Finally, the moment I was waiting for - the results of three weeks of travel and listening - was here, and there were a few surprises, and a number of reflections, as always.

 

The first reflection was how closely the four jury members came together in voting for the majority of the 24 candidates - most of them were unanimous or almost unanimous choices.

Second, that regional and national differences still exist, despite the “flatness” of the earth. The availability of recordings and scores through the internet, the globe-trotting schedules of major concert artists, the globe-trotting schedules of music STUDENTS today, all contribute to a general rise in the level of playing, and a general awareness of stylistic elements in the music. At least, one would think that. There are still distinctive characteristics that appeared in most of the Russian candidates, and other characteristics that showed up in most of the Chinese candidates. Northern and Western Europeans were more homogenous, but there were even differences between Italian and French and English pianists that fit the centuries-long traditions in teaching and performing in those particular countries.

Third reflection: Liszt was truly a European composer, and there is something about playing Liszt, hearing Liszt, generally experiencing Liszt in Europe. The bulk of the candidates who presented themselves did so in Holland. There were 8 candidates in Shanghai, 8 candidates in New York, and the rest, 48 in Utrecht. Now, quite a number of the candidates in Utrecht were not Europeans. And on the first day in New York we heard a Japanese and 4 Chinese pianists! I’m not sure how reliable it is to draw conclusions from this one experience, but it seems to me that being in Europe encourages an understanding of, or at least an affinity for, Liszt.

In terms of repertoire, some interesting trends made themselves clear very quickly. For some reason, the Valse Impromptu became the most chosen work. More than half of the candidates - 34 out of 64 - chose this work from a substantial list of required works. Among the other popular works were the Mephisto Waltz, La Campanella and some of the better-known Etudes - Mazeppa, Feux Follets, F minor, Wilde Jagd. All in all, some 56 works were played, a small fraction of the more than 2000 cataloged works. I wish there had been more variety, but this is the result of the pressure brought on by the competition process.

After hearing the Valse Impromptu a few times, I thought that perhaps it would be a beneficial use of my time to try to learn the piece by studying the score, which is one of the main exercises in my Deeper Piano Studies workshops. Well, after focusing on that during a few more performances, I was so tired of this work - not one of Liszt’s most inspired, although there were many good qualities that very few of the pianists explored - that even if I HAD learned it having never practiced it, I would be loathe to perform it! A similar case of hearing the Chopin Funeral March Sonata in its entirety 40 times in a row at the Marguerite Long Competition in Paris inoculated me against ever wanting to hear the work in concert!

Some other odds and ends: there were no candidates from the US! (Come on, US!) And there were NO Hungarians defending the music of one of their landmark composers (only one half-Hungarian). Liszt is still misunderstood, even by most sympathetic performers. Smoked salmon is quite good for breakfast. Fresh herring is even better!

 

And here is the surprise: one of the people on the top of my “Liszt” did not make it into the final list of 24. This was due purely to mathematical reasons, as the pianist did garner enthusiasm from a second juror, but so little from the remaining two that the average of the scores (since there was no unanimity on advancement, the pianist’s qualifications were subject to a ranking by average scores given by the jurors) pulled the ranking down below the cut-off line.

In light of the results, which all the jurors signed off on as being fair according to the predetermined rules of qualification, I was curious to explore, with real numbers to play with, other methods of selection that would have possibly preserved this amazing pianist’s place in the final 24. We are exploring one of these processes currently, through the wonders of technology and email! More on the results of that experiment in a later blog entry, with reflections on the competition process overall.

 

The final results of the Utrecht Liszt Competitor for this juror? Some great discoveries, some reaffirmations on the state of piano today, great restaurants in all cities, a wonderful collaborative and nurturing spirit among the jurors, new friendships, amazement at the state of Shanghai today. The final chapter of our 3 week long journey would be summed up on the final evening, after we had finished hearing all the candidates but before we had tallied the results. This would be a trip to Birdland to hear Randy Weston’s trio perform an African influenced jazz set that brought us out of our cloud of Liszt and into the greater circle of the piano and music. When Randy Weston joined our table afterwards, we spoke about the power of music to communicate and to join people together. Despite the huge differences in our musical languages, we all understood each other. Liszt understood that power; the proof was in the group seated around that table, who had come together through the sole power of his music.