Philharmonic

Author: Alexander Tsererteli Source: Филармоник < Philharmonic > № 1, 2007

For original article + photos do check out the part of this website. "Perpetual Motion" Igor Zhukov What can be said about the musician-performer, starting to write an essay about him? Designate a pedigree - literally and figuratively. Describe a life path full of triumphs and victories. Nurtured teachers: by all means everyone, from those who put their hand to those who let them out into the big world. To praise, say, octaves, but to scold for something ... however, scolding is not accepted at all now. Describe repertoire preferences, praising the successful, and try to get past the unsuccessful. Focus on the main thing - and show how it all changed the surrounding musical world. All of the above is not suitable for our hero. A student of two eminent musicians, he argued (and argues) furiously with the first and says little about the second. He considers himself a Self Made Man and categorically rejects even a shadow of suspicion that someone could influence him. From the very beginning of his career, he proved himself to be a serious artist, it would be in vain to expect even a slight indulgence in the taste of the audience in his concerts! Neither the "Moonlight" sonata, nor the "Revolutionary" etude will ever be heard performed by him, either in the program or as an encore (unless the encores are generally canceled by a special notice at the beginning of the concert). Moreover, applause may also be forbidden, and the listeners will disperse in a sad split, deprived of the opportunity to express their attitude to the just finished good concert. The well-informed reader has already understood, of course, whom it is about: Igor Zhukov. The wonderful and unsociable Igor Zhukov, who plays a lot "there" and little "here", has a stable circle of unspoiled fans who are waiting for each of his concerts, each new recording - and not too often presented with both. But the beginning of the journey was almost triumphant. And, however, from this very beginning, the pianist managed to reveal to the world such an intensity of the contradictory nature and behavior that every new artistic gesture of his made - and makes - tense in anticipation: what the coming day has in store for us again? Perhaps the genesis of the inconsistency lay in the conservative prehistory of the pianist. A student of Gilels overnight became a student of another master, G. Neuhaus. Departure from Gilels: that it was a coincidence of the personalities of the student and the teacher? Acceptance of thought music - or flow music? Did the arrogance of youth play a role, or too early independence? The fact remains: the two musicians parted ways. In the ideological sense, they often disagreed with Gilels in general: the search for oneself? Or non- or flow music? The ethical bar of his life and art was too high, he was too strict with himself and with those around him, not knowing concessions even for those close to him. Abstracting from the external canvas - and here there was a conflict - let's say that subsequently Zhukov began to call himself a student of Neuhaus, although in his heart he always considered himself, undoubtedly, independent and not dependent on the influence of both of his teachers. However, reality tells a different story: the influence of the first - Gilels - turned out to be inseparable from the artist's creative path, and the internal dispute with him, which became a kind of driving force for development, does not seem to subside to this day. Again and again the young pianist turns to what he learned or heard in class, borrows from the repertoire, trying to re-create, re-express, create a different musical reality. the fact that these people were bred not by fate but by character. And with this, the commentary should end: reality, like history, does not know the subjunctive. Zhukov graduated from Neuhaus without getting any special marks from him. It seems that there was some cunning in this: the garrulous creator of the "School" could not but understand the superiority of "non-standard" students over those who slavishly copied the teacher. But for the young musician this was also a moment of testing - in the current situation, he had to prove his independence - including to himself. This task was brilliantly accomplished. Enumeration of the antitheses of the classically interpreted and, as it were, newly created would take us far from the essence of what is being discussed; Let's just say that at a certain moment - namely, after the success of Marguerite Long and Jacques Thibaud Competition - a pianist appeared to the world, whose defining quality of being was - protest! He always protests: when he conceives a program and when he plays it: when he appears on the air and when he answers innocent questions in a super- temperamental way. And if he writes an article (it’s a pity