong notes. This is a Competition 101 rule: you don’t move to the next stage with technical flaws, especially on the level of the Cliburn.
And yeah, I am sure musicians on the jury like Stephen Hough would be able to measure up to Kate’s performance of 110 🙂
Kate should have moved on after her Chopin 3rd prize. She has already made a name for herself. Why continue to take part in competitions and waste her precious youth? Is she trying to prove something to herself or her parents? Her style would be unlikely to win her a first prize. It’s too dreamy and poetic. But it will gather her lots of fans for life.
Looks a bit like Alma at her youngest