Gabriela Montero at Spivey Hall: Contrast, Continuity, and Control

 

Gabriela Montero at Spivey Hall: Contrast, Continuity, and Control

Spivey Hall continues its survey of the world’s leading pianists with an appearance by an appearance by Gabriela Montero, the Venezuelan-born pianist whose career, like those of several composers on the program, has unfolded across national boundaries. Her work integrates formal coherence, stylistic awareness, and immediate responsiveness, placing her within a lineage of pianist-composers rather than solely as an interpreter.

One immediately noticeable feature of the evening was the presence of a large video screen positioned behind the piano. Its placement altered the acoustic projection: with sound waves partially blocked from reaching the rear wall, the piano registered with unusual directness and volume in the hall. Even so, the characteristic clarity of Spivey Hall remained intact.

Beyond its surface variety, the program suggested two additional throughlines. The first is historical: each composer represented—Sergei Prokofiev, Sergei Rachmaninoff, and Igor Stravinsky—spent part of their lives as émigrés in the United States, a fact that aligns naturally with the inclusion of The Immigrant. The second is more perceptual: much of the program suggested a cinematic quality, whether inherent in the music or projected by the listener.

PROKOFIEV | Sarcasms, Op. 17 (1912–1914)

As one of Prokofiev’s early modernist works, Sarcasms departs from continuous, developmental writing in favor of discontinuity and juxtaposition. Its significance lies in its use of contrast and distortion as organizing principles, replacing extended melodic development with concise, sharply articulated gestures. These works belong to a period that would likely have been labeled “formalist” under later Soviet doctrine.

The set comprises five short movements (Tempestoso, Allegro rubato, Allegro precipitato, Smanioso, Precipitosissimo) marked by abrupt changes in dynamics, register, and texture. Angular figures and percussive articulation produce a surface defined by instability and rapid shifts.

In performance, the work suggested a kind of visual parallel: it unfolded like a cartoon sequence, with quick, exaggerated changes of direction and pacing. The music moves forward with little reliance on thematic development, instead progressing through a succession of sharply defined moments, as if tracking a series of actions rather than unfolding an argument. Montero navigated these transitions with ease, maintaining continuity despite the absence of a clear developmental thread.

PROKOFIEV | Piano Sonata No. 2 in D Minor, Op. 14 (1912; rev. 1913)

Composed contemporaneously with Sarcasms, the Second Sonata reflects a parallel strand in Prokofiev’s early output. While Sarcasms is built from short, sharply contrasting ideas, the Sonata shows how Prokofiev shapes those same kinds of sounds into a longer, more continuous musical argument.

Together, these works predate by more than two decades Romeo and Juliet and by over thirty years the Symphony No. 5, where Prokofiev redirects this language toward greater continuity and broader formal spans.

The four-movement structure contrasts driving outer movements with more restrained inner sections. In performance, the Sonata maintained a similar reliance on forward motion without extensive thematic development, though at a lower level of intensity than Sarcasms. Montero played the work attacca following Sarcasms, reinforcing their connection while differentiating their scale and pacing.

RACHMANINOFF | Piano Sonata No. 2, Op. 36 (1913; rev. 1931)

Rachmaninoff’s Second Sonata represents a late-Romantic approach carried to a high level of structural concentration. The sonata unfolds in three connected movements (Allegro agitato, Non allegro—Lento, Allegro molto), forming a continuous span characterized by dense textures and persistent forward drive.

In this performance, the work came across as large in scale and unrelenting in execution. Its dense chordal writing and frequent arpeggiated passages create a sustained level of intensity that, on the piano, can become percussive and tiring to the ear over time. The piece serves as a clear example of the kind of expansive Romantic approach against which many twentieth-century composers reacted. Montero brought the necessary energy and technical control to sustain the work’s demands, preventing it from collapsing under its own weight.

At the conclusion of the sonata, the program indicated that the Stravinsky Sonata would follow. Instead, after Montero exited the stage, there was an extended pause before Spivey Hall staff announced that the Stravinsky would be performed after intermission. During the break, a piano technician appeared to adjust the Steinway, suggesting that the instrument—particularly in its upper register—required attention after the demands of the Rachmaninoff.

STRAVINSKY | Sonata, K. 043 (1924)

In contrast to the preceding work, Stravinsky’s Sonata reflects a turn toward neoclassical restraint. Its significance lies in its rejection of Romantic-era excess in favor of clarity, proportion, and control.

The three-movement structure (Moderato, Adagietto, Allegro moderato) emphasizes economy of material and precision of gesture. Following the Rachmaninoff, the work registered as comparatively slight in this context. While occasional Baroque-inspired figures appear, the overall impression was one of reduced scale and impact, underscoring the extent to which Stravinsky’s approach diverges from the expansive model represented by Rachmaninoff.

C. CHAPLIN | The Immigrant (1917)

with improvised score by Gabriela Montero

The final portion of the program paired Chaplin’s The Immigrant with a live improvised score. The film, likely projected at a higher frame rate than originally intended, gave the movement a sped-up, jerky quality, with gestures appearing exaggerated and mechanically abrupt.

Montero performs the score while following the film on a tablet placed at the piano, allowing her to synchronize her playing with the projected image seen by the audience. This setup makes clear that the music is being constructed in real time, with each gesture aligned to the unfolding visual action rather than drawn from a fixed score.

Her improvisation returned the program to a mode similar to Sarcasms: high-energy, moment-to-moment construction without extended thematic development. The music functioned as a sequence of discrete responses to on-screen action, emphasizing immediacy over continuity and reinforcing the program’s broader exploration of musical surface and structure.

Closing

Taken together, the program presented a forceful and at times raw sequence of works that highlighted Montero’s technical command and physical approach to the piano. It also offered a concise view of shifting compositional priorities across the twentieth century—from the large-scale, highly developed structures of Rachmaninoff to Prokofiev’s angular, forward-driven constructions, to Stravinsky’s deliberate reduction of scale and means—before concluding with improvisation as a real-time compositional act. Montero’s performance throughout reinforced her standing as one of the leading pianists performing today, combining technical control with the ability to shape both fixed and spontaneous material at a high level.