Piotr Anderszewski - Beethoven: Diabelli Variations
Now in his thirties, Anderszewski is at the dangerous stage where he could easily become a cult figure. To have reached that point, of course, says much for the quality of his pianism, which is indeed remarkable and which opens up the full range of interpretative possibilities. He never plays flashily for the sake of it – if anything the presto variations are understated, even to the detriment of the larger design – and like Brendel and Kovacevich, and often just as convincingly, he delights in Beethoven's fantasy and musical quirks. But there are worrying features too. It will be fascinating to see whether Bruno Monsaingeon's forthcoming documentary film of the interpretation will throw light on them.The overall impression is of a great pianist in the making. The theme and first variation are strong-willed and sharply profiled, nicely setting off the subtly voiced second variation (held within an ideal neutral poco allegro tempo and subdued dynamic) and the third, with its beautifully flexible response to the harmony. In Var. 6 Anderszewski finds an appropriately dogged serioso character, with the help of some excellent schoolmasterly trills, and he lends a lovely exploratory feel to the teneramente of Var. 8. After this he takes a significant pause before launching into the pesante e risoluto of Var. 9 at an unusually steady pace; and the presto of Var. 10 is also less hectic than often heard, allowing for a nicely burbling texture. At the other end of the work he rightly sees the three minor-mode Vars. 29-31 as gateways to another world, very nearly sentimentalizing Var. 30 by the sheer breadth of his andante and the freedom of his rubato.Which brings me to the point of debate. Anderszewski seems determined to monumentalize the structure by exceptionally broad tempos for the double-dotted Var. 14 (6'20" to Kovacevich's 5'17") and the Largo, molto espressivo Var. 31 (6'33" to Kovacevich's 5'06"). He may have the ability to sustain them but not, in my book, to make them convincing. At these points, and one or two elsewhere, boldness tips over into mannerism and the interpretation falls apart at the seams. Like Schnabel, therefore, though for different reasons, this cannot be a top recommendation. Yet it should still count as a version from which anyone who wishes to engage seriously with the music would derive great stimulation. Brendel and Kovacevich remain the benchmark interpreters of the Diabellis, the latter getting even further by instinct than his rivals do by calculation. Recording quality is superb, but the booklet essay is poor – unless, that is, you actually prefer whimsical fantasy to basic information.David Fanning--From International Record Review - subscribe now