Bughouse Square Podcast with Eve Ewing has launched, check out the first episode and subscribe now! Read the Story

00 / 00

Interview with Paul Ulanowsky

BROADCAST: Mar. 22, 1962 | DURATION: 00:37:32

Transcript

Tap within the transcript to jump to that part of the audio.

OK

Studs Terkel This morning is the rebroadcast of a 1962 conversation with the pianist, the favorite accompanist of a good number of concert singers, including Lotte Lehmann, Paul Ulanowsky. The program in a moment after this message [pause in recording]. I guess each man who loves music and loves life has his own memorable experiences. Those who were fortunate enough to be at Town Hall on the night of February sixteenth, 1951, I imagine experienced an evening they will never forget. As the artist was on the stage, it was just before the intermission. She had finished the first half. The artist was Madam Lehmann. The incomparable Lotte Lehmann, and she spoke to the audience [pause in recording]. Our guest this morning, the man who was on the stage with her, whom she referred to just a moment ago, Paul Ulanowsky. Do you, do you remember this, this evening, Mr. Ulanowsky?

Paul Ulanowsky I certainly, I don't think I'll ever forget it. Simply listening to the voice now has thrown me completely off balance as I think anybody would have been. It was the end of 14 years of magnificent concerts with Lotte Lehmann. That implies a relationship that could only be called the ideal relationship with any singer and accompanist that you could imagine. I'd like to attach a personal note to the event that was just mentioned, the farewell recital. The hall was full, naturally, standing room, and there were possibly a handful of people who knew that this would be the farewell recital; her manager, her agent, and one or two friends. In retrospect, I must be grateful that I was not among them. I had no idea that this was to be her farewell recital. And when Lotte Lehmann said, at the end of the intermission, I'm going to make a speech. She didn't say what it was going to be, and I said, all right you go out and when you have finished with the speech then I'll join you for the rest of the program. She said, oh no, I want you to sit out there. So when we both went out and she started her speech I had to brace myself for what I could only guess was coming. There was not a tearless eye in the whole audience, except Lotte Lehmann. With incredible discipline she carried through the speech and the rest of the program. And it was only after she had said, I will try to sing "An Die Musik", that may have been the psychological cue for her, that there was an attempt to do something which would include so much personal emotion for her in singing this, you might almost call it theme song, for the last time in Town Hall, that prompted her to abandon this discipline, this control, just a few seconds before the end of her singing when she broke down. I'd like to say that this was not a studied thing. She didn't expect it to happen. And as she went from the piano out the door of Town Hall she said to me, this is terrible. An artist with that much experience should have the discipline not to let this happen. So this was entirely impromptu. I think that you ought to know that.

Studs Terkel Of course this is, this is overwhelmingly moving, Mr. Ulanowsky. You mentioned the word, emotion, the artist and the emotion. Earlier, before you went on the air, I was asking you the number of great artists whom you've accompanied and been, well, practically the alter ego of them on the stage, and I asked you whether you yourself, the impeccable accompanist, does not become emotionally involved sometimes.

Paul Ulanowsky Certainly, first of all there is the literature that you perform, since the accompanist has to take into account not only what happens into the, in the piano part, but also in the vocal part, he familiarize himself with the emotions and thoughts that are expressed in the vocal part. And in order to do full justice to the work of art as an entirety, he must associate, not to say identify himself, very closely with what goes on in the text. And that means that your emotions should get involved, up to a point with that, in the ideal case actually, to the same degree as the emotions of the singer. Naturally, you always want to have your mind retain the lost control. Without that, you would get carried away beyond the point where good taste allows you to perform. But without the emotions I don't think that anybody could perform to his own, or to the public's content. I've never tried to, and I hope I never will.

Studs Terkel The intelligence must be in control, but at the same time that reign, free reign, must begin within that framework.

Paul Ulanowsky Within these limitations, yes, there must be emotion.

Studs Terkel Not a cold intelligence.

Paul Ulanowsky No, although I have come across people where the cold intelligence and the artistic organization entirely on instrumental, vocal, and stylistic lines was paramount, almost to the point of obliteration of genuine, direct emotion. That is possible.

Studs Terkel That is possible. Now.

Paul Ulanowsky [clears throat].

Studs Terkel This, this is a fascinating point that you raise. Does this move an audience, the artist, let us say, is cold, let us say, but a master craftsman.

Paul Ulanowsky Mmmhmm.

Studs Terkel Does this, is the artist craftsmanship so good that he/she moves the audience?

