It takes a special pianist that has
the stamina to play an all Chopin programme. The challenge is compounded when
the recital encompasses both books of the Études (Op. 10 and
25) as well as the Preludes, Op. 28. And so it was that Canada’s
own Louis Lortie graced the Orpheum stage for just such a performance. It was
an evening of incredible pianism, but musically and emotionally somewhat less
than entirely satisfactory.
It was impressive to watch Lortie
launch right into the Études in C major, Op. 10, No. 1. I
appreciated the clarity of his playing and his refraining from excessive
pedaling. In the second Étude, the pianist’s fingerwork was
immaculate, and he brought out the lightness and bounciness of the left hand.
The celebrated Étude in E major, Op. 10, No. 3 had a beautiful
return to the A section at the end of the work. Both the fourth and fifth Études were
technically stunning. I particularly liked the glittering effect he achieved
with the right hand triplets. Lortie successfully negotiated the subtle
harmonic changes in the Rachmaninoff-like Étude in E-flat minor,
Op. 10, No. 6, although I felt that there could have been more gradations of
colours. I appreciated the clarity of texture and his voicing of the right hand
in the Étude in C major, Op. 10, No. 7 as well as how he drew our
attention to the beauty of the left hand in the Étude in F major,
Op. 10, No. 8. The pianist underplayed the drama in the beginning of the Étude
in F minor, Op. 10, No. 9 until the octave passages beginning at m. 49, and
played a lovely ending bringing to life Chopin’s leggierissimo indication.
The pedaling was particularly well done in his playing of the Étude in
A-flat major, Op. 10, No. 10, which created some beautiful blending of
sounds. Although the broken chords were immaculately executed in the Étude
in E-flat major, Op. 10, No. 11, there was unfortunately a feeling of
sameness in the sound. I thought that he missed Chopin’s dolcissimo indication
at m. 44. This indication can only be found in the autograph and not the
printed version, but it does make sense to have a different feel to the chords
toward the end of the work. The so-called Revolutionary Étude (Op.
10, No. 12) was played with a great deal of sweep.
After only a brief pause, Lortie
continued the first half with his performance of the Op. 25 set of Études. Unfortunately,
the brightness of the piano took away the very subtle beauty of the music in
the Étude in A-flat major, Op. 25, No. 1, but he did achieve the
lightness that the music calls for. I have never understood Chopin’s seemingly
absurdly fast metronomic indication (half note equals 112) for the Étude
in F minor, Op. 25, No. 2. I feel that one would miss the beauty of
the right hand triplets with such a quick tempo. Perhaps Lortie’s playing of
the work has its own logic, since it created a lovely blending of sonorities. I
was somewhat surprised at the very heavy handed playing of the third and
fourth Études of the set, although I did admire his incisive
attacks of the right hand chords in the fourth Étude. His
playing of the Étude in E minor, Op. 25, No. 5 was far too
heavily pedaled, and took away the gentle humour of the music. I believe that
the opening section should be played much more dryly. He did, however,
successfully convey the beauty of the left hand in the B section. Lortie’s
performance of the frightfully difficult Étude in G-sharp minor, Op.
25, No. 6 was perhaps the highlight of the evening. To be sure, the rapid
thirds in the right hand were perfectly played, but the beauty of the work, as
Vladimir Howoritz said, is in the left hand. I think Lortie understood this, as
he played it with grace and subtlety. His performance of the Étude in
C-sharp minor, Op. 25, No. 7, was successful as well, conveying the utter bleakness,
sadness and despair that is inherent in the music. The transition to the B-flat
major 6/4 chord at m. 27 was like a ray of sunlight that suddenly shone
through. The artist pedaled the Étude in D-flat major, Op. 25, No.
8 most effectively, and played the short piece as if it were one long phrase.
Unfortunately, the Étude in G-flat major, Op. 25, No. 9 (refer to
by some as the Butterfly Étude) was far, far too
heavily played – the butterfly was much too earthbound. He brought out the
strange beauty of the B section in the Étude in B minor, Op. 25,
No. 10, and his pacing in the return to the A section was most effective. The
pianist really observed the composer’s risoluto indication at m. 5 of
the Étude in A minor, Op. 25, No. 11. I find it interesting that most of
Chopin’s indication in this very dramatic work is forte only,
not fortissimo. In fact, the first fortissimo indications come only
as late as m. 61 and 63. I thought Lortie understood this, and really let the
music build rather than giving it all right at the outset. The last work of the
set was also well played. He resisted pedaling the work excessively, which lent
the work a clarity that we don’t often hear.
