Customer Reviews

Glenn Gould: The Ecstasy and Tragedy of Genius

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(9)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Glenn Gould was, by all accounts, a fascinating and extraordinary man, but difficult to know ; apart from his art, he was renowned for his perceived eccentricity, his reclusiveness, and his wish to keep his private life entirely hidden and separate from his public persona. Various books and endless articles have attempted to present a portrait of Gould, but to my mind, no writer has ever come close to the "essence" of the man; perhaps this is as Gould himself would have wished. His primary mode of communicating with the world was with his music, and music -related writing and broadcasting, and the author of this book makes that very clear. It is mostly concerned with the glorious music, not with Gould's private life, and this is how it should be. But Peter Ostwald, the author, was a doctor and a psychiatrist as well as a gifted musician,(Well, I have read that he was a gifted musician; I've never heard him play!) and does therefore concentrate one one aspect of Gould that he finds interesting and important to understanding the man: his attitude to health, and his emotional state. Gould was, notoriously, considered to be a hypochondriac, although this is not to suggest that his ill-health was imaginary; he did indeed suffer with a number of serious health problems throughout his short life that affected his ability to play the piano. Ostwald considers these, and Goulds mental states, from a medical point of view, although he rather irritatingly does not form any definite conclusions about the roots of Gould's difficulties and does not offer the reader more than a mere suggestion of diagnosis. (there is a brief mention of the possibility that Gould had Asperger's syndrome .... an idea that seems to arouse the wrath of many Gould admirers!) Yet the subject is fascinating, although I feel that some of the personal details given are a little intrusive. But then, Ostwald knew Gould personally.
And therein lies my greatest reservation about this book. Ostwald writes as though he wishes us to believe that he and Gould were very close friends (despite the fact that he is describing a man who, sadly, seems never to have been truly close to anyone outside his family) but this idea is belied by the facts. Ostwald's last meeting with his subject was some years before Gould died: and he mentions that even that meeting took place after a gap of several years. They had some disagreement at this final meeting and it appears that subsequently Gould cut off all communication beteween them. And this , alas, seems to have affected Ostwald's attitude towards his subject; despite the protestations of friendship and admiration, there is an undertone of bitterness and resentment throughout the book that shows in the writing, as of a friend scorned. No; this book certainly does not leave the reader with the impression that the two men were ever truly close. Despite this, though, it is an informative book, and will interest many, especially - but not only! -those who find Gould's music incomparable . But perhaps it is best not to trust all the conclusions that the author draws; when it comes to Glenn Gould, we will probably never know the man's heart.

_

For many reasons Peter Ostwald appears to have borne something of a grudge against Glenn Gould.

There is some explanation for this. For example, at one point, Gould allegedly dismissed Ostwald's earlier biography of Schumann with "why don't you write a book about a really important musician". But this is after Ostwald insults Gould's recording (with Laredo) of the Bach violin and keyboard sonatas.

Additionally, it is true that their friendship cooled over the years, to the point that, in the last five years of Gould's life, they were not in contact at all. Ostwald implies Gould's interest in him was motivated by a desire to mooch off him in a professional capacity, by getting Ostwald, a psychiatrist, to endorse his hypochondriacal excuses for cancelling concerts, and that once Gould understood Ostwald wasn't about to play ball, Gould ended the friendship.

It would be nice if Gould could present his side of the story. The tacit implication is that there could be no other reason for not wishing to be Ostwald's friend. Well, I can think of a few. Ostwald's descriptions of Gould often fairly drip with disdain. It is clear that they disagree on many personal and aesthetic levels. In the end it doesn't seem Ostwald liked Gould much. He has little good to say about his character, or even his recordings. It is hard to see what an enduring friendship was supposed to be based upon.

Ostwald's musical comments are, on occasion, strikingly naive for a music biographer, and in at least one respect grossly in error. For example, he dismisses Gould/Laredo's brilliant recording of the Bach violin sonatas, but praises Gould/Menuhin's recording of the c minor sonata as "a flawless rendition". Objectively, their rendition is anything but "flawless". Menuhin's tone and attack are off throughout the entire piece. But even ignorning Menuhin's technical problems, the musicians don't seem to be in synch interpretively, and their performance is wooden and dull.

When Gould dismisses Mozart's great G minor symphony, Ostwald asks "Had Glenn ever listened to the late viola quartets. How could anyone 'hate' such sublime music?" Well, why evoke the viola quartets after Gould has dismissed K. 550?? Isn't it far harder (or at least as hard) to understand why anyone would hate K. 550?

Ostwald has much company in criticizing Gould's Well Tempered Clavier, but he complains only of Gould's broken chords (a trivial criticism). He then goes on to praise Gould's recording of the Liszt-Beethoven 5th symphony as an example of Gould's ability to "toe the line" and "to play with authentic respect for the composer". But this recording is extremely wayward and eccentric, even for Gould. What could Ostwald have been thinking?

