Creative differences

[cygnusdei]

How do you handle situations in which your student have a different interpretation of a passage? Do you put your foot down or let the student have his/her own way?

[asyncopated]

I am a student, and I think that my teacher gives me a lot of creative freedom.  I know this because when after polishing a piece, it does not sound exactly the same as when she plays its.

I think that there are two important things to seperate here.  There is basic musicallity like phrasing on and off, pedalling (if any) in baroque and classical pieces, getting the touch and sound right.  This is necessary, and in my way, does not count towards the creative process. I reject the argument that in creativity, you can do anything you like, and am more for the argument, that you can do anything you like given the wishes of the composer, the history and the period.

Despite these constrains, there is still a huge amount of room for creativity. A lot of the time, she says things like, 'that sounds good'  I would play it like that, but I'm sure that there are people who play it like you do (within the confines mentioned above).  In this sense, she certianly does not restrict how I play the piece.

[m1469]

Well, I suppose to some degree it depends.   As a student myself, I used to believe there was a "correct way" to interpret things and to be musical.  And, some teachers would treat me more like this than others.  I learned a lot from all, depending on my ability to realize that a teacher presenting a strong opinion one way was simply expressing a personal opinion (even if well-educated) that I could then bounce my own ideas off of (and that was the main purpose somebody dictating to me would serve).

Aside from physical motions, there are basic tools for expression :

Dynamics (pedalling included)
Articulations (pedalling included)
Accents (both agogic and velocity-induced)
Phrasing
Tempo
Rhythm (rubato comes to mind)

People use these tools differently and sometimes have no awareness of what they are doing nor why.  My goal as a teacher is not to dictate, necessarily, how these tools "should" be used and where but rather, to help bring about awareness regarding the kinds of effects they, as a performer, are getting by the decisions (or non-decisions) they are making.  

Ideally, I want to encourage the student to explore different uses of these tools within the context of the musical style, etc..  If they have explored and have some true decision on why they have arrived where they have arrived without "rewriting" the score (ie, notes that are not actually there, or missing notes that should be there, etc), generally I will not mess with it even if I disagree with it or would choose something different myself.   

It does depend on the student, the piece, the precise interpretative decision, and the situation.



m1469

[rc]

As a student, I'm excited by the learning opprotunities in these creative differences.  The important thing, for both teacher and student, is to be able to have expressive reasons for their choices - that it serves a purpose and isn't some arbitrary thing.

Another thing worth mentioning is how a lot of the time in the moment I can be unyielding to another opinion, but afterwards will think about it and decide "oh, my teacher had a good point!"   I'm just suggesting that a teacher should give their opinion even if a hardheaded student won't hear it in the moment, they may give it consideration afterwards.

I really like m1469s approach of showing the student options they have to experiment with.  That would be fun for a student as well - suddenly having all these ideas to play around with.

On a sidenote, I don't consider all interpretive reasons equal.  I tried giving an informal lesson to a girl once who gave me reasoning that struck me as an elaborate explaination for simple laziness - to not learn all the notes or correct wrong notes.

[penguinlover]

I also agree with m1469, and her approach.  To say more would be restating the same things.  After the student has learned the piece, with all the interpretations the compose wrote in, it's pretty much free game.  Let them experiment.  That's how we make musicians, not robots!

[tiasjoy]

Yes! Me Too!  I agree with m1469 - especially for advanced students.  We listen to many different interpretations to a piece - I'll play certain phrases in two different ways to demonstrate- or we'll sometimes improvise to get into a mood/feeling. 

I've had one advanced student (a few years ago now, they're off teaching piano in another city) who didn't agree with my particular take on a piece, (we were listening to).  It was played with rubato, which I thought added to the passion, and she thought it distracted the rhythm and thus the melody.   And I LOVED that she had developed her own opinions!!  I hope all my studens will eventually do the same.

