Abilities of a violinist, depth of cello – a juror, prof. Piotr Reichert, chamber musician, pedagogue of the Fryderyk Chopin University of Music talks about the true virtue of viola player. Interview conducted by Agnieszka Nowok.
Agnieszka Nowok: I guess the jury never – or at least rarely – is unanimous, but is there a matter that you discuss more often and in a more heated manner than the others?
Piotr Reichert: Luckily, the practice of this competition is such that we do not actually discuss. I think this is a good move, because then the judgment is based on the impression of a jury that has not been suggested by a colleague. This impression translates directly into the score proposed by each member of the jury. Obviously, each of us notes his observations on individual performances, which he can use as a justification for the discussion, if any. It may also be useful to discuss performances with participants after the competition. I am glad that we do not discuss, but we give “dry” points – in my opinion this gives a meaningful picture, which is an average view of all the jury for a given candidate.
A.N.: We are talking exactly halfway through the second stage of the viola specialty auditions – what can we say about this strong “twelve” that fights for the finals?
P.R.: I have been observing viola competitions for a dozen or so years, both nationally and internationally. I do not want to fall into elevated tones and use gossipy phrases to discuss the high level of competition, but I can definitely say one thing: the level is growing over time, which is mostly evidence in order of playing, especially in terms of intonation. Comparing today’s violin performances to those of more than a dozen years ago, it is certainly better.
A.N.: Has the program for the viola group been arranged on the basis of “pieces-whistleblowers” aiming to reveal the shortcomings of the candidates already in the first stage, thus selecting the best of them?
P.R.: The main determinant of the program were primarily economic and practical considerations, so as not to involve the pianists in the first stage. At the same time, we can then check many features of the participants’ play. By letting them play only solo songs, we check the technical qualities, sound and intonation. Assuming a play without a piano, we think of how to choose the remaining pieces: there must be some stylistic scatter here, such as this year, when one of Bach’s ensembles appears and then a whimper that has been selected from two of the most popular collections of viola. This configuration allows us to evaluate the candidate in terms of the workshop, knowledge of styles and broad interpretation skills.
A.N.: In the second stage the violists are extremely eager to choose the “Konzertstück” by Romanian composer George Enescu (1881-1955). Why is this piece so popular among them?
P.R.: I think it is a piece that most artists like because of its romantic aesthetics in which everyone can find themselves. This piece is a work of virtuosic parameters. It seems to me that from among the five compositions proposed in the second stage with such profile, Enescu is the easiest in this respect. And as far as the stylistic and tone layers are concerned, at least the participants think that it is absolutely within their reach, hence its popularity. I admit that I personally do not like this piece.
A.N.: Regarding tastes: Professor, being a juror, also listens to the performances of your pupils, taking part in competition. What emotions accompany you during your students performances??
P.R.: I do not evaluate them as a juror, but the truth is that in this occupation one always evaluates even when listening to music only for pleasure. Maybe I’ll surprise you, but I’m not very emotional during their performances. I approach this in quite a “cool” manner and with the right distance. I am glad that I was released from rating my students at that time. I am interested in the general verdict and acceptance by the other members of the committee as well as by the audience – an experience that enriches me in my professional approach.
A.N.: I understand that for the jury the winner is, in a way, a technically complete, expressive and interpretive artist, which determines the highest position. Is there any nuance, a detail that according to you decides about the fact that a given violist is a truly outstanding musician? What aspect do you pay particular attention to??
P.R.: Skipping the elementary issues that you already mentioned – technical efficiency, stylistic flexibility, perfect intonation, etc. – for me it is the ability to immediately switch to the deep, warm sound of this instrument. I have in mind the special sound emission that distinguishes it from the violin and cello. A prominent violist must have abilities of a violinist and a certain depth of cello tone and be able to correlate these two qualities. Most often, unfortunately, one has only one of those aspects that dominate the play: s/he is either superficial, light and smooth, sounding “dry”, or s/he can bring out a deep tone, but with a strenuous play. True craftsmanship is manifested by the combination of these two elements.