Ostwald does praise both of Gould's studio recordings of the Goldberg variations, and (correctly, IMO) argues that both have their virtues. But he unwittingly diplays shocking ignorance when he remarks on page 318 (re: Monsaingeon's filmed version of the Goldbergs) that "...Glenn's hands are often jittery--see for example variation 17...". This piqued my curiosity, so I popped the DVD in the player for a look. Gould's hands are steady as a rock in variation 17. Again, I had to ask myself what Ostwald was thinking. It then hit me, he must not know the correct number of the variation.... On a hunch I looked at *track* 18 of the DVD. Track 18 is where variation 17 would be found if the DVD began numbering tracks with the opening aria. But there is some biographical footage and a short interview which occupy tracks 1 and 2. Hence, all variations are "off" by 3. The aria is on track 3. Var 1 is on track 4, and so on.... This means track 18 is, in fact, variation 15. Indeed Gould's hands *are* shaking in this variation.

This must seem very trivial, but it isn't. Every student of the Goldbergs must know variation 15 from the others. For one, it is the first of Bach's minor key variations, and it occupies a crucial point in the structure of the Goldbergs (it is the last variation of the first half, before the French "overture"). For Ostwald to get the variation number wrong betrays a startling level of ignorance. Anyone who undertakes a biography of Gould should know these variations forward and back. As trivial as Ostwald's error may seem, it is startlingly telling.

But also any good Gould biographer should at least bring up the possibility that Gould's trembing hands are trembling with a purpose, not uncontrollably. As absurd as it may sound, Gould sometimes applied "vibrato" to the piano keys. He insisted, in typical eccentric fashion, that this had an effect on the sound. This theory is bolstered by the fact that, early on in the variation, Gould, who often (equally absurdly) "conducted" his own performances, brings his left hand up briefly and makes a vibrato gesture, the sort an orchestral conductor would make when he wants more sweetness from the strings. Thus, it seems likely that Gould is applying his trademark "paino vibrato" throughout the variation, especially since his hands, otherwise, seem very steady and controlled.

So why do I give this biography 3 stars? Because it offers some first hand insights which will be important to Gould fans and Scholars, and because the writing is good, not "inapt" as one reviewer puts it below. This is a page turner, and, for someone for whom writing is an avocation or a side line, Peter Ostwald offers lucid, engaging and well-organized prose. Even with its faults, I put this biography above Payzant's but below Friedrich's. I disagree with the reviewer who claims Gould lived without regrets. It is clear he was deeply troubled, and in many ways a tragic figure. Ostwald's biography communicates the "tragedy of genius" very eloquently. Genius need not be tragic, but part of Ostwald's point is to show, using Gould as a case in point, how the level of intensity genius requires can be its own sort of trap.

We are interested in Gould not because of his eerie behavior or his being a paranoid. We are JUST fascinated by his wonderful music. This book gives us some perspective of the psychic state and health of Gould, but it stress too much on them ,regardless the really good music Gould had move us, and it tells too little about how Gould make music, what's the connection between music and Gould, and what the meaning of life to Gould? After reading the book, I get the impression that Gould is but a tragic freak. But I ask myself, where does the music come from? The book tells us nothing. It does help me know Gould the guy, but doesn't help me penetrate into Gould the musician.

I had high hopes for this book, reserving a copy the second I heard of its existance. And though it provided some new perspectives, not on new material. I also felt that while he continued to talk about Gould's ego problems, his writing seemed to reflect some of his own ego problems. One cannot forget his contradictory parenthetical statements about Gould's views, and the amount of himself that can be found in a biography about Gould. Overall, it was a good idea, but not necesarily as well implimented

This book is valuable for many new anecdotes about Gould when he was out of the spotlight. For example there is a description of a night of chamber music playing at a friend of the author's house that displays both Gould's strengths as a musician and his limitations as a social being. For those tired of the endlessly repeated tales about wearing gloves in the summer and eating arrowroot biscuits, this is a refreshing book. I won't comment on the psychobiographical aspects of the book because I don't know anything about psychology, but at the very least, Ostwald was an intelligent man who had experience with psychiatry, music, and Gould, so I think there is some value in what he says. Also, unlike some of the other books about relationships that authors have had with pianists (read: Evenings with Horowitz by David Dubal) Ostwald keeps himself in the background for much of the book. I disagree that Ostwald used the book to get back at Gould. It is admittedly a book based on personal experience, and one of his experiences with Gould was that he was ultimately rejected. Why shouldn't he write about being hurt by this experience? At least he didn't try to cast himself as the most important thing in Gould's life, a la Dubal, and recognizes that any relationship with Gould was tenuous, something that he explores in the book.

