MS: Sandra Carlock, you're an international concert pianist, teacher and lecturer. You've played
many concerts in the UK and the US and your music has been described by critics
as having dazzling tonal range, sureness of style, awesome musical force. How
did it all start?
SC: Well when I was two and half years old, my Mother tells me that I climbed up onto the piano bench and played some of the music that her pupils had been playing. My mother was an organist and a pianist, she taught piano in the home. She was quite terrified by this because she didn’t know what to do about it. I think I would probably have felt the same.
Anyway, she left me to my own devices for about six months and when I was three she
intervened because she didn't want me learning bad habits. So she started to
teach me then. She taught me by ear, by rote, until I was five, at which point
I was learning to read words and she taught me to read music. And I will say
that it wasn’t without some sort of resistance on my part because, at that
point, being able to play anything I wanted just by listening to her play it
first…. Of course, it was wonderful training for my ear and, I think, wonderful
training for my ability to memorize. I remember her bringing a lovely piece of
sheet music home to me, which had a pretty picture on the front, and I said to
her, "Will you play this for me" and her saying "No, I won’t, if
you want to play this piece you will have to read it."
I was very angry and I remember being very manipulative in trying every which-way I could to get her to give in and play
it for me. But she wouldn't - rightly so. I did learn to read, and I did, of course, finally learn to play that piece and felt a great sense of accomplishment.
But, the answer to "when did it all start"
is really that I can't ever remember a time when I couldn't play the piano. So
that actually makes it something that is so integral to who I am. I think
that's quite wonderful in a way.
MS:
Does it give you a sense of destiny?
SC:
Destiny? Yes, I guess
I hadn't thought of it, or put it quite in that way, but it makes me feel as
though there isn't anything else that's more natural for me to do, aside from
of course breathing and walking around the planet and so on.
MS:
We normally assume
that someone who has developed great artistic accomplishment, has had to go
through tremendous sacrifice etc. Has it cost you sacrifice as well?
SC:
Oh, very much so in
lots and lots of ways. But not at that early age. I mean I didn’t want
to deal with the discipline of learning to read music. But, in terms of
learning, I think things - musical things - were very natural as a child and
tended to just flow. It happened, it was something that I just did. It was a
part of me I think. Technical difficulties, the kinds of things that come about
when you are really beginning to work with more difficult literature, that
comes later, but early on it was just something that flowed out of me and it
was just there.
Other kinds of sacrifice came later, though. I
was a very intellectual little kid, and also something of a tomboy. I loved to
climb trees and I loved being outdoors. I was very active but, on the other
hand, I was a tremendous bookworm - reading about all sorts of subjects - and
loved to listen to music. My other passion is animals. So there were lots of
ways in which I found outlets.
But the real sacrifice came around the age of 7
or 8 when I was developing quite a reliable technical equipment at the piano,
and so I was starting to play much more advanced music. And what that meant was
that hours of practice had to happen. I was practicing 4 to 5 hours a day and
keeping up very high academic standards, so there wasn’t much time for what one
would consider normal childhood.
Also, most of my classmates thought I was a bit
of an oddity. And I probably was. There was a lot of pain there, too, because I
wanted very, very much to belong. As I think all children do, I wanted to be a
part of it all. And I just didn’t seem to be able to relate to them. I was much
better at relating to adults. So - that was difficult and painful. Finally my
Mother felt that there were certain kinds of influences that she simply didn’t
want for me. I wasn’t allowed to do lots of things that kids did in those days
- and so my Mother kept me apart from the others. So that was the sacrifice.
These are all areas where the natural growing up process wasn’t there.
On the other hand, my Mother
shaped me in so many ways. She gave me life, nurtured my talents, helped me to
develop an understanding of culture, music and art…helped me learn how to
explore the world and find joy in it.
MS:
Did you have a sense
of somehow controlling this talent you had as a child? Did you feel that you
were being led or that it was yours or what?
SC:
It was mine, I don't
think I had a sense of controlling it, I think I was just being it. I was doing
something that came so naturally and obviously sprang from a very deep part of
myself.
I can give you an image that illustrates this -
that actually sprang out of a very sad experience. A little over a year ago, my
brother and sister and I had to place our mother in a nursing home. Afterwards
we packed up her home. I was going through all her books and music and found
some family photographs that I knew were there but hadn't seen in many, many
years. There were two very early pictures of me, at the piano, as a child of
about two and one-half to three. My legs barely came over the edge of the piano
bench and I couldn't really look straight at the music desk at all. So my head
was tipped way up. I had my hands just moving right straight into the keyboard
as if I were playing Lisztian octaves ... my mouth wide open singing full
throttle. There was such obvious identification and joy. I don't think at that
point I really was playing anything that made terribly much sense but there was
just a feeling of this is who I am - this is what I want to do - this is where
I want to be ... so that was my sense of identification with my music and it
was just natural and no, I wasn't feeling led.
