>> From the Library of
Congress in Washington, D.C.
[ Pause ]
>> Good evening.
I'm Anne McLean from the
Library's Music Division.
I'm delighted to be hosting the
entire St. Lawrence String Quartet,
Geoff Nuttall and Mark Fewer,
violins; Lesley Robertson, viola;
and Christopher Constance a cello.
And also pianist Podgy Muzijevic
for our pre- concert talk tonight.
Welcome. This evening opens a
three concert residency project
for the St. Lawrence
here at the Library.
And for each of those concerts
they will be playing our
Stradivarius instruments.
So that's really exciting for us.
And we heard the rehearsal this
afternoon and it sounds sumptuous.
It's a wonderful way for us to share
in celebrating the
quartet's 25th anniversary.
I think serendipitously in a way
your programs here this season
happen to illuminate quite a few
important facets of your career,
your strong involvement with
new music and your relationships
with composers like John
Adams and Osvaldo Golijov,
an abiding curiosity and interest
in unusual repertoire for Podgy
as well, your love of Haydn,
and definition something I now
you are truly passionate about,
your keen desire to
connect with audiences.
We'll come back to
all this in a moment,
but first the [inaudible] question.
So how about those strads?
>> Not bad at all.
Well, as we were discussing the
cello is absolutely magnificent.
I mean it is really one of the
great cellos I think probably
in the world.
It's in magnificent
condition first of all.
I mean just to look at
is really something.
But it has this gigantic
sort of bassey sound.
There's a richness to the
upper register as well.
And the middle register
may be most impressive.
Because sometimes that
the register of a cello
that gets swallowed up a little bit.
But with this particular instrument
I find there's a great not just
projection but sort of interesting
multilayered quality to that sound.
And it's an absolute treat to
have to be able to play it.
And I'm so excited to be coming
back twice more to play it.
>> The truth be told
Chris sounds really good
on his crappy cello as well.
[Laughter] There's a certain
amount of truth to that.
I mean a if a great player
like Chris you can imagine
he sounds really good.
So I think a lot of the joy of
these instruments is the ability --
what it allows the players to do is
as much as how it sounds to you all.
That's an interesting question
and topic of conversation.
But I think the cello sounds
great, but I think it's almost --
well, that would be a test, wouldn't
it which has been happening a lot.
Given him a total piece
of junk Chinese made cello
and he would sound great.
It might not be as
fun for him, though.
>> Now that you've had a little
while to get used to them,
is there anything you're
doing differently,
anything that you consciously
are adjusting?
>> I mean I think a lot of
the adjustments are things
that happen even subconsciously.
You just find yourself drawing the
bow slightly differently or leading
into the string differently
or even vibrating differently.
Because [inaudible]
you have one instrument
that may be a really good
instrument, but you have to work
to some degree to get a
certain sound out of it.
You go to another instrument
like this particular strad
and you don't have to do that kind
of work to get that sound out of it.
Suddenly it frees you up
to focus on other things
and maybe just exploring new colors
which is a fascinating thing.
And to truly have that experience,
and I'm sure you guys could comment
on this as well, two or three days
with an instrument it takes years
to really get to know an instrument.
But the learning curve
is pretty sharp at first.
We discover a lot of
things immediately.
>> It's not entirely dissimilar
to when you're on the road a lot,
even if you're using your own
instrument, every hall is different,
every space is different.
So you kind of have an inborn
sense after so many years of being
on the road that whatever space
you're in you have to from
within have the inner
game shift and change.
The biggest difference for me here
has been just the relationship,
the external relationship
being something I have
to change and shift as well.
But I also find that this
space that we're going to play
in this evening is so live and so
fantastic for these instruments,
it's almost like going to one
of the great violin stores.
I don't know if you
find this, Geoff,
but you can't find a
really great violin store
that doesn't have a really
great resonant space in it
because they want you to buy.
So you go in and try a Stradivarius
anywhere they're never going
to have a bad space to play it
in because they don't
want it to sound bad.
But here the space is so
fantastic we're in a position
where once we get over
that little learning curve
of the externals then the
internal world kicks in again.
It's a joy to play in this space.
I have to tell you for us at
least it's a great experience.
>> Great. Back to the
theme of anniversaries,
this is a shared interest for you
and for us because you're at 25
and we're coming up
on 90 in January.
>> You look great.
[Laughter]
>> We're going to be officially
opening an 18 month celebration
of our 90th anniversary with
your concert in January.
And we have a major, major
celebration with so far eight
and maybe nine commissions.
We're really excited about that.
And the one for you in January,
the St. Lawrence will be --
or the East Coast premier
I should say
of a new work written
for them by John Adams.
The Library is a co-commissioner of
this work along with Stanford Live,
Carnegie, Juilliard an Wigmore Hall.
So we're pretty excited.
