 |
First of all, we would like to inform the Reader that this page will be updated, Deo favente, according to the Calendar dictated for the 19th International Fr. Chopin Piano Competition. For the moment, therefore, we will limit ourselves to some preliminary remarks concerning the repertoire, some Rules and the Jury. (Anyhow, we advise our Reader to read again what we wrote On the Margins of the XVI International Fr. Chopin Piano Competition of Warsaw, in particular the following chapters: Preliminary qualification, The new piano school, which Chopin longed for, and Programmes.)
The repertoire.
We were shocked to see that the Impromptus, the Rondos, the First Sonata and the Allegro de concert were excluded from the repertoire. Could it be the effect of the Spike protein?
In the previous edition, poor Chopin was given a mask, in this one they go even further: his corpus is mutilated! Are the organizers of the Competition music-cannibals? What is wrong with the Impromptus, the Rondos, the First Sonata and the Allegro de concert? What is wrong is probably in the brain of those who have carried out such mutilation.
Again, the only compositions for piano and orchestra admitted are the two Concertos. Perhaps they do not want the audience to have the chance to appreciate the splendid Variations dedicated to Tytus, the Krakowiak and the Fantasy on Polish Arias?
And let us forget about the choices imposed for the various rounds.
Finally, there is no mention of editions. In the past, space was given to any edition; this time, silence is preferred. Instead, each participant should declare in writing which edition has been used for each piece, since Jurors, not knowing all editions, tend to consider as errors the differences they can perceive between what they hear and the version they have studied.
Rules.
In Article XX.1.e, we read: "(Each Preliminary Round and Competition participant will) permit the Institute to use his/ her artistic performances, interviews, statements and images, in full or in part, to make adaptations, abridged versions, alterations and translations, and declare that such use of them will not be deemed to damage his/ her name; the participant will also grant leave to mark with his/her first and last name his/her artistic performances, statements, interviews and images specified under a) and b) above.”
Well, everyone knows that when entering the world of entertainment by contract, the weaker party is forced to renounce some fundamental rights. Whoever agrees, knows that he is about to enter an infernal pit and, therefore, that is his own lookout!
What, on the other hand, leaves one stunned is the expression “make adaptations” and above all “alterations”... In essence, whoever subscribes to such an unspeakable condition consents to the Institute altering his/her statements so much as to give them a meaning contrary to that expressed in the original version. No sensible person could accept such a condition and no true artist would!
Should we suspect that all participants are willing to suffer all sorts of humiliation, just to show off? If so, none of them would be a real artist, but a mere puppet without dignity,
The Jury.
When we saw the list of the members of the Jury, we felt a deep sense of pity for the most talented participants, because they will almost certainly all be eliminated at the Preliminary Round
None of Jurors applies the principles of the new piano school conceived by Chopin, based on Belcanto and the sound quality. Most of them have played many of Chopin's works, some even all the works, including the Rondos ... , but none of them has demonstrated the ability to sing through the keyboard as some pianists of the past have done; they were all different, but all great pianists, great performers, capable of producing their own sound and making the piano sing.
To assess how well these “outstanding” members of the Jury know Chopin, it would be enough to listen to their performance of the Etude in E flat minor from op. 10, according the metronome indicated by Chopin and without any pedal, as Chopin wanted. The result would be irrefutable proof of how far they are from Chopin.
The irony is that this Etude, which, if performed under the conditions dictated by Chopin, would put the performer to the most difficult test, is considered on a par with a Nocturne; in other words, its intrinsic technical value has never been understood. Whoever succeeds in executing such Etude well, can also tackle the Third Sonata...
However, in the absence of such proof, you can listen to the masterclasses on YouTube, at least those available, of such expert Jurors: you will hear a torrent of useless words, false praise, systematic lies and absolute emptiness, while the naive student, sitting or standing, stays there dazed, with an idiotic smile, nodding in agreement from time to time like a riding horse
We sincerely hope we are wrong, but the premises do not bode well. We shall see, or rather, hear...
(March 3, 2025)
Among the 171 candidates qualified for the elimination round, held between 23 April and 4 May 2025, nine of them did not turn up. Their number was thus reduced to 162. Since 85 candidates were admitted to the competition—19 of whom by virtue of qualifications acquired in other competitions (a regrettable custom) skipped the preliminary round—, from those 162 the jury drew 66 candidates, just as a conjurer draws a rabbit from his top hat. To better understand such a sleight of hand, we have prepared the following very simple table:
In the first column: nationality, as it appears on the list published on the Institute's website;
in the second: number of participants of each nationality;
third: its percentage with reference to the total of 162;
fourth: number of participants eliminated;
fifth: its percentage with reference to the corresponding number in the second column;
sixth: number of participants who skipped the preliminary round;
seventh: number of candidates admitted to the Competition;
eighth: number of competitors (85) divided by nationality;
ninth: its percentage with reference to the total number of 85.
