Head of Int'l Tchaikovsky Competition: on unethical juries, Daniil Trifonov...

[vlhorowitz]

Hi Everyone,

Here is Part II of our recent conversation with the current General Director of the International Tchaikovsky Competition, Richard Rodzinski. In this segment, he elaborates on competition, Daniil Trifonov, and the question of politically-motivated jurors.

Thank you all for reading and have a wonderful weekend!

https://www.examiner.com/article/interview-with-richard-rodzinski-part-ii-1

[marik1]

Hi Everyone,

Here is Part II of our recent conversation with the current General Director of the International Tchaikovsky Competition, Richard Rodzinski. In this segment, he elaborates on competition, Daniil Trifonov, and the question of politically-motivated jurors.

Thank you all for reading and have a wonderful weekend!

https://www.examiner.com/article/interview-with-richard-rodzinski-part-ii-1

I'd respectfully disagree with Mr. Rodzinski sentence: "But I think that the ethical level of the top competitions is generally very high: the Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Cliburn, and the Queen Elisabeth."
 
I am sure Mr. Rodzinski is driven by being "politically correct", but up until the last Competition the Tchaikovsky was highly unethical. It took decades for people to get fed-up--the reason Dorensky was finally thrown out (I wish it happened looooong ago before so many lives and careers were ruined) and set completely new board.

Best, M  

[pytheamateur]

I'd respectfully disagree with Mr. Rodzinski sentence: "But I think that the ethical level of the top competitions is generally very high: the Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Cliburn, and the Queen Elisabeth."
 
I am sure Mr. Rodzinski is driven by being "politically correct", but up until the last Competition the Tchaikovsky was highly unethical. It took decades for people to get fed-up--the reason Dorensky was finally thrown out (I wish it happened looooong ago before so many lives and careers were ruined) and set completely new board.

Best, M  

https://vimeo.com/groups/26641/videos/7338216 https://vimeo.com/groups/26641/videos/7338216 Here's a video about the 1990 Tchaikovsky Competition, in which one piano juror admits that someone attempted to bribe him.

Looking at this competition's past winners, there are certainly some famous names (eg Ashkenazy), but there are also some that have remained relatively obscure.  I wonder whether it has any relationship with the alleged unethical standards of the jury.  It seems to me (or rather I'd like to believe) that if you were an unworthy winner of the Tchaikovsky, you would not go on to have a great career simply by virtue of winning it.  On the contrary, if you were unfairly denied the first prize, you could still make a name for yourself if you had substance.  Perhaps I am being naive.

[marik1]

It is not as simple as that. The real issue was that most of the strongest competitors, which had chance to win, were cut off the 1st or 2nd round and then instead less strong were passed in order not to make a competition for the prospected winners, which were decided even before the competition has started. As far as I can remember, every Tchaikowski Competition had scandal--that was with A. Lapland, A. Sultanov (which surely contributed to his untimely passing), I. Kamenz, and many others.

Best, M

https://vimeo.com/groups/26641/videos/7338216 https://vimeo.com/groups/26641/videos/7338216 Here's a video about the 1990 Tchaikovsky Competition, in which one piano juror admits that someone attempted to bribe him.

Looking at this competition's past winners, there are certainly some famous names (eg Ashkenazy), but there are also some that have remained relatively obscure.  I wonder whether it has any relationship with the alleged unethical standards of the jury.  It seems to me (or rather I'd like to believe) that if you were an unworthy winner of the Tchaikovsky, you would not go on to have a great career simply by virtue of winning it.  On the contrary, if you were unfairly denied the first prize, you could still make a name for yourself if you had substance.  Perhaps I am being naive.

[pts1]

Arguably, the single most famous winner of the Tchaikovsky was Van Cliburn in 1958.

This, of course was during the Cold War with the Sovet Union, which was threatening to be "not so cold" with the entire world seemingly on the verge of nuclear apocalypse.

It was Soviet Premier Nikita Kruschev himself who basically "awarded" Van Cliburn the first prize medal, in that the judges sought his permission.

Cliburn a very charismatic figure, of course, was the very essence of humility, diplomacy, and the "international communicator and diplomat of music as a language and 'olive branch' ", and it was correctly surmised that awarding him the first place prize could only be good for Soviet/American relations.

The rest, as they say, is history, and we will likely never again see such fame and a lasting piano career ever created again so fast and almost out of thin air. 

It is, of course, merely speculation to say that Cliburn's playing alone without his origins from Texas, USA, without his tall good looks, his humility, grace, etc., and without the perfect timing  given the political climate would have resulted in his winning of the most prestigious piano prize at that time.

We simply will never know, but it would seem a bit naive to think Cliburn's extra-musical "assets" both personal and otherwise, had nothing whatsoever to do with his winning.

It really does not matter, however, in that he has exceeded by all measures everything and anything that might have ever been expected of a Tchaikovsky Competition winner, as he remains to this day likely the most famous, inspiring, and influential "pianist/ambassador" in the world with unrivaled accomplishments too numerous and diverse to ennumerate. 

[p2u_]

Arguably, the single most famous winner of the Tchaikovsky was Van Cliburn in 1958.