And let's talk for a moment, now
that we've mentioned Stanford,
let's talk about what seems
like a remarkably supportive
and warm environment
for you out there.
When did you start
your residency there?
>> We started there in 1998,
and we moved there in 99.
And it's been great.
We love it there.
It's a nice family of colleagues,
great and interested
students, great community.
A lot of people who play,
amateur involvement.
They might not play
at an amateur level,
actually many of them are stunningly
gifted and accomplished but choose
to do other things professionally.
And it's been a really rich
experience for us to be there.
>> The weather's nice, too.
>> You direct the [inaudible]
Seminar there, don't you, Lesley?
>> We have a summer program.
We have an emerging artists program,
emerging [inaudible] program.
We also have a program with
gifted youth which takes place
in the summer, and a couple other
things that we're involved in.
>> Any of you players out there you
can come and hang out at Stanford
for ten days and hear some music.
It's a great mix of --
the concept of music is
that everybody's in
the blender together.
So you have young quartets,
you have old amateurs,
you have young amateurs that just
graduated from Stanford are working
at Google or whatever, and we're
all in this together making music
and learning new [inaudible].
So if you play come and hang out.
>> You talked about, I think Chris
on your blog you said something
about working with ridiculously
intelligent and talented students.
>> Ridiculous in the
most positive way.
>> Exactly, exactly.
I was wondering just how in the
world you managed to design a job
with so much scope for creativity.
You have an amazing range
of things you do there.
>> Yeah, it is.
>> Obviously you say
the beauty of it,
but there was no job
description in many ways.
There was a basic one, but it's more
of a situation of what can you do
to make yourself relevant
to our community
or make yourself indispensable
from our perspective.
>> So we do what we would
consider normal quartet
and residents' activities meaning we
teach private students, we organize
and administer a chamber of
music program for students.
We coach some of those groups.
We perform on campus formally
three times a year at Stanford Live
and then informally at
various other places.
But then we've been able to
expand, and I think it's every sort
of growing and it's
continually flexible
into other programs meaning
we sometimes will do joint
presentations at other schools
and departments on campus.
We've done programs at the
med school and law school
and business school
and various others.
We were working at one point,
maybe we should revive it,
something with the
athletic department.
We met with growing team people.
We though [inaudible] and
rowing and regular music.
And so we keep trying
to come up with --
when I say trying to we
don't want to force it.
We just want to come up
with ideas that seem sort
of naturally interesting.
We have such supportive colleagues
on campus that we don't come
up against very many roadblocks when
we want to get something to happen.
So we can continually
look for these things,
and we'll continue
to find them I think.
>> I think we should stress, too,
that like one of the coolest things
about teaching and
working at Stanford is
that very rarely anybody
gets out of there and wants
to become a professional musician.
So the idea of teaching people who
are going to go out in the world
and hopefully take a love of
music and continue to play.
But it's a totally different animal
when you're training
someone at conservatory.
To get somebody to performance
degree even from the great schools
in the country, Curtis, Juilliard,
the chances of actually earning a
living doing what you really want
to do are very slim.
So it's a whole different animal.
And it's a joy to teach people who
are going to be audience members
and amateur players
rather than trying to get
that second tier orchestra
job at the back of the second
and struggle the rest
of their lives.
So it's a real -- and a lot
of the kids are very gifted.
But they have no preconceived
notions about I'm going
to make a living doing this.
I'm going to be a doctor or an
engineer and I work at Facebook
and I play [inaudible] for fun in
my spare time which is very cool.
>> There's still a
vetting process, though.
I mean we don't take just
anybody who walks in the door.
We will have them audition, and
they have to be at a certain level
for them to be able to
come into the music school
and for us to teach them.
So there is still a level there.
But, yeah, I think the idea that
they're coming in with a love
of the art that is not
necessarily their primary focus,
but they see very well that they
gain a great benefit from it
as a part of their lives
that's really a great thing.
>> And you have really
major composers out there,
too, very significant ones.
I've been following some of
your music in the [inaudible],
symposia things that you do.
We had a similar symposium here.
And two of the people that
are on your faculty are people
that we've been associated recently
in our Technofile [phonetic] series.
One is Mark Applebaum who came
here last year to give a lecture
with Gowan [phonetic] and
did this amazing performance.
I've forgotten the
name of the piece,
but it's a performance piece
he does seated himself.
>> It's called Aphasia.
>> Aphasia, that's it.
It was incredible.
So this was a part of a
double header lecture.
And also Gowan spoke
about technology.
And then this year we are going
to be presenting a professor
that you have worked with who
has written a work for you,
a new one, Jonathan Berger.
In fact, you've had
several pieces from him.
Podgy, this is very much involving
you because this piece that --
well, one of the pieces that I
was looking into was Theotokia.
And we'd like to try and play it.
We have a clip which I apologize
has an old picture of you.
I hope it will play.
