Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Dumb Music Questions

I don't know, can you play a scherzo if you're not funny? :P

Playing a scherzo is no joke (especially if it's one of Chopin's.....).

You can't just decide to play an intermezzo in the middle of everything.

It is if you play like this.

Personally, I like to have my intermezzo first, my finale next, and my introduction last.

A one night stand?

Some people, even on this board, seem to think that this is not a dumb question.
The answer is: The premise is not true. The score may be written out, but the intent of the composer not necessarily known.
And anyway, even if it was: The performer is the one giving the recital, not the composer. So if the performer decides to take creative liberties, he/she is allowed to do so.

Can I play a march in September?

Sorry, could not resist.

Only March-Andre Hamelin is allowed to do that.

Hmmm... Is it Double Lang or is it the Share-zo video?

The latter, I think.

There's an old thread about Rubinstein and Reuben sandwiches, haha..

Sadly, I knew without even looking.

The infamous Cindy Elizondo strikes again, along with all her brilliant insights into the mind of "ChoPAN, the greatest composer."

I must say (and please forgive my critical review) that was the absolute worst performance I have ever heard for this piece.

What an embarrassment it must have been although the audience apparently seems to love it!

Did the pianist study the work before attempting to play it?

My guess is no. (There's a Youtube comment that's pretty hilarious under the video: "I think you people making fun of this should be ashamed. First, consider that she must've been very nervous playing the piece for the first time. Second, she was obviously wearing boxing gloves while playing, and that didn't improve her technique. She actually makes the piece sound very modern, like Cecil Taylor or an experimental piece with a distressed opossum running across the keys." ) Don't worry, my comment about "brilliant insights" was sarcastic. This is a notoriously awful performance, and has been discussed here before, in various guises.

What always gets me most is the announcer at the beginning: "MUSIC IS THE UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE, AND SHOPAN WAS THE GREATEST COMPOSER OF THIS LANGUAGE. HERETOPERFORM SHOPAN'S SHERZO NUMBER ONE IN B MINOR OPUS TWUNNY, IS CINNY ELIZONDO MISS GULF COAST!!!!!"

Gotta love the crowd reaction... Both before, AND after her playing!

She probably had to play standing because of her dress at the competition...

In all seriousness, I wouldn't characterize it as "taking creative liberties" as that would imply an "ideal" performance that the performer is deviating from.

To me (at least), it is clear that there is no one "platonic ideal" of a piece that a performer is attempting to produce- there may be many, there may be an infinite number. This is because the idea of a composer's intent is nebulous. A composer generally has a good idea of what he/she wants, but that idea is not, and cannot be, exact. Moreover, written communication is inexact, so, even if a composer has an exact intent (which I doubt), we cannot know what it is. The written score, therefore, is more of a "map of possibilities" that the performer explores and, perhaps, adds to. (The map may be confined to a small territory.)

Great performers push the map into terra incognita, expanding the piece and revealing nuances, depths, and new musical places that the composer may not have even considered.

Does this make sense?

Sounded like the "wild west bar piano" version played by a drunk. Thatth one hellava' share-zoe, pardner...