Filed under: Reviews | Tags: Also Sprach Zarathustra, Keitaro Harada, Lamont Symphony Orchestra, Lawrence Golan, Phoenix Youth Symphony, Richard Strauss, Sleeping Beauty, Tchaikovsky
It has been a very long time since I have heard Also Sprach Zarathustra in a live performance, and all the way through, so I was quite interested to hear the Lamont Symphony Orchestra perform this work on Sunday, January 15. In addition, it was to be the yearly performance with the Phoenix Youth Symphony, which means that the orchestra would be absolutely enormous. I haven’t heard the Phoenix Youth Symphony since they performed The Planets by the English composer, Gustav Holtz, and that was in 2010.
The Phoenix Youth Symphony has a new conductor, Maestro Keitaro Harada, and I will briefly quote from his website:
“Keitaro Harada is increasingly recognized as a conducting luminary of the next generation. A student of Lorin Maazel at Castleton Festival and recipient of the Seiji Ozawa Conducting Fellowship at Tanglewood Music Festival, Harada’s credentials are exemplary. At Tanglewood he assisted Christoph von Dohnanyi in the production of Strauss’ Ariadne auf Naxos and conducted the closing performance garnering this praise from The Boston Musical Intelligencer: ‘perfect timing, dramatic dynamics, and unerring coordination of the musical stagecraft.’ And, this review from Opera News: ‘For the third and final performance of Strauss’s Ariadne auf Naxos … rising young Japanese conductor Keitaro Harada, a student in the TMC program, got his turn to lead the forces prepared by Christoph von Dohnányi. Harada’s command of the score was total, from the uncommonly beautiful legato and sweep of the opening orchestral phrases, hinting at the inspired, ecstatic melodies created by the character known as the Composer, to the carefully controlled climaxes of the final duet, in which Ariadne and Bacchus join in uncomprehending ecstasy.’
“Harada is currently the Principal Guest Conductor for the Sierra Vista Symphony Orchestra, Assistant Conductor for Arizona Opera and Music Director for Phoenix Youth Symphony, an organization internationally recognized as one of the premiere youth orchestras in the United States. He previously served as Conductor of Arizona Symphony, UA Philharmonic Orchestra, and Mercer/Macon Symphony Youth Orchestra, and Assistant Conductor of the Tucson Symphony and Macon Symphony Orchestras.”
The Phoenix Youth Symphony performed first, Sunday, playing the Sleeping Beauty: Suite, Opus 66a, by Tchaikovsky. After the Tchaikovsky, they joined with the Lamont Symphony Orchestra and performed the Strauss Also Sprach Zarathustra.
Maestro Harada introduced the orchestra to the audience (which were far too few), then turned to his orchestra and began the Tchaikovsky. It has been a very long time since I have seen such an animated conductor on the podium. In addition, his movements were very angular and very sharp, but nonetheless, he was able to guide the orchestra through the flowing phrases of this ballet suite.
Keep in mind that this orchestra is comprised of high school students, so the Tchaikovsky couldn’t have been all that easy for them, even though they are one of the best youth orchestras in the United States. They’re playing was very impressive, and their woodwind section was outstanding. In addition, there was some fine work from the harp, which I could not see from where I was sitting.
As I listened to this excellent young orchestra, I wondered how many of them will go on to become professional musicians. All of them were working very hard, and were truly concerned with making music. Occasionally, an individual member’s enthusiasm would get the better of him, and there would be an incorrect dynamic or an incorrect entrance. Nonetheless, it was very enjoyable to listen to, and it was also quite enjoyable watching these young people play their hearts out.
Maestro Lawrence Golan then led the combined Lamont Symphony Orchestra and the Phoenix Youth Orchestra in the performance of Richard Strauss’ well-known Also Sprach Zarathustra. Except, is it really well known? Everyone knows the introduction, because it is that which was used in Stanley Kubrick’s famous movie, 2001: A Space Odyssey. But how many of you readers have heard it all the way through? I have spoken to many students who were unaware that this was a tone poem that contains such wonderfully beautiful music. Therefore, I applaud the choice of this piece of music for I think the students learned a great deal from it.
