Quasthoff on Bocelli

London Telegraph 18 October 2000 Interview by Norman Lebrecht
http://www.telegraph.co.uk:80/et?ac=000647321007942&rtmo=gwSnjfku&atmo=9 9999999&pg=/et/00/10/18/bmquas18.html

'Andrea Bocelli is not an opera singer,' he proclaims, 'and I cannot understand why Pavarotti should have called him 'my successor'. What is that? Where are we living? Where is the quality? Why are big conductors making records with this guy? I am a teacher, and I know how hard it is to learn classical singing. He is not a classical artist.'

To the suggestion that the blind Bocelli might have been formed artistically by the experience of adversity, Quasthoff retorts: 'Obviously not formed well enough.' To a DG proposal that he should record jazz and cabaret numbers, he replied: 'I may do it some time, but if I do I don't want to sound like 'the classical' Thomas Quasthoff. I won't do that kind of Bocelli crossover.'

Before you buy.

Um, they cite 'adversity' to Quasthoff??? (In case anyone doesn't know, he's one of the thalidomide babies of the late 1950s, with approximately no limbs on his torso. He says he won't play Rigoletto on stage, because it's such an obvious and pathetic piece of casting. Source: *60 Minutes* interview a few years ago.)

OTOH, it doesn't surprise me at all that Luciano would consider Bocelli a fine artist.

The voices are quite different, let's be honest about it, but speaking of greediness.........they surely do understand each other!

Because Paparotti is not an opera singer, as well.

Sììììì! Grande, great.....