Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
40
PawełMajewski
totheoriginalconceptoftheCompetition,accordingtowhichPoleswere
meanttowin.Hecouldnotacceptthefactthattheywerenottheonlywin-
nersthattheotherjurorspointedtointheend52.Hekeptfaithfultothesame
ideasduringthenextChCedition.Moreinterestingly,though,wecansee
howtwokindsofaestheticandsocialtensionsmadethemselvesfeltalready
attheveryoutsetoftheCompetitionhistory–thesametensionsthatwereto
determineitslatercourseformanyeditionstofollow.Thefirstofthesewas
thepresenceofstrongconflictswithinthejury,whichinextremeinstances
ledtosomecontestingmembersleavingthejuryduringtheCompetition.
ThesecondwasthecontrastbetweenGvirtuosity’andGartistry’thatwould
influenceperformanceassessmentmanytimesuntilthepresentday53.The
suggestedthoughneverpreciselydefinedsuperiorityoftheGtrueartist’over
atechnicallyperfectperformerwhootherwisehadnothingimportantto
expressthroughhisorherplaying–wastobecomeoneofthekeycata-
lystsofemotionsemergingduringthesuccessiveChCeditions.Theutopian
visionofaGperfectChopininterpretation’isstronglylinkedtotheopposi-
tionbetweenGablandvirtuoso’andGaninspiredartist’–themoresosince
thehighstandardsmeantthattheparticipantsseldommadesimpletechnical
errors,andiftheydid,theywouldbeeliminatedinstageone.Anyqualitative
gradation(whichwasnecessaryfortheCompetitiontomakesense)there-
forehadtodependonthedistinctionbetweenGthebest’(i.e.theGvirtuosi’)
andGtheevenbetter’(i.e.theGartists’).Thusthebriefpressnotein“IKC”
providesuswithaninsightintooneoftheessentialcharacteristicsofthe
ChopinCompetition.
52InhisbriefsummaryoftheCompetitionin“PolskaZbrojna”(Kilkasłówokonkursie
Chopinowskim[AFewWordsConcerningtheChopinCompetition],“PolskaZbrojna”,2nd
February1927,p.7),musiccriticWładysławFabry(c.1888–1946)claimedthatMichałowski
hadresignedfromthejurybecause“hisownpupil,Ms[MariaMiriam]Bar,wasnotincluded
amongtheselectedeight[finalists].”However,inthesamesentencehestatedwronglythat
Michałowskiwasthejury’schairman,whereasinfactthispostwasfilledbyMaliszewski,and
laterinhisreportheclaimedthatOborin“washailedbythepublicopinionfromtheverystart
asthe1stprizewinner,”whichcontradictsotherreports.ThereforealsoFabry’sinformation
concerningthereasonsforMichałowski’sdecisionmustbeapproachedwithsomecaution,
similarly,infact,asthearticlein“IKC”,whichattributedŚliwiński’sresignationtoartistic
factorsratherthanhishurtambitions,assuggestedbytheothersourcesquotedhere.Fabry’s
reportonthe2ndChCedition,printedin“PolskaZbrojna”,containedsimilarlymisleading
information,suchasthatconcerningarepetitionofthebanonjournalists’assessmentofthe
pianists’performances.
53ThiswasanissuealsocommenteduponbyKarolStromenger:“Theessentialdilemma
inthiscontextiswhichofthecandidatesisartisticallyindependent,matureandproductive
byhim-orherselfasanartist,andwhichisonlyaperfectlyeducatedpupil?Evaluatingthe
performancesfromthispointofviewmayprovethekeytaskforthejurors,andcertainly
themostdifficultone.”(Przeglądmuzyczny[MusicalSurvey],“TygodnikIlustrowany”1927,
No.7,p.138).