On the chance that some of you readers may be from Phoenix, and therefore a little unfamiliar with Dr. Lawrence Golan, I will quote from his website:
“Lawrence Golan is currently in his second season as the Helen N. Jewett Music Director of the Yakima Symphony Orchestra, central Washington’s premier professional orchestra. During his highly successful inaugural season, Golan helped to dramatically raise the artistic level of the orchestra. In addition, he spearheaded efforts to grow the organization financially as well. In just one year, the YSO increased its budget by 27%, its concert season by 33%, its private donations by 23%, its total ticket revenue by 39%, and single ticket sales more than doubled. Golan and the YSO also won an ASCAP Award for the Adventurous Programming of Contemporary Music. Golan’s appointment in Yakima comes on the heels of an equally successful four-year term as Resident Conductor of The Phoenix Symphony. That orchestra’s President and CEO Maryellen Gleason stated that Lawrence Golan was ‘unequivocally the best Resident Conductor The Phoenix Symphony ever had.’ Music Director Michael Christie said that Golan ‘is a programmer of virtually unprecedented creativity and scope.’ Several of the concerts that Golan programmed, conducted and narrated with The Phoenix Symphony turned out to be the most financially successful and well-attended performances in the history of the orchestra, completely selling out triple concert sets in a 2200-seat hall. Golan continues to guest conduct professional orchestras, opera, and ballet companies in the United States and around the world. Having conducted in 25 U.S. states and 15 countries, recent engagements include performances in Boulder, Macon, Memphis, and Tucson as well as the Czech Republic, Italy, Korea, and Taiwan.
“Following in the footsteps of his father Joseph Golan, longtime Principal Second Violinist of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, Lawrence Golan is also an accomplished violinist. He was Concertmaster of the Portland Symphony Orchestra for eleven years, has appeared as soloist with numerous orchestras, including the Chicago Symphony, and has made several commercially available recordings as a violinist. His recording entitled Indian Summer: The Music of George Perlman, is treasured by young violin students and their teachers and is regarded as a very helpful and inspiring pedagogical aide.”
Before I continue with this review, you must understand that the Phoenix Youth Symphony arrived in Denver on Saturday, January 14. That means, that since this performance was given on the 15th, there was one day for these two orchestras to merge and have some rehearsal time. Think of that. The Strauss work is very difficult, to say the least, and here, you have a youth orchestra and a university orchestra trying to work out all of the difficulties caused by the merger (the logistics are mind-boggling) in one day. I think that everyone involved, in any way with this concert, deserves a lot of praise.
There is a world of difference (and why shouldn’t there be) between Maestro Harada and Maestro Golan. Golan’s movements, in comparison to Harada’s, are smooth and almost liquid. When I make such a statement, please understand that I’m not criticizing either conductor, I am simply describing the difference between the two. It must be interesting, to say the least, to conduct an orchestra with such mixed abilities and experience. However, Maestro Golan did it, and it is my opinion that he did it extremely well. It was amazing to sit in the audience, in the seventh row, and watch this entire orchestra work so very hard and be so incredibly moved by the music and the fact that they were giving birth to it. You must understand that some of the students in this orchestra, and they were all students, had never played in such a large ensemble, and I am certain, that some of them had never played a piece of music similar to the Strauss. Any musician, who is rewarded by teaching, will tell you that one of those rewards is seeing the students moved by the music itself. Were there mistakes in this performance? Yes, but you must not hold it against any of these performers, especially when you consider their age, and the lack of rehearsal time. Was the performance exciting? Yes, without a doubt, it was. It is very gratifying to see young students so tremendously moved by the power of the music, and there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that these students were. They were also trying as hard as they could to make this a successful performance. In spite of the mistakes, it was a successful performance, because it was clear that the students were having a marvelous learning experience.
Filed under: Reviews | Tags: Benjamin Hochman, Boulder Philharmonic Orchestra, Debussy, Eric Satie, Howard Hanson, Jean Sibleius, Michael Butterman, Ravel
Saturday, January 14, was a most unusual day. I was able to attend two outstanding concerts: the Boulder Philharmonic Orchestra with Benjamin Hochman, piano, and the Peak Performances Chamber Series. It was also unusual when I considered how many truly remarkable performances I have been able to attend this concert season. I don’t recall any particular year where there have been so many fine performances by so many fine organizations.