But anyway, for a moment I will
just say while we're cuing this
up that Jonathan Berger is going
to be giving a lecture here December
10th called the Aesthetics of Data
which is pretty wonky
kind of a title.
But [inaudible].
And, yes, that's the piece.
Wonderful, yeah.
We'll play just an excerpt.
>> From the Library of
Congress in Washington, D.C.
[ Pause ]
[ Music ]
>> So tell us about this work.
It's kind of fascinating.
>> Well, that was Podgy [inaudible].
>> Hello everybody.
So let me talk now.
So, yeah, this is a piece that we
premiered at the Spaletto [phonetic]
with Don Upshaw [phonetic]
and five of us.
And then it had another life as
a staged opera with more players.
And what I find interesting
about Jonathan who lives a lot
in the computer world
that he to me is weirdly,
which you would not expect,
among the more humane composers
that actually he can write a
tune which is an odd combination
of somebody who lives with
computers and then he writes a tune.
And you think, hmm,
that's kind of cool.
So I've enjoyed -- I've
played another piece
for the reopening of
Buck Street Theater.
But I just want to back
up as I've been sort
of a lucky witness occasionally
to their Stanford life
including the seminar.
The first time I came to the seminar
I said that the collective IQ
of the fellows was higher
than our national debt.
So it's an incredible
combination of forces there.
But what I have to commend then is
that they truly enable whole
generations of music lovers
which really goes to
their passion for music
and their commitment
in the community.
And that's exactly
what Lesley said is
that they've really created
this situation for themselves
in a most creative way rather
than just saying, okay,
this many hours we're going to this.
Always thinking what else can we do
and how else can we be integrated.
And, of course, the
response has been amazing.
So every time I've
been there to play all
of these people come to concerts.
There are 30 to 50 middle
fixed income, six figure income
that we all search
for they're all there
in the concert hall
where these guys play.
So it's pretty remarkable
in that sense.
>> And now this is
part of a larger piece.
Is it Visitation is the name of it?
>> Yeah, they're two
operas that we premier.
>> We should mention we just
premiered his new string quartet
called Swallow last week.
>> Wonderful.
>> Our first show at Bing
[phonetic] Concert Hall [inaudible].
Yeah, go check Jonathan out.
He's a really interesting,
brilliant passionate guy.
>> We're looking forward
to bringing him.
The title of that lecture,
the Aesthetics
of Data is kind of daunting.
But when you look at the description
online I think you'll find it
very fascinating.
>> It's just a short breakfast
meeting at Stanford, of course.
>> This is what they do there.
>> So one of the things that you do
at an anniversary is to look back
at your organization, your goals,
your missions, your ideals,
your accomplishments and
evaluating what you started
with and what you have now.
We're enjoying doing that right now.
We're getting ready for our
anniversary looking back at some
of the things that were
done here in the 1920s.
It's kind of fascinating because
they include not only the things
that you would expect, remarkable
string quartets including the
[inaudible] Quartet, the Curtis
[phonetic] Quartet, William Kroll,
I mean major names of course, people
like that, Harold Bauer the pianist
and [inaudible] and on
and on we could talk.
But we find that they
also did early music
which was very unusual
in those days.
[Inaudible] promoted early music
in a very serious way,
and some jazz even.
One of the earlier
concerts included some jazz,
the Nathaniel Shilkret
Orchestra performing music
of W.C. Handy [phonetic].
That was very unusual.
Really cool.
So for the Library
our goals are involved
in maintaining a strong
commitment to free programming,
to diverse programming,
artistry of the highest caliber,
and the importance of
supporting new commissions.
For the St. Lawrence what are
you thinking about these days
as you look at your anniversary?
>> Party, cake and martinis.
>> The string quartet
is not rocket science.
What we were doing 25 years
ago we are doing today.
You try to play great music as well
as you can in spaces that are cool
with people who like
to listen to music.
I mean it hasn't changed at all.
We get paid a little more.
Our manager's here thanks
to David Rowe [phonetic].
But really the thing is I mean I
don't feel a whole lot different.
The remarkable thing is that
we've actually been able to have
like a life, buy a house and have
a family and play string quartets.
Because when you start out --
but it hasn't changed in the way
the Library of Congress has changed.
It's sort of the same.
Hopefully we're better.
That's the other thing with
music which is so cool,
25 years is young for
a string quartet.
So the idea is that you keep
trying to get better and you can.
A tennis player you're done at 34.
As a string player you're in
your prime in your 40s and 50s.
So that's part of the
joy in getting better.
But the actual act you
can't make it better.
I mean you can take a space like
that, you take really great music
and an audience that
likes to listen,
and there's nothing else you can do.
You can't make it better.
I mean you can make it different.
So it's not rocket science.
The celebration is just like an
excuse, A, to have some new pieces
which is sort of cool like
Jonathan writing a new piece.
And, B, you have a few more
parties like Chris said.
But the actual events themselves
are what we were doing 25 years ago.
