Michael Edwards wrote:
[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz:]
I did not suggest notation provides everything. But the information it *does* provide (such as 8va, which is the genesis of this discussion) needs to be used.
In theory I would agree with this position - but I'm going to sound a little inconsistent now with my previously-stated argument, and raise a possible problem here. I will use a particular example - but, even if you don't know it, I think the general point will be clear enough, and valid for performance of music generally.
There is a particular Scriabin Prelude for piano in Db major, which is a bit like a Chopin Nocturne in style: an expressive, decorative right-hand melody above a wide-spread left-hand arpeggiated accompaniment which gives a rich harmonic background. Pedalling is not for the most part notated, and presumably is obvious: that is, change the pedal at the start of each new harmony or each new bass-note in the left-hand figuration (these two mostly occurring together). However, an anomaly exists in the score for this piece, at least in my edition: there are just *two* bars in the middle of the piece which are marked "senza Ped.". The two bars are very similar to all the surrounding bars, and there is nothing about them, judging by the overall context they're in, to suggest they have a special expressive function, and need to be performed in a different style from the surrounding ones. The "senza Ped." indication is so anomalous that it looks like a misprint to me; and I cannot follow it literally without the music suddenly sounding utterly thin and ridiculous, completely spoiling the mood of the whole piece. I cannot follow this instruction and make musical sense out of the passage. I am very familiar with almost all of Scriabin's complete output, and feel I can make certain judgements about how his music should sound - and there is no other piece by him which has a similar anomaly notated in it.
But if you are of the "composer-notated-it-so-play-it-as-it-is" school, then why would you think you have the right to make ANY judgements about how his music should sound? As soon as you try to make judgements like that you are not in the "it's written so it should be played just like it is" school. Perhaps it is because he has no other passage similar that he chose to make that passage sound unique.
Personally, I would think that the senza ped. marking would clearly show you that the pedal should be depressed for ALL the other measures.
But if you believe Scriabin felt comfortable with pianist's ability to interpret his music, expecting what many would feel is appropriate pedalling (as you said, letting the pedal up and depressing it again at the start of each new harmony) then I would think you would have to honor the printed statement. It would show that Scriabin felt comfortable with pianists' pedalling skills EXCEPT in those two measures.
Or, you can do as it seems you want to do, and use your best judgement to achieve what you feel is Scriabin's desired interpretation.
But you can't have it both ways -- you can't allow yourself such an interpretive luxury with others' music and then demand rigid adherence to everything you notate in your own music.
If you can do it, so can we.
Now, in good conscience, what should I do here? Follow the instruction because the score tells me to, and produce a performance that sounds ridiculous and uncomfortable to me, out of keeping with the spirit (as I perceive it) of Scriabin's music? - or ignore it and produce a performance that sounds just right and where the two bars in question fit in well with the rest of the piece. I am strongly tempted to do the latter - but I do so with a guilty twinge, because I know it violates the principle I believe in, at least 99 percent of the time, of following the composer's intentions.
But why should you have a guilty twinge? Why can't you accept that your interpretation IS the composer's intentions? Why can't you accept that there truly is a partnership between composer and performer? And realize that in any partnership when one partner no longer trusts the other partner, that distrust goes both ways and before long the former partners are antagonists in an us-vs.-them situation, such as you so eloquently outlined in your previous post.
Why do you feel the musical world has to be so cut and dried?
I personally don't see how it CAN be cut and dried -- you may write a piece for clarinet and piano, expecting the clarinet tone of a Stanley Drucker or a Richard Stoltzman and the piano tone of an Andre Watts, but there's no way you can notate that other than to put an admonition for the clarinet player to play like Richard Stoltzman and the piano player to play with Andre Watts technique and tone. And since they are two very unique performers you are stuck with having only Richard and Andre perform it. But they would be able to do it exactly as you wrote it.
Except we get back to that "what is a forte" business.
Perhaps some may not know the Scriabin Prelude I mentioned - but it is just an example of the kind of anomaly that occasionally occurs in various pieces. I'd be interested in any thoughts on this. Are there times when something a composer has written is so out of style that a musician who tries honestly to realize the composer's wishes can validly conclude it is a slip of the pen or a misjudgement, and override it? (This being a solo piano piece, there are no considerations here of having to balance weight or texture with other performers - issues which, if present, might clarify the matter.)
Regards, Michael Edwards.
Composers are not gods, performers are not gods. And the notion that either is a god is perhaps the biggest and most harmful legacy of recording ability. Once a "definitive" interpretation is recorded by one artist and fulfills the goals and dreams of the composer, then nobody can ever perform it again because nobody can ever guarantee the sax player won't squeak, or the pianist may feel the work at a slower tempo which makes a work into a brand new work than many love better than the original.
We're partners in this art we all love and share -- as a composer I trust the performers to play what they feel is the best performance they are capable of. As a performer, I trust the composer will accept the best performance I am capable of giving as fulfilling his/her goals with the work in question.
And if a composer doesn't trust my judgement to give what I feel is the best performance, then I simply won't perform that composer's music.
-- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