[ramseytheii]

Well, I suppose to some degree it depends.   As a student myself, I used to believe there was a "correct way" to interpret things and to be musical.  And, some teachers would treat me more like this than others.  I learned a lot from all, depending on my ability to realize that a teacher presenting a strong opinion one way was simply expressing a personal opinion (even if well-educated) that I could then bounce my own ideas off of (and that was the main purpose somebody dictating to me would serve).

I still believe there is a correct way to interpret things.  However this presupposes that one has a philosophy that can be applied universally to all pieces.  For example. Richter held the philosophy that, in Ravel's words, a performer is essentially a slave who plays exactly what is on the page: "nothing more, nothing less."  This is an objective philosophy that is not just a personal opinion of Richter, and for those who follow it, it provides the criteria for determining whether something or not is correct.

If a teacher tells you strongly to play in one way, and the argument is based in reason and not whim, then it is not just a personal opinion, but an objective analysis of the facts at hand from the piece.  In your defense, this probably doesn't happen very often, because in the piano world people are just more concerned with their personal opinions, which only go as far as the opinion givers themselves: they never reach anybody else, and that is what you just proved.  So in effect opinions don't propagate.  Therefore we should always be at pains to come to our decisions, and our final product, rationally, with sound musical logic. 

Aside from physical motions, there are basic tools for expression :

Dynamics (pedalling included)
Articulations (pedalling included)
Accents (both agogic and velocity-induced)
Phrasing
Tempo
Rhythm (rubato comes to mind)

I would just say that physical motions are only expressive insofar as they achieve the goals for the categories you list above.

Ideally, I want to encourage the student to explore different uses of these tools within the context of the musical style, etc..  If they have explored and have some true decision on why they have arrived where they have arrived without "rewriting" the score (ie, notes that are not actually there, or missing notes that should be there, etc), generally I will not mess with it even if I disagree with it or would choose something different myself.   

It does depend on the student, the piece, the precise interpretative decision, and the situation.

m1469

Your last comment does somewhat cancel out the preceding paragraph, but I have to wonder, and want to ask you seriously: as a teacher, we could naturally presume you have more experience with the subject at hand than your student.  You've spent more time thinking about it, trying different things, actually doing it.  You have obviously come to certain conclusions based on your experience, since you make a lot of interesting posts.  So if you disagree with a student on the way they play a piece, why won't you "mess with it?"
Isn't it your duty as a teacher to impart your hard-gained experience to the student?  Isn't it your duty, to guide the student through the process which you painstakingly did?

It seems you are wary of influence, because previously in the post you talked about your struggle to escape from teachers with strong opinions.  But if you came to conclusions that you believed were right, it can only be good to influence your students in that direction.  Otherwise how will they find what is right?

Food for thought for a snowy weekend!

Walter Ramsey

[m1469]

Hi, Walter .  I want to thank you for your thoughtful post and your questions.  Let me see if I can adequetly answer them, and I will start with a different order than what you presented, because I feel it sets up nicer that way.

It seems you are wary of influence, because previously in the post you talked about your struggle to escape from teachers with strong opinions.

There are two perspectives for me to consider here.  One, as a student myself, and the other, as a teacher.

As a student, I find myself developing into an "understanding" where I view the entire world as my teacher, in a fairly discernable and tangible way (this can depend on my own fear factors as well).  My main aim as this student, at this point in my life, is to observe, experiment, and gather information.  There are certain fields that interest me more than others, however I am currently of the mind to consider all matters, and I am currently in a state of gleaning from what all of the greatest thinkers and doers have accomplished and discovered thus far in life.  I am giving myself a time-frame of about 20 more years for this type of student-life.

My impressions of the world and of humanity, or of life in general, thus far, are that there are many corners that are still unexplored and many aspects of living that seem like complete mysteries.  Mixed in with that, there are times when humanity, and certain individuals, believes we have found concrete answers (and perhaps we have to some degree).  However, further study, deeper digging, and more growth inevitably shows us that what we once thought was concrete, is not actually what it once seemed.  This is a pattern that I have noticed about the overall progress of humanity.