The Boulder Philharmonic Orchestra concert was simply beyond compare from at least two standpoints: 1) the programming was absolutely brilliant: Satie, Hanson, Ravel, and Gershwin. 2) The performance itself, the ability of the orchestra, and the brilliant performance of Benjamin Hochman, were magnificent.
The Boulder Phil began their program with two of the Gymnopédies, Nr. 1 and Nr. 3, by the French composer, Eric Satie (1866-1925). Eric Satie was born into a good family, but in spite of his wealth, he embraced poverty as the price of admission into artistic freedom. There is a wonderful portrait of Satie which was painted in 1891 by Santiago Rusiñol. It shows the young composer in his apartment in the Montmartre section of Paris, sitting before his fireplace, lost in thought. To me, it seems to show his loneliness, in spite of his friendship with so many artists, and especially that of Claude Debussy. In fact, it was Debussy who orchestrated the two Gymnopédies performed on the evening’s program, and he did so with the full approval of Eric Satie. However, many of his friends described Satie as being rather odd, and even inaccessible. As stated in the program notes, this oddness of personality was manifested by the directions that he would give in his scores, for example, “like a nightingale with a toothache.” That may seem unusual to us today, but isn’t it only a tiny bit more extreme than Robert Schumann’s instructions for the performer known as “eye music,” where he wrote accents over a series of tied notes, or wrote, “The sound of the carnival fades into the distance?”
The Boulder Philharmonic performed Satie’s two Gymnopédies beautifully. Maestro Butterman certainly allowed the music to express itself in its simplicity and remarkable melodic lines. It was limpid and fluid and it also demonstrated Debussy’s skill at orchestration. It reflected Satie’s adherence to the aesthetics of Les Six, the group of French composers who aspired to more “simple” music when compared to that of Richard Wagner.
The second work on the program was by the American composer Howard Hanson (1896-1981). Hanson was born in Wahoo, Nebraska of Nordic parents, and never really absorbed the American-influenced sounds that typified other American composers of the 20th century. In fact, he often admitted that he was strongly affected by the music of Sibelius. After obtaining a degree from Northwestern University in 1916, he became the first American composer to win the Prix de Rome, which gave him the opportunity to study with the Italian composer, Ottorino Respighi. When he returned to the United States, he was appointed head of the Eastman School of Music, which he had helped found.
Hanson’s Symphony Nr. 2, is without a doubt, Hanson’s best known work. There is no question that in this work, there is much influence, as Hanson himself admitted, from the Fifth Symphony by Jean Sibelius. It contains a great deal of dramatic tension and orchestral weight. In addition, this symphony is, as the program notes point out, cyclical. The same theme occurs in each of the symphony’s movements, and this adds to the remarkable accessibility of this work, aside from the incredible lyricism with its long and arching shapes.
The opening of this work is really quite dark in mood, and there is enough dissonance, that one has the feeling of listening to something that is both new and old. The woodwind section throughout this entire work was absolutely excellent, but I must say that as Butterman swept the first movement along on its path, it was very clear that there is not one weak section in this entire orchestra. The Boulder Philharmonic Orchestras is so successful because they are so well-balanced in ability. This was the second concert I had heard on this day, and it almost seems miraculous that both performances, one a chamber group and the other a full orchestra, were so well conceived and shaped. There is much brass work in all three movements of the Symphony, but in the second movement, they were exceptional. Maestro Butterman was very committed to achieving the rich and full sound that Hanson demands from the orchestra. Before the performance of this work began, Butterman said that in some respects, this Symphony was similar to a movie theme waiting for the movie to come along, and compared it to the writing of John Williams, who has written so many movie scores. While I can certainly understand Maestro Butterman’s point, I do think that Howard Hanson is a better musician and composer, and I assure you, I do not wish to take anything away from John Williams’ ability.
