You are here:   Charles rosen > A Fusion of Piano and Cerebellum
 

His intellectualism arose (as it does in most) from a fear of boredom — in particular, I suspect, from an awful anxiety that music itself would fail to satisfy his personal need for meaning. While rehearsing for his concert debut at 23 years old, he completed a PhD in French literature at Princeton, adding further credits in mathematics and philosophy. Making his first records, he dispensed with hack-written sleeve notes and composed his own. A publisher, impressed, commissioned The Classical Style, an award-laden book which not only defined lucid distinctions between Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and the rest in truly original capsules but served for 40 years as the final arbiter of style — the top item on every music student's booklist and a cop-out for academics who never needed to rethink classical form once Charles had nailed it.

He was, by this exalted measure, the ultimate fusion of keyboard and cerebellum, of profundity and playfulness, of performance and reflection — all of these, along with such other expert interests as French cuisine, 19th-century art history and the ribald tradition in English theatre. 

Brilliant as violinists can be, charming as most cellists are, none can play the public intellectual as pianists do. From the high brows of Liszt and Busoni, to the iconoclasms of Scriabin and Wanda Landowska, from the religious devotions of Maria Yudina and Albert Schweitzer to the logical perversities of Artur Schnabel and Glenn Gould, pianists assert the right to think aloud, independently and outside the box.

String players have to fiddle too much with bits of hair and gut and rosin to find the leisure for intellectualism. They have to make their own notes, where pianists have everything laid out for them in black and white. Violinists turn to other musicians for mental stimulation. Yehudi Menuhin, a man of the greatest imaginable curiosity and most catholic interests, told me that he relied on his accompanist for enlightenment on lengthy prewar tours. If the pianist read thrillers, he got replaced. A pianist was meant to raise his partner's IQ.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Cliff K.
March 17th, 2013
12:03 PM
A most enjoyable article. But as Amar pointed out, "a fusion of piano and cerebellum" is not so unusual; indeed, the cerebellum is the part of your brain responsible for motor coordination, so I would think all pianists would require one in excellent working order!

Anonymous
March 11th, 2013
9:03 PM
Yes, but the next next great philosopher-pianist is Paavali Jumppanen.

Sir Huddleston Fuddleston
March 11th, 2013
7:03 PM
Albert Schweitzer was an organist. Shame on you.

ed
March 11th, 2013
6:03 PM
Charles Rosen never, to my knowledge, addressed the question of the pianos' temperament, remaining in the straight-jacket of equal temperament and completely missing the real reasons that composers chose the keys for their compositions that they did.

Amar
March 11th, 2013
1:03 PM
Pardon me for asking, did you mean cerebrum instead?

Larry Janowski
March 11th, 2013
12:03 PM
Thank you for that last paragraph. I was waiting for Stephen Hough's name to be mentioned. After hearing him perform in Chicago last year, I would have left the hall enthralled. After hearing him speak in a post-concert conversation, I was doubly impressed, much in the way Lebrecht is in this essay on Rosen.

Mara
March 5th, 2013
6:03 PM
And you, Norman Lebrecht, are no slouch as a musician/philosopher yourself!

Anonymous
March 4th, 2013
5:03 PM
I was also thinking of Denk! He writes lyrically and yet accessibly, if sometimes less academically. I just checked his bio, and it turns out he majored in chemistry as an undergrad.

Anonymous
February 28th, 2013
7:02 PM
The next great philosopher-pianist is Jeremy Denk.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.