Morton Feldman, Judith Wegmann, Andreas Kunz - 2021 - For John Cage

 

ezz-thetics – ezz-thetics 2-1036  382.18MB FLAC

The physical division of For John Cage across two CDs is a practical necessity, but it also creates an unintended threshold inside Morton Feldman’s ninety-minute composition. The first disc ends after 44 minutes; the second resumes for another 46. Nothing in the music behaves like a conventional first and second movement, yet changing discs briefly returns the listener to ordinary time. A hand reaches toward the player, the room becomes noticeable again, and then Judith Wegmann’s piano and Andreas Kunz’s violin reopen the quiet space they had been constructing. The interruption makes the scale of the work tangible. This is not background stillness or an enlarged miniature. It is an environment that must be entered, left and entered again.

Feldman wrote For John Cage in 1982 for violinist Paul Zukofsky and pianist Aki Takahashi, and it was first performed during a concert celebrating Cage’s seventieth birthday. The dedication carries the history of one of twentieth-century music’s most important friendships, but the piece does not attempt a musical portrait of Cage. There are no obvious quotations, jokes or demonstrations of chance procedure. Instead, Feldman seems to consider what Cage made possible for him: a freedom from inherited ideas of development, climax and resolution, and permission to treat sound as something worthy of attention before it becomes part of an argument. Feldman and Cage reached different musical conclusions, but both changed the listener’s relationship with attention.

This 2021 recording gives that attention an unusually spacious acoustic body. Recorded at the Mazzini Stiftung in Grenchen, Switzerland, it places Wegmann at a Bösendorfer 280VC while Kunz plays with a Baroque violin bow. Those details are not decorative specifications. The Bösendorfer possesses a deep, lingering lower register, while the lighter Baroque bow allows Kunz to produce violin tones that can appear without the continuous pressure and polished projection associated with a modern concerto performance. Neither instrument is pushed toward brilliance. Their sounds bloom, hover and withdraw into the room, leaving resonances that sometimes seem nearly as important as the notes that caused them.

Wegmann and Kunz take slightly more than ninety minutes, considerably longer than many recorded performances of the piece. The tempo does not feel stretched for effect. It feels as though each sound has been given enough room to complete its entire physical existence. A piano chord is not finished when the keys are struck, and a violin tone is not limited to the movement of the bow. Both continue changing after their initial appearance. Overtones separate, vibrations weaken, and the surrounding silence slowly absorbs what remains. The performance listens to those changes rather than rushing ahead to replace them.

The opening establishes the work’s materials with deceptive simplicity. Small piano figures are followed by restrained violin responses. Sometimes the order reverses; sometimes the two instruments overlap or briefly seem to occupy the same line. The relationship is conversational, but not in the dramatic sense of two personalities debating. Feldman wanted the instruments to inhabit the same space, almost as though violin and piano were parts of a single composite instrument. Wegmann and Kunz achieve this without sacrificing their differences. The piano has weight, attack and decay. The violin can sustain, bend and alter its pressure from within a note. What joins them is not matching tone color but matching concentration.

Patterns return throughout the piece, although repetition in Feldman is rarely exact enough to become a dependable cycle. A compact figure comes back with one pitch displaced, a pause lengthened, an accent softened or the instrumental roles exchanged. The listener recognizes something without being able to say precisely what has been recognized. Memory begins to operate imperfectly. After forty or sixty minutes, a phrase may feel familiar because it appeared earlier, because it resembles another phrase, or simply because the entire work has taught the ear to recognize its particular shapes. For John Cage gradually becomes its own unstable memory system.

This uncertainty distinguishes the piece from minimalism built upon a clearly audible process. Feldman does not give the listener a machine whose operation can be followed. Nor does he use quietness to create passive serenity. The music contains unease, weight and occasional darkening. Low piano notes can make the room suddenly seem larger and less secure. A violin response may resemble a sigh without becoming an expressionist gesture. Closely spaced pitches create momentary friction, and the musicians sometimes move through stop-and-start passages whose hesitant articulation feels almost physical. The surface remains restrained, but the emotional temperature is continually shifting underneath it.

Kunz’s control is especially important because the violin can too easily introduce theatrical emotion into such exposed writing. He avoids exaggerated vibrato and refuses to turn sustained notes into declarations. His playing can be pale, grainy, tender or slightly resistant, but it never treats Feldman’s fragility as prettiness. The Baroque bow helps give individual tones a finely tapered shape. They enter the acoustic like narrow threads and then meet the heavier strands of Wegmann’s piano. Feldman’s interest in handmade Middle Eastern carpets is often used as a metaphor for his late music, and here it is particularly useful: recurring figures resemble patterns woven from materials whose tiny irregularities keep the design alive.

Wegmann’s performance is equally free from ornamental sensitivity. She does not announce every chord as a precious object. Some sounds arrive almost neutrally, while others carry unexpected depth because of register, spacing or resonance. Her restraint allows the Bösendorfer to speak without turning its richness into Romantic grandeur. Even when a low interval acquires mournful force, she does not underline it. This produces one of the recording’s central paradoxes: the less the musicians insist upon expression, the more emotionally exposed the music becomes.

For John Cage asks for a form of listening that modern life steadily erodes. Its duration cannot be reduced to a few representative minutes because its meaning lies partly in what happens to perception over time. Early in the performance, silence appears to separate events. Later, it becomes part of the same fabric, holding the fading piano, the suspended violin and the listener’s uncertain recollection together. By the end, ninety minutes have passed without a conventional destination being reached. The piece has not told a story, built a monument or delivered a final answer. It has altered the dimensions of the room. Wegmann and Kunz make that alteration feel patient, intimate and complete: two instruments gradually becoming one space, then leaving the listener alone inside it.