The third movement of this symphony seems to have a few references to Stravinsky in it, with its ostinato and strong percussion. The lush melody, which makes this symphony cyclical, returns and ends the symphony by refreshing everyone’s ear. The string section, the cellos in particular, were most noticeable in their warm tone and provided a genuine sense of reconciliation at the end of the work. The performance of Howard Hanson’s Symphony Nr. 2 on this program was a genuine surprise, and provided a wonderful contrast with the other works on the program. Hanson may not be ensconced on Mount Parnassus at the same level as Beethoven or Mahler or Bruckner, but he is a composer that deserves a position there, and also deserves to be heard on a more regular basis.
After the intermission, the pianist, Benjamin Hochman, joined the orchestra and performed Ravel’s Piano Concerto in G Major.
I will quote from the bio statement on his website:
“Born in Jerusalem, Benjamin Hochman began his studies with Esther Narkiss at the Conservatory of the Rubin Academy in Jerusalem and Emanuel Krasovsky in Tel Aviv. He is a graduate of the Curtis Institute of Music and the Mannes College of Music where his principal teachers were Claude Frank and Richard Goode. Mr. Hochman’s studies were supported by the America-Israel Cultural Foundation and he is an Associate Professor of Piano at East Carolina University. Benjamin Hochman is a Steinway Artist and lives in New York City with his wife, violinist Jennifer Koh.
“Winner of 2011’s prestigious Avery Fisher Career Grant, Pianist Benjamin Hochman has achieved widespread acclaim for his effortless and thoughtful performances as an accomplished orchestral soloist, recitalist and chamber musician. After his successful recital debut at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, he became a strong musical presence in New York through his concerts with the New York Philharmonic and the American Symphony Orchestra, his Carnegie Hall debut with the Israel Philharmonic and appearances at the 92nd Street Y. Mr. Hochman has performed with the Chicago, Pittsburgh, American, Cincinnati. Houston Symphony and Istanbul State Orchestras, the Seattle, San Francisco, Vancouver, New Jersey and Portland Symphonies, the New York String Orchestra, Prague Philharmonia and the National Arts Centre Orchestra in Canada under eminent conductors such as Kazuyoshi Akiyama, Leon Botstein, Nir Kabaretti, Jaime Laredo, Jun Märkl, Daniel Meyer, Arthur Post, Lucas Richman, Bramwell Tovey, Kaspar Zehnder and Pinchas Zukerman. He has appeared in his native Israel with the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra, Tel Aviv Soloists, the Raanana and Jerusalem Symphonies, and has joined conductor Pinchas Zukerman and the Chicago Symphony Orchestra in a Mozart Piano Concerto project with Hubbard Street Dance Chicago.
“Past festival highlights include Ravinia, Caramoor, Marlboro, Santa Fe, Bard, Bridgehampton, Gilmore, Vail, An Appalachian Summer and Vancouver in North America, as well as international festivals such as Lucerne, Spoleto, Verbier, Ruhr, and Prussia Cove. Mr. Hochman has performed internationally at such major halls as the Concertgebouw, the Louvre, Tivoli Theatre, l’Auditori de Barcelona, Suntory Hall in Tokyo and Kumho Art Hall in Seoul. A masterful collaborator, Benjamin Hochman has worked with the Tokyo, Mendelssohn, Casals, Prazak and Daedalus Quartets, the Zukerman ChamberPlayers, members of the Guarneri and Orion Quartets, Miklós Perényi, Ralph Kirshbaum, Jaime Laredo, Sharon Robinson, Cho-Liang Lin and Ani Kavafian. As a dedicated advocate for contemporary music, he has performed works by Kurtág, Carter, Lutoslowski, and Andriessen, and has worked closely with such notable composers as Krzysztof Penderecki, Philippe Hurel, Osvaldo Golijov and Tania Leon, among others.”