Paul Ulanowsky Certainly, I don't think that the audience, [tapping] theoretically speaking, has any idea whether the artist himself is moved.

Studs Terkel Ah.

Paul Ulanowsky And to what point, because he transmits matters of emotion by certain tricks of the trade, by everything that is in his tool chest or transmission. Now, in order to handle these tools properly he has to retain the mental, intellectual control. Furthermore, it is his duty rather to evoke certain reactions, aesthetic as well as emotional reactions, in his audience. Now when we are deeply moved in a concert we are moved by impressions that are made on our emotional centers. Whether they were made from emotional sources of the performer, or whether they were produced by his artistic, skillful manipulation of these tricks of the trade is beyond the listener to decide. Actually, I think it is the artist who has a very fine control of these skills who can gauge the intensity and the timing of these impressions more carefully than somebody who, in singing or otherwise performing, wipes up the floor with his own emotions.

Studs Terkel The artist need not cry to make the audience cry, if I may just use a phrase.

Paul Ulanowsky Exactly, he shouldn't.

Studs Terkel He should not. This, I'm smiling as you're saying this. I remember I, it was some years ago, I when I watched this actor in a play, a very moving play. It was "Watch On The Rhine", and I was so overwhelmed. I saw it four times. I cried every time, and I asked a friend of mine who was in the cast, an understudy, this man must be terribly moved. He said, oh no, he's so cold [laughter].

Paul Ulanowsky Exactly.

Studs Terkel And thus it was, yeah.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes.

Studs Terkel He was a fine artist, fine actor, and thus it applies to the singer.

Paul Ulanowsky Oh, yes, definitely.

Studs Terkel There's something you had said, Ernst Haefliger, the very excellent tenor whom you accompanied Friday night at the Studebaker Theater, said something about you as he was rehearsing. He said you were advising him in some of the pieces, the compositions were so great in themselves, he did not have to impose too much. Would you mind expanding on that a bit? Too much of his own, his artistry is there, but the piece itself was--.

Paul Ulanowsky Well, I think that, first of all I'd like to correct it. I'm not advising. That would be presumptuous, but when it comes to a close collaboration on lieder then you feel you have to unburden your own conscience and you want to reach the greatest possible agreement between the two performers. Every piece of music, of vocal music or any other field, has it's own gravitational field where the emotions and other aesthetic elements are defined and limited. It is our interest, first, to establish the limits of this field and then try to reach the utmost in expression and delivery within these limits. When somebody has more to give than this field suggests then there is always the temptation to give more than the score demands. You want to lavish all that you have on your audience or on this particular piece of music, and every now and then it so happens that a piece is not elastic enough to carry all this extra weight of expression, or whatever it happens to be. And then, I feel that I should tell the singer that, from my listeners point of view, this might be too much of a good thing. And a singer who is both the instrument and the performer on this instrument sometimes doesn't have that kind of distance to gauge the effect that he creates with his singing. And, therefore, I feel it's up to the accompanist to raise his voice every now and then when he sees its--.

Studs Terkel You spoke of the accompanist as a collaborator.

Paul Ulanowsky Yeah.

Studs Terkel A close collaborator. The, the, the point you made here the piece, the nature of the work, whether it's a Schubert lied or a Mozart aria.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes.

Studs Terkel The nature of the work will determine how much the artist, the performing artist. has to give to it.

Paul Ulanowsky Right.

Studs Terkel Some more than others, some less. There's more, if the artist is good enough, he has more he can retain. There's more where that came from.

Paul Ulanowsky Naturally, yes and that makes itself manifest.

Studs Terkel Okay.

Paul Ulanowsky No matter what he sings. Actually, I think in the withholding of vocal splendor and in the greatest economy of execution is the great mastery that we admire the great accomplished singers.

Studs Terkel And something else I had mentioned to you after the interview with Mr. Haefliger. I spoke to you while he was out, of his good humor, his ease. There's something you said, that of course, because the, his confidence. He knows his craft. There was no need for a superimposition of [heady?]--.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes.

Studs Terkel [If only?] seriousness.

Paul Ulanowsky I mean, when you know who you are and what you can do, it gives you an authority that asserts itself quietly. You don't have to stress anything.

Studs Terkel Don't, the ponderousness superimposed doesn't have to be there, if the talent is there.

Paul Ulanowsky That's right.