I missed the feeling of desperate
longing and anticipation in Lortie’s playing of the Prelude in C major,
Op. 28, No. 1, as well as the dark, menacing colours of the Prelude in
A minor, Op. 28, No. 2. The pianist completely missed Chopin’s leggiermente marking
for the Prelude in G major, Op. 28, No. 3, and played the left hand
as if it were Czerny. I also missed the slow build-up that the music calls for
in the Prelude in E minor, Op. 28, No. 4, as well as the Prelude
in B minor, Op. 28, No. 6. Strangely, he seemed to have played the work
with just a single colour. Again, the Prelude in D major, Op. 28,
No. 5 was far too heavily played, and he failed to convey the beguiling beauty
of the music. The Prelude in A major, Op. 28, No. 7 was played
simply and gracefully, exactly the qualities that the music calls for. The
opening of the Prelude in F-sharp minor, Op. 28, No. 8 sounded
mechanical to my ears, but things did improve later on, but I did like the
dignity he conveyed in his playing of the Prelude in E major, Op.
28, No. 9. I also liked the lightness of his right hand in the Prelude
in C-sharp minor, Op. 28, No. 10, and his beautiful playing of the Prelude
in B major, Op. 28, No. 11. Lortie successfully brought across the wildness
of the music in the Prelude in G-sharp minor, Op. 28, No. 12. He achieved a
rare real feeling of intimacy in his performance of the Prelude in
F-sharp major, Op. 28, No. 13, and a feeling of buoyancy in the A section’s
right hand chords. The playing got too loud too soon in the Prelude in
E-flat minor, Op. 28, No. 14, and I missed the “weirdness” of the unison
writing that is so apparent in the music. The artist gave us a lovely opening
for the Prelude in D-flat major, Op. 28, No. 15, as well as effective
transitions to the C-sharp minor B section and then back to the A section,
although the climaxes in the B section could have been much more shattering
(without being heavy).
Lortie certainly took no prisoners in
his dramatic reading of the Prelude in B-flat minor, Op. 28, No.
16, although his sparse pedaling in the opening runs worked less successfully
in this work. There were some lovely colours in the unique sonorities of the
key of A-flat major (Op. 28, No. 17), even though I missed the richness in
sound that the work calls for. The pianist captured the unsettling feeling in
the Prelude in F minor, Op. 28, No. 18, and achieved in the Prelude
in E-flat major (Op. 28, No. 19) the lightness and that had quite
often eluded him last evening. There was lovely voicing of the middle voice in
Lortie’s playing of the funereal Prelude in C minor, Op. 28, No. 20,
but the right hand forte and fortissimo chords
were much too heavy in the Prelude in B-flat major, Op. 28, No. 21.
His playing of the Prelude in G minor, Op. 28, No. 22 was
appropriately stormy, and technically impeccable. There was wonderful contrast between
the aforementioned Prelude and the Prelude in F major (Op.
28, No. 23) that followed. Here, Lortie beautifully conveyed the picture of
blue skies and calm waters. Likewise, the he captured the high drama and utter
destruction (at the end) of the Prelude in D minor, Op. 28, No. 24.
Although there was much to admire in
Mr. Lortie’s performance last night, honesty compels me to say that I found
the essence of Chopin only in very few of the works performed.
Part of the problem, I thought, was the instrument of the artist’s choice -
that beautifully built concert grand of Italian origin that has been attracting
fans amongst both musicians and the very wealthy. The sound was simply too
bright, too booming, and it does not, in my view, possess the large tonal
palette of the Steinway. There was much in Lortie’s playing that was heavy, and
the very big sound that he commands does not always work for the composer’s
music.
From the standpoint of piano playing,
Lortie’s performance was beyond reproach, and it was obvious that every element
in his conception of the pieces had been thoroughly worked out down to the last
detail. I would like to believe that an artist with the talent and musicality
of Louis Lortie would some day arrive at an ideal interpretation of Chopin’s
music, if he continues his quest. In his encore, Chopin’s Nocturne in
D-flat major, Op. 27, No. 2, he gave us a tantalizing hint that he is able
to capture Chopin’s soul in his beautiful interpretation of the much loved
work.
Alfred Brendel was correct in saying
that a pianist either plays Chopin or everything else. And the entire evening
reminded me yet again of how difficult it is to really interpret Chopin. Of all
the composers, the essence, or the soul, of Chopin is most elusive to even the greatest
pianists of any time. I am quite hopeful that Louis Lortie will one day find
the true essence of Chopin in his artistic journey.
Patrick May
May 10, 2017