After hearing Benjamin Hochman perform the Ravel, it should be obvious to anyone in the audience that all of us heard a world-class pianist. What was so startling about his performance was the ease with which he played. In order to be accurate, which he was, and in order to shape the phrases the way the composer wishes at the tempo the composer demands, one has to be totally relaxed physically and mentally. Every performer, whether a violinist, a singer, or a pianist, becomes nervous immediately before they enter the stage. But, after they begin to perform, and after the first few measures of the piece, they must know it so well mentally, and be so competent physically, that they can relax and enjoy making the music. You must understand, that the reason one becomes a performing artist, is because there is joy in it, and so many people who are not performing musicians seem to miss this point. Benjamin Hochman is one of the most relaxed pianists that I have seen in several years. He was totally at ease and able to concentrate totally on the job that he enjoys so much. He plays so unbelievably well, there is no need to make the extravagant motions that some pianists make, as if they are saying, “Look how I lifted my hand from the keyboard. Isn’t that terribly expressive and indicative of my great sensitivity?” Hochman simply sits down at the piano, and through the music, shows us what a remarkable artist he is and how remarkable the music is.
His reliable musicianship (And even that seems silly to say. If he was not reliable, he wouldn’t be where he is) obviously made it much easier for Maestro Butterman to make music as well, and I was under the distinct impression that they truly enjoyed working together. And of course every performance is much easier if there is mutual respect.
The tempos taken were absolutely perfect: full of energy and drive. Ravel often said that the piano was his favorite instrument and it certainly shows in this composition, for he uses the piano’s expressive ability to the fullest potential. In addition, the orchestration of the piece, which is remarkable, supports everything that the piano executes. But it was Hochman’s relaxation that made his performance look so easy and sound so absolutely marvelous. His hands and arms never once became rigid or tense, and mentally, he was absolutely beyond compare.
I hope there were some aspiring pianists in the audience who could recognize why his playing is so artistically perfect. It will certainly give them something to strive for, and at the same time, give them the awareness that their goal is entirely realistic.
Following the Ravel, the Boulder Philharmonic Orchestra performed George Gershwin’s American in Paris. For whatever reason, when I was an undergraduate student (and that was in the late 50s and early 60s), no one seemed to understand that Ravel and Gershwin knew each other, even though it was admitted that they influenced each other a great deal. Everyone expressed the knowledge that they had their pictures taken together, but scholars always said that they never really met. I studied with a man, Walter Bricht, who was a close friend of Ravel’s, and he told me that he saw Gershwin at Ravel’s house. I wrote about that and posted the article on April 6, 2011. If you just go to the archives listed the left-hand side of this page and click on April 2011, you can find the article. At any rate, it was a great relief to hear Maestro Butterman state that they certainly did know each other, and that they compared each other’s scores, for there is much more in their compositions than just casual influence.
American in Paris needs no introduction whatsoever, and really, George Gershwin doesn’t either. But I will say that George Gershwin still remains a remarkably underrated composer. The performance of this remarkable tone poem, and it is a tone poem because it was inspired by extra-musical considerations, was absolutely marvelous. Yes, there is much American jazz influence in this work as well, with its 9th, 11th, and 13th chords, but Gershwin also said, that aside from the Ravel influence, that he was also inspired by Claude Debussy. But I must say, that if Paris is known by its nickname, The City of Lights, then this performance certainly reflected that image.
The performance of the Boulder Philharmonic Orchestra, and the performance of Benjamin Hochman, plus the ability of the Boulder Phil to invite such an artist, underscores a fact that needs to be clearly stated: the State of Colorado has two major orchestras: the Colorado Symphony Orchestra in Denver, and the Boulder Philharmonic Orchestra.
Filed under: Reviews | Tags: César Franck, Christina Jennings, Debussy, Erica Eckert, frank bridge, Lina Bahn, Margaret Soper Gutierrez, Matthew Dane, Mozart, Peak Performances Chamber Series, Ravel, Silver Ainomäe, Thomas Heinrich
Saturday evening, January 14, the Peak Performances Chamber Series performed again at the Saint Andrews Episcopal Church on Glenarm Place. As I have said before, this is an absolutely marvelous venue for chamber music – it is large enough for a decent sized audience, and yet, the surroundings are quite intimate, and the acoustics are excellent.
Matthew Dane and Christina Jennings founded the Peak Performances Chamber Series, and in this, their second performance, the ensemble performed two string sextets. Because of that, we did not get to hear Christina Jennings, who is a flautist, but she will perform next weekend, Saturday, January 21, at Augustana Lutheran Church with guitarist Jonathan Leathwood.
