The following is a transcript of an interview that took place on February 6, 1996.

dt: Although I realize the brunt of this conversation will be, for the benefit of our readers, on Canadian pianist Glenn Gould and how he relates to the concept of the interview, I'm really curious about your own ideas on this topic. Where do you see yourself as fitting in?

DT: Well, I'd rather begin with what Gould had to say. Maybe as we explore his ideas, I'll pop in every now and then with my own editorial comments.

dt: Fair enough. Well, to begin, tell me why you think someone like Gould, a pianist and composer whose work seems to fall pretty far from the subject we're discussing, could have anything to say about interviewing.

DT: There was a lot more to Gould than just his musical recordings. The fact that he was quite a prolific writer of essays and stories, and the fact that many of them stretched thematically beyond classical music, shows, I think, that he was as great a writer as he was a pianist. What interests

   
me especially are his own philosophical writings on the decline of the need for a concert experience and the significance of technology and recorded music.

dt: If you'll excuse me, Mr. Teague, but I don't really see how that fits into analyzing the concept of interview.

DT: I think a broader knowledge of Gould's philosophy will be helpful and I think you'll find much of it applicable to ideas of the "interview." If we're going to talk about Gould at all, I think an understanding of some of his main theses is important.

dt: Go ahead then.

DT: Thank you. Now, as I was saying, technology played a very important role in music to Gould. Technology represented a way in which a certain piece, say Bach's Invention No. 13 in A Minor, could be recorded separately note by note and then spliced together to create a "perfect" rendition of the work. Even better, instead of recording at all the tones could be created by a computer to eliminate any kind of

 
e x t i m a c y

 
1 of 8