Hate Mail

The word "interpret" doesn't mean "impose your choices over the composers'" it doesn't mean "thrilling the ignorant and vulgar by vulgar display".   It means consulting and taking seriously the instructions of the composer and trying to discern the composers' intentions and communicating those, not displaying yourself.  That's called "show biz".   That is when it's not a symptom.  But I don't want to get back to Glenn Gould just now.  

I'm a few years apart from the fine musician, Peter Serkin and have followed his career most of my life.  If you want to see how stupid what Stupy said was, go look up the reviews of his performances, especially the ones where the reviewer didn't agree with Serkin's interpretive decisions.  I suspect he read one review, once, or one jacket cover and is regurgitating what an ignorant critic said about him.  Criticism as a career has something just a little bit pathetic about it, especially when it's just an imposition of opinion without any real basis.   

Mozart -  Sonata in B-Flat Major, K. 570

Update:  Here's what Ned Rorem said and, unusually, I agree with him on this.   "His [Peter Serkin's] uniqueness lies, as I hear it, in a friendly rather than over-awed approach to the classics, which nonetheless he plays with the care and brio that is in the family blood. (And) he's not afraid to be ugly. He approaches contemporary music with the same depth as he does the classics, and he is unique among the superstars in that he approaches it at all."