The musicians in Saturday’s performance were founder and violist, Matthew Dane; Lina Bahn, violin; Margaret Soper Gutierrez, violin; Erica Eckert, viola; Silver Ainomäe, cello; and Thomas Heinrich, cello. Of the two sextets that were performed, the first was an arrangement of Mozart’s Sinfonia Concertante, K. 364, and the second was the Sextet in E flat Major, by English composer Frank Bridge.
The Mozart was first on the program, and I wish that the German–American musicologist, Alfred Einstein, could have heard it. He often said that he thought the most perfect work ever written was Mozart’s Eine kleine Nachtmusik. I think he would have been amazed if he could have heard the performance Saturday evening. Yes, it was an arrangement, but it was enormously well done, and had I not known it was an arrangement, it would have been very easy to believe that that was the original form of the work. Alfred Einstein was certainly aware, I’m sure, that there was an arrangement of Mozart’s Sinfonia Concertante. Please do not confuse Alfred Einstein with the physicist, Albert Einstein, which is done quite often. As a matter of fact, if you Google Alfred Einstein, you will get pictures of Albert Einstein with Alfred’s name above them. At any rate, Alfred Einstein was a Mozart scholar, and in 1936, published the first major revision of the Köchel Thematic Catalogue of Mozart’s Works. Aside from that monumental task, and writing several books on the history of music, he did spend part of his life demonstrating that he was not related to the physicist Albert Einstein.
As stated above, the individual who arranged the Mozart for string sextet is unknown, but it certainly preserves the expansiveness and the warmness of the original version. It was also quite wonderful watching the performance Saturday night, because once again, Dane and Jennings have put together an ensemble that was matched in ability and in enthusiasm. It was a spellbinding performance that began with an absolutely enormous sound and was very authoritative, and I assure you that this arrangement was full and rich. There was some marvelous divisi writing between each of the cellos and each of the violas that produced the most remarkable textures. I am sure that those in the audience who were familiar with the original K. 364, had a moment of epiphany when the B theme of the first movement was played. As the (well-written) program notes stated, it is quite easy to have the feeling as this piece is performed, that one is hearing something new, and yet, something very familiar.
The second movement was sheer bliss. Lina Bahn obtains an incredibly sweet sound from her violin, and it was complemented by the full richness of the two cellos. The second movement was technically perfect by all six members of the sextet: their dynamics were absolutely superb individually, and as a group. Again, I was struck by the ability of Matthew Dane and putting together such a remarkable ensemble.
The musicians gave the third movement the typical Mozart ambiance of playfulness. This work was written on the cusp of a period of time where the Viennese public was beginning to think that Mozart’s music was too dense and difficult to understand. Yes, there are some dense textures in the third movement, but it is not quite as dense as the first movement, particularly when one takes into consideration that Mozart almost always provided music theorists with two hundred years’ worth of problems upon which to write dissertations. This is a beautiful piece, and these musicians gave it an absolutely wonderful performance. They played with great enthusiasm for what they were doing, and they were so astoundingly skilled at playing their instruments, and so musical, that they actually had time to acknowledge the joy they felt by smiling to each other.
It is always refreshing, I think, when a group of musicians performs a composer that is not heard frequently. And, I might add, frequently enough. I also admit that even though I am familiar with the composer, this was the first time I have ever heard this particular work. I am speaking about the Sextet in E flat Major by English composer, Frank Bridge, which the Peak Performances Chamber Series performed Saturday afternoon.
Frank Bridge (1878-1941) was from Brighton, England, and he won a scholarship to the Royal College of Music where he proceeded to lead an almost Renaissance in the composition of English music. And, likewise with his fellow students Ralph Vaughn Williams, John Ireland, and Gustav Holst. He also became a prominent violist and conductor, even though composition remained his major interest. Throughout the course of his life, his works changed from almost Brahms-ian romanticism to works which embraced the world of Alban Berg, Webern, and Schoenberg. Certainly, these three composers from the Second Viennese School proved to be quite radical for the English audience, and I don’t know if it was because of that, but, after he died in 1941, his works received few performances.