Because of this observation, I find myself very wary of banking my entire existence, or for that matter, the entire existence of even certain elements of my life, on what one person says.  I would probably be more willing if I observed more congruity among individuals, but, that congruity is just not there.  Exact examples have comically shewn themselves to me throughout my own pianistic study (along with other areas of life).   

Though my musical study did not begin in all the ways I used to wish it had, I now consider myself to have been quite blessed in the opportunities I have had, and in the teachers I have come across.  Through this time, my observing, experimenting, and collecting of informations carried on as usual.  It didn't take long for me to realize that there were big discrepencies within this particular field (along with pretty much any other field), as I learned that various editions of the same printed music were different from one another, one revered artist would play the same piece as another but with a completely different impression and with different thoughts on articulation and phrasing.  Thoughts on what is proper performacne practice for certain styles, like Bach's music, for example, vary far and wide.  Even physical approaches to the piano vary to some degree, some making much more sense to me than others.  If they are all masters, and if they are all revered, who is right ?

There were two main points where I crossed over a line and took a real action toward needing to discover my own idea of interpretation, vs taking a mere spoonfeeding from my teachers (though many experiences helped me build up to crossing this line).  One time was when I was preparing a Scarlatti sonata for a masterclass.  At that time, I was studying with a teacher whom I did not feel generally inspired to find my own thoughts on interpretation with, and that was a newer experience for me.  For three years before that, I had studied under different circumstances and during those three years, I often lived in a state of the deepest considerations I could manage, to find myself within a piece of music. 

As I prepared this Scarlatti, I felt that I just wasn't getting some of it.  And, that meant that it wasn't fitting in me physically, either.  So, I decided to go back to my old ways and I took a dive into the ethers with this piece.  I came to some conclusions that I valued, and it was physically working better, too, and took it to my next lesson where each of my ideas were changed, one by one.  That was fine.  I had lost nothing, really, except the desire to ever think deeply and then bring my ideas to this teacher again (this, after it being the second concrete experience like this with this particular individual).

When I showed up to the masterclass, I performed as my teacher had asked.  As I sat there, however, the "master" began to change things once again.  However, what we changed to were many of the things and along the same line of reasoning that I had come up with in my own searchings (and if what my teacher had come up with was "right," why was it now being changed again? ).  Was he more right than my teacher ?  I don't know.  But, for me and on a personal level, that whole experience was a bigger lesson in interpretation than either one of them could have offered me individually.

Another example was a time when I was involved in a weeklong piano camp.  During this time I brought the same piece to a teacher in private, and then to a masterclass with a different teacher the very next day.  What the teacher had asked me to do in private, I did in masterclass, only to have the master tell me to do exactly the opposite. 

For awhile, the circumstances were so strange to me, that I thought teachers were conspiring together in order to convince me of the lessons I felt I was actually getting out of these experiecnes (and that wasn't too good for my psyche either, btw), but whatever the event, the lesson was very clear that I needed to consider other's ideas, but it was time for me to start thinking for myself and decide how I am going to use the informations I have been given.

If there is anything that is hard-gained experience about where I am at with my music (or in life), or processies that I have painstankingly undergone, it is to have learned that there are common practices, some contradictory to others, some more favorable than others, but that after considering what has already been said and done, I must finally, in the end, think for myself and make my own decisions.  My Uni teacher pushed me so far in this direction that it truly was *extremely* painstaking; full of an "artist's" agony, full of tears, full of prayer, full of soul-searching, full of defeats and triumphs ... but the key word through it all is -- full.