But that contest was not without scandals, by the way. Van Cliburn's virtuosity was embarrassing for the Soviet jurists. They feared the wrath of Khruschev, who might not understand how they could ever have picked a foreigner as the winner. There's a story that some of the jurists manipulated the scores so that it would appear as if nothing "illegal" was happening. BUT... One of the jury members was Sviatoslav Richter. He hated competitions and he hated the system, so he systematically gave 25 points to Van Cliburn, and the rest nothing but zeros. When he was asked for an explanation, he is claimed to have said: "People either make music, or they don't."
He was never invited again on any other jury.

Paul

[pts1]

[quoteBUT... One of the jury members was Sviatoslav Richter. He hated competitions and he hated the system, so he systematically gave 25 points to Van Cliburn, and the rest nothing but zeros. When he was asked for an explanation, he is claimed to have said: "People either make music, or they don't."
He was never invited again on any other jury. ][/quote]

Ha! That's pretty good... and good for Richter!

Just to add to this and the irony, Van Cliburn recently had most of the memorabilia he's been given and collected from all over the world auctioned off for 4.5 Million giving the proceeds to Julliard and the Moscow Conservatory, as I remember.

In a local newspaper interview he said that Kruschev really liked him and took him to this home showing him special attention taking him to venues no American and few Soviets had ever seen.

As a result, the then FBI Director Edgar Hoover became highly suspicious and had Cliburn investigated for his supposed Communist leanings! A prominent US Senator -- a friend of Cliburns father -- eventually convinced Hoover that Cliburn was no more a Communist than the FBI Director himself.

Funny and amazing how things work out.

[marik1]

Ha! That's pretty good... and good for Richter!

Since we are on that, another story about Richter. He was invited to teach at the Moscow Conservatory and in order to get the job he had to submit an application form. They gave him that standard form where was written: "I am (first name, last name) asking you to accept me for a job...". Richter: "Wait a second, this is not me asking you to accept me for a job--this is YOU who is asking me to accept this job". He never worked at the Concervatory...

Everybody new he did not like America. Towards the end of his life when he was already old, ill, and broke (he lived in some hotels and his friends were helping him with money) he was invited to give two concerts in Carnegi hall with unprecedented fee of one million dollars. He declined and instead went for his half a year journey to little towns and villages of Siberia, playing for free. 

Best, M

[pts1]

Everybody new he did not like America. Towards the end of his life when he was already old, ill, and broke (he lived in some hotels and his friends were helping him with money) he was invited to give two concerts in Carnegi hall with unprecedented fee of one million dollars. He declined and instead went for his half a year journey to little towns and villages of Siberia, playing for free. 

Hmmm.... perhaps he found the Carnegie Hall offer offensive in its extravagance and a "selling out" of his values to accept. It would seem obvious that he had little concern for his own comfort.

It's sad, however, that someone of Richter's accomplishment and repute apparently did not have the will, foresight or care to make sure his vast and long career built a nest egg for his declining years.

Contrast this with Horowitz who managed to live a quite comfortable life during his latter years in expensive New York City, wanting for nothing, due to wisely investing his career assets.

[marik1]

Hmmm.... perhaps he found the Carnegie Hall offer offensive in its extravagance and a "selling out" of his values to accept. It would seem obvious that he had little concern for his own comfort.

It's sad, however, that someone of Richter's accomplishment and repute apparently did not have the will, foresight or care to make sure his vast and long career built a nest egg for his declining years.

Contrast this with Horowitz who managed to live a quite comfortable life during his latter years in expensive New York City, wanting for nothing, due to wisely investing his career assets.

Yes, but then I have very hard time imagining Richter saying something like: "There are only Jewish, gay, and bad pianists". It is a well known fact he was completely indifferent to comfort (he used and was happy to sleep at Neuhaus' apartment under piano). He was living in completely different world. The only things he was interested in life were music, art, literature, poetry, walking all over Moscow, and... his own burning ambitions of playing piano.  Materialistic values were foreign to him. He even did not know his own phone number--his reason was: "How can I know it if I never call myself?"

Best, M

[p2u_]

Yes, but then I have very hard time imagining Richter saying something like: "There are only Jewish, gay, and bad pianists".

I remember him quoting: "When people start speaking in words, it is as if God is leaving them." (I forgot the author) That's probably also why he didn't say much and, as a rule, would not give interviews.

Paul

[pytheamateur]

Here's pianist Peter Donohoe's diary during the 1982 Tchaikovsky Competition for your interest:

https://www.peter-donohoe.com/sites/default/files/profile/2672/downloads/tchaikovskycompetition1982new.pdf

[monelle]

Does anyone know whether Cliburn would have won the Tchaikovsky competition without Richter's 25 votes?

[dima_76557]

Does anyone know whether Cliburn would have won the Tchaikovsky competition without Richter's 25 votes?

No, at that time, he simply couldn't have won otherwise. Here is the story with the details:
https://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/09/1117490/-Top-Comments-the-Van-Cliburn-edition

[...]After the first two (of three) rounds, Richter and Gilels started noticing strange voting habits amongst their fellow judges. On the belief that Krushchev would not abide a non-Russian winning the inaugural competition (let alone an American) some judges were deliberately scoring Cliburn lower than other pianists of lesser ability. As a result, Richter gave Cliburn perfect (25) scores in each category, while giving other pianists zeroes. [...]