MS:
Since then, have you
reflected on this early ability? Because there is actually no explanation at
all in our genetic theory for how it is that somebody seems to have so much
information already in the system. Have you ever wondered about that?
SC:
I have wondered about
it. My mother of course was a musician. My father was also extremely musical,
and in fact his older brother had been a clarinetist but had unfortunately died
very young but was apparently wonderfully talented. And my grandfather was a
country fiddler - in fact I still have his violin. So I think, when I look back
at all of this, that because there was music and musical inclination in the
family and because my mother used her music as a means of making a living that
it would be very natural for me. And yet, having said that I think I bounded
ahead much more quickly than anyone would have expected me to. In fact, as a
teacher, I know very well that most young children don't have anywhere near
enough fine motor coordination to play an instrument at that age, or if they
do, its a very, very early beginning kind of thing, and they're just working
bit by bit, whereas I was just jumping ahead.
MS:
Lets talk about your
repertoire a bit. When I've looked through your programmes and listened to what
you've recorded, I have come across Bach, Mozart, Haydn, Chopin, Beethoven,
Liszt and Schumann, Mendelssohn, Brahms, Debussy, ... it all seems to be from
the great classical period and later classical period. Do you play modern music
as well?
SC:
I've had the
wonderful experience of playing some contemporary music for the composers
themselves or in their presence and even being able to work on the music with
them as I was preparing it. And that's a wonderful and valuable experience.
However, having said that - Yes, I really feel
that I identify much more strongly with the sort of Bach to - let's say -
Debussy and a bit beyond, but I mustn't forget Prokofiev and Shostakovich and
so on. I do feel a very, very close identification, I think, with Bach, Mozart, Chopin, Brahms.
I feel that I need very much to do that which is
most meaningful to me, so I go in the direction of the works that really
fascinate me and also with which I feel a deep emotional connection.
MS:
Is music all about emotion?
SC:
Oh, I think so. There
might be tons of people who might disagree, but as much as it is about emotion
and the communication of feeling it is not just inspiration. Of course, from
the standpoint of either composer or performer there is an enormous amount of
craftsmanship involved ... so in that way No, it's not all about emotion - but
in terms of what is being communicated, Yes, I think it is.
MS:
You're very much a performance artist, aren't you?
SC:
Yes.
MS:
And I know that you feel that it’s being lost at the moment, the performance art...
SC:
I think that's true
of both the performance art and the art of composition. I think classical music
as we know it is in very grave trouble right now. Part of the problem with
performance art, funnily enough, is the glut of CD's that are on the market.
The recording industry started out to be an absolutely wonderful thing…people
could bring great music right into their homes. Now, however, I think it
affects concert going audiences in that it's easier for them to stay home and
listen, and in some ways perhaps more satisfactory, because they don't have to
sit in either a hot or a cold hall - which may have, or may not have such good
acoustics - and listen to people coughing and pulling off candy wrappers and all
the rest. There's a lot that goes on in live performances that doesn't happen
when you're sitting in your living room at home and listening to CD's. On the
other hand what happens with CD's is that they are quite often very heavily
edited, whole sections dubbed in from different "takes" - which means
you get a kind of "perfection" which might be attractive in some ways
and to some people - but I don't feel is real art and real performance.
MS:
Why is that?
SC:
Well, music was meant
to be performed live. And having just produced my first CD, I am thrilled to
death to be able to give people a copy of my work ... but I think one thing
that is very meaningful to me about that CD is that it was all taken from live
performances from start to finish, with no follow-up editing of any kind. So it
appears just the way you would hear me on the platform in a live
setting.
I think that is exactly the way music was meant
to be heard. The composer obviously works hard through many drafts to produce a
piece of music and that piece of music is then as the composer intends it to be
or as near as he or she can get it to that point. The performer is then left
with the responsibility of bringing that back to life otherwise it would be
imprisoned as a bunch of black dots on white paper. So the performers job is to
understand the composer's intention. That involves knowledge of the style
period during which the composer lived; it involves understanding the musical
language; it involves understanding how the piece was constructed so there is a
sense of continuity and coherence in the performance.
