Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner about whether we can truly realize the composer's intent

I was around a good three months before you "left". Your mannerisms often offended people, whether you said something idiotic or absolutely true. I don't know if you had any deep personal problems with fellow PW members, nor is it any of my business. What I am curious to know is why you created a goodbye thread, but for some reason continue to post every now and again stating how you will not get involved. I've seen it happen many times. What's the meaning of this lukewarm existence on PW? Make a decision and stick with it.

Respecting the score doesn't cause boring performances - boring performances are the result of poor musicianship..

I agree. And if someone totally ignores a diminuendo/crescendo, or a dynamic, or an articulation marking, or does the opposite of those, I think that's incorrect to do. However, if it says "tempo rubato" or "marcato," one person's rubato may be a tad less than the other, or one person's marcato may be a little "starker" than the other. I think that's more intuition and performance practice, because you're already doing one way or another what's on the score. Crescendo means crescendo; if you do a few decibels more or less than the other person, who cares as long as it's still in the overall character and context?

There's certain amount of respect with following a score and I don't understand why people seem to struggle with that concept.

The Liszt sonata is in multiple movements?

Maybe because it's a fairly recent idea, and wasn't always dogma.

Have you read Kenneth Hamilton's After the Golden Age: Romantic Pianism and Modern Performance yet? If you haven't, you really should. It's something of an eye-opener about all this. Besides, it's a great read.

Rant warning:

This is a huge, HUGE problem in my opinion. A lot of people take the score as gospel. Crescendo here, diminuendo here, etc. because the score says so. It just doesn't work. Even when every part of the score is taken into account, quite often the performance will still wind up being utterly boring. I think this kind of mentality is the primary source of musical banality in the classical world. Music shouldn't be premeditated in such a way. It should be spontaneous and organic. Even the composers themselves almost blatantly ignored their own scores at times. At least Debussy did.. we know that for a fact. Doesn't that tell you anything? Look, I'm not advocating rebellion against the score. All I'm saying is that music should be, like I said, spontaneous and organic. Playing an exact, literal reading of the score without plugging in your own ideas will never provide this, because then it just becomes dictation. Music doesn't belong in such shackles.

And the blunt truth is that we do NOT know the reasons behind anything, let alone the intentions of a composer!

...nor is it any of my business...

I should give that a look. It's not that it's a "dogma" per se, but I have always learned, even recently heard again that with Beethoven, Debussy, Bartok and Ravel (at least) you don't mess around. They were extreme about following markings. I mean composers worked and worked to come up with the score as it is. Why should we not follow what they wrote? I mean, with someone like Brahms, yes, it's more forgiving because he under-edited a lot of things (for instance he'll have 3 pages of forte and nothing else, so you have to be creative). You have to at least strive to achieve the overall concept. And there's SO much you can do with all the markings in the score. Like someone said, someone's staccato will be different than another person, or marcato or their dynamics even. Or their sense of "piu mosso" etc etc etc etc. That's why it's so interesting.

With Debussy violin sonata for instance, I've had at least 14 different coaches over the years. None of them disregard anything in the score, but they all have had different things to say and different ways of achieving something you see. It's incredibly interesting and rewarding to try all these things.

I don't understand why people see it as a bad thing. There's a lot you can do with that's there, in many ways - not just one.

I agree that following the score, especially with composers who really tried to put everything in, can result in wonderful performances. I don't see that as a bad thing in itself, and in my amateurish way, it is usually what I try to do.

But I do see it as a bad thing that musicians are taught that they aren't ever supposed to "think outside the box", as it were, and are not supposed to get very wild with their interpretations. It suppresses the imagination, I think. I don't think that every pianist on the planet should follow Liszt's example and add extra filigree to Chopin, but sometimes I wish just a few would dare to, if they really felt the urge. I think it's healthy to be adventurous, even outrageous, sometimes. On the other hand, if somebody turned pseudo-Lisztian score alteration into some kind of grotesque schtick (which it could easily become), I wouldn't be so happy.

This seems the only to the point answer so far.

Maybe we can know our own reasons, but apart from that I tend to agree with this.

So, the answer is NO

The performer is part of the reality of the performance. The best never play the same piece the same way twice. A good composer will understand that this attitude in the hands of the best interpreters insures the life force in a piece of music.

But I do see it as a bad thing that musicians are taught that they aren't ever supposed to "think outside the box", as it were, and are not supposed to get very wild with their interpretations. It suppresses the imagination, I think.

To hear what we're missing today, have a listen to Raoul Koczalski, who, among the pianists who have left us good recordings, was the closest in 'lineage' from Chopin himself via Karol Mikuli, Chopin's favorite student.

http://youtu.be/VRmek8kADWA Nocturne in E flat, Op.9/2
http://youtu.be/XqvLEdvrhjE Ballade No.1 in G minor

To hear what we're missing today, have a listen to Raoul Koczalski, who, among the pianists who have left us good recordings, was the closest in 'lineage' from Chopin himself via Karol Mikuli, Chopin's favorite student.

http://youtu.be/VRmek8kADWA Nocturne in E flat, Op.9/2
http://youtu.be/XqvLEdvrhjE Ballade No.1 in G minor