Interview: Yevgeny Sudbin talks to AllaboutClassical
Yevgeny Sudbin, one of the most interesting young pianists on the scene today, and who had recently received many rave reviews, happily agreed when AllaboutClassical approached him for an interview. The questions were prepared by Bassiouny and Mark from AllaboutClassical, and revolve around his live performances and his studio recordings. Mr. Sudbin also gives us a hint about some of his future recording projects.
Mr. Sudbin, you were hailed by some as one of the most ‘imaginative' performers on the scene; do you think that imagination in a pianist's performance is innate? Or you believe it can be learned?
I don't think it is an "either or" question. It has to be both. I believe every performer has plenty of imagination to begin with but that is not enough. The trick, I think, is to find the creative force to express ideas in a way that is naturally aligned with one's personality. If a creative idea, no matter how brilliant, is alien to the performer's character traits, the listener will be the first to tell that the sincerity isn't there. When it comes to performance, I don't think ideas or emotion can at all be manufactured or even simply imagined. They actually have to be lived through during the performance.
Did your teachers have a role in building your ‘imagination'?
The teacher's role varies depending on the current development cycle of the musician. When you are a child, you absorb everything like a sponge. The gift of a ‘wunderkind' I'd say lies mostly in imitation. There comes a point in time however when you have to make this soup of ideas into your own dish. In my case, I had a wonderful but very persuasive teacher Lyubov Pevsner in St. Petersburg when I was young. Every time I came for a lesson, I couldn't believe the hot-blooded temperament that was gushing from this small person whenever my interpretation differed. She was incredible at chanelling the ‘right' kind of emotion through her unique personality directly into the pupil which often ended in tears (on my part anyway). Honestly, without this friction we had during the lessons, I don't think I would have been able to open up and learn to express ideas properly. But mostly, the ideas and ‘imagination' derived from her and my challenge was to channel them properly the way she intended them, but as time went on, I became more stubborn about what I wanted to do.
Yevgeny Sudbin, born 1980, is now 28.
In Berlin, I had a teacher with an entirely different approach. For example, I was often instructed to come up with a story that would best resemble the emotion of the work that I was playing. It is certainly a very valid approach for some and it definitely puts parts of your imagination to work, but in retrospect, this particular aspect felt to me like putting a cart before the horse. You can enhance the emotional impact of a story with music, but I am not sure it makes sense to do it the other way around. That is not to say that words cannot be used to express an emotion, but I think vocabulary works on a different level altogether. In my view, a musical work paints a thousand pictures (and therefore one million words - if a certain saying is to be believed!).
In London, I had a great mentor, Christopher Elton, also very different from all my other teachers. If I brought a piece without any of my own ideas, it was like trying to cook without ingredients. I noticed that I derived most benefit, when I formed a strong concept about a piece already, so we could discuss, adjust and mould them from something outrageous, into something more coherent. I went through a stage where I had too many ‘interesting' ideas when I felt my playing wasn't distinguishable enough. What I didn't realize at the time was that if you don't have anything to say (musically), you shouldn't force and try to ‘manufacture' an interpretation. You can drill and improve technical challenges but you can't force an emotion, if it isn't there. Anyway, it was a bit of a struggle between keeping the ‘bag of tricks' under control and focus more on the original intentions of the composer more organically.
And as someone who participated and won several competitions; do you think that competitions, with all the fierce rivalry, affect the imagination of our performers today?
If you want to win a competition, you could use your imagination to imagine how the jury members would like you to hear you play. In all seriousness however, I am not convinced piano competitions particularly stimulate imagination in the way they were intended to although it is a generalized observation and it always depends on who is judging. I sometimes felt that the best way to make it to the last round was to slip through each round unnoticed, so that there's as little debate as possible about you. I have often failed at the first round however, but then again I have done very few competitions. I regarded them as a good stimulus to learn new repertoire. Although I do acknowledge that for some, competitions are a vital tool to move forward in career. But the odds are usually against you.