As a teacher, I am not wary of influence.  Actually, it's quite the contrary.  I aim to be one of the most, if not thee most, influential figures in my students lives as musicians, and as individuals.   But, my influence is aimed at getting them seeking, thinking, and discovering from their own deepest parts and to become more aware of how their decisions affect their work and their life -- this is a *vital* life-skill.  My aim is to give them tools to help them get through that particular territory, too.  So, if I see them doing this and accomplishing this and drawing thier own thoughtful conclusions, I would never dream of taking it away from them over a particular piece of music.  Because, the tool and the attitude is what I want them to grow in, and that needs special care, nurturing, attention, and support. 

As far as being influenced as a student, I am confident in my abilities to listen, consider, and understand where another is coming from.  I take a person's offering of thoughts and ideas very seriously, and I make a great effort to mentally walk in their shoes for awhile so I can try to grasp the fuller picture of what they are telling me.  But, the most influential aspects of anybody's teaching with me, are those times when something they say or do just resonates with me (and this can cause an instant change in me), or when my time with them has encouraged growth for me (and hopefully for them, too).  I want to be most influenced by the validity of what they do and say, I want to be convinced, and what inevitably convinces me is my own thinking through of it, my own experimenting, my own gathering of informations (however, there are some things in life, including in music, that I do just believe when somebody says/does it). 

hee hee... I am tired  .



m1469

[ramseytheii]

One never knows to start with your posts!  If I deleted anything, it's because your point seemed strong.

As a student, I find myself developing into an "understanding" where I view the entire world as my teacher, in a fairly discernable and tangible way (this can depend on my own fear factors as well).  My main aim as this student, at this point in my life, is to observe, experiment, and gather information. 

This is very curious and I honestly can't say I understand what you mean.  It seems to me that you are saying, you ahve the tendency to adopt the values of your teacher ("an 'understanding'") but that you do it as detached from your own values ("I view the entire world as my teacher") in order to learn from a scientific point of view ("observe, experiment, and gather information.") 

My impressions of the world and of humanity, or of life in general, thus far, are that there are many corners that are still unexplored and many aspects of living that seem like complete mysteries.  Mixed in with that, there are times when humanity, and certain individuals, believes we have found concrete answers (and perhaps we have to some degree).  However, further study, deeper digging, and more growth inevitably shows us that what we once thought was concrete, is not actually what it once seemed.  This is a pattern that I have noticed about the overall progress of humanity.

Because of this observation, I find myself very wary of banking my entire existence, or for that matter, the entire existence of even certain elements of my life, on what one person says.  I would probably be more willing if I observed more congruity among individuals, but, that congruity is just not there.

It's a grand statement, and while I can relate to the experience you are describing, I disagree with your conclusions.  I find, thinking of those things which seem concrete then disentigrate when one knows them better, they tend to be things that one doesn't know well enough to begin with.  In other words the concreteness is supplied by the imagination, and not by reality.

It's dangerous in any case to bank your existence on one person's attitude, in fact it's lethal, but I wouldn't take the concrete example to mean, nothing in this world is congruent with anything else, or that concrete things don't exist.  Concrete - or in other words, universal - values and philosophies do exist, and they can always be proved by logic and reason.  Observe philosophies that instruct generations, and change the world.  These are ideas that go beyond opinions.  These days the tendency seems to be to treat individual opinions as the equal of objective observation, but the two are not equal.

I think as teachers, we should strive for finding the fundamental principles that can be applied in a myriad of cases, that are concrete, and that do exist.

It didn't take long for me to realize that there were big discrepencies within this particular field (along with pretty much any other field), as I learned that various editions of the same printed music were different from one another, one revered artist would play the same piece as another but with a completely different impression and with different thoughts on articulation and phrasing.  Thoughts on what is proper performacne practice for certain styles, like Bach's music, for example, vary far and wide.  Even physical approaches to the piano vary to some degree, some making much more sense to me than others.  If they are all masters, and if they are all revered, who is right ?