We just sound better hopefully.
>> I think you sound great.
And we have a perspective on you
because we were looking back on some
of the earlier programs, and we
were noticing you've always had,
of course, this interest in
unusual repertoire which is great,
a lot of pieces that
don't get played so often.
And you played, for example, in 1998
the beautiful [inaudible] sextet
with Miriam Fried and James Toko
which is really hard
for some reason.
That's a gorgeous piece.
But that's one of the
hallmarks of your career is
that you find these fabulous works
and bring them out
or reintroduce them.
And that brings us to
the Amy Beach piece
that we're going to
be hearing tonight.
You really helped to
bring that piece back
in a very serious way, didn't you?
>> Who found that?
You find that Podgy?
>> I think you did.
>> I think you did.
>> We played it with
Podgy many years ago,
I can't remember how many
years ago and we left it.
It was such a great experience.
We were excited to have
another opportunity to play it.
>> You remember we were coaching
in the master class
one time for students.
>> In Arizona I think.
>> I remember we all looked
at each other and thought --
>> Yeah, I was actually asked to
learn it for a concert in New York
with another quartet that will
remain nameless, of course.
No, actually a great quartet.
And I liked it.
I really, really enjoyed it.
And I hope you will, too.
Beach was a very skillful
composer the later half
of the 19th century
and died in 1944.
Very much in romantic tradition,
a little Vagner [phonetic],
a little Frank [phonetic],
very inspired I feel.
Really lots of beautiful moments.
>> It's funny, often when you find a
piece that no one has ever heard of
or is never played it is terrible.
There's a reason it's never.
But every once in a
while you discover things
like the Tweel [phonetic]
[inaudible] there's things
you discover.
It's mysterious why.
And there's certain
aspects of the repertoire
like that whole late French
romantic like [inaudible].
But the [inaudible] quartet and
the piano trio are both tremendous.
You never hear those.
Still we're lucky to this
day parts of the repertoire
that had not been unearthed.
And then there are parts of the
repertoire that should be earthed.
[Laughter]
>> What I find fascinating
is how the sort
of double standards
that we all have.
So we dig out Amy Beach.
And I'm very tempted to stop
myself to say there are many,
many parts of the piece
that are really inspired,
and then there are
some that are not.
But I can say that for
99 percent of the music.
There are a handful
of true masterpieces.
And then there's a lot of music that
we love and other parts we check
out a little bit and we could
live without these eight bars.
But when we have somebody who is not
Schubert then we are sort of ever
so more ready to say,
well, this is [inaudible].
But we just directly accept.
>> And that sort of brings up the --
>> Favorite.
>> We will go there.
But, for instance, when you're
working with Jonathan Berger
and you find moments like
that it doesn't feel right,
it doesn't really work
these eight bars.
Now, of course, Ms. Beach is
long gone so you can't sort of --
>> Well, we tried to reach her but
there's no reception in the halls.
>> There are moments when
you're creating a new work
that the composer says this
doesn't really work, what can we do?
And he says, no, I like it or
you're right or I'll do this.
So Berger there were
five to ten moments
where he cut measures
or added something.
So that's why you wish
you could back in time.
I'm sure Mrs. Beach would
say, oh yeah, you're right.
That's extra, let's just
get rid of that bar.
But we don't have the right to do
that because she's not with us.
>> We don't?
[Laughter]
>> Well, it's really a powerfully --
the word you always hear about
in this piece is rhapsodic.
Every single description, every
program always says rhapsodic.
But you'll find it's a
very beautiful piece.
And I was interested in looking to
see what we had about Mrs. Beach.
We have one of her manuscripts here.
And we actually have
a number of letters
that she wrote to Mrs. Coolidge.
And, interestingly, she was
just three years younger
than Mrs. Coolidge.
Mrs. Coolidge was born in 1864,
and Mrs. Beach was born in 1867.
And they both had some similar
career trajectories or perhaps lack
of a career trajectory from Mrs.
Coolidge before she really got
rolling in her careers
and impresario.
Because both were ladies from
relatively well to do backgrounds,
and women were not
expected or really allowed
to have professional
performing careers.
So Mrs. Beach taught herself.
All the things you read about
here in the biographies say
that she literally taught herself.
And she was not really
allowed, it's a harsh word,
but they didn't want
her to have a teacher.
Mrs. Coolidge, on the other hand,
had excellent musical education all
the way through, was a fine pianist,
and the two women shared
a lot of acquaintances
in the music world and so forth.
For example, according to the
biography they may have met
at the 1893 Columbian
World Exposition
because Mrs. Coolidge was playing
the Shulan [phonetic] concerto there
with Theodore Thomas which
is nothing to sneeze at.
But unfortunately it was her only
public performance of that stature.
It was considered to be
a charity performance.
But, anyway, back quickly to Mrs.