The sextet that was performed was written between 1906 and 1912. It is a remarkably lush piece, and shows far more influence than the above mentioned Brahms-ian style romanticism. It shows much influence, harmonically, from the French Impressionists, Debussy and Ravel, in addition to influence from Debussy’s teacher, César Franck. Truly, it was much more French than English. It was full of deceptive resolutions, and made much use of common tones in order to affect the resolution. For example, a G sharp might be rewritten as an A flat, thus changing the destination of the chord. The opening movement was incredibly lush and full of tension, and its darkness reminded me very much of the first movement of Franck’s formidable Piano Quintet in F minor in that respect. But there were many instances where the influence of Debussy and Ravel were unmistakable. This led me to wonder why scholars don’t refer to Bridge as an Impressionist composer, rather than, simply, a romantic composer.
Of course, the really important consideration about Saturday’s performance is the performance itself. And, it was lush, it was passionate, and it was full of tension. This was such a successful performance of such a beautiful piece, that I am puzzled about the lack of performances, not only of this piece, but of the music of Frank Bridge. I am absolutely convinced that if the public at large was aware of this composer, he would be performed considerably more often.
I can assure you with all enthusiasm and confidence, that the Peak Performances Chamber Series is composed, not just of consummate musicians, but of consummate artists, and I mean that with all sincerity. These performers (and performances) are absolutely stellar. They’re the kind of performers that one would hear in any major venue in the world. It gives me great pleasure to encourage all of you readers to attend these performances. I also encourage you to go back to the first three paragraphs of this article. Read the names of these musicians and remember them.
I know that you will run across their names again and again, for they represent what music is all about.
Filed under: Commentary
Recently, I have been forced, through no fault of my own (Does that expose prejudice?) to deal with method books designed to make piano teaching “exciting and easy” for the student. I decided to post my opinion on this subject, because, in some ways, it could have been included in my two recent articles on the fragility and diminution of our culture.
For those of you who are not familiar with method books, they are books (most often a series of five or more) which are designed to be used, usually in consecutive order, starting with learning to read music, and usually covering some aspect of technique, which the books define as the ability to move one’s fingers in the right place at the right time. There are many publishers of method books, and I will not name any of the publishers since my opinion of method books has never been high, and with every re-acquaintance, sinks lower. The reason for my poor opinion of them is that all of these books and their authors and their publishers make several assumptions which are contrary to what I believe about teaching piano and teaching the art of music.
1.) They make the assumption that all students are alike.
2.) They make the assumption that learning piano is an arduous task for young people who want to learn it, therefore:
3.) The music in them is quite often a famous melody from symphonies, ballets, or operas that have been simplified so that the student can play them.
4.) That automatically assumes that the student cannot possibly be interested in anything they have not heard before.
5.) This should make it fairly clear that the authors and publishers (note that I did not say composers and publishers) think that children can’t be very bright.
6.) The five items above should also make it fairly clear that the authors and publishers think that the teachers can’t be very bright, or at least have not much education to know about the music written by composers for their children or their students, which is, unfortunately, often the case.
7.) The authors and publishers of method books also advertise often that their publications make it easy for the piano teacher.
8.) All of the above destroy the art of music, particularly when one considers that:
9.) Some of the authors of the method books consider themselves to be composers, and “compose” pieces with catchy titles such as “From the Wigwam” which they think will appeal to young students.
10.) This obfuscates the necessity of the teacher to teach music as an art and piano playing as an art.
11.) There is an alarming number of piano teachers who are not seemingly concerned with teaching music as an art, and likewise, playing the piano. Many of them have the absolute best of intentions, but continually insult the intelligence of even four-year-olds when it comes to teaching piano and music.
There are those teachers who think that only students who are “born with a natural gift” will ever become good students. They fail to recognize the fact that it has been proven that no one is born with a natural gift for anything in particular. Mozart excelled because his father, while a mediocre composer, happened to be a good teacher, and he started teaching Mozart at a very early age. The same thing applies to the famous golfer, Tiger Woods. Those who proclaim him a “natural talent” don’t seem to understand that his father, like Mozart’s, was a very skilled teacher, plus, he gave Tiger his first golf club when he was 11 months old.