Studs Terkel [knocking] Mr. Ulanowsky, you've been described as the consummate accompanist. The art of accompanying, I know nothing about piano, but we think of you and the various artists, the singers you have accompanied[knocking]. The art of the accompanist. Would you mind, I know this is a general question, [knocking] your own coming to it?

Paul Ulanowsky You mean how I became.

Studs Terkel Perhaps.

Paul Ulanowsky an accompanist?

Studs Terkel How you became an accompanist and from this we will--.

Paul Ulanowsky That was a unusual combination of very favorable circumstances. I was born as the son of two singers and so got my training [knocking] as soon as I could distinguish the black from the white keys, practically, at home when I had to play for my parents. My father was a voice teacher, so I started very early playing for his pupils. And from there on it was an easy way down or up as you wanted to put it [laughter].

Studs Terkel [chuckle].

Paul Ulanowsky Into the job and the profession of an accompanist, which I enjoyed then and still enjoy.

Studs Terkel So, it was accompanying your father first then?

Paul Ulanowsky That's right.

Studs Terkel Where was this, Mr. Ulanowsky?

Paul Ulanowsky That was in Vienna, where I was born, raised, got all my musical education. It also might be of interest, that when Mr. Haefliger mentioned that this, "Song Of The Earth", in which he performed the tenor part, was Bruno Walter's last recording of this work. I, in a more modest capacity, was active in the first recording that Bruno Walter made of the work because a very early recording was made during a concert of the Philharmonic Orchestra in Vienna where Walter performed [knocking] Mahler, as he so often did, and where I played the celesta part. For many years I had been an incidental piano, and celesta, and harpsichord, even piano player in the orchestra. It was my privilege to play under all the big conductors. And [knocking] when Mr. Haefliger sang the tenor part I was reminded of these many years ago when I played in the same work.

Studs Terkel In a way the completion of a cycle.

Paul Ulanowsky Exactly.

Studs Terkel A Walter cycle.

Paul Ulanowsky That was my reaction, a very personal one, I admit.

Studs Terkel It seems [knocking] again, you use the word a personal reaction, the person and the artist on the stage cannot be separated. They're parts of the same being.

Paul Ulanowsky I think so. Of course, there are certain aspects of the person that come more into the spotlight on a stage, but I don't think you can easily separate the two.

Studs Terkel Were there, in your Viennese boyhood, were their major influences among piano players in your [knocking] memory?

Paul Ulanowsky I must admit that this is so long ago.

Studs Terkel Yeah.

Paul Ulanowsky That I can only remember very few and rather disconnected facts about it. Of course, everybody who played any instrument or who sang came to Vienna, just as they come to New York or Chicago to perform. And as a student I listened to as many concerts as I could get in to hear, but I could not say that any particular man exerted that much influence because I was interested in too many different aspects. I was playing piano and I also studied the violin and viola, and I took theory lessons and played chamber music. So that practically anything in the whole realm of music was of vital interest to me.

Studs Terkel All interested you, but it was the piano primarily. You said you studied the viola, the violin, chamber music [unintelligible].

Paul Ulanowsky That was for the fun of it. In order to get a better aspect.

Studs Terkel Yeah.

Paul Ulanowsky More rounded idea of what music was, even for the performer. But piano, naturally, was my main instrument and eventually my bread and butter.

Studs Terkel Well, the phrase to describe you, accompanist. Accomp-, you know, the master accompanist, as distinguished, say, from a solo pianist?

Paul Ulanowsky Well, these are two completely.

Studs Terkel Yes. Yes.

Paul Ulanowsky Different things and they are distinguished, not only by the fact that there's an entirely different literature. In comparison, I should say that the accompanist has so much less to worry about, as they are so many fewer notes to practice, and that was one of the great attractions to me in the profession of an accompanist because it left the 8 or 10 hours, that the solo of pianist has to practice every day, for other purposes, which I valued very much. Then, of course, it's a matter of temperament because if there is something in your personal [build up?] that cries out for asserting yourself and having no other gods beside you, then, of course, you are the born soloist. But in the other case, if you enjoy working together in a team, ensemble of 2, or 4, or more people, then of course the possibility of doing accompanying or chamber music work is a much closer one.

Studs Terkel And isn't there a, thinking about you, Mr. Ulanowsky, isn't there the added challenge to an accompanist, though he may play less than a soloist, the challenge of that other being, that, now I don't, I don't want to use the word adjustment because adjustment isn't right either, the sensing of the nuances and all. And you have accompanied so many of our finest vocalists. The, the, this challenge of--.

