Sunday, June 5, 2011

The Blue Note: Is that classical?

Ah, the first post! I'm full of hope! But still, I'm sitting here wondering, Will this actually become something? Will it, on the one hand, become a worthwhile investment of time and brain power, perhaps lasting years to come? Will it bear even modest fruit? Will it lead to something else? Will it make me rich? Or on the other hand will it, after this first strong, inspired post, just fizzle out like my numerous unfinished novels? There's this nagging thought that must be the same for anyone who assumes the burden of an unnecessary artistic project: Why am I doing this? Who's gonna read this? In the present case the odds are stacked. This is a blog on classical piano. And who am I? Admittedly, I don't yet have the international pop star-like following that any self-respecting classical pianist knows and expects to be his one day -- but that'll come.

That last sentence was a joke.

But in all seriousness, I have hope. Another ressource that attempts to address the numerous difficulties and frustrations the modern pianist faces should always be welcome.

The idea for the blog came to me after the realization that there were holes in my pianistic abilities. These stemmed from a faulty and, above all, unreliable technique. After studying the Alexander Technique, I decided to embarque on a thourough study of piano technique. I read books, watched videos, picked apart Hanon, went back through the so-called easy repertoire. And now, without the pressure of performance, I have decided to study that monument of piano literature, the Chopin Etudes, and to document the perilous journey, making observations along the way. The idea, of course, is not to simply learn to play the notes quickly (anyone can do that), but to play them in a coordinated and, yes, natural way.

The title of the blog is not unrelated. "The Blue Note: A Classical Piano Blog" may seem contradictory to some, since the jazz world has so completely appropriated the term Blue Note. Though I'm a big fan of the genre, I'd like to reclaim the phrase in the name of classical music, for it was the French writer Georges Sand who coined it in describing Chopin's music. " Et puis la note bleue résonne et nous voilà dans l’azur de la nuit transparente..."  And then the blue note resonates and there you are, in the blue azur of a transparent night.

In addition to exploring the pianist's woes, I have two other main objectives: to keep up with new research on the piano, and to comment on the goings-on in the classical music world.

And so here's to the blue note every pianist is capable of, and to the success of this humble blog!

11 comments:

  1. "
    And now, without the pressure of performance, I have decided to study that monument of piano literature, the Chopin Etudes, and to document the perilous journey, making observations along the way. The idea, of course, is not to simply learn to play the notes quickly (anyone can do that), but to play them in a coordinated and, yes, natural way.
    "
    I actually feel ignorant reading the above. What do you mean when you say 'study?'

    ReplyDelete
  2. 'Study' is driven by the desire to get at the truth of something. When you Study (in this case a piece of music, however the same applies to just about anything), you're receptive, you're completely open to what the piece has to offer; and the process isn't tainted by outside pressure such as the demands of performance, or the fear of failure or judgement. Of course you can learn about a piece of music -- its structure, its rhythms, notes, etc. -- or about yourself -- i.e. your abilities -- when preparing a piece for performance, competition or juries. But I really think that in a certain sense performance is antithetical to true study because your focus is the RESULT rather than the PROCESS. For me, it's like the difference between reading a novel to get an A on a literature exam, and reading it because you love fiction, the author, the style, or the subject. There's a difference of receptibility and aim. So 'Study' of the études in my case has to do with the goal being the process, and my attitude as to why I'm learning them in the first place: to see what they can teach me about Technique. (The fact that they're beautiful, kick-ass works makes the study of them that much more enjoyable.)

    ReplyDelete
  3. I enjoy foreplay as much as the next guy (the journey is fun) but after a certain amount of time passes, I'm gonna want to bust a nut (the definitive result).

    "
    ...you're completely open to what the piece has to offer; and the process isn't tainted by outside pressure such as the demands of performance, or the fear of failure or judgement.
    "
    I like the idea of the above, but isn't your 'study' limited by what Chopin dictated? There is no freedom in 'studying' or studying, if you will, someone else's music. That is why composers compose; that they might do their own thing. Aren't you bound by Chopin's notes, rhythms, and even tempo: to 'play the notes quickly' as it were. And for the record, the latter, in my humble opinion is no easy feat, and certainly not one that anyone can do. Perhaps, what I reference infringes to much on your definition of 'performance' to have credence.

