Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Interview with Gary Graffman: on Lang Lang criticism, etc.

Hi Everyone,

Hope you're all doing well. Here is our latest interview with the Curtis Institute's Gary Graffman. Mr. Graffman was kind enough to speak about his brief encounters with Rachmaninoff, Hofmann, and Tatum, attending Glenn Gould's Town Hall debut, Horowitz' Medtner repertoire, and of course, the criticism directed towards Lang Lang.

As always, many thanks for reading

http://www.examiner.com/article/interview-with-pianist-gary-graffman

Gary Graffman: "Lang Lang has received horrible reviews, and in many different cities. I think part of it comes from a bit of jealousy. When people see that he has 150 concerts every year, at a fee that only some opera divas used to get (or now get), they begin to ask questions, ‘why does he deserve it and not others ?’, ‘why is life so unfair ?’."

I'm quite jealous that he got to listen to Horowitz's Medtner. What a sublime treat that would be.

This, so much! Plus his prok 6 and 8. If only a bootleg existed somewhere...

Thanks for the interview, that box set of Graffman must be mine!

Which is utter nonsense.

Jealousy as the motivation for bad reviews makes no sense at all, since the reviewers aren't pianists in competition with LL. There is nothing for them to be jealous about.

On the other hand, Graffman might have some motivation for trying to deflect bad reviews of his "product".

Bravo!

Agreed. That's a pretty typical defensive response. The fact is, the critiques about Lang Lang are spot on. He's overly showy, his playing is imprecise, and his theatrics distract from the music rather than enhance it.

None of this, of course, is a knock on Gary Graffman. This is the type of performer Lang Lang is, and it has worked quite well for his career. I only hope that as he matures he'll start playing more musically.

Steve

Really??

Sir Simon Rattle had something to say on this aspect, in his latest recording.

Perhaps, but you can take those criticisms with you to the poorhouse.

A lot of critics are not aware of what the goal of a performer is: To sell tickets. They may not even be aware of what their job is: To sell advertising to readers. They may be, in the sense that negative reviews probably get read more than positive reviews, but if they are selling to people who are not aware of the public's tastes, the quality of the readers they are providing to advertisers is not so great.

If you want proof that the deck is stacked in the U.S., when it comes to piano fame a fortune, all you have to note is that two of the most famous pianists of American birth, Fleisher and Graffman cannot play normally with two hands. Graffman can't play at all with two hands.

And yet, they and their students are put up on pedestals for all to admire and emulate.

I typically don't prefer Lang Lang's interpretations (La Campanella? No thanks, I'll stick to Yundi Li's), but I also don't think the hyper-criticism he receives is justified. People seem to like to jump on the bandwagon of hating Lang Lang after hearing just a single interpretation of his, but what of the rest? His Liszt Romance in E minor and Chopin etude op 10 no 3 are absolutely great!

Wonderful interview -- thanks for posting the link!

I think there are people of certain personality types that would write a bad review from the point of view that they are jealous FOR their favorites who aren't getting the gigs. I've read posts here where the basher mentioned other, more deserving artists. Do you think reviewers are all above that?

Very good point, Mr Graffman.

That was a very enjoyable interview. Many thanks to the OP for posting a link to it here.

Lots of people dislike highly popular musicians. It's nothing new. It's not necessarily unjustified either. I think once someone or something reaches a certain point of popularity, the popularity on itself drives further popularity, there are all kinds of books and songs and movies that are acclaimed basically because they are well known. I think it is personally reasonable to criticize this, to be aware of when we like something because it resonates with us or if we are just brainwashing ourselves into liking it because it is already so well liked.

Whatsoever is hugely successful is usually doomed to also be hugely criticized. If there are any counter examples of this please share.

burl ives?

The long word version of the often used music industry word "hype" is the word hyperbole.

Why, of all the piano teachers in the U.S. did Lang Lang select Gary Graffman? My guess is it may have had to do with two things.

The first is the old concept of being a big fish in a small pond. At Juilliard, he would not have had that. Further, Graffman had a reputation in mainland China.

Second, unlike Juilliard, where you cannot just "study" under someone, you have to take a formal path of matriculation. Lang Lang, I may be wrong, does not have a degree from Curtis.

As far as Graffman stipulating that he (Lang Lang) was a nobody, when he arrived, who subsequently made it on his own through performance brilliance, I only list the two letters BS in response!

Did Gary Graffman make one or two phone calls to anybody and everybody he could, in regards his Chinese students? My guess is yes he did.

Finally, it is no accident that, after all of the negative posts that have been made lately regarding Lang Lang on PW, this post just happens to appear. I have some swamp land in Florida I can sell you, if you believe that one.

Most of the great pianists were not hugely criticized IMO, except in the sense that since they played a lot of concerts the number of negative reviews they received in some cases might be high. But the percentages of negative reviews was not so high. If two pianists each get 5 negative reviews but one pianist plays 10 recitals a year and the plays 100, I'd say the second was much more successful with the critics.

Most of the greatest pianists were popular with the critics and the public.