Also inherent in live performances is a sense of
spontaneity - things happen that don't happen in the practice room. In a given
performance situation there is a huge amount of variety possible. This comes
from the type of instrument I'm playing on, it comes from the acoustic of the
hall in which I find myself, what I'm perceiving to be my relationship to the
audience, whether I'm feeling a really wonderful bond with them and a wonderful
connection or whether I'm feeling a bit of a wall somehow....
And risks can be taken that come from a moment
of inspiration ...and if there is a sufficient understanding of the piece those
bits of inspiration are wonderfully enhancing.
MS:
How do you mean - "risks"?
SC:
Well for example with
the timing... how quickly I'm playing or how slowly I'm playing, how much time
it takes me to leap from one part of the keyboard to another let’s say. It's
athletic ... kinesthetic. If you do something just slightly differently, then
it affects the timing - it can be risky. But with that risk comes excitement
and drama.
On my CD for example right now, as proud as I am
of it, let's say that people play it once and then they play it two or three
times, it's always going to be the same. They are always going to hear it in
exactly the same way, whereas if they were to come to hear me play, let's say
the Chopin C sharp minor Scherzo in a concert hall, say three times in a month,
it wouldn't be the same.
And in a studio if you do too much editing - too
much patchwork - then you lose the continuity. You lose the progression
of the piece from beginning to end, which is in fact the strength of the
interpretation ...because the interpretation grows as the structure of the
piece grows and there should be a very close parallelism there. Am I making
sense?
MS:
Yes. So the audience
are, as it were, this exclusive band which is getting this particular
continuity on the piece, which is probably never going to happen again.
SC:
That's right it can't
happen again, as human beings it’s not possible for it to happen again. It’s
going to be different each time. But different within a particular concept
which I’ve developed of a piece of music. And that is art, that is life. Well isn't
it? That's life. There’s all this variety and all this scope.
MS:
You do something
which you call "informance"... can you tell us about that?
SC:
Well, I have to say
that the term comes from Richard Marble, the director of the Georgetown Art
Guild in Washington. He likes very much to present a concert of an hour to an
hour and fifteen minutes which features absolutely serious concert fare but at
the same time features an explanation of the music, discussion of the
performing issues. I mean it really can be anything that the performers want to
talk about that has relevance to the material being played.
You know we were talking a little while ago
about the field of classical music and that audiences are shrinking now. I
think that the idea a lot of presenters have is that if audiences feel that
artists are accessible and that we're not off on another planet somewhere, and
that the music that's called "classical music" is accessible, then
audiences will not fall away and perhaps will even develop. I think this is
very valid. But I certainly don’t think that we should get away from the
traditional type of recital in which the music is left to speak for itself.
MS:
What exactly happens at an informance?
SC:
Well, I might walk
out and sit down and play, then get up and talk about what I had just played,
or I might walk out and talk to people a little bit first about what I am going
to play and then sit down and play. It's whatever I feel fits the music that I
have chosen in the best way. And then, throughout the programme I'll talk to
people about the music and how I go about preparing it - if I sense that is
something that they would like to hear. Sometimes I open the situation up for
questions, although generally I like to leave questions for the end so that it
can be a little more controlled as I move my way through the programme. Then I
can really talk about what I want to talk about and what I feel is pertinent to
that particular programme.
But to get back to the more standard piano
recital or concert - I think of the programme as a structure, just the way the
music within the programme is structured. So, in a sense, the programme can
become a work of art or a composition in its own right. So I think about key
relationships and tempo relationships. I think about composers and periods and
how one thing moves to another and how the whole programme balances. And, if
you're thinking in those terms, then of course you don't want to talk in the
middle of it because you want, not only the music to speak for itself, but you
want the progression from one composition to another to project a kind of
feeling. To project something to people so that they walk away feeling a sense
of the whole as well as the content and the emotional message of the music.
MS:
I asked, when we
first met, whether you had favourite pieces of music and you were quite
definite that you don't have favourites - but you must get a particular sense
of different composers and special feelings about them. No?
SC:
Well, a very
important part of musical interpretation stems from knowledge about the
composer, knowledge about the style period in which the composer was writing.
So, yes, in order to play the music of any composer convincingly I feel I need
to sort of climb into the composer’s head and that really means that the
performer is an actor or an actress. It's like taking on another identity, it's
like becoming someone else, understanding how someone else was thinking and
feeling ... there must be that. I move from one perspective to another, and try
to find out under what circumstances the music was written - and this can give
great depth to my sense of the emotional content of a composition. So in that
way, no, I don’t have favorites as such. I just need to go very deeply into
whatever music I’m playing at the time.
MS:
One composer that you
have been particularly identified with has been Clara Schumann. Tell us about
her.