Yes, who is right, in the case of different revered masters playing the same pieces in radically different ways?  First one has to ask, what makes something right.  It is only the fundamental philosophy behind the action that makes it right or wrong.  And it is up to us as individuals to judge these philosophies, which can be derived from actions, to find what is true and what is opinion.

That doesn't mean opinion is worthless, but opinions don't propagate.  If you try and play as Horowitz played, or in some cases like Cortot, or like Gould, or like Gulda, you will be called an imitation.  Opinions, when transmitted from one source to another, become fossilized and dead - even when they create genuine electricty with those who generate them.  If however we can discover fundamental and objective reasoning, it is renewed each time with each person, and life is transmitted to life.  Pianists like Rachmaninoff and Richter come to mind.  Who was ever accused of being a Rachmaninoff "imitator," or a Richter "impersonation?"  Yet this happens all the time in the case of those who try and replicate Gould's eccentricity, or Horowitz's mania.

What I ultimately want to say is, in order to find out who is right, you have to use your own knowledge.  You have to listen to recordings, and where they differ, you have to ask why.  Why does this person play it like this, and that person like that.  Perhaps you cannot answer every time - but this is how you expand your knowledge.  Perhaps other times you will come to the realization that there is no reason except that person's personal opinion - which works for that person, and that person alone.  In order for us to learn from the masters, we have to be able to distinguish.

When I showed up to the masterclass, I performed as my teacher had asked.  As I sat there, however, the "master" began to change things once again.  However, what we changed to were many of the things and along the same line of reasoning that I had come up with in my own searchings (and if what my teacher had come up with was "right," why was it now being changed again? ).  Was he more right than my teacher ?  I don't know.  But, for me and on a personal level, that whole experience was a bigger lesson in interpretation than either one of them could have offered me individually.

In your story about the Scarlatti sonata, you address everything except the reasoning of your teacher.  It seems to me you found the reasoning of your teacher, not worth addressing.  So you must have learned that this person being your teacher, doesn't make them right by any means - and that you can identify what is right when you encounter it!

As a teacher, I am not wary of influence.  Actually, it's quite the contrary.  I aim to be one of the most, if not the most, influential figures in my students lives as musicians, and as individuals.   But, my influence is aimed at getting them seeking, thinking, and discovering from their own deepest parts and to become more aware of how their decisions affect their work and their life -- this is a *vital* life-skill.  My aim is to give them tools to help them get through that particular territory, too.  So, if I see them doing this and accomplishing this and drawing thier own thoughtful conclusions, I would never dream of taking it away from them over a particular piece of music.  Because, the tool and the attitude is what I want them to grow in, and that needs special care, nurturing, attention, and support. 

This sounds all very good, but I can't square it with what you originally said, which was that it sometimes happens that your students play something in a way which you disagree with, and you don't want to mess with it.  You wrote eloquently above how you used the process of reasoning to learn to think for yourself, to not trust one opinion over another, and this seems to be the vital skill.  But if your approach comes from reasoning, then a disagreement goes beyond your personal opinion, and enters the realm of objectivity - in that case it seems totally appropriate to voice the disagreement, and present the alternative.  Or at least, to try and determine what the student was thinking, in case it is not obvious.

ANd I wonder also about the concept of "nurturing," since that concept is often used to mean, always encouraging and never denying.  But if one has conviction in ones ideas, to the extent that one feels a disagreement rather then a vague sense of resentment (which is the consequence of having an opinion denied), it seems to me only proper to try and pass that to someone else, who may be playing something just out of their own whims - and sometimes this takes denying a person.

It will be interesting to hear your response.

Walter Ramsey

[pianowolfi]

I still believe there is a correct way to interpret things.  However this presupposes that one has a philosophy that can be applied universally to all pieces.  For example. Richter held the philosophy that, in Ravel's words, a performer is essentially a slave who plays exactly what is on the page: "nothing more, nothing less."  This is an objective philosophy that is not just a personal opinion of Richter, and for those who follow it, it provides the criteria for determining whether something or not is correct.