Beach, I looked up some letters,
and I found one where she
thanks her for inviting her
to the first festival
in the Berkshires,
and says what a remarkable
experience.
She thanks her profusely.
And she writes to her also
sending a manuscript of some music.
She says I'm sending my
variations to you with many thanks
for being able to do this.
She says it's seldom that I've
cared so much for anything
of mine as for this composition.
And I cannot help hoping that it
may appeal sufficiently to you
to lead you to suggest it for a
festival performance in Pittsfield.
And then she says it's short.
And she goes on to kind of
promote short is good and so forth.
But, anyway, so there
are these moments here
that the two ladies
coincide in time.
And I wanted to just thank
you for bringing this out.
David, my colleague, was saying
that it was performed as recently
as 1944 I believe you said at the
Phillips collection or in the 40s,
yeah, here in Washington.
But then it went into a long limbo.
>> Yeah, and what I find
actually interesting
about this piece this is a time when
many composers if one is to look
for sort of a general problem
in this time is the length.
People sometimes went on.
And when you say rhapsodically
I would immediately think, oh,
it's the catch phrase that goes on.
It's a very concise piece.
And that's what's kind of remarkable
because at that time that was often
when you go to this late romantic
music and you're like, oh,
and here we are, it's
47 minutes, 53 minutes.
This is actually incredibly -- I
mean she's really edited herself
in a way that's really
disciplined and kind of remarkable
for the language which
was incredibly lush
and beautiful harmonies and
gorgeous melody the second one.
But she could have lingered
and she could have gone on.
She's very actually efficient
in that sense which is rare.
>> And it's tied together,
this strong cyclic form I mean
she copied which I think is great.
Some people disagree, but I love it
when that tremendous first
movement tune comes back and goes
through the movements and
really sums up the whole piece.
It's an amazing moment.
>> Now, you guys really
share a lot of passions.
And I wanted to sort of wrap
up or move towards wrapping
up as we are getting to the
question time by talking with you
about something that I know
is really very much front
and center for all of you.
And that is your extremely
fervent desire to work to engage
with audience, connect
with audiences.
You have a number of remarkable
ways that you go about that.
But let's talk about your passion
for communication and connection.
>> Well, fundamentally that's
what a performance is all about.
And I think it's important
to remind ourselves of that,
but I think all performing people
should remind themselves of that.
We should remind our students of it.
It's one thing to play really,
really well and be studious and get
to know the music and even be very
musical in your playing the piece.
It's another thing to be able
to take that accomplishment
of learning something
well and communicate it
to an audience of people.
And sometimes it's
hard to put your finger
on exactly what one does
to make that happen.
Some people kind of have it in spade
as a natural ability to communicate.
Other people are very introverted
and even uncomfortable trying
to step outside that comfort
zone, that comfort zone being
by yourself playing really well.
So I think it's essential that
we always remind ourselves
that that's important or at least
realize that we're doing it or not.
And what is that thing?
Well, I think it's believing
in what we're doing, trusting,
having confidence, going out
on a limb sometimes more sort
of objectively the idea of
literally talking to audiences,
having a conversation to
sometimes a large degree,
sometimes a small degree.
But being able to connect with the
audience verbally to have a style
of playing that I think is
perhaps physically interesting.
That's a little bit less important.
But so at least the
audience understands
that we're really working to
communicate what it is that we feel
to them as opposed to being sort of
closed up and playing really well.
Again, we can think of
groups, I won't name any,
or people who play really well
but aren't so good at that act
of connecting to audiences.
And I think that also
speaks to the need for there
to be different types
of performances.
I mean there are some performances
that are more formal than others.
It's important to have less
formal opportunities to play
where you can do a lot
of that connection,
the extra musical connection.
We learn, we all did this when
we were just starting to perform,
we'll go do school concerts, do
kiddie concerts, it's essential
that we do kiddie concerts.
But it's not only to
connect with children.
It's to connect with all audiences.
And I think that's what can be very
exciting about chamber music, too,
that it's easy for a small group
of people to unify that connection.
I think in some ways larger
ensembles have a hard time
of it unless you have a conductor
like Michael Tilson Thomas
in San Francisco, for example,
who will frequently just walk
out on stage and start talking
spontaneously to the audience.
>> I saw Norman Lebrecht's
comment about you
that you're the quartet that speaks.
But not just speaks.
It's amazing if you watch their
Haydn discovery videos it's --
I want to ask how you
became so coordinated
as a dramatic troupe
because it's incredible.
Geoff will speak and talk
about Haydn whom he says is
the best, first and only.
I think that was your
comment about it.
And it's a fascinating
video on their website.
But the comments, the
stream of comments
on Normal Lebrecht's Slipped
Disc site went on and on
and on about your abilities.
And, Mark, I know you are
a person of vast interests.
I'm aware of your early music work,
and also you're a jazz player.
