Assessing Tan Dun

After thoroughly enjoying Tan Dun's Water Concerto a few weeks ago, I was a bit surprised by Lloyd Schwartz's review in the Phoenix:

It’s a shallow piece, three percussionists slapping and plunging various objects into deep, clear-plastic, electronically amplified “hemispherical water basins” — plish, plosh, drizzle, drip — with movie-melodrama accompaniment, in a pretentiously darkened hall. The orchestra and NY Phil principal percussionist Christopher Lamb, for whom the piece was commissioned, were expert, but the piece is all wet.

That isn't the first time that Schwartz has written an unenthusiastic review of Tan's works. He also criticized The Map for formal reasons:

The Map amounts to an inflated orchestral accompaniment to 10 excerpts (more like a suite than a concerto) from films of Chinese folk musicians Tan made with video and sound artist Davey Frankel — which are projected by Frankel as part of the performance.

I'm willing to believe that the video elements of The Map works better viewed on DVD than projected in large concert hall. However, I've never found its suite-like structure problematic. Its strength is that it brings in such a variety of folk music and is able to bring them together. These two pieces share a focus on virtuosity. In the case of The Map, it is a showcase for the folk music (rather than the solo cello). The Water Concerto is as much a showpiece for percussionists (and for the composer) as anything Liszt or Paganini wrote for their respective instruments.

But is that enough? Isn't empty virtuosity still empty?

I think these pieces are original enough and interesting enough that they are worthwhile. Tan is in the difficult position of living between worlds, and does a good enough job balancing the Western orchestra with his Chinese heritage. While I understand where Schwartz is coming from, I think Tan is able to overcome the formal difficulties.