 |
| Fritz Kreisler in 1912, Copyrighted by Aime Dupont |
At ten years old he won a gold medal in Vienna and went to the Paris Conservatoire to continue his studies with Lambert Massart, the most renowned violin professor there (by then in his seventies) who had previously been Wieniawski's teacher.
In 1887, still only twelve years old, he graduated from the conservatoire, sharing first prize with four other violinists, all ten years his senior. In 1889-90 he made a tour of the United States, with pianist Moritz Rosenthal, but then returned to Vienna, and his career changed direction: he began medical studies, and then was obliged to do military service. When this was over, in 1896, he returned to the violin, and auditioned, unsuccessfully, for the Vienna State Opera Orchestra (poor sight-reading is said to be the reason for his failure).
However, two months later he appeared, with great success, as soloist with the same orchestra, under its other guise as the Vienna Philharmonic, and an equally successful appearance in 1889 with the Berlin Philharmonic, conducted by Artur Nikisch, set the seal on his standing as one of the finest violinists of his time.
 |
| ⓒ yourclassical.org |
In 1910 he gave the first performance of the Elgar concerto, with the composer conducting, and about this time made the first of his many gramophone recordings.
At the start of the 1914-18 war, Kreisler was for a brief time in the Austrian army, but was wounded, discharged, and spent the rest of the war years in America. From 1924 to 1934 he lived in Berlin, from 1934-9 in France, and after 1939 made his home in New York. In 1941 he was knocked down crossing Madison Avenue.
This accident affected both his hearing and eyesight, but he did return to violin-playing, making records and giving concerts till 1947.
Kreisler's personality and style emerge from his recordings with exceptional vividness.
He is, above all, a natural and spontaneous player-he can't resist, for example, adding a few little ornaments of his own to the Mendelssohn concerto, nor giving a very personal expressive character to everything he plays- he's almost like a jazz player in the way he uses rubato, subtly lengthening one note, shortening others to communicate a particular emotional quality.
 |
| art.com |
This flexible, spur-of-the-moment impression is allied to a famously warm, appealing tone, when Kreisler began his career, all the older violinists were very sparing in their use of vibrato. (This style can clearly be heard in recordings by such players as Joachim and Arnold Rose). Kreisler was one of the most influential figures in the move to a more intense and expressive sound, playing above all with a much more continuous vibrato than Joachim would have allowed. Nonetheless, Kreisler's sound always retains purity as well as warmth: the lyrical passages in the great violin concertos have surely never sounded more beautiful, the more so because Kreisler always keeps the music flowing.
Indeed, this natural rhythmic flow gives a wonderful sense of the formal design of the great violin concertos.
I think it is NOT common to be as beautiful as water flowing in the world, and yet it is surprisingly rare to realize that water is beautiful. Kreisler's performance is like water. Is that why? Unlike Horowitz, Heifetz or Menuhin, he did not attract the attention of the whole world in the morning. There are many performances that people who are so enchanted by technique can hear. But without more insight, it is hard to be attracted to Kreisler. Critics and audiences with the right eye are always rare, so it took him time to get his true value known.
I think Kreisler was more than an interpretive artist. One senses at each moment that he's a creator, and it's no coincidence that he was perhaps the last great violinist to make extensive use of his own compositions. Most of these are, of course, light works, but they are all highly accomplished in technique (does the purity and strength of the part-writing stem from his early training from Bruckner, I wonder?).
I think it is NOT common to be as beautiful as water flowing in the world, and yet it is surprisingly rare to realize that water is beautiful. Kreisler's performance is like water. Is that why? Unlike Horowitz, Heifetz or Menuhin, he did not attract the attention of the whole world in the morning. There are many performances that people who are so enchanted by technique can hear. But without more insight, it is hard to be attracted to Kreisler. Critics and audiences with the right eye are always rare, so it took him time to get his true value known.
I think Kreisler was more than an interpretive artist. One senses at each moment that he's a creator, and it's no coincidence that he was perhaps the last great violinist to make extensive use of his own compositions. Most of these are, of course, light works, but they are all highly accomplished in technique (does the purity and strength of the part-writing stem from his early training from Bruckner, I wonder?).
 |
| BBC.com |
Kreisler graduated from the Paris Conservatoire when he was 12; he had never had a violin lesson since. So sometimes he was asked if it would be better to study more. He said this:
"I didn't learn it myself, but all the great artists were my teachers; I tried to learn from anyone, if I needed anything, just as bees were picking honey. For me, not only the great performer, but also the great writers and painters were both my teachers."
It is not only learning from a particular teacher, but taking everyone who can be helpful as a teacher, which is a choice for any wise man. I think he was a wise man, before he was a great violinist.
0 댓글