Rather than spending time on the blog, I took a few weeks to interview several figures in the harpsichord world about what it is about the instrument itself that makes them tick. I’m grateful to VAN Magazine in Berlin, for taking these pieces on, as I find many articles and profiles on harpsichordists (including several of my own) to focus on how the instrument it physically approached by human hands, and not necessarily on its autonomy before one sits down to launch into a rendition of the Goldberg Variations.
Robert and Keith Hill graciously explained what it is that makes a harpsichord a harpsichord, not just from a mechanical perspective, but from an acoustical perspective.
Thereafter, I talked to Pierre Hantaï (who himself owns one of Keith’s instruments), about what harpsichordists do with the instrument once they have the right instrument.
Lastly, I skyped one of my favorite harpsichordists, Alina Rotaru. While Robert, Keith and Pierre all talked about the necessity of “historicity” as an aesthetic, Alina talked about the multiple plains on which historicity dwells, both physically and intellectually.
(By the way, placing three articles on this page was intentional, as VAN offers three free articles a month to its readers. If you want to read more…. subscribe! You won’t regret it!)