David Cozy wrote:

>So now, how about naming names: which pianists (since we started with
>Rubinstein lets stick with pianists for the moment) would you say are
>intellectual musicians?  (Brendel has been suggested as one who falls
>into this category).  And which pianists are the other kind (sensual?)?
>(I guess Argerich would fall into this camp, but again, I'd never want
>to suggest that she doesn't understand the music she plays so wonderfully.)
>
>And on a slightly different tack, which performing musicians are
>intellectuals in the non-musical sense of the term.  Charles Rosen is
>one, of course.  And wasn't Ian Bostridge offered a fellowship in history
>at one of the Oxbridge colleges?

For me, any musician who can provide credible performance must have great
intellect.  Just remembering those notes and coordinating that with the
use of one's muscles is remarkable.  Understanding music notation is
like learning another language.

Some musicians were both informed and expressive.  I think of Cortot,
who was a fine scholar, similarly, Schnabel, Hoffmann who were both
significant scholars, creative thinkers and amongst the most expressive
pianists.  I like to point to my friend Barbara Nissman...Barbara is a
fine scholar, with a book on Bartok's piano music and one on Prokofiev's
piano music on the way...and yet, to my ears, she is clearly of the
romantic tradition as a pianist.

Serkin was intellectual, and his performances were restrained...however
I still treasure his explosive Beethoven 4th with Toscanini and a bombastic
New York Phil performance of the Bartok 1st with Reiner...

For me, Rubinstein's playing was controlled, informed and human.
Rachmaninoff's intelligent and brilliant and wonderfully expressive.
In short, I don't believe one can truly be at one extreme or the other
and still be valued by the informed.

Karl