Paul Ulanowsky Oh, yes, always to expect the unexpected no matter how well rehearsed something may be. Also, the challenge of performing one of the same piece with different artists from completely different angles and, in a greater majority of cases, even in a completely new way with the same artist on different occasions. So that there is actually no repetition, even in as limited a repertory as the vocal literature may be in comparison with the vast solo repertory.

Studs Terkel The different experience in accompanying the same artist in the same number, for example, let us.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes.

Studs Terkel Assume Lotte Lehmann again, if we come back to Madam Lehmann. You've accompanied her some 50 times in, in.

Paul Ulanowsky In New York alone, yes.

Studs Terkel New York. And, let us say, "An Die Musik", for example, any number of times.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes.

Studs Terkel And yet each time there was another nuance. It was, it was never quite the same, was it?

Paul Ulanowsky It could never be quite the same. You have to realize that, of course, as you repeat the performance of one and the same thing the large outlines will be the same. They will fall into a predictable pattern. It is the very small details, the taking of a breath, the taking of a bigger breath here, the accentuation of this part of the sentence rather than the next, a heightening of the inflection in another. These assume major importance because they are the distinguishing marks between the last week's performance or last year's performance. It is not that they are intrinsically of great value. They only serve to illustrate to yourself that there is no dead, no empty repetition of anything, if somebody goes at it with a freshness and a spontaneity of a new experience.

Studs Terkel So, no matter how planned a recital might be, the element, there is always that element of some improvisation.

Paul Ulanowsky Oh, there should be.

Studs Terkel Under there.

Paul Ulanowsky Definitely. The ideal is that you prepare something extremely well, carefully, sometimes over weeks or months and then, in a moment of performance after they have sort of settled in a groove, you make yourself forget those and create, as it were, completely from scratch. You don't do it, fortunately, because all these things that you have elaborated in the rehearsals of weeks and months before have become routine in the better sense of the word.

Studs Terkel Isn't this a marvelous paradox. The more you prepare, the more seriously two artists, the singer and the accompanist, prepare the better chance there is for freshness, in a true sense.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes, if--.

Studs Terkel That is, you're free of all the--.

Paul Ulanowsky That's right. If the preparation is always a creative one. If it is not just a repetition for repetition's sake, then I would say that this holds true.

Studs Terkel Mr. Ulanowsky, I'm not asking for anecdotes because that's, it's really minor, but you have accompanied so many different artists of, I imagine, so many different temperaments too.

Paul Ulanowsky Oh, yes [squeaking].

Studs Terkel And yet you find each time then, each time your approach as an accompanist is, it's new. You start a fresh, as though you start a fresh again.

Paul Ulanowsky For me it is easier in a way because I react to whatever I find the emotional or intellectual atmosphere to be set by the singer. After all, he has a much more difficult job to perform and it is only right that I, sort of, find the same level of approach; emotional, intellectual, stylistic, aesthetic, and what have you. And once this is [knocking] established, we can discuss possible changes where it might be of value. But for a lot of obvious reasons it is easier for me to adapt myself and the way I play, the accompaniment, to the requirements of the singer's preference than the other way around. Although, in the last analysis, when people get together for a longer period of work it always develops into a system of give and take, of exchange of information, of comparing notes, that finally there doesn't seem to be any coercion. That only happens when there are extraordinary circumstances influencing the performance, or when a singer feels that he is not in complete control of all his ordinary vocal gifts and that a certain extra care is required of the accompanist to be on the alert and do things a little differently from the accepted way. In that case, I might tell you a story.

Studs Terkel Please do. I was hoping you would [laughing].

Paul Ulanowsky [Laughing] Which, however, concerns people that are long dead. The famous Polish pianist, Ignaz Friedman, in his early days was traveling as an accompanist to a singer, a tenor, who was well past his prime. And toward the end of the tour it happened one night when the tenor was even more tired than usual, that in the middle of an aria, he dropped about one and a half or two tones in the middle of a phrase. Without dropping more than a beat, Friedman transposed into the new key and at the end of the concert the singer was overjoyed at having such a fine and alert accompanist and presented Friedman with an extra florin, which at that time was a fortune for young Friedman. I'd like to say that Friedman told this story on himself. That for the end of that tour he always managed to start the one or the other piece of the program in a key which he knew would prove too high for the tenor.

Studs Terkel [Laughter].

Studs Terkel So that during that course the tenor would have to drop. Friedman would drop with him.

Studs Terkel [Laughter].