Since you've joined the quartet
how do you feel that you've fed
into this and jumped in the middle?
>> Well, I've often said that
this is the only string quartet
in work today that works
like a great jazz ensemble.
There's a depth of listening
that the [inaudible] have,
the immediate attracting to me as a
performer but also to the listener.
There's a real depth in
between the four of us.
And so that is something that you
can only build on if it's there.
The comfort in the silence.
And once you're really comfortable
in that silence, and I'm looking
down there and I'm seeing the
Excelsa [phonetic] String Quartets
sitting right there,
they're on their way
to being incredible comfortable
in their own silence, too.
You were working with them
at Stanford not long ago.
When you're really comfortable in
that silence then the very nature
and the communicative
power of the gesture
that you're committing
to becomes amplified.
That's really the heart of it.
I think the really
great jazz players
and the really great improvisational
baroque players that I've worked
with over the years they
share that same [inaudible].
There's never any need
for one person
to say this is the
only way it can be
and you're going to
have to follow me.
There's actually an inverse
relationship in the listener's ear
when you're in that performance
space where you're really committed
to the moment, when everybody is
committed to whatever is going
to happen and then you do it.
And then sometimes, you know,
when you do that sometimes you
might have a little bit of egg
on your face when it's all done.
But that's totally fine, and
that's part of the experience.
And I think that's one of the ways
in which communicatively this
group is much more effective
as a string quartet than
just about anybody else.
That we commit to that
moment come what may.
So if Geoff falls off
his chair by chance --
>> We'll all fall off our chairs.
>> We'll all fall off our chairs.
[Laughter]
>> Not going to happen.
>> He hasn't done it in at
least 10 or 12 [inaudible].
>> It's been a long time.
It's not the only one
you have, right?
>> Luckily we have a few spares.
>> Oh, gosh.
Well, continuing on from there
I wanted to ask you to react
to a couple things about trends
now in presenting and so forth.
I was reading an interesting
blog earlier this month
from a conductor named
Baldor Branigan [phonetic]
who is associated with the BBC
Symphony and the Britain Symphony
and a number of -- you might have
heard of him, a music conductor
who conducts [inaudible] and a
number of really fine groups.
I was interested to read he talks
about the ten things he
thinks people need to address.
And his blog has attracted more
than 100,000 hits on this subject.
One of these endless dialogues
between various advocates.
But he advises the idea
of bringing cell phones
into a concert hall he says that
people should be allowed silently
to engage on their phone
and tweet about it.
He even thinks they should have
the right to record what they see.
I don't know about that.
But that's a huge issue
copyright-wise.
We don't have to get into that.
But, anyway, that's one of
the things he talks about.
And he talks about clothing
and allowing downloads of music
from the artist before
and afterwards.
I got a kick out of Philip
Kennicott's article mentioning
in a recent article in the New
York Republic that the Cleveland --
New Republic, that the Cleveland
orchestra musicians are now doing
concerts at the Happy Dog bar as a
way to reach out in the community.
So, anyway, what for
you is a balance?
How do you balance
these kinds of issues?
>> You've got to use
your cell phone.
Sort of back to the point
about simplistic, it's basic.
Silence is crucial.
Totally crucial.
The genius of Haydn or any great
composer is often [inaudible]
in the silence.
So I love bars.
>> Not for the drinking.
>> I mean just in general
to hang out.
But it often fails miserably
as a venue for what we do.
And it's super cool.
And there's a trend in that.
And I don't want to sound like
a total old grumpy person,
but it usually sounds terrible
because there's no
silent background.
So that's bad.
National reverb is really important.
So like wooden box with quiet.
That's why cell phones sort of
suck because they often make noise.
I know you don't want to be
stodgy, and that's the whole balance
between making people feel
like they're part of the action
but also having this incredible
- - there's nothing great --
I mean that's why the
opera is so cool.
You go to the opera and there are
3,500 people sitting dead silent
focused all together in
that one incredible moment.
And that is the magic
of live performance,
having everybody connecting
at one moment.
And, again, there's no
substitute for that.
You can't make it cooler than that.
>> There's a balance where it's such
a fine line between people wanting
to feel like if they've paid money
to come hear you play
they have a right
of a certain kind of ownership.
But also there's the hoarder
side of it which is people
like to just collect everything.
And they want to collect
everything they experience
in their lives come what may.
So they'll have the
cell phone out looking
at the dog doing its business in
the morning, oh isn't that cute.
And they do the same thing coming
to a string quartet concert.
It's human habit that completely
goes the wrong direction.
So once you open up that door
and you allow that energy
into the concert space
the silence is gone.
That opportunity of enjoying
what potentially comes
from the silence is over.
And then I'm completely
on Geoff's side with this,
you can't possibly have
an experience that --
>> But I just wonder if it's also
not silence in a sense of vacuum
or submission to something
but silence as a dialogue,
silence as something that's active.
