oh come on zkep
You will watch it only to get a sneak pic at da Brew 
I doubt Iām pretty enough for da skep.
Vlad?
Damn Iād forgotten about this thread.
Mine is a young Andrei Platonov. Heās probably my favourite Russian writer with Dostoevsky.
He had a hard life, some of his work was banned, his son sent to a gulag, got tuberculosis, then Platonov got it while taking care of his released son.
Early on he was a true believer in Communism and acted it out. Disillusionment can be a killer though and that made his literature amazing. If you want to try something from him, The Foundation Pit is a great novel. Dark and heavy however.
Well that explains why I couldnāt figure it out!
Thanks, Iām invariably curious whenever you like something esthetic so Iāll put Platonov on my list. Christmas at the earliest though, Iām already reading books which together have almost 8000 pages left in them (all non-fiction).
wow. Youāre comfortable with reading multiple books at once? Itās something I couldnāt do, at least not with fiction (and I wanted to focus on one style at a time). Respect.
Itās since one of them is a huge 10-volume tome on Swedish history. Itās a relatively easy read, but itās good to have something to alternate with during such a long project. Iām at 1611 now, so still ways to go. The others are a book on art history I read in sync with this to get a more vivid feel for their world, a textbook on quantum mechanics since Iām 
enough to think itās fun, and finally Schonbergās Great Pianists book Iām taking up again for the first time since I was in my teens.
So history, art, science & music. Feels like me. 
Thatās clever, to synchronise reading a book that will complement the first and give you a deeper understanding of things. 
Back when I read much more, Iād like to read the authorās work chronologically, to try to get a sense of the person and their development. Even if you start with one of the more well-known works, you can go back and read through in order. I suppose we all do that once we like an artistās work, whether composer or writer or painter.
Sounds good. In another life I used to read quantum mechanics stuff. A favorite book of mine was titled āDoes God Play Dice?ā and another book on quantum realities that seems to have been the inspiration for a Star Trek TNG episode (where Worf kept shifting to different realities).
It was fun picking up the Schonberg Great Pianists book again. The first time I read it I had only heard the more mainstream and recentish pianists going back to Horowitz. Then after many years and having gotten to hear a lot of the historic pianists he mentions, like Godowsky, Friedman, dāAlbert, etc. was a real pleasure. Didnāt always agree with him, but I probably wouldnāt have sought out most of those historical performers had he not piqued my curiosity.
Oh! So you have a background in physics too? The QM stuff is largely to alleviate my inferiority complex as it were. I did (fusion) plasma physics at university, which is this big sinkhole of a topic where literally everything I had read in both physics, mathematics and electrical engineering came together - very much including quantum mechanics - but Iāve never taken an actual course in it. Itās such an iconic topic that I thought Iād read up on it a little. It turns out Iām already familiar with everything in this introduction to it though, but itās still good to check back at it and get it presented in a pedagogical, coherent fashion. Rather unlike the bits and pieces Iāve had to learn - often literally at lunch breaks - as Iāve needed them earlier.
Schonberg is actually really good. I remember he does a few misses later on in the book, but where I am now Iām really impressed by how he brings people from the 1700s and 1800s back to life as it were. Itās a difficult job when you only have written accounts to go by, but for the most part I think heās on point and characterizes them splendidly. One does need to remember that the original version of the book goes back to the 1960s however, and read what he writes about what pianists would or would never do ātodayā in the context of its time. It was true during the time the book was written, but maybe not so much here in 2018. Still, yeah, definitely a good read.
Mine is tacky gay dude with history of sex crime
And also Liberace
Gosh! I havenāt realized until now just what a tasteless profile pic you have haha.
So much subtext on this oneā¦ too lazy to change it now though
[/url]
For me it was more of a youthful fascination with the subject. I was a hardcore math/science guy in high school and continued with it for a couple of years at university, but I think the intensity of study led to burnoutā¦it was no longer fun for me, and after I turned away from it I freed up so much time to study other subjects I had neglected, including music, and life has been more enriched since. I still kept an interest in the sciences and continue to study it, mostly from a policy and economic standpoint, but I do study a little of the technical stuff as well, especially medicine.
On Schonberg, the first time I read his book it was an old edition from like the 70s. Then when I read it again it was the latest edition, and it was fun to see how he changed his opinion somewhat on some of the contemporary pianists. I recall not agreeing much with his takes on Richter/Gilels/Ashkenazy, and a few other instances I canāt remember right now.
I used to read Schonbergās book a lot when I was studying law. Iād go over to the music school library and read it during breaks. It didnāt actually teach me anything about pianists, since I was already quite experienced by then, but I enjoyed some of the anecdotes.
ahahahaha da fuckin TRUMP GHEY-LIB combo
Just noticed they are both feeding the bear a candy cane while holding hands.
Gosh, it would be fun to read the 1963 original. I have the 1987 revision. I donāt remember what he said about SR/EG/VA actually (Liszt is just emerging where I am in the book now), but the misses I recall is that he dismissed some of the most important pianists of the young generation at the time by āPletnev, Sokolov and [bunch of random mofos] have all come and gone without making any particular impressionā, or words to that effect. And he was too harsh on Pachmann of course, IMO anyway. Surprisingly however I remember he liked Pogo, although I also know he recorded his Carnegie recitals at the time which were outstanding so he caught him in good light.
The most annoying thing about the book for me otherwise is that he doesnāt list any sources, though he sometimes mentions them during the narrative. Spohrās memoirs would probably make a pretty interesting read.