Paul Ulanowsky And cash the extra florin at the.

Studs Terkel He picked up a lot of florins

Paul Ulanowsky that way. End of the concert. Yes [laughing].

Studs Terkel [Laughing] That's a marvelous technique.

Paul Ulanowsky Ja, so there are, let us say, unusual experiences as well as sources of income.

Studs Terkel [Laughter].

Paul Ulanowsky For the accompanist [chuckling].

Studs Terkel There was something else inherent in the story, though the story doesn't deal with, the element of accident, of happy accident. Sometimes, something can be accidental and yet the accompanist or the vocalist can use that accident and make it become an asset.

Paul Ulanowsky Oh, yes. That, of course, depends entirely on the sang-froid, on the stage presence, of the performer. These things do happen. Fortunately they do, because they enrich the life of both performer and the audience, and as long as the performer knows how to make the accident rather a funny experience than a disaster, everybody gains by that [ice tinkling]. I remember once there was a long, beautiful program presented in Town Hall by the distinguished mezzo-soprano Martha Lipton. It was a very long program because she was intent on showing any number of facets of her art. And despite that fact there were still people, lots of people left, who wanted encores, and there was one encore and another encore. And then we came out when they still were clapping for the third encore. And people were sort of sitting down. The doors were being closed. It was quiet and I raised my hands to play the introduction when from the back of the hall a child's voice piped out very clearly, aren't we going home yet?

Studs Terkel [chuckle].

Paul Ulanowsky That was the wonderful thing to happen at the end of the concert. The house broke down.

Studs Terkel Sure.

Paul Ulanowsky Took a long time before that last encore, which was fortunately a short and happy one, could be performed and then that was over.

Studs Terkel Martha Lipton, in a way then, welcomed this [unintelligible].

Paul Ulanowsky Oh, yes. Yes. I don't think that she had engaged the child.

Studs Terkel [Laughter].

Paul Ulanowsky to come in, but--.

Studs Terkel A private [unintelligible].

Paul Ulanowsky [Laughing] Yes.

Studs Terkel Anti- [unintelligible].

Paul Ulanowsky Yeah.

Studs Terkel There's a point that Madam Lehman raised during one of her interviews here in Chicago on this station when she was teaching at Northwestern, and I'd like your opinion of this, Mr. Ulanowsky. You've accompanied so many of the excellent singers. She was decrying the speed, the rush with which so many singers are brought to the fore these days. She spoke of more intense training. As a result the singer grows more naturally. Do you feel this so today? Do you--

Paul Ulanowsky I'm aware of that, and I also am aware of the fact [squeak] that the singers and the students cannot be blamed for an economic system that has exerted its force and its influence on the music life, just as it has done in any other direction. We live in an accelerated speed of experience everywhere. And it is very regrettable that in the field of art, where a slower development should be maintained, this cannot be done. At least, not as much as it used to be done when I was a student. These are things that are very difficult to assess. Somebody with a very fast capacity for absorption, assimilation, and reflection will suffer less from that, but other people whose way of developing is slow will be very much at the mercy of good luck and connections before they find their own fulfillment or rather come sufficiently close to the fulfillment of their potential.

Studs Terkel And yet the person with the facility who, let us say, is able to, to span this obstacle, overcome this. Isn't that a sad thing too, perhaps too much facility and not enough of the time to call upon his innermost resources? You know, there's the great facility. And yet you feel there is more there, perhaps, if it we're slower.

Paul Ulanowsky Certainly there would be, but then there is always the possibility and, let us say, the hope that these things will catch up with the performer even though he may not have been able to assemble all these paraphernalia during his course of study. They will creep into his performance as he matures as a person. And I don't think that, [chuckle] it sounds a little corny, that anybody who is, or wants to be, a real artist ever stops learning. I find myself reviewing the same score that I have looked at 30 and 35 years ago, and I find new or different things in it. It is not because, necessarily, I have neglected to study this, but when you grow older, you look at things in a different way, so that you keep learning and adding new experiences, even if infinitesimal ones, to the store of what you know about any one piece.

Studs Terkel You then do go back. You reread. You look over, relook.

Paul Ulanowsky Well.

Studs Terkel [unintelligible].

Paul Ulanowsky That is the singers that make me.

Studs Terkel Yes.

Paul Ulanowsky Do that because they always like to go back to the masterpieces of the nineteenth century. That is the great treasure chest of vocal literature. There is naturally music from before and after, but the vast bulk of the vocal literature in which I'm involved stems from the nineteenth century. And there is no end of going back to that.