that this doesn’t happen often!) You can be calm: absolutely everything will be overthrown; but in the ruins of victory there will certainly be a couple of ideas, facts and circumstances that seemed to be clear to all of you - but why didn’t you notice this? As a pianist, Zhukov should be characterized by the most superlatives. His instrument is clear and articulate behind the instrument; he can do anything. This is achieved not by endless training and, of course, not by learning difficult places. Any puzzling complexity and any inconvenience undertaken by the author are taken apart by him - and then harmoniously combined. The whole is always clear and transparent. It is beautiful not because there is an impulse or inspiration, but because there is a plan, and the task of the performer is to bring it to life. He, the performer, knows no weaknesses, and everything in him is subordinated to the pronunciation of the text. Actually, music for a pianist is a kind of fiery text that is pronounced and serves as an appeal for those who understand and feel! But if you do not belong to them, if signs of misunderstanding are shown, - woe to you: you will not be admitted, and they will not come down to you with explanations! Moreover, the reasons for the poverty of your awareness will be severely diagnosed, and the most derogatory assessments will not keep you waiting! No beauties of style, no moments where you could take a breath, this speech does not provide! The text is uttered as a verdict, and your only way out is in unquestioning obedience to it! Hence - the expulsion of everything non-musical from his musical mystery. He does not gesticulate when playing and does not throw his head back, peering into unknown heights. Gloomy and concentrated, he works on the keyboard swarm - in vain you will wait for the manifestations of any artistic expression. The best that comes as an example is the words of Mandelstam (Osip Mandelstam, Russian poet): "Inspiration is not the whim of a demigod, but the predatory eye of a simple carpenter." (Let's not keep silent here about the fact that for a considerable time - especially during the conductor's time - the musician felt the need to speak literally - that is, to precede the concert with speech messages. With all the costs of speech of a person who is completely devoid of oratory, he was invariably interesting, and one can only regret that many of his preambles did not see the light of day in printed form!). By virtue of all these qualities, and, first of all, performance stability, it is clear that Zhukov recorded a lot - and in Soviet times over forty of his records were released. And there is a real opportunity to assess how competent his speech was. There is not a single area in performance where he would not leave a mark - and this mark is always serious. Fragments of the Bach Sonata were recorded (“why the fragments? They were not written by Bach, why play any third-rate nonsense! And in general - read the literature, everything is written there!”). Transcriptions of the same Bach are being created - do you want to hear the Passacaglia on the piano? Zhukov! Or the organ Frank? He ALSO found a piano life under the same hands! There were a lot of romantics. As in all other repertoire "zones", the pianist went his own way: in addition to the main works, in demand by the listener, Zhukov climbed into rarely played - or almost not Played areas. So, in Schuman, Fantasia in C major appeared - but also Forest Scenes op. 82 (Waldszenen), in Prokofiev - sonatas (especially - 7th and 9th). - but also Children's music op. 65 etc. He was the first Soviet pianist to play - and recorded, of course - 10 sonatas by Scrabin (the recording was timed to coincide with the composer's 100th birthday in 1972). The only one of all he fulfills the author's wish that the Fantasy in B minor should precede the second sonata - the Fantasy Sonata No. 2 op. 19. The cycle was subsequently repeated many times - in the country and abroad, and, as far as is known, this principle is strictly applied. It is important to note that from the very beginning Zhukov declared himself to be a universal musician - refusing the temptation to become a Scriabinist, a Chopinist or something like that. Sonatas of the classics and romantics are played, concertos with an orchestra are played - and here, too, the range is classically wide: Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms (a wonderful recording with G. Rozhdestvensky, one of the pianist's first recordings - together with the Rimsky-Korsakov Concerto - dated 1957), and even Prokofiev and Shostakovich. (Performance of Shostakovich's First Concerto, along with Scriabin's Concerto, in general, should be ranked among the exceptional achievements of the pianist, and his Mozart is interesting not for stylization, but precisely for the modern reading of the Concertos.) Everywhere a clear, serious and