Some also equally blame studio recordings; do you prefer studio work or live performances?
I enjoy recording at least as much as performing. When I play in concert, I often imagine and single out one ‘perfect' listener whom I play for. I can easily reproduce the same situation in the studio. In fact, I don't have to; my producer has much better and more critical ears than most!
Also speaking of live performances: some critics have described your playing as ‘belonging to the Russian school of pianism', what do you think makes the Russian school of pianism so special?
I am not sure what ‘Russian school' refers to. It is a very elusive term as every Russian pianist on the concert stage is so distinct and differs enormously in sound and articulation. It is impossible to distill and classify what makes your playing Russian I think. The ‘Russian piano playing' - whatever that is - is nowadays much more diluted and ‘internationalized' on top of that making it even harder to pinpoint the common traits. Sometimes one can hear students from the same teacher playing incredibly well but very similarly. This is hardly a good thing in my opinion as original thought is what makes people actually listen, whether it comes from a Russian background or not.
So who among the Russian pianists, and they are many, can count as your favorite?
Alive or dead? There are many recordings I admire, depending on repertoire, but they are probably equally split between Russian and non-Russian pianists. I love Moiseiwitsch, Hofmann, Friedman's Chopin, Cziffra, Horowitz, Cliburn, Gilels and Sofronitzky's Scriabin, Rachmaninov - it's impossible to single out anyone. There are much more. Currently, I would travel a long way to hear Sokolov play a concert or Pletnev and Argerich. I also admire many of Stephen Hough's recordings.
Most pianists prefer to choose highly virtuosic repertoire or well-known repertoire in their Debut CDs; don't you think that choosing Scarlatti for a Debut album was kind of a stunt?
Not a stunt, it was more of an experiment. I always loved Scarlatti - of course Horowitz and Pletnev's recordings of Scarlatti are some of my favourites. I always felt that Scarlatti offers almost unlimited expressive possibilities. He can sound entirely different depending on who is playing and there are literally a million qualities one can bring out. I became obsessed with the project at the time and simply spent a month experimenting with colour and voicing. I had such fun with the sonatas at the time.
So how do you choose repertoire for your recording projects Mr. Sudbin?
I go through various phases when I feel the need to play or record a certain composer; I don't really have a system how to pick repertoire. It usually happens spontaneously that I come to like a certain piece. Then I simply see how it fits within a recital programme. I also make sure that there is a balance between known pieces and lesser known pieces (or known composers versus lesser known composers). Although concert organizers often request more ‘standard' repertoire, I try to push (where I can) for more inventive ideas.
One thing that I noticed happens frequently is that I don't necessarily pick repertoire that is very natural to me but rather that poses a challenge and often requires adaptation on my part to suit the piece (rather than picking a piece that suits me). I think it's because I don't really want to feel restricted or end up playing only repertoire that is second nature to m (if there is such a thing)e. Also, it is quite hard to look at yourself objectively and know exactly in advance what kind of repertoire will suit you. Often, I think performers (myself included) have mental images of themselves of what they are like (or more likely, of what they wish they were like) and it doesn't always correspond with reality.
But I also notice that your next albums featured exclusively Russian composers!
That is a coincidence. There was no real planning involved. The only thought that I had in mind was that I wanted to record as varied projects as possible to keep myself intellectually occupied. The composers that followed the Scarlatti album (Rachmaninov, Medtner, Tchaikovsky, Scriabin etc) are all entirely different in styles despite the fact that they are all Russian!
And can I ask you who, from the Russian composers, are your favorites?
I would not possibly be able to say which composer I prefer; I find there are aspects in every composer where I can find room to enjoy certain qualities.
Thank you very much, Mr. Sudbin. In the end, can you give us a hint about some of your future projects?
I am planning to record some Haydn, Beethoven, more Medtner, Chopin and possibly Janáček at some point. Basically, whatever happens to catch my attention.
Thank you again for your time Mr. Sudbin, and I wish you all the luck with your future recording ventures.
