ABSTRACT Two of the most famous pianists of the 1950s, Glenn Gould and Liberace occupied opposing esthetic and cultural positions. Liberace’s style of performance and self-presentation was by and large consistent with his late nineteenth-century pianistic models; however, emerging television esthetics, among other factors, made this style increasingly incomprehensible, except as an extreme brand of musical kitsch or camp (the mode for which he became notorious). Meanwhile, Gould’s studied neutrality, which energetically deployed the period’s new media forms to cultivate a radical denial of the performing mechanism and the performing body, interpellated a generation of listeners who were not addressed by a musical rhetorician as much as they were invited to eavesdrop on, and to make their own, a self-possessed sound object. The story of Gould and Liberace thus not only sheds light on the new austerity of 1950s performance practice, but has something important to teach us about the ideological fate of nineteenth-century performance cultures since the late twentieth century.

中文翻译：

---

古尔德和利伯拉斯，或 19 世纪表演文化的命运

摘要 1950 年代最著名的两位钢琴家 Glenn Gould 和 Liberace 占据了对立的审美和文化立场。Liberace 的表演风格和自我表现风格大体上与他 19 世纪晚期的钢琴风格一致。然而，新兴的电视美学以及其他因素使这种风格越来越难以理解，除非作为一种极端的音乐媚俗或坎普（他因这种模式而臭名昭著）。同时，古尔德研究的中立性，积极运用该时期的新媒体形式，培养对表演机制和表演身体的彻底否定，询问了一代没有被音乐修辞学家所解决的听众，而是被邀请窃听。 ，并让他们自己，一个自有的声音对象。