SC: She was an amazing lady, she was the first
woman pianist to become an internationally famous virtuoso. She was also the
mother of eight children, seven of whom lived. She was the wife of Robert
Schumann, a very loving companion of his for many years - some years even
before they were married - and also a very, very dear friend of Johannes
Brahms. In many ways I think it could be said that she was the soul mate and
muse to both her husband and to Brahms. She was very central to the
tremendously generative and creative period which was the romantic era - right
through to the end of the last century.
One of the things that performers of that time
did was to write their own music as a vehicle for virtuosity. Her father, who
was her teacher, helped her to compose pieces at a very early age. And as she
became closer to Schumann, he encouraged her to write and then later on Brahms
encouraged her to write. So she actually wrote quite a lot of music between the
time when she was an early teenager and her late thirties which was when Robert
died.
MS:
So what drew you to her?
SC:
... Because of my
fascination with her as a pianist. I think any female concert pianist should
relate to her just simply because she beat the path for us …or at least opened
up the possibilities. It was in finding out about Clara as a person and as a
pianist that I began to realise that she had written all this wonderful music.
I was fortunate enough, I think, to find the one complete recording of her solo
piano works at Tower Records back in 1995.
I bought it and came home and sat down at about
seven on a Sunday evening. At twelve midnight I got up. I had listened to all
of it and I was astonished and moved ... really just flabbergasted - that's all
I can say. I had no idea that her music would have such depth and such beauty -
such warmth.
I realised that 1996 would be the 100th
anniversary of her death. So I developed a lecture recital to celebrate that
event. And this is again, a different way of performing - different to a
standard recital or to an “informance.” I discuss Clara’s life and the
influences on her composition and how her composition developed. The
circumstances surrounding each piece of music, the relationship that she and
Robert had through their composing and also she and Brahms. And about half of
the time is spent demonstrating her music. So it's a different way of
presenting music and information about music.
All this has led me to a very strong
identification with Clara, and I think her music is wonderful. She isn't a
Brahms, she isn't a Robert Schumann, she isn't a Chopin. Her music was not
quite on that level but it's wonderful music and audiences respond very
strongly to it. And, because there have been so few well known women composers,
her work needs to be explored and put forward.
MS:
Coming back to
yourself.... Does it matter to you what size audience you are playing for?
SC:
No it really doesn't
... I always remember, years ago when I was in my early twenties, I played a
concert in a little town in North Carolina ... the wonderful comedian, Victor
Borge was playing in the same town, the same night, so of course we had
something of a smaller turnout. This doesn't happen a lot but it has happened.
In fact I once played a concert where there were only four people in the
audience. I played quite happily for those four people and I was delighted -
and actually ended up being invited back later …so ultimately there was a
larger audience.
My feeling is that I have a very strong
responsibility to my audience, and I feel a very definite commitment to the
audience, so I don’t care how many are there. Because the people who have come
are the people who really want to be there. That evening with the four people -
it was a wonderful performance and there was a lovely feeling in the room, a
lovely bond with those people.
That leads me also into other thoughts about the
performer's responsibility to an audience, I think composers have
responsibility as well, but the performer is the middle person really. The
performer is responsible for transmitting the composer’s work of art into sound
and into a coherent performance, which is something we’ve already discussed.
But I feel very strongly about the necessity to do that well.
One of the most difficult things about doing
that, however, is that I have a strong personality and lots of performers do.
In point of fact, to be a performer I think you have to have a strong
personality. So how do you take the composer's music, project it to an
audience, convey the composer's intentions, do this forcefully, dramatically,
sensitively, lyrically ... and at the same time not impose your own personality.
I need to use my personality and its force but without imposing it - and that's
quite a trick.
And another thing about the audience ... there
are times when I've played a piece of music when I don't want applause - that
can sound crazy, but I don't want applause, because I don't want people to feel
that the mood has to be broken because of some sort of expected response from
them. If I feel that I've managed to achieve that sort of a mood then very
often I simply sit with my head bowed over the keyboard and my hands still
there for a long time.
I can feel when people are
with me - and that’s what it’s all about - that’s what you want. On the other
hand, if you’ve played something that is wonderfully exciting and dramatic -
then immediate applause is a kind of release for the audience and that’s
spontaneous and absolutely appropriate. Applause of that sort makes me feel
rewarded. But when applause breaks a mood…I don’t like it, I don’t want it and
I do whatever I can to keep it from happening. I mean…I’m there as the middle
person. So this is all a part of how I see my responsibility to my audiences.
MS:
Recently you had an
unusual performance opportunity in Norway ...?