It is alarming to me that the reliance on method books is so strong. It certainly demonstrates, again, in my opinion, that the teacher does not have proper training on which to rely. Education is of paramount importance to any profession. Lawyers and doctors have a professional degree, which they have to have before they practice, and for the rest of their lives they are reading to keep themselves current in their profession. The same applies to accountants and architects. I have run across many piano teachers who rely on method books because they lack that education. Therefore, the easiest path for them to take is to rely on a series of books that tells them what to do. I have always been mystified by those who don’t know the literature, and yet feel comfortable teaching the inadequate material that usually appears in method books.
It seems most obvious to refute the above eleven points as follows:
1.) It should be plainly clear that no two students are alike, no matter the similarities. It is certain that their hands will not be alike.
2.) Learning to play the piano can be an arduous task if:
3.) The music is poor, or a badly arranged version for piano of some orchestral piece that the student may, or may not be, familiar with.
4.) It is up to the teacher to teach the student something new. After all, learning to play the piano is new. What a gift it is to the student to learn Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, Schumann, Kabalevsky, Prokofiev, Haydn, Clementi, and countless others, who wrote music specifically for the keyboard, rather than teach something that has been poorly arranged for the keyboard (How many of you readers have ever heard a young student pound out the theme from “Star Wars,” and shuddered every single time?). There are those who believe that because they can play the piano, not only can they teach it, but they can compose music for it. The teachers who think this way suffer from a failing to understand that composition takes as much skill and study to learn as does learning to play the piano.
5.) Comments in Number 4.) should make it obvious why I call method book authors “authors,” and not composers.
6.) It has often seemed to me that method book authors and publishers do believe that teachers can’t be very bright because they seldom write material that does not insult the teachers intelligence because of its lack of artistic taste, and its implied statement that it will help make teaching and art easy. I am constantly reminded of Pablo Picasso’s statement that, “Anyone can turn the sun into a yellow spot, but only an artist can turn a yellow spot into the sun.”
7.) Teaching is work.
8.) How could one be involved in the destruction of art, and not even recognize it? The teacher fails in his own perception of music as art.
9.) Why continue to insult the intelligence and learning ability of the students?
10.) If the teachers don’t recognize music as an art, they ought not to be teaching it. What an advantage it would be if really young students grew up to realize that music is an art.
The problem arises because as the students get older, and can form their own thoughts, they can look back and regret that they never learned an art.
Many have complained, including myself, that concert audiences today do not include many young people – the majority of the audience is fifty years old and older, however this particular concert season, I have noticed that more young people have been attending concerts. I have sometimes blamed technology for the decline of the acceptance of culture (briefly described as music, art, interest in reading, and knowledge of those fields) in individuals younger than thirty-five years of age, but sometimes I think I have been unfair. Culture has had its aesthetic Pollyannas, preaching that all that it might do would be right; it has had its abusers, pushing it to express various agendas, sometimes literally “out of the barrel of a gun”; others have urged that it be respected, warning, as Robert Bolt’s Sir Thomas More did, “This country’s planted thick with laws… and if you cut them down… Do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?” In addition, as everyone is aware, every time there is a financial crisis, artistic culture is the first thing that disappears.
Some may say that I am exaggerating when I discuss method books and compare them to the loss of culture. However, I would point out that the earlier students learn good music, the easier it is for them to understand and appreciate it, and what is learned at an early age usually stays with the student for a very long time. It also exposes them, by making them curious, to other forms of the arts such as literature and the visual arts. How many of Debussy’s friends were artists? Or Stravinsky’s? Or Webern’s? Or Cage’s?
On what path do we set our students? No matter how removed teachers think they are or wish to be, they must realize that they are navigators for these students lives, and they must not use faulty maps. I am quite sure that no teacher wants his student to suffer a loss of definition, or place, or meaning, for example, in the same manner that some of the characters in Samuel Beckett’s plays have suffered, such as Vladimir and Estragon who spend their lives together, and apart, with little to do but looking and waiting for Godot, because they have no culture in their lives to help give them meaning.