Klarinet Archive - Posting 000265.txt from 2003/02

From: "Raycraft" <raycraft@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Klarinet 101: Performance
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 18:37:36 -0500

I agree that good music is already interesting! But the
question was regarding whether to play a C or a C#
and whether it sounds "right" or not, and if it sounds "wrong",
maybe that was the intent of the composer...and
how will we ever know for sure what the intent of the
composer was, and so on......
One thing I have learned from all this is that I AM NOT
THE ONLY PERSON WHO IS ON THE COMPUTER
TOO MUCH!!! :)
Sue

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Pay" <Tony@-----.uk>
Subject: Re: [kl] Klarinet 101: Performance

> On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 13:48:28 -0700, cactus@-----.net said:
>
> > > ...I think that the 'bringing to' bit, that seems to imply an
> > > 'addition' of some sort, is the metaphor that creates the
> > > difficulty. It's as though you have to 'make it interesting', then.
> >
> > I'm not sure why this is difficult, unless it is a language usage
> > issue that is getting in the way.
>
> It is a language usage issue in part. The words people use are often
> misleading.
>
> By the way, I should be clear that we're talking here about music like
> the C-T sonata. We're not talking about improvisation, or even about
> what might happen were somebody to take elements of the C-T sonata as a
> basis for an improvisation; though I could probably say something
> different, but similar, about that too.
>
> I shall further assume that the C-T is 'good' music. (It obviously
> doesn't matter what you do to bad music -- changing it might easily make
> it better:-)
>
> The point is, 'good' music is *already* interesting.
>
> Now, everyone's view of it *as interesting* is slightly different, which
> means that interesting performances differ.
>
> But those interesting performances are not interesting *because* they
> are different. And more importantly, they're not interesting *because*
> they differ from the text provided by the composer. As I've tried to
> make clear here before in various ways, it's perfectly possible to do
> wonderful performances of pieces like the C-T that could be said to
> diverge not at all from what the composer wrote.
>
> But conversely, it's all too possible for a performer to do something
> that comes over as an attempt to make interesting something that they
> don't find interesting, by changing it. I encounter students doing that
> all the time. It's as though the first thing they do is to *not play
> what's written*, because they think they need to 'bring something of
> their own' to it.
>
> This is a mistake, and you can hear that it's a mistake if you're
> familiar with the sort of experience that wonderful performances give
> you. It's the sort of mistake that makes you think that the
> performer is unduly pleased with themselves, or makes you think that
> the piece itself is rather shallow.
>
> You can avoid that mistake by concentrating on how you can most clearly
> represent *what is interesting about the text* to someone else; namely,
> a member of your audience, because funnily enough, no one really wants
> to hear what you think is interesting about *you*.
>
> Of course, doing that doesn't guarantee a good performance, because you
> just may not be up to recognising enough of what is interesting about
> the music, or not technically able to make that clear.
>
> Tony
> --
> _________ Tony Pay
> |ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
> | |ay Oxford OX2 6RE http://classicalplus.gmn.com/artists
> tel/fax 01865 553339
>
> ... Tie-poas? No way! My modem has MNP1-5!
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------