stylish playing, without flirting with newfangled trends or exaggerations. Moreover, self-confidence never leaves a musician: he is responsible for his records, he is confident in their quality - and boldly takes them out of the bowels of his vast music library! And now - as soon as you start listening to them, you instantly find yourself captivated by the amazing logic of almost any interpretation of it. (Memory prompts the author of the impression of the unusually convincing performance of Liszt's h-moll Sonata in the 80s: unfortunately, nothing is known about the existence of its recording.) Zhukov also went through the "clave" period: he passed - and consciously left it, considering the artistic task mastered. As a plus - he noted that the harpsichord gives exceptional accuracy of movements ", as an artistic achievement - the development of a whole layer of clavier literature. "Layer" expressed itself, again, in a considerable number of recordings, among which the Royal Concertos of Rameau and Bach's "Musical offering" in its full version, with all the author's remarks possible in this source. An extremely large amount of music was played by the piano trio Igor Zhukov - Grigory Feigin - Valentin Feigin, and here Zhukov performed in both capacities: as a pianist and as a harpsichordist. Three equal-sized musicians played, without exaggeration, a serious and extensive repertoire - Russian and European; there was a sight for all Beethoven trios (four recorded). One can only regret that the growth of "protest moods" finally separated the musicians - for all of us it reduced the opportunity to hear their serious and deep playing. (Among the concrete objects of regret, it is worth mentioning three Medtner violin sonatas, the performance and recording of which were commissioned to Igor Zhukov and Grigory Feigin. The recording did not take place; more precisely, completely different musicians took part in its implementation ... Why guess? I guess the music wouldn't have disappeared, given the records of two different groups!). He completely switched over to the conductor's field, which turned him off "from grand pianism for at least 15 years. That is, he certainly performed, played - mainly abroad, where he is steadfastly in demand, occasionally here ... But the main place in his life was occupied by another instrument: ORCHESTRA! To suggest that Zhukov simply came to an orchestra and headed it is unworthy of our character! We just don't do it that way! (and where are they - these free orchestras?) Of course, the level of difficulties was chosen to be maximum: the orchestra was CREATED. Those who do not have contact with this matter, can't even imagine what it's like to create an orchestra! The simple and correct idea that there should be many, many, and even more orchestras - especially chamber orchestras - does not find a place for itself in our open spaces. Mars may be reached, another peak conquered, the Yenisei blocked once more - but a human life must be put into the creation of a chamber orchestra! Since the idea of ​​bringing together 20 like- minded musicians seems to the authorities not only suspicious - it is also incredibly burdensome for the budget! No money! No money for an orchestra! Never, you hear - NEVER - YES there is no money for these orchestras of yours! And point. Building a skyscraper? In five minutes. Lay a highway? Reverse something? With our pleasure. But there is no money for orchestras. And yet, Zhukov created the orchestra. A good orchestra, to which he gave a simple name: the Moscow Chamber Orchestra (The "Barshaevsky" < Баршаевский > orchestra at that time had the name of the USSR State Chamber Orchestra). And I worked with him for more than a dozen years, doing much and much, which is the topic of a completely different story. And the orchestral period is over, and Igor Zhukov is a pianist again. What is the appearance of the musician now, when yesterday the eighth decade was exchanged and by all standards it would be time to sum up? Is there anything like stability now? And what is Zhukov like now - the same as before, or has the appearance of the musician been enriched with new features? Basically, he is the same. New recordings speak about this unambiguously: he has not lost anything of value. (An eternal reproach to our record companies, for which it has become a virtue to re-release old records. The news is not written - for the same, we believe, thoughtful financial reasons. Not so in the cursed West; here is a short list of companies involved in the Russian pianist Zhukov in the last decade: Telos, A&E, MCA, RCD, Olympia, Live Classic, BMG, Denon! Moreover, the Telos company, for example, promotes such a "relevant" composer for Europe as Medtner!) Of course, he performs what has already been played - but he continues to enrich the repertoire. The amazing clarity of pronunciation has become even more intense - when the piano sounds with its normal, natural sound, enriched by the artist's extraordinary auditory sensitivity (this was so clearly manifested in his conducting experiments!). In Chopin's Fantasy, Schumann's "Waldszenen" - we hear every rustle and every voice separately, but their totality remains crystal clear. The poles of unthinkable contrast turn out to be close - in order to slow down the reflections, say, of the first part of Sonata op. 110 of Beethoven, found its natural resolution in the relief-enlarged tension of the fugue. A new one would be worth a separate study - after almost 30 years! - Recording of Scriabin's Sonatas, made in 2000. Alas, there is no such study, as, in fact, there is no recording itself within our borders: a new one was made in 2000 "there", at the already mentioned company "Telos", - and it is also distributed there! Most recently, Medtner appeared in his repertoire! Moreover, the Sonata in G minor - but also the Caintet, a cadero of sorts, is the quintessence of the composer's work, "The Salutation of Christ to the People" in music, the creation of which in the same way required a considerable part of the life of its creator. He is again busy with his secret work performing with vocalists. Recorded with Natalia Gerasimova - think about it! - fifty romances: 25 each by Glinka and Rachmaninoff. (Despite the fact that neither Glinka nor Rachmaninov are the "main characters" of his repertoire.) His ability to extract from the vocalist opportunities that the singer himself might not have suspected remains unsurpassed: however, the most specific piano part does not turn his tongue, say accompaniment! - grows in importance so much that a well-known romance often changes its appearance beyond recognition! The textbook "Do not sing, beauty, in front of me", often drowning in the vagueness of vocal overcoming, turns out to be almost graphic in terms of the specificity and clarity of the author's intention! Or "Oh. Long will I be", in which the lyrical text is permeated with the polyphonic richness of the accompaniment, which turns an almost everyday sketch into an upbeat romantic poem! Or "Oh no, I beg you, don't go", where two or three precisely placed accents highlight the unexpected intensity of the dramaturgy, which grips you and does not let you breathe… Processuality, eventfulness more and more seizes his thinking, and if we do not always find its triumph, it is only because we SEE the pianist at the stage of some new path, perhaps even not quite clear to him. It seems that there is no talk of any results - he is on the move again. His immediate plans include the release of new recordings of concertos by Mozart (No. 23, A-dur), Shostakovich No. 1, C-dur), Bach (No. 3, D-dur). His F-minor Brahms Sonata opens not with a majestic, romantically excited introduction, but with a majestic hymn that makes one recall the unthinkable statuary quality that Maria Yudina endowed this music with. And the final number of "Waldszenen" turns out not to be the end of a cycle of eight pieces, but a genuine "Last Song", in which both the longing for departure, which the artist constantly thinks about, and the reconciling "Der Dichter spricht" of the great composer, constantly testing the truth of his view of the world. The degree of saturation of his game, his manner of incessant disclosure of the text makes even now to remember the young Zhukov. But now he has become calmer to play, the blazing fire of temperament now warms more than burns. He continues his argument - but, it seems, it becomes clear to him that the object of the dispute is no longer just one! It seems that he asked himself this question: what is important - to refute someone personally or to say the main thing that will remain forever? And he gave an answer to it - in favor of the main thing. When we talk about this, we do not mean innovations in the repertoire - although there are many of them - or some special penetration that can remain an aching note in the hearts of sensitive listeners for many years. We are talking about the ability to raise a large, serious topic in performance, to discover in oneself - and to convey to others - a figurative and intellectual correspondence to that vast world, which is reflected for us in great Music. One of his programs speaks plainly about this. She is laconic and laconic: Scriabin and Chopin, sonatas number two - in the first part, number three - in the second. (The program was played and recorded at the Wigmore Hall on June 18, 1997.) First, we are clearly referring to the controversy between Sofronitsky and Neuhaus: whose weight in the concerto is more significant - Scriabin or Chopin? (1). (1) "Sometimes the ambassador of Scriabin Vladimir Vladimirovich played something virtuoso - Liszt or Debussy And never tired of being surprised: << No, nothing else sounds like the ambassador of Scriabin! >> If the program included