Puzzle or Conquest??

[lisztisforkids]

My teacher asked me this question. And i have to say it made me think a little bit about the repotoire. Liszt- a conquest. Bach- a puzzel.

[xvimbi]

Both. There is a "battle" component to pieces with respect to the technical challenges. It's a struggle to get the notes down. But then, there is the component that has to do with unlocking the secrets of a piece. That, to me, refers to its musical meaning, its larger structure, development of themes, modulations, etc.

In the end, every piece has both of those components. Liszt wrote pieces that are extreme puzzles, just like Bach wrote pieces that are technically challenging, but not challenging at all from an intellectual point of view.

To me, the question is, is it possible that unlocking the secrets of a piece is a battle? That simply implies that it might be intellectually difficult to get to the heart of a piece, in which case the piece indeed poses a puzzle.

So, the answert to me is both, and the two choices refer to different aspects of a piece, they are not mutually exclusive.

[Bouter Boogie]

Neither. I'm too lazy

- BB

[Tash]

i'd say neither, as there's never a complete ending- when do you solve the puzzle or conquer it? it's like working out when something you're painting is 'finished'- whenever you think if you'll make another mark it'll kill the whole painting- but it's subjective- there is no final answer. i'd put those metaphors more with analysing the chords and stuff of the piece, but even that can get messy at times...

[leahcim]

when do you solve the puzzle or conquer it?

That question implies to me, "both, but you can never really solve or conquer it" - or at least the solution is very subjective.

Which I'd agree with - a puzzle doesn't need to be solved to be a puzzle.

[Tash]

i don't agree with that- a puzzle has to be solved that's the whole point of a puzzle!

[arensky]

xvimbi is right, could not explain it better....