Studs Terkel And in fact going back, as you say, you are different now than you were some 20 years ago. You're a different man. And.

Paul Ulanowsky Mmm.

Studs Terkel So you look at that very same work, but there's a different pair of eyes involved now.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes. The only thing is, I don't know it. I only assume it.

Studs Terkel You assume it, and yet--.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes.

Studs Terkel Perhaps one last question. Well, there are many questions I'd like to ask you, Mr. Ulanowsky. You're very gracious.

Paul Ulanowsky Mmmhmm.

Studs Terkel The, an assessment, on your part, of concert goers today. We speak of the speed which we live in today, technological advances, the rush. Is there a difference? Do they listen more or less, do you sense this on the stage than say 20 years? This is a tough question. I don't, your own assessment of audiences today, say contrasted with 20 years?

Paul Ulanowsky That is very hard.

Studs Terkel Yes.

Paul Ulanowsky For me to say, because I could not really judge from their reaction how they listen, because when they applaud, they may applaud a variety of things. Some of which may not even have to do with their listening at all. The difference between, let us say, American and European audiences, to me, is something that, to my mind has nothing to do with music at all. In Europe, by and large, the concerts start at 7 or 7:30. People go there having had a little snack, and they have supper afterwards. And I feel that listening to music or partaking in any artistic experience, even as on the receiving end, is quite different when your stomach isn't full with a large dinner. And there, I believe American audiences are at a disadvantage.

Studs Terkel You feel then listening on an empty stomach or a light snack might be, make them more conducive to another kind of food.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes, you are more alert and, there is no doubt about it, that your reactions, both the active and the negative, are much faster and you are more in tune with what comes from the stage than when you are busy watching your own digestion, so to speak.

Studs Terkel Mr. Ulanowsky, these comments you're making are very, well, I don't want to use the word profound, but they're very, very perceptive comments.

Paul Ulanowsky [Chuckling].

Studs Terkel Certainly they're both. The [have?] a very perceptive comments. I know there are many questions I'd like to ask you. I'm also thinking of your rest for the various concerts you have to perform. Anything you would care to say that you haven't said thus far? It could be anything in nature. Your own feelings about music today, the art of the accompanist, or taste, generally, in reference to music today. Comments that you haven't said, thus far, that you feel like saying.

Paul Ulanowsky I think I'd like to come back to something that we discussed at the very beginning. The field of music is so diversified today. So much more than it was 100 or 200 years ago. There are so many more styles to be taken into account. So many more different ways to present music. We have the radio, [knocking] the television, and so on. So that whatever I could say would have to be hedged in by considerations. This applies to this, but not to that, etcetera. I think the most important thing is the honesty with which you try to identify yourself with the composer or, when it comes to vocal [knocking] literature, with composer and poet. To go back to what they wanted to put down in their combined work of sound and word. To go to the ends of your imagination in recreating the atmosphere out of which they have written this particular song and then transmit it in terms of your own perception, as well as in terms of your own artistry and vocal instrumental gifts. Still, however, trying to be their spokesman rather than consider whatever you do as a playground for your particular person or endowment. If you do that, and if you keep that foremost in your work, I think the rest will take care of itself. It's just a matter of schooling and application.

Studs Terkel You come back to the core of the apple, then. The artist, his honesty and his respect for the work.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes.

Studs Terkel That he is performing, no matter what the age in which he lives.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes, and I think that eventually will always tell.

Studs Terkel Perhaps the best way to end this, to me, a very delightful and pleasurable conversation, Mr. Ulanowsky, is in hearing the voice of Lotte Lehmann, once again. The last song she sang during her farewell concert, "An Die Musik", which I imagine is almost the trademark, isn't that.

Paul Ulanowsky Well, that is. That's the cradle of every artist, certainly of every musician.

Studs Terkel A joy that is in music.

Paul Ulanowsky Yes.

Studs Terkel The love for music and it's [unintelligible].

Paul Ulanowsky The cradle and the thanksgiving.

Studs Terkel The thanksgiving. Thank you very much, Paul Ulanowsky.

Paul Ulanowsky You're very welcome. Thank you, Mr. Terkel. [pause in recording]

Studs Terkel This, our program for this morning, and a word about Monday's program after this message [pause in recording]. It's funny. Monday's program, I have not yet decided upon, but it probably will be music in one form or another. Until then, take it easy, but take it.