SC:
Yes, I occasionally
give concerts on cruises and I was on the P & O cruise ship Arcadia. We
went up the west coast of Norway. Bergen was one of our first ports of call,
and it's the former home of the composer Edvard Grieg. My agent arranged for me
to play not just in the little concert hall there - where there is a concert
series - but actually to play on Grieg's own piano in the sitting room of the
villa where he had lived, which has been restored as a memorial to him. I gave
a mini recital for the tour groups that were coming through that morning. It
was an absolutely astonishing and privileged experience. I have played lots and
lots of early pianos but it's not often that one plays an instrument which
belonged to a great composer ... to actually do it in Grieg's own home... I
felt a very strong sense of his presence and I think many of the people there
did as well. Many people told me that they were deeply moved and touched by the
experience. It was a wonderful thing to be able to do.
MS:
In contrast to that,
there was another anecdote from that cruise - something to do with Chopin and a
force eight gale...?
SC:
Oh yes. The Norwegian
sea had several days of almost twenty-four hour sunlight, which was very
exciting and, as we went, many whales traveled with the boat, played games with
us and that was a total delight.
But then we went to Iceland ... and it was about
an hour south of Iceland, on our way down to Cork, Ireland that we ran into a
real north Atlantic gale - a force eight gale - and it stayed a force eight
gale, hardly changing, for forty-eight hours.
Now when I'm on board ship I’ll do anything from
eight to twelve concerts - two in an evening with six completely different
programmes - and my Chopin recital was planned for the first evening of the
gale. I must admit that my primary worry was whether the piano would stay on
the stage or end up in the audience! But the piano was weighted and had brakes
on the wheels, so it sort of moved with the ship and didn't slide around the
stage, so the people who were sitting in the first row of the audience were not
endangered; but obviously playing a piano that's not stationary is a very
different experience; it gives a completely new meaning to performance anxiety
because you start worrying about things that you don't normally have to think
about - such as the piano bounding up and down or dipping wildly from one side
to another. We were talking about technical timing a little while ago ... well
it very much alters that, as you can imagine. I was also talking about
concentrating on feeling the music is coming through me - getting away from
concentration on everyday things ... such as what I had for dinner ... well,
you can imagine what my tummy was doing in the middle of a force eight gale.
MS:
Sandra, the future
... well, how do you see it?
SC:
I've never been
particularly ambitious in the way that a lot of people think of ambition. I
once had people say to me "don't you want to play in all the greatest
halls in the world and don't you want to be known all over the world as a very
famous pianist" and I think I have to say, quite honestly, that if that
were to happen then I suppose it would happen, but it has not been a goal. My
goals have been, I think, much more personal in a sense that I have always
wanted to play the piano as well as I possibly can.
I’ve also always wanted to
communicate the beautiful music that’s written for the piano as well as
possible, in every way that I can, and with a degree of real integrity. I want
to do this very, very well because it is so important to do. Because the music
is deep, wonderful, rich…it’s a reflection of human experience that must be
heard. I want to make audiences love this music as much as I do. I want them to
feel that great music is completely accessible. I have something to share and I
must do that.
You know while we've been talking I've felt I
wanted to come back to that question you asked about suffering. May I?
MS:
Of course.
SC: Well, very often people do think that
creativity requires suffering; and I think what I would say about that, is that
creativity requires, rather, a tremendous breadth of experience. All kinds of
experience can be used.
Something which happened in my own life, was
that thirteen years ago, my husband died very suddenly, and although we had
only been married about four years at the time, I had known him for nine years
in total. I know that something happens when you go through real tragedy - when
you work through something like that.
You know, I talked a little bit earlier about
how performing is a bit like acting and in a sense that sounds almost as though
you're pretending and I suppose when it comes to representing a composer's
point of view, you have to pretend because in many instances composers lived a
long time ago so you can't really know, because you can't speak to them, so in a
way that is pretending.
But the use of everyday experience, the
incorporating of life into one's art and the way in which one expresses
oneself, that I think, is something that everybody does in different ways. The
death of a husband, I can tell you, was tremendously painful and difficult to
go through. Now I obviously know that Kurt did not die so that I could grow -
he clearly had his own agenda there - but I did grow and it's the fact that
I've experienced great pain and also great joy that enables me, I think, to go
back to what we were talking about earlier ... it enables me to look at a piece
of music and to really.... well .... you asked at the very beginning if music
was about communicating emotion - I think it's about communicating experience -
it's about communicating life and obviously an awful lot of that is feeling and
emotion, but the more experience you have had and the more deeply you've felt
it, then the more successfully you can take a work of art, understand what it
is about and go from there.
MS:
Sandra Carlock, thank you very much.