>> People listening actively totally
fills the silence of an empty room.
>> Correct.
But I do think that stodgy and
stiff is something different.
And that's where I think this
gets lost in translation.
It doesn't have to be stodgy.
And if you're one to clap after
the first movement please do.
It's a 20th century invention.
Don't encourage, Chris.
No, and I think it's a mixed media.
There are certain things
that could relax.
And then I agree 100 percent with
Geoff that the first and foremost
of that sound going naturally.
Because the huge difference
and something
that often people forget
is we work acoustically.
And often when you bring especially
younger people they don't really
understand the difference.
It's a fascinating thing
to go to a big opera house
and see one human person
open their mouth and fill
up the 4,000 seat auditorium.
>> It's a freak show.
>> There is if they don't know.
>> Well, every so often
somebody makes a mistake
and some very famous person comes
to the [inaudible] and like,
will do a little song, and I
say I don't need amplification.
You do. It's huge.
So I think there is a lot of
mixed media that some things --
I mean I've read that thing,
I love first [inaudible].
Do not do it on stage please unless
there's an emergency [inaudible].
And there was an [inaudible]
clapping within the movements.
If something ends like
the first movement
of the Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto,
as Liberace always said
I wouldn't dress this way
if I didn't want to be noticed.
If you end that way that
calls for an applause.
[Inaudible] every bit of a symphony.
Please [inaudible] and
then it's vacuum silence.
Why? I mean we know
historically that people clapped
because people inserted
aria between the movement
and of course they clapped.
So that I think it's
a mixed conversation.
But don't tweet.
>> I guess I wanted to
hear your thoughts on this
because it is a mixed conversation
and an ongoing one and so forth.
And to step back to Phil Kennicott
again just for one moment,
he had a fascinating
quick phrase about this.
And he said the orchestral
concert experience is,
in fact, countercultural.
I like that.
Exactly what you're
saying, Geoff about this.
And I think this is maybe
a good time to move forward
and have a chance to have people
in the audience ask
you a few questions.
I know you need to
get onto those strads.
Okay, sir?
>> Could you comment on the
Korngold especially the programming
with the early -- could you
comment on the Korngold piece
and especially the programming
with the early Beethoven?
>> Oh, yeah.
We saw the Korngold manuscript along
with some other Korngold
manuscripts.
It's amazing.
Just so exciting to see.
Well, the Korngold has been
a fascinating piece to us
in the quartet for the last couple
of years that we've been playing it.
The first piece that he wrote after
the conclusion of World War II
when he went back to writing music
for the stage, he refused to do
such a thing and wrote film
scores throughout the entire war
because the Nazis had
banned his music in Europe
and it was a sort of protest.
So it was a very meaningful
piece for him.
Now, we gravitated toward it
because we just liked it a lot.
And also it sort of fits so
well into our general sort
of philosophical sense
of looking for works
that are neglected
that should be played.
Now, how that necessarily ties
to Beethoven I probably
couldn't tell you,
and I don't think that it does.
I think the program just
has a certain balance
by having our early Beethoven
quartet at the beginning
and then giving it as Amy Beach
which is an unexpected gem.
And then ending with another
unexpected gem in the Korngold.
And I think these unexpected
gems are actually so beautiful
and heartfelt and meaningful
that I think we end up hopefully,
we'll see how it all works for you,
we end up with a sort of balance.
But I'm not sure we put our heads
together and said that Korngold
and Beethoven necessarily
complemented
in any sort of deep way.
>> It is an interesting
through line, though,
and a lot of what makes
a string quartet
such an incredible art
form is this through line
from Haydn and then Beethoven.
So Opus [inaudible] was jut Haydn.
The form that Haydn set up is
the same form that Korngold uses.
So you have the juxtaposition
there's a [inaudible],
a slow movement, there's a
finally with koda [phonetic].
There are a lot of similarities
in terms of the structure.
Of course, the musical
language is totally different.
But it's interesting to see that
Korngold was choosing to write
in basically a classical style in
terms of the forms that he used.
So not a form first movement.
So a lot of similarities in
terms of form and then it ends.
>> But I do think while there may
be not a conscious effort it's a
language we speak.
And it's part of your
sort of inner being.
So when you think of programming
and you think how about that,
and you sometimes get a very
visceral reaction that would not go.
So you may not be conscious.
But as you put together
programs you have to say, oh,
that would work for whatever reason.
It's like cooking pork
with dried figs.
>> It's a lot like that.
>> I think you guys picked the
program, the Library people, right?
>> There was back and forth.
But I do think what Podgy said
it's just fundamental what it is.
It's just, oh yeah, these
seem to go well together,
I think we'd have fun
playing these together.
It's not about dramatic
programming in this particular case.
Sometimes we end up doing
that but not all that often.
>> We have a question here.
>> Thank you.
A couple question.