This book makes you wonder about the profession of psychology. For example: Glenn Gould calls some of his radio pieces, collages of recorded interviews and conversations, polyphonic. The author alleges that this is evidence Gould is pathologically "out of touch with reality" because "polyphonic" is a musical term, and music requires pitches. Obviously, Gould is using the term "polyphonic" figuratively, but whether or not the term is appropriate should be considered a matter of opinion, not psychological diagnosis. Buy "The Glenn Gould Reader" instead. Let Glenn Gould speak for himself.

Recommended: PENTATONIC SCALES FOR THE JAZZ-ROCK KEYBOARDIST by Jeff Burns.

Probably not, but this is a surprisingly shallow psychobiography of a remarkable musician of enormous attractiveness; Glenn Gould was so gifted one might call him laden, and indeed Ostwald genuinely recognises this extraordinary condition, only to question the idea of such a thing, let alone its value, for the length of the book. Well, it was simply a fact, and for all Gould's self-oppression, it's clear that he lived his extraordinary life as he wished, on his own terms, without regret; and considering the gifts of art left to the world by this magisterial musician, one cannot but admire the whole man, eccentricities and all! In any case, Ostwald was never Gould's shrink, at least not in a professional sense, and who knows, perhaps the author is a better musician than writer. As to Glenn Gould and how much of him is conjured in these pages, there is a great deal more to be said about Gould, but you'll not find much in this book. The writing style is inapt, a reminiscence of sorts but with no warmth, certainly none to match the indelible warmth of its subject; Glenn Gould's artistic legacy remains not only intact, but warm and alive. Though I have read most of Gould's own writings (a worthwhile endeavor, by the way), and a number of compilations including various appreciations of the man, this was the first full-scale biography for me; surely there are others more appropriately seasoned with right perspective. Ostwald doesn't go very deep; one suspects he probed as deep as he was capable, but in the end one is left concerned that not much but the surface was peeled away. Disappointing for us Gould-aholics, but not a complete waste of time.

As a person who suffers from hypochondria, I read this book mostly out of interest in the struggles of a world-class hypochondriac. But I found it more interesting for the glimpses it provides into the much stranger minds and motivations of psychiatrists such as Peter Ostwald and Joseph Stephens.

The book does drip bitterness, in places deteriorating into a disorganized hodgepodge of personal gripes against Gould. But Ostwald goes beyond the typical and easily spotted hatchet job: He often appears to couch his contempt for Gould in arrogant psychiatric digs, some even contradicted by some facts in his book.

I certainly wouldn't want such a `friend' who was discussing me behind my back in clinical terms with another shrinker (Joseph Stephens) who was also pretending to be a friend while instead withholding honest expression and respect essential to any sort of emotional intimacy in favor of trying to surreptitiously fix me!

Even more weirdly, neither Ostwald nor Stephens seems to have a clue that they were using Gould rather than being his friends. Ostwald hilariously hints that if Gould couldn't have real friendships with the likes of him and Stephens, he must have been incapable of friendship with anyone. It seems far more likely, given Gould's keen mind, that he knew the exact score and was in turn simply getting what he could from them, understanding that such deeply dishonest and unperceptive people aren't capable of emotionally intimate relationships.

One of the most bizarre of Ostwald's assumptions is that Gould had little or no insight into his many difficulties with hypochondria, anxiety, and psychosomatic illnesses - and hence was in desperate need of psychotherapy. However Gould's own writing and other published statements reveal many subtly and imaginatively expressed ideas indicating a rich perspective into his quirks and problems.

By luring in musically oriented psychiatrists, apparently Gould was able not only to get a constantly available free supply of medical reassurance (very handy for a constantly medically anxious person), but was also able to in effect charm and control `the enemy' - those he knew were eager to plaster him with nasty psychiatric opinions, just as these two sneaky, gutless `friends' have done after his death. And I cannot help but suspect that Gould also may have enjoyed a heightened sense of control from observing how effortlessly he could hide in plain sight from members of the supposed `mental health god class.'

I enjoyed Ostwald's book on Schumann so much that I was really looking forward to this book. Unfortunately, it is something of a disappointment. There is little ecstasy or tragedy in his treatment of Gould. About the only new angle he applied was getting in touch with every doctor that ever treated Gould (and there were a lot of them) to give a more detailed account of his medical and psychiatric history than was available before. Otherwise, he largely rehashes previous ideas and writings about Gould (especially the Otto Friedrich biography). A pity that it did not live up to the standard set by his Schumann biography.

Biography on a dead man by a dead man (published after Gould's
death by the estate of Peter Ostwald). The first 100 pages tell
the story. The isolated and mother-dominated childhood explain a
lot of Gould's eccentric behaviour (the emotional shields, group
phobias, extreme monologues). In fact, the opening chapter which
describes and psychoanalyses Mr Gould's and Mr Ostwald's first long
encounter is the most enlightening of the whole book. Subsequent
chapters which follow from birth to initial fame are well-documented
and humane. The book then falls apart due to loose organisation and
waffled writing (is here where the author died editing?). High hopes
disappointed.