Taking into account the four nationalities with the largest number of participants, i.e. China Japan South Korea and Poland—ruling out the dual nationalities—, we can immediately see that the percentage of eliminated candidates is roughly around 50%, except for South Korea (in red): this is the first statistically problematic result. If we then compare the percentages in the third and last columns, a surprising anomaly jumps to the eye: while the percentages of China (39%-33% approx.) and Japan (12%-14% approx.) are somewhat acceptable, those of South Korea (12%-4% approx.) and Poland (5%-13% approx.) reveal a forcing that is apparently explained by the percentage of South Korean candidates eliminated (89% approx.!). If one considers that the 162 candidates are the result of a selection made from among the applicants, of whom we know nothing, that 89% can hardly be explained. Hence, the data shown in the table acquire a precise meaning, which we can condense into two deductions:
1. candidates from South Korea were judged in a confusedly harsh way; 2. those from Poland were favoured in spite of the quality of their performance; which would seem to be indirectly confirmed by the anomalous number of direct admissions (7).
Everyone knows that all juries in all competitions in the world, whatever the field (music competitions, literary competitions, state tenders, university professorships, etc.) are more or less corrupt depending on the reciprocal blackmail—falsely cordial and politically correct, of course—that jurors are able to exert on each other. But there should be a limit imposed by decency. Our table would seem to show that such a limit has been exceeded.
Now let us go into some details to see if what the percentages suggest is borne out in any way.
South Korea's Juhee Lim, who on 24 April played better than compatriot Kwanwook Lee (admitted), was eliminated. On 26 April, the performance of Y. Prokopowicz (Polish admitted) was slightly inferior to that of J. Park (South Korean eliminated). In truth, both should have been eliminated.
On 27 April, the performance of Zuzanna Sejbuk (Polish admitted) was far inferior to that of Yangyue Qin (Chinese eliminated), and, likewise, the Brazilian I. Rodrigues Uemara, whose performance was not on the whole inferior to that of the Pole, was eliminated. An 'understandable' elimination the latter, scandalous the former. A second scandalous elimination was that of the Chinese Hanwen Shi, who performed on the same day
In the examination on 30 April, Yoonji Yeo (South Korean) together with Ryota Yamazaki of Japan offered the two best performances of the day, but the former was eliminated, the latter admitted together with his compatriot Miki Yamagata, whose performance was inferior to both the South Korean and her compatriot.
On 2 May, the performance of M. Basista (Polish admitted) was not only noticeably inferior to that of Junho Cha (South Korean eliminated, who gave one of the best renditions of the Scherzo Op. 20), but also to that of the Serbian Aćimović in spite of some slowness and almost inaudible pianissimi.
The elimination of Kwan Chai Wong, who presented himself as an 'individual neutral pianist,' cannot be explained except by making embarrassing assumptions; and the elimination of Ul. Khandohi (23 April, Belarusian), who played no less well than D. Khrikuli (Georgian admitted), could perhaps appear as a 'political' elimination. On the other hand, the total absence of participants from Russia is in itself telling.
None of the Poles deserved to be admitted, but, evidently, the seven who skipped the preliminaries were not enough...
Listed here are some surprising or, rather, unfair if not scandalous eliminations: Chinese Zhiqian Lyu (25 April), Chinese Liya Wang (29 April), American Nathaniel Zhang (1 May), Chinese Peida Du (3 May).
As for the Italian candidates, Ruben Micieli's admission was recommended, since a large number of participants, including many of those eliminated, played not only better, but much better. Gabriele Strata is a neat, unpretentious pianist: he is not a virtuoso; his admission is not scandalous, but he certainly cannot hope to win just any prize. We should not be surprised, therefore, if he will be eliminated in the first round, provided, of course, that an extraneous force does not prevail.
In general, the technical level was rather high to the detriment of the interpretetion. From the tragic and despairing expression on the faces of many candidates, it seemed that they had received the news of their mother's death shortly before performing. In any case, Chopin was not present. The Mazurkas were interpreted as Nocturnes, the Nocturnes as funeral marches, the Etudes as empty, insignificant pieces, and the Scherzi as an unavoidable burden. The pianists who tried to understand what they were playing were very few, very few indeed, some of whom were eliminated. It is not unlikely that among those not admitted to the preliminaries were gifted interpreters.
The prize for the best performance of the Mazurkas cannot be awarded; if it will be, it means that the jurors will have moved their ears elsewhere. On the other hand, no wonder, since none of the jurors has ever played a Mazurka with its own rhythm, least of all the longwinded chairman Garrick Ohlsson, as close to Chopin as the winter solstice is to the summer one. Do you want to hear the real rhythm of the Mazurkas? Well, listen to Ignaz Friedman: sometimes he exaggerates, but that is the rhythm. Rhythm, which is not to be confused either with the division of time or with the so-called rubato, is either felt or not felt; it cannot be imitated, as Jean-Marc Luisada tried to do in his collection (DGG 435 760-2); this guy in 1985 won the 5th prize; in that same edition the prize for the best performance of the Mazurkas was awarded to Marc Laforet (2nd prize), a current member of the jury; the 3rd prize was given to Jabłoński, also a current member of the jury. But the 1st prize, in 1985, had to be awarded to Kemal Gekić, who, due to piano bigotry and the dull-mindedness of the jury, received no recognition.
Fortunately, there are those among the 85 competitors who deserve to be rewarded, but the current jury unfortunately is too narrow-minded to be impartial. We must finally confess that we prefer a corrupt but intelligent juror to an obtuse one, because the former knows how far the limits of decency can be moved, the latter always crosses them, not through bad faith but through obtuseness.
Goodbye till October.
[Dorno, May 28, 2025] © Franco Luigi Viero