Well I am not yet done with reading on this thread. I just pick out one point here.
I don't agree with the claim that there would be "a correct way" to interpret things. You can say that some of the elements are interpreted wrongly if someone plays piano instead of an indicated forte or presto instead of adagio. But you can not claim in general that there is "a correct way" which would also implicate that there is a wrong way. This seems a very problematic approach to me. There are numerous ways to climb a mountain. It will always be the same mountain. Some ways are better to climb than others. All are intersting. And the view from the mountain will always be different. Each interpretation is a unique event. If Richter talked about himself himself as a slave he argued, in my opinion, just theoretically. Richter played not like a slave but extremely individually and uniquely. It is the same as with Stravinsky who claimed something similar but was a bundle of temperament and fire and subjective passion when he was conducting (At least I once  heard something like that).

[rc]

Some ways are better to climb than others. All are intersting. And the view from the mountain will always be different.

That's how I understood the comment on correct ways, that there are better and worse ways to achieve an effect, so one could call the best known ways 'correct'.  Especially with older music which has less indications of how to play it, Bach is a well known example, if one were to consider the written score the only rule in playing, than anything is possible with Bach.

I believe the purpose is of finding the best (or, correct) way of achieving the musical effect.  Implying that a musician should HAVE a musical effect to achieve...  To avoid meaningless playing.  So the better of an idea we have of the musical meaning, the less appealing are other options, the more we are a slave to that interpretation.

[pianowolfi]

Still I am busy reading this thread and trying to find the point of some discussions. I think now I'll try not to pick out single statements (and argue against or for them) but to come back to the question of the original poster.

To me there ARE creative differences in fact from the first second of a first piano lesson you hold with a student. They are a fact. To be able to deal with it is one of the most difficult things but also one of the most interesting in teaching. Once somebody asked me what criteria I have to tell if somebody is a good piano teacher or not. I answered (intuitively) that to me probably the best piano teacher would be the one who is always able and willing to learn from his students. Though this statement was a bit extreme, I still live with it and I think it is an important point. Of course there is "right" and "wrong" in music as well as in other arts or in science. If you play the Hammerklavier sonata in b flat minor instead of b flat major it is wrong. At least then you can't claim to play the Hammerklavier sonata anymore. Ok so far all posters probably would agree. But the SENSE of the creative differences is to me that teacher and student are developing something TOGETHER. And this SOMETHING is a product of their interactions. Each part has his mission in this process. The teacher has his enormous experience (which includes everything, musical education as well as life experience) and helps the student with all the technical, craftsman and knowledge matters. And the teacher (and this is the part that is existentially important) has furthermore the duty to SEE the student, see his special condition and his character and try to bring out this students individual musicianship. The result is NOT predictable. If this job is done well the student will one day surprise the teacher with HIS own approach and individual artistic way. The level of the student does not play a role. If your goal is to teach the ART of music through the ART of teaching from the first lesson there will be a result already after a short time of teaching this student.

All this is very sketchy and needs to be explored more in deapth

To m1469's second post:

As a student, I find myself developing into an "understanding" where I view the entire world as my teacher, in a fairly discernable and tangible way (this can depend on my own fear factors as well).  My main aim as this student, at this point in my life, is to observe, experiment, and gather information.  There are certain fields that interest me more than others, however I am currently of the mind to consider all matters, and I am currently in a state of gleaning from what all of the greatest thinkers and doers have accomplished and discovered thus far in life.  I am giving myself a time-frame of about 20 more years for this type of student-life.

To me this is intuitively evident. the only question is: why do you give yourself only 20 years? Isn't this a lifelong process anyway?

If there is anything that is hard-gained experience about where I am at with my music (or in life), or processies that I have painstankingly undergone, it is to have learned that there are common practices, some contradictory to others, some more favorable than others, but that after considering what has already been said and done, I must finally, in the end, think for myself and make my own decisions.  My Uni teacher pushed me so far in this direction that it truly was *extremely* painstaking; full of an "artist's" agony, full of tears, full of prayer, full of soul-searching, full of defeats and triumphs ... but the key word through it all is -- full.