Going back to the Beach and that
sort of period in American music,
have you or are you exploring other
repertoire by American composers
of that era, late 19th,
early 20th century.
This could be piano quintets,
string quartets, piano music.
Are any of you delving
further into that?
And, second question, I
remember reading something
about the various things
you're doing at Stanford.
What are you doing with the
law school, for example?
>> To address the first
question we did actually read
through a few pieces by
perhaps Arthur Foot [phonetic]
and Joy [inaudible] Chadwick.
>> At Stanford, yeah.
There's a whole era that there's
a lot of that music that we --
the question is at what point
do you think it's worthwhile
to present in public?
It's like really fun
to read through.
And the Beach sort of
raised itself above.
Oh, we need to show people this.
A lot of the other stuff
is really fun to play,
but half through you think, hmm, it
might not be so fun to listen to.
So it's always a balance that way.
But there is a lot
of really interesting
and borderline great repertoire.
>> About 25 years ago I explored
a lot of cello piano repertoire
by those same composers
scheming to do a recording
which I never got around to doing.
But there's actually a lot of music
by that collection of composers.
McDowell comes to mind.
And Arthur Foot, I
mentioned Chadwick,
they wrote a significant
amount of stuff.
The question is like
what Geoff said,
hard to tell how much
of it really holds up.
We probably should delve
into it a little bit more.
>> But then the law school.
>> We've done several
programs at the law school.
The biggest one we did
was several years ago,
and it was in collaboration
with four constitutional lawyers
who three of them happened
to be amateur musicians.
We did a collaborative
presentation where we spoke
about [inaudible] intent.
And they looked at
the U.S. Constitution
as their ancient document.
And we used [inaudible] music
as the music original document.
And there were things
about interpretation
and how many differences can
you make or changes can you make
to those documents before you
violate the original meaning.
Things like technological
innovation how does
that change the interpretation
of the document.
And we would do demonstrations.
That was turned into a PBS program.
But we've done other things.
We did a presentation for the class
that teaches negotiation
and conflict resolution.
The teacher came and filmed
one of our rehearsals,
and then they took a three minute
section from the larger rehearsal.
>> That was embarrassing.
>> The art of negotiation
was the class.
That was really -- it is true a
string quartet is sort of that,
so it was an interesting like seeing
your dirty laundry before a bunch
of lawyers.
It was interesting.
>> At least you were
not paying $800 an hour.
>> But [inaudible] and the
Constitution were penned
in the same year, so that
was the obvious tie in there.
>> Anyone else have a question?
>> So returning to the strads
how many exist now in the world?
How many of these Stradivarius
instruments exist?
And it kind of surprises
me that the Library
of Congress has these instruments.
I think of this institution
as doing lots of things,
but collecting instruments,
for example, did not seem to me
to be one of them before tonight.
>> I think they were
forced upon the Library.
We can ask the experts.
I think if somebody comes
forward and says I want
to give you all a bunch of
strads you don't really say no.
I think that's how
it started, right?
I mean am I wrong there?
>> I can speak to that.
>> They were gifted them.
>> I was going to say I can
speak to how we got them.
I can't answer the question of
how many there are in the world.
I think people say 600 violins.
I do know that they say there
were ten authenticated violas.
I can't resist saying
that we're going
to have the St. Lawrence
playing the Mozart string quintet
to show off two of the violas
which we have right here.
That's pretty unusual.
And there are only a few cellos.
>> Not too many.
>> I think 50, about 50.
So that's all I know about that.
But the way the Library acquired
these instruments was the lady whose
picture is on the wall just around
the corner from the door there,
Gertrude Clark Whittall gave them to
the Library between 1935 and 1937.
And she wanted to be a
cultural philanthropist.
She was very interested in music.
She was not a musician.
Her husband was a carpet
manufacturer,
and that's all we know about her.
She had no children,
she had little family,
and her life is very mysterious.
But, anyway, she watched
Mrs. Coolidge's benefactions
to the Library and
this interested her.
So she purchased them with
the help of Louis Krasner
who was a violinist, a very well
known violinist and conductor
of the time, and gave
them to the Library.
So that's the short answer.
>> The first of several
gifts which came afterwards.
>> Which came afterwards.
>> There were more
gifts since then, right.
>> Yes, she gave the
initial number of them.
Then later on in 1954 we acquired
the Fritz Kreisler [inaudible]
which is a treasure, and it's
probably over there right now.
We have the Brookings Amadi
[phonetic] which is going
to be refurbished this fall
which is a stunning instrument.
And we have the Tuscan
[inaudible] on loan to us
from the Baird [phonetic] family
from the Tuscan Corporation.
So we're very, very, very fortunate.
And it takes major
artists like these
to make them do what
they can do best,
bring joy really in music making.
Anybody else have a question?
Okay, well, we thank you so
much for taking the time.
[Applause]
>> This has been a presentation
of the Library of Congress.
Visit us at loc.gov.