MUSICA E SCUOLA, Year 14th - Nr.18
(Gioiosa Editrice - Sannicandro Garganico, FG)
October 2000 (page 6):
The interview - Sergio Calligaris,
by Adriano Bassi

I met Maestro Sergio Calligaris in Milan, the day after the performance of his work "Toccata, Adagio and Fugue", performed by the Orchestra Milano Classica conducted by Vittorio Parisi at Palazzina Liberty.
Calligaris is undoubtedly a solar, real person, who's bursting with pleasantness and concreteness in all his words.
We were at the head office of Carisch Publisher, which takes care of Maestro's production, sitting down in a quiet and well ventiled little hall. The description of the setting in which the interview took place is important, because the reader must become a third presence of the dialogue into action.
About Maestro's style, it's possible summarizing his research in a deep rereading of music come before us, with his own personal enrichment, succeeding in creation of a perfect bridge of connection between past and present, and producing sonorities and sound "alchemies" not joined to sterile labels as "neo-romanticism" or an extremely dimishing background of a composer's research.
Calligaris must be heard at least twice a piece, acquired and in this way only one can understand that besides his stature of composer there's his true research not subordinate to market. After this, let's start on our interview.

I would like to know your thought about the neoromantic tendency, which seems to label the whole production of these last years.

When talking about neoromantic tendency I remind what Michelangelo Zurletti said with regard to this aspect and which finds me perfectly in agreement: that is my music isn't neoromantic, because it follows a very rigorous and counterpointistic form. Formally it can go back to a very developed classicism as Beethoven's to Brahms' one, and rather to Bach about counterpoint. Therefore, it isn't neoromantic. Regarding my opinion about neoromanticism, it seems to me that all is based on a melody accompanied by a functional and very complete harmony. In my music, instead, it exists a more complex construction, where one can find, through analysis, a series of altered chords which can digress into atonality.

It seems important to me make the reader understand your style and your research.

I love symmetry because of performance, and I do be a very practical man, therefore I like having a scheme to follow also going beyond this aspect but having at disposal a starting basis. Then everything can be dilated as in Bruckner, but there's something important: symmetry is for me what compensates for the harmonic and melodic inventiveness, because it's reassuring. I think that in a composer must exist a basic element, that is the presence of a personality beyond labels, that I don't like.

What do you think about performing tradition?

That's a delicate word to be used. "Routine" isn't tradition. I'm bored when I listen to predictable pianists, who make catch on straight away what will follow. I like, instead, listening to pianists who bring out through the dynamic accent some music aspects which aren't based on highlighting melody only, neglecting harmony. In this way, by means of using both harmony and melody, an interesting and fashinating compactness arises. Without using fantasy and personality, taking care of tradition only, one gets just an amorphous, stupid and indistinct performance.

How do you choose ensembles to write for?

Many times according to errands of works by some soloists, groups or institutions. Moreover some artists, later becoming addressees of my compositions, inspired me a certain type of piece already arising with that character. For example, I wrote for the Magna Grecia Society a piece for two pianos and orchestra for the Duo Gemmiti, two pianists of strength and granitic technique and, since I do be a pianist of strength, I got a perfect inspiration in creating my piece. This work was already born in my mind with that sound and then enthusiasm makes the rest.

Your opinion about the world of composition in Italy.

My adjustment into this sector wasn't easy, because mentality of musicians is based on one's origin. They think according to the criterion of the schools. For instance, these composers of the roman school studied with this teacher, the other ones with another system. I came from abroad with a very solid training and I've been considered as an "outsider", therefore I've been labelled like this. I accepted it although it didn't make me happy, because I consider me Italian and I'm very fond of Italy. I've noted a provincial, closed and worrying mentality. At first, I thought they didn't like my presence, then I understood they don't even love each other and, instead, they deeply hate each other. I already know that my comment is a bit drastic.

But isn't there a research into action?

A research of what? We have the complex of novelty at all costs. An author's personality is not painting green hair or something similar, therefore a composer revoluzionizes music inside, not writing pieces using forks or spoons in the name of an originality that he knows himself (in his mind or heart depths - although many are shy about talking of heart) it doesn't exist. He doesn't want to follow already covered paths. Many contemporaries don't understand that some effects they use, as the "fluttering" of flutes or the "puffing" sound of trombone have been made thousands of times as Bellini's arpeggiato accompaniment. There's a lot of dialectics and lots of chatter.

Our interview comes to an end with a vigorous handshake and the promise to meet soon again to understand if neoromanticism will go on. All the best, Maestro Calligaris!

Adriano Bassi