Thomas Sauer recalls Jorge Bolet
- Blue Pumpkin
- 1 day ago
- 3 min read
Thomas Sauer, a professional musician who is also on the music faculty of Vassar College (Poughkeepsie, New York) and of the Mannes School of Music (NYC), has generously offered some memories of his time with JB at Curtis.
The first thing to note is that I arrived at Curtis at age 16 with a limited repertoire, having played the piano for seven years. In other words, very green. In no way was I deserving of a place in Mr. Bolet's studio. I unquestionably needed a different sort of guidance than he was inclined to provide. All the same, I did my best to internalize his sound and approach to the instrument, storing information for later in my development, so to speak.
In my first couple of years (1982-84), he demonstrated quite often, sometimes passages from the work I had brought to the lesson, other times playing an altogether different work. Needless to say, I had never heard playing like that at close range, nor have I heard it much during the past forty years (he resigned his position in 1986, at the end of what was my fourth year at Curtis).
His primary concern with me was balancing the pianistic texture. I am quite sure that I frustrated him to no end in this respect, as I simply did not possess the pianistic tools to voice textures in the manner that he desired (though I understood clearly what he was after).
His overarching concern with repertoire was that we study an enormous amount of it. He took a dim view of the competition scene in which a young pianist learned a couple of recital programs and concerti, then entered competition after competition with the same repertoire. He typically heard pieces only once in lessons, expecting us to move on to different repertoire for each cycle of lessons. This was very challenging for most of us, and resulted in a couple of students being asked to leave the studio during my time there.
I can say, however, that he had a tremendous ear and memory, and was able to play pieces that he hadn't touched for decades after hearing them once or twice. Undoubtedly there are other pianists capable of this, but I have not met them.
He often spoke of pianists from the past, Rachmaninov, Hofmann and Moiseiwitsch above all. He was not a lover of the Urtext tradition, which of course represented a significant departure from the Curtis of his predecessor, Rudolf Serkin. He spoke of the freedom and imagination of the older tradition, and encouraged us to encounter it via recordings and emulate it.
He rarely discussed his touring with me. He did make clear that he had had many lean years, and seemed to enjoy the recognition that came to him post-1975, but I know next to nothing about any one concert. Re contacts in South America, I know that he was acquainted with Alberto Ginastera. One spring he encouraged my classmate Makoto Ueno and me to learn his first concerto over that summer. I found the prospect utterly overwhelming at that time, and failed to act (which was of course a mistake).
He was quite formal with his students, learning what by today's standards would be a minimal amount about each individual, and in turn divulging little of his own personal life. He was never harsh with me, only rarely losing his patience (despite the abundant opportunities my playing offered him to do so). My sense is that he was a private person, dignified in bearing, and probably difficult to get to know. But again, we were students, and he observed boundaries. I would not be at all surprised to learn that he was a warm and loyal friend to many.
