SLIDE 7 McCormick cover Thus in her recent book on music competitions, Lisa McCormick shows how on the one hand jurors, agents, and programmers all claim they are looking for a performer with something unique to say, while on the other, al their values in relation to composer, score and Performance tradition, tend towards enforcing conformity. The competition between Performers is thus to conform more strikingly, more persuasively, to be a better cheerleader for the system. And if a performer does play anything significantly differently—and it doesn’t happen often—you can be sure there'llbe a critic there ready to denounce them for narcissism and self-indulgence. Let’s look at the kinds of things critics say about performers. Gramophone magazine is good for this, because it encapsulates beliefs about proper performance over almost 100 years. SLIDE 8, ‘Mannerism’ proves to be a key accusation in Gramophone. And it’s used to denounce anything a performer does that a reviewer finds unfamiliar and unwelcome, The most admired performers do what's expected but simply more vividly than anyone else. Thus Alfred Brendel, Angela Hewitt, Rattle, Abbado, Guilini, Hilary Hahn, Cecilia Bartoli, and so on ‘come out consistently well. People like Schwarzkopf, Fischer-Dieskau, Kennedy, Bernstein are more problematic. And Gould of course. We can get a richer sense of what mannerism means, as a reaction to difference, by looking at some of the words that are used together with it. SLIDE 9 Complaints about mannerism often introduced by accusing the performer of: into m 2- Lurching into m collapses into ~ harde to 2 ~ give way to 2~ spill over into 2 ~ eroded into ~ laps/ing into resorting to - stoops to 2 ~ crosses to 2 ~ pushed over the ded into. Also: resort to, have recourse to. And: Descen crystallize into ~ shade in 3— degenerate/ing into 3 border into 1 - morphed into 2 — ero parade. ow of course the players are not shading into, oF descending into anything: they're not eben meen mmrrare oye gue terzalne geen the ten Hall saat core aecumulating impression, about their changing attention, their responses as they begin to notice features ofa performer's personal style It's the performer who gets the posi pecause anything contributed by the performer conflicts with their belief that agency auld le with the composer alone. So anything thats noticeable, whatever it is, must by srewition be wrong, because the performer should, ideal, be inaudible. It’s not hard to seehow ludicrous that i Imagine expecting the work of an artist to be invisible, so that every fa ; ‘rein and Child came unmediated from God. But that is where music ideology is still stuck. There are so many words re soci wacwes : “mannerism’ that I them by theme. ee SUDE 10 Irritating 22 — tiresome/ing 15 [1963, 4 rash] — distracting 9 — annoying 5 — infuriating 3 (2, 1989] - disturbing 2 — objectionable 1 - trying 1 aggravating 1 ~ distressing 1 [1965] [1965] — disquieting 1 - unsettling 1 - irksome 1 —nasty 1 [OR IN DATE ORDER??] These terms have little to do with the performers and everything to do with the critic. Mannerisms are cited in two contexts: least commonly when the performer descends or lurches or lapses into them, and most commonly when the critic comments that the performer shows a complete lack of mannerism. What's curious about ths is the need the reviewer feels to point to the absence of something that he rarely encounters in the first place. It’s as if his mannerism detector is constantly on, constantly giving him feedback, constantly nagging at him to report its findings. As if somewhere out there is a host of badly intentioned performers struggling to ‘iritate, ‘tire’ ‘distract, ‘annoy’ and ‘infuriate’ him with prickly mannerisms, which only his constant vigilance can keep at bay. What's most striking here is the level of malice that critics find in performers, as if the performer who plays anything at all differently were fundamentally il-intentioned. SLIDE 11 Self-conscious 13 [1939, 1978] - egocentric/egotistic 12 [?, then 1973 RL]- preening. 12 ~ affectation 10 - (self-)indulge 9 [1961, self- 1966, 91x2, 92x2] - self-serving 3 [1999] — vain/ity 2 [both 8M?) ~ narcissism/tic 2 (2, 2001] — posturing 2~ exhibitionism 1 [1957] - self-regarding 2 [1984 not BM] -- draws attention to itself 2 = Disingenuous 2 [?, 04] - pretension 1 Itseems these performers are only annoying the reviewer in order to draw attention to themselves. Thus mannerisms are self-conscious, egocentric, preening, sel-indulgent, sttected, self-serving, vain, narcissistic, posturing, sel-regarding, drawing attention to themselves, disingenuous—in other words, lying, (That last one comes from a reviewer who qealco head of a conservatoire, which should give one pause for thought.) I ind these accusations very shocking, personal, insulting, extraordinarily rude. t seems as if ntunetive performers are playing with no other purpose than to be admired. Is that our snperience of performers? Do they not onthe whole share the critics’ belief that their roles carers the composer? Yet for cits it seems aif even to notice a performer's musical xe sett i tobe affronted by their presumption, thei failure to know their place, their moral failure. NAV