Yes that is the situation exaggerated in the extremest sense. Since you seem to be a very strong personality after all you have been able to get the best out of this process. A hard and sometimes dangerous way! The keyword is full, yes. I have made similar experiences (perhaps all prospective musicians make them more or less) And also my experiences led me to very extreme regions.. Now I am in a phase where I try to learn to deal with such experiences without drowning or struggling.

As a teacher, I am not wary of influence.  Actually, it's quite the contrary.  I aim to be one of the most, if not thee most, influential figures in my students lives as musicians, and as individuals.   But, my influence is aimed at getting them seeking, thinking, and discovering from their own deepest parts and to become more aware of how their decisions affect their work and their life -- this is a *vital* life-skill.  My aim is to give them tools to help them get through that particular territory, too.  So, if I see them doing this and accomplishing this and drawing thier own thoughtful conclusions, I would never dream of taking it away from them over a particular piece of music.  Because, the tool and the attitude is what I want them to grow in, and that needs special care, nurturing, attention, and support. 

As far as being influenced as a student, I am confident in my abilities to listen, consider, and understand where another is coming from.  I take a person's offering of thoughts and ideas very seriously, and I make a great effort to mentally walk in their shoes for awhile so I can try to grasp the fuller picture of what they are telling me.  But, the most influential aspects of anybody's teaching with me, are those times when something they say or do just resonates with me (and this can cause an instant change in me), or when my time with them has encouraged growth for me (and hopefully for them, too).  I want to be most influenced by the validity of what they do and say, I want to be convinced, and what inevitably convinces me is my own thinking through of it, my own experimenting, my own gathering of informations (however, there are some things in life, including in music, that I do just believe when somebody says/does it). 

I indeed couldn't agree more!

hee hee... I am tired  .

Yes that is understandable because you have made a HUGE effort to write this and it has become very individual but very in general at the same time so everyone can benefit from your experience. 

[m1469]

One never knows to start with your posts!

That's funny because I have been having the similar difficulty with yours.  Unfortunately, there is so much here that I believe is either misunderstood or improperly assumed, that I tire just at thinking of responding to your every point, or to your every "section" that seems like it's supposed to be a point of some sort. 

At this particular junction, I am not going to go about trying, to no avail, to explain my approach to life and the things that I believe and how I have "arrived" at these places.  For one, because that is not really what this thread is about, I don't think.  And the only reason I ever brought anything up about it was for you (and whomever else) to have some concept of where I am coming from with my thoughts on this subject -- to me it's all connected.  But secondly, it is actually impossible for me to explain or give some kind of accurate idea as to all of the inner and outter workings of my life -- as a person, as a student, and as a teacher -- over an internet forum.  As a matter of fact, I can't rightly define that with any single element no matter how advanced nor sophisticated or artful that element may be, so, in this case, if people don't get what I am saying, I feel there is not much I can do unless there are specific questions I can answer; which in your case, it seems there are not.  Read my thoughts again and ponder them a bit.

Generally, you list practices that you state I should incorporate into my musical study, yet they are things that I am already doing.   

What I feel is most misunderstood and underappreciated is this :

If there is anything that is hard-gained experience about where I am at with my music (or in life), or processies that I have painstankingly undergone, it is to have learned that there are common practices, some contradictory to others, some more favorable than others, but that after considering what has already been said and done, I must finally, in the end, think for myself and make my own decisions. 

And this :

(...)my influence is aimed at getting them seeking, thinking, and discovering from their own deepest parts and to become more aware of how their decisions affect their work and their life -- this is a *vital* life-skill.  My aim is to give them tools to help them get through that particular territory, too.  So, if I see them doing this and accomplishing this and drawing thier own thoughtful conclusions, I would never dream of taking it away from them over a particular piece of music.