Chopin and Scriabin, then Vladimir Vladimirovich, arguing with G.G. Neuhaus confidently played first Chopin, then Scriabin (G.G. Neuhaus believed that Scriabin in this case should be performed before Chopin: "Little Scriabin - on the knees of the big Chopon"). So, once in the museum (of Scriabin) he played 24 Chopin preludes in the first part, in the second - 24 Scriabin preludes, op. eleven. - The ambassador of Scriabin sounds like nothing else! Shiryaeva N.G. In recent years // Memories of Sofronitsky, ed. 2.0. M., Sopot composer, 1982. C. 380-381. Zhukov's choice - genre and Despotism of the "school". (Recall that it was this Sonata that was chosen by Neuhaus as "a criterion for matching the truth of Chopin; the performer's subjectivism was raised to the level of a canon. Those who disagree with the line - even if it was Rachmaninov - were ruthlessly removed from the ship of modernity, and it is difficult to calculate how many mirror-like and inexpressible we got the result!) (2) (2) Here is a verbatim statement of a dubious, to put it mildly, position: "Perhaps, my statement (or rather, direct sensation) will seem paradoxical that Rakhmaninov's performance of his own works or, say, Tchaikovsky's Troika (and many, many others) and, on the other hand, his performance of the b - moll - sonata Chopin (as we know them by recording) are two distinct categories of performing arts. In the first case, there is a complete fusion of the performance with the performed, truthfulness, truthfulness, more truthful than which nothing can be imagined: in the second - the rahmanized Chopin, an emigrant who received such an injection of healthy Russian blood, almost "Zamoskvoretskaya" bravery, that it is sometimes difficult to recognize him after such an operation. But in both cases, the same brilliant, unique pianist plays! I know that many will not agree with me, they will even be offended for Rachmaninoff. What if this is my "irresistible feeling, if you like, - a conviction?" donkey, beautiful and angry. I will not be offended at all if the reader remembers this donkey in connection with my "belief", especially since I will defend it with donkey obstinacy.)" Neuhaus G.G. On the art of piano playing. M., Muzgiz, 1958 p. 255. (First edition, this place was not corrected in subsequent editions). One can rejoice that the degree of protest served such a useful service this time! There are almost no traces of romantic convulsions left in Chopin - and we have before us the theme of fate, pronounced precisely as Theme - the main one in this Sonata, a powerful motive that speaks of the forces that inevitably juggling life and predetermining its end. The words about a new stage in the development of Zhukov, the pianist, were not accidental. All signs speak of ongoing movement. Here - and updating programs, and deepening what has already been said. The unceasing dispute with Gilels continues to this day: repertoire repetitions indicate that the pianist is still trying to "recreate" what he has learned and absorbed. (Take at least the 28th Beethoven sonata or the Medtner Sonata in G minor.) A considerable body of records speaks of THIS - and one could attribute victory to someone in this dispute, if not for one "but": the dispute has long turned into a monologue. The other side remained silent even in life; the more she is silent now. Therefore, we can say: here we have Igor Zhukov, a pianist unlike others and going his own way. Is this good or bad? Let's answer honestly: wherever the pianist is led by music, he is the most serious figure. The opposition turned out to be superfluous - and only because the Opponent has long been gone, the world has changed, and the listener has become completely different ... Understanding the value of artistic expression has remained the lot of singles, to whom few people care. Now they play the piano well (more often - badly!) The dispute about communicators and interpreters is clearly overdue and is almost relic in nature - for lack of, so to speak, the subject of the dispute. In fact, both have disappeared. How important it is not to lose yourself in the resulting loneliness! In fact, the pianist Zhukov himself has long been an opponent of everything that is happening on the musical stage. To all sorts of "Solios and their friends", as well as to the "Masters" with their innumerable "students" who are in a hurry to bring to the stage the Sonata No. 14 they learned yesterday or Musical Moment No. 3! When everything that made up the essence of art, represented by great figures, dissolves before our eyes, is this struggle of heroes appropriate? Let's say to ourselves: he was in our history. He is among us. He plays. He is against everyone again. Is it because he alone is seriously present in our minds? And again and again attracts our attention, our desire to hear it again? Alexander Tsereteli

< Translated using Google Translate >