MANILA, Philippines - The recent concert of Charisse Baldoria at the BDO Francisco Santiago Hall was generally satisfactory. It was difficult, though, to pin it down and be more specific about what made it work or otherwise.

It could be a matter of taste and not whether she did good or bad, for it was obvious she?s much too intelligent to be unreliable at this point in her career. As a technician, she may be one of the more qualified pianists around.
Her interpretation of some of the works that particular evening might have lacked something or other that is way beyond technique. Or, it could have been simply a difference of perspective that is ultimately grounded in choice.

Of course, she knew what the choices were. I can only surmise that she was probably aiming for a cosmopolitan sound. The considerable focus on economy works well for certain pieces. But, generally speaking, there is no definitive criterion for such a sound.

If some critics consider Serkin?s to be cosmopolitan, there is enough contention to prove he might be more than just that. The kind of almost Teutonic seriousness he projected in his performances and recordings was more noticeable than any dubious term about a pianist?s concept of sound. Baldoria was faced with something as basic as that?how to make a preference for economy her own.

The E Major Haydn Sonata was rendered with a sophistication that could be easily mistaken for safe playing. Baldoria?s running notes, phrasing, articulation and whatnot were all in place, not to mention a good deal of virtuosity (in Hanslick?s terms most memorably) which eventually would have to refer to the musician?s responsibility to the music, and hardly to herself.

Restatement

There were a couple of things I might have preferred. For one, she has the tendency to abandon the idea of contrast in three-part forms, or any piece where a return or restatement is expected.

I remember a friend who told me about Barenboim?s London master class on the Beethoven sonatas, where the brilliant pianist quipped about the ensuing difference between playing the statement and the restatement as the fine ontological divide between the present and its transformation?a memory of it.

That I didn?t hear the return of the Menuetto, for example, as a kind of remembering in her version of the Haydn, makes it quite difficult to carry her straightforward rendition a step further. What got lost is the possibility of an event (the statement) to hold within itself a viable past.

Baldoria?s Miroirs was even harder to assess. For the most part, you?d appreciate her decision not to mar the pieces with an uneven concept of time because, quite frankly, it has already become passé to think you can afford not to count when playing the Impressionists. Ravel has an even more clear-cut plan for his rhythms and use of meter (being a classicist and all) compared to Debussy.

The problem was evident in her gravitation toward a type of playing that was matter-of-fact, and ending there, without compromises. But one thing a musician cannot possibly compromise in an impressionistic work is ?the awareness of sensation.?

The art critic James Rubin, in his book on Manet, recounted the destruction of the monocular model of vision during the 19th century in favor of binocularity. Baldoria missed this dynamic quality of aural images at play in Ravel?s ?Miroirs??not absolute visual representations but ?competent approximations.?

Limited range

Her performance of Scriabin?s G-Sharp Minor Sonata was exciting enough even with her limited dynamic range. The Presto movement (which is more or less one of those unsettling final movements like the Precipitato in Prokofiev?s 7th Sonata or Ginastera?s ?Ruvido ed Ostinato?) was rendered with a rhythmic vitality and pacing that was well-spaced, making the buildup a gratifying experience.

Baldoria?s Op. 116 was reminiscent of those pianists who believed that Brahms was supposed to be played as simply as possible, in stark contrast to his rich, orchestral piano writing. This may ultimately be an acquired taste for most people.

Personally I believe she made a rather interesting deviation from what most pianists, at least local ones, have done with Brahms. I may not prefer that approach, but her decisions (not only in these pieces but the others before them) were valid and not without thoughtful consideration from an intelligent pianist like herself.

At least, she doesn?t make her renditions falsely interesting through exaggerated means. In the first place, she need not to.