Just because I have not spelled it all out in intricate detail for you here (though I feel I have given the idea), does not mean that I do not consider, as a student, and that I am not presenting, as a teacher, clear thoughts on how a piece should sound and be.  And, again, there is too much that goes into this particular aspect of my "teaching" to justly explain here on the forum, and the effort to do so would be especially big considering that it is not as though people here are actually trying to learn anything from what I have to say (vs my students whom actually are) -- and I am simply not interested in, nor do I have the time for, aimless, meandering debate and conversation over these particular subjects. 

When all is said and done, I feel I have sufficiently answered (within my very first post), as well as I am capable, what the original poster's question was.

Now, this, I will marginally address :

ANd I wonder also about the concept of "nurturing," since that concept is often used to mean, always encouraging and never denying.  But if one has conviction in ones ideas, to the extent that one feels a disagreement rather then a vague sense of resentment (which is the consequence of having an opinion denied), it seems to me only proper to try and pass that to someone else, who may be playing something just out of their own whims - and sometimes this takes denying a person.

I am not even going to try to mess with your reasoning here because, frankly, I don't know you well enough.  However, I will state that I do not interpret the word "nurturing" in the same ways as it seems you do  .


Thanks,
m1469

[m1469]

There are numerous ways to climb a mountain. It will always be the same mountain. Some ways are better to climb than others. All are intersting. And the view from the mountain will always be different. Each interpretation is a unique event.

I would like to address your comments here, because I believe it is easy for what I have been saying to be taken in a way that is not quite as it seems.  I am not under the illusion in life, nor in music, that all opinions are equally as valid as the next, just because they "exist."  And, I think that concept is what my comments have been disguised as.

In the case of a mountain, which analogy I enjoy, my goal as a teacher (and as a student) is to have the student know the entire mountain (or all the options and what those options include) before choosing a path s/he would take a group of hikers on.  Why ?  Because depending on what their precise aim is, they will have to choose the best path for them to take -- and a guide needs to know where to take them to get them the experience they are wanting.  And, herein lay the *only* validity of a chosen path.

And, this is along the lines of what I want my students to be thinking about with their music and musical decisions; 'how am I going to achieve what I am wanting' ?  And, 'what and why am I wanting it ?'  Now, in the case of music, I don't think it's quite possible to know all of the possibilities.  However, one can learn what are general practices of such and such a style, and so on, and I believe that part of my job as the teacher is to help them understand what their options are.  But also, to give them feedback on whether or not they are actually achieving what they are wanting to achieve.

In terms of 'creative differences,' and going back to the analogy of the mountain, if I have done my work as the guide (for the guide in training) and have shown them what the possibilities are, and what those possibilities include, and my student is obviously capabable of hiking any of those paths, I will not disuade him from the path he chooses if that's precisely the path s/he wants to take and knows it (including the whys and hows).  Even if I would have taken a different path for the reason of having a different experience (btw, living my own desired experience is precisely what I get my very own life for  ).

If I have given every tool I know, and the student is capable of deciding something based on the use of these tools, then I have done my job.  And like a parent, at some point I must trust my own teaching of the "child," and let them go their own way.  And, the only way a "child" builds confidence in his/her ability to make these decisions is by making them (with adult guidence to begin with).  In my opinion, a parent should never expect a child to be an exact replica of himself/herself, and likewise with teacher and student, though there may be similarities between the persons and the choices they make.

These are some things that are quite difficult to talk about, so, I am trusting for some bridges to be formed between what I am able to communicate through words with what my meaning may be.  But, I am also happy to answer specific questions.



m1469

[ted]

This discussion, of which I seem to understand next to nothing, is, I hope and assume, confined to how people should be taught to play classical music ? If it means anything broader or deeper than that then I am either completely mad or a simpleton.