    That you can learn a lot, the music is beautiful, and kicks ass I can't--or refuse--to argue. But I do think that 'beauty' is constrained by performance necessities and can't be fully achieved with what you deem, 'study' unless I'm grossly missing something; which is entirely possible. After all, how beautiful would the etudes be if 'studied' or dare I even say 'performed' with wrong notes, horribly incorrect tempos, or grossly liberal rubato?

    This is fun.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't see a problem with being constrained by Chopin's notes, rhythms and tempi. Part of the game of interpretation (which is different from composition)is finding your own voice while remaining within the limits set down by the composer. Unfortunately you'll have a deal of trouble doing that if you have an unreliable technique.

    But this whole project isn't really about interpretation. (If it were I would just study the score like a conductor). It's about technique. What can the études teach one about technique?

    I don't want to give the impression though that interpretation or 'beauty' are unimportant -- of course they are -- or that technique is an end in itself -- it's not. A project such as this would be vain if it ended there, at technique. My ultimate goal is to accurately translate musical intention via a dependable and well-coordinated technique, without which there can be nothing else.

    I don't know if this is very clear.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi Dwayne,

    Great Blog! I can't wait to hear more about how the 'blue note' plays a role in classical music and the 'woes' of the classical pianist.

    As Leonard Bernstein used to say, "Keep on Truckin" !

    --K

    ReplyDelete
  6. Salut,

    je trouve aussi que c'est une bonne idée. Ce n'est pas pour rien que ce sont des "études". Je pense donc que les étudier permet d'acquérir une certaine technique. Je dis "certaine" parce que je pense que ce que tu vas apprendre en faisant ça aurait été différent si tu avais par exemple choisis les études de Ligeti .

    Mais il y a autre chose qui m'intéresse dans ce que tu dis. Le but d'étudier ces études est technique mais tu ne veux pas simplement "jouer les notes rapidement". Quels rapports est-ce que tu perçois entre la technique pure et le fait d'aller vers une compréhension plus profonde de l'oeuvre ?

    Si je pose cette question, c'est que je n'ai pas autant de facilité à distinguer la technique de l'interprétation ou de la musicalité. Par exemple, réaliser un crescendo est aussi bien une capacité technique qu'un choix musical (ou non...).

    En tout cas, j'ai hâte de voir les prochains articles si tu décides de continuer ce blog.
    Je pense que je t'ai déjà croisé aux séminaires de Madurell... C'est comme ça que je suis tombé sur ton blog.

    Bonne continuation.
    Hadrien. (http://www.parispiano.fr)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Merci Hadrien pour ton commentaire. Je suis tout à fait d'accord avec toi sur le fait que jouer les études de Chopin va apporter autre chose que de jouer celles de Debussy ou de ligeti. Je suis également d'accord sur le lien entre technique et interprétation, et que réaliser un crescendo est aussi une capacité technique. Ceci dit, on peut faire ce crescendo plus ou moins bien, plus ou moins efficacement. La différence est la technique ; et la bonne technique est la capacité de produire des sons de façon coordonnée. C'est aussi important pour un instrumentiste de savoir se servir de son corps que pour un danseur ou un athlète.

    Je crois que technique et interprétation sont deux pôles de la même échelle. D'un côté il y a la technique pure (les exercices de Hanon par exemple, où toutes considérations musicales sont écartées afin de porter toute l'attention sur la façon dont on utilise son corps) aussi bien que l'interprétation pure (la lecture d'une partition où la musique est entendue mentalement sans toucher à un quelconque instrument). Chacun ses avantages et désavantages.

    ReplyDelete
  8. To say my French is anything but awful is a lie, so please excuse my extrapolation on Hadrien's commentary should I improperly translate anything. (Talk about biting off more than you can chew...) Dwayne, perhaps it's because I know you, but your French came to me much faster... I just hear your voice and it makes sense regardless of language.

    "
    Si je pose cette question, c'est que je n'ai pas autant de facilité à distinguer la technique de l'interprétation ou de la musicalité. Par exemple, réaliser un crescendo est aussi bien une capacité technique qu'un choix musical (ou non...).
    "
    I make no distinction at all. I feel we are in fundamental agreement on this disparity. Technical execution can be to the detriment of musicality and visa versa.

    "
    La différence est la technique
    "
    Dwayne, that seems to be your perch and you ain't budging... That's okay. I think it's good to have an opinion. I remain unconvinced but then again, this is only your first post, a mere introduction one would think (or perhaps, hope for?), and I'm treating you as if it's the 'alpha and omega.' Perhaps you'll win me over yet.

    ReplyDelete
  9. AS a nouvelle etudiante (6 years) as an adult, relying on the theory I obtained in 3 or 4 years of study in elementary school, I am interested in how you think adult students should be taught. I did scales and Hanon as a child, but do scales only occasionally as an adult. I'm tackling huge pieces now in spite of what I consider to be a tiny foundation. I've read most of a simple theory book to help me understand more, (but still don't do scales regularly as I think I should). I have certainly progressed tremendously in what I can do over the last 6 years, but feel overwhelmed. The pieces I work on seem to not leave time for anything as prosaic as scales or Hanon. Do you think it is better to do shorter pieces that you can better perfect, or do learn huge pieces and work on multiple techniques? Should I indeed be setting aside 30 minutes a day for scales or Hanon? Should I pay more attention to theory?

    I do love the music I'm learning, but am impatient to get the technique and interpretation that I long for.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thanks for the comment Susan.

    For many years -- from the moment I began playing until I finished my Bachelor's -- I advanced by gradually and relentlessly moving on to more and more advanced repertoire, always trying to go further. But my opinion is, that'll only take you so far (especially if the foundation is weak or incomplete): there is always the inevitable moment when you hit a plateau, when you seem to stop getting better (even though you're far from mastering the instrument) when playing yet another piece that's even more difficult than what you played last month or last year doesn't build on anything but your frustrations. You get the feeling that you've gone as far as you can, it's the depth of your talent. But it's a faux summit.Once I reached this plateau (and lived on it for a number of years) I realized that a new approach was needed. For me, that meant first going back to easier music (Schumann's Album for the Young, Debussy's Children's Corner, etc.)

    But the real break through was in reading a book called "A Symposium for Pianists and Teachers..." edited by Kris Kropff, which in turn lead me to Barbara Lister-Sink (see Freeing the Caged Bird) and the Alexander Technique. Later I went to Hanon -- but Hanon alone. For six months I dropped all repertoire to study the 60 exercises from beginning to end. And what a revelation!

    To answer your question, I think you should go by stages: I see nothing wrong with studying big repertoire; at a given moment in time (perhaps when you feel things are stagnating), change, do something else, take a step back. Learning the piano isn't a race to the finish.

    As for theory, to be truly free in your playing, for true, sustainable enjoyment there has to be understanding. I quoted Neuhaus above, and I'll quote him again: A pianist must know three things to master his art: the music, himself, the instrument. Knowing the music (how it works, its "grammar")is first and foremost.

    Good luck to you.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks for this lovely blog! I look forward to checking in on it regularly. As a fellow pianist and Alexander student, I admire your honesty in deciding that your technique was imperfect (like mine!) and your humility and diligence in deciding to go back to basics with Hanon.

    My only other thought at this point is that there are, in addition to Hanon and Czerny, myriad other composers such as Heller, Burgmuller, Cramer, Reinecke, etc., wrote studies at every level of difficulty, and that these can also provide the opportunity for a student to focus on a single aspect of technique while also enjoying an artistic experience. They're not masterworks, like Chopin's, but they're still very useful--in fact, maybe more so in the sense that they're not always distracting you with their sheer beauty and genius...Just a thought, and good luck with your blog!

    ReplyDelete