Gender and Differences in Playing

[faulty_damper]

This idea came to me in the thread in the Students Corner about playing angry.

From my observations of my teacher's students playing, I noticed that the women played rather unexpressively while the men were quite comfortable playing expressively.  Why is this?  I don't think it has anything to do with skill as the women were very talented just as the men.

But the way the women play is noticeably different than the way the men play.  Though the men play expressively, not as expressively as one would really appreciate, the women played in a rather strict manner: no rubato, no logical order of crescendo or diminuendo, no feeling, no facial expressions, they were like gargoyles atop a bench.  Why is this?

The men seemed to pay particular attention to how it sounds and put a lot of feeling into the music, often moving around as well.  Why is this?

Have you ever just heard someone play the piano and just know it was a man or a woman playing?  I have.  "I could just tell."

The reason for this has to with culture.  Gender is a cultural term.  Sex is a biological term.  In all cultures, there are gender roles that men and women follow.  That role is expected to be followed by every member of society and they do follow it and behave the way they are expected to behave.  This expectation is why women and men play the piano differently.

The students under my teacher are almost all of Chinese descent and all are Asian.  The country is the United States and almost all were born here.  In Chinese culture, the women are expected to be polite, respectful, not show much emotions, submissive.  The men are supposed to be polite, respectful, allowed to show extreme emotions, outwardly confident.  I'm not sure how to characterize white people in the United States so I can't comment too much but I'm sure it is the same to varying degrees.

The gender roles of women mean that even when playing the piano, they are not able to separate from it.  They play exactly the way they behave in the social sphere - they don't express themselves.  They sit at the bench and do not move around very much; they stay still.  The result of this is that they play rather unexpressively regardless of how much talent they have.  

Contrary, the men play expressively.  This is because they are expected to play that way, or at least show their emotions which afftects how they play.  Men tend to move around much more and show expression on their face.

Now consider how our culture, also Western culture, expects men to not be emotional, especially in the "soft" ways, but allowed to be angry and violent; and women are expected to never be angry or violent but allowed to show a wide range of emotions of the "soft" kind.  Why is it that when playing the piano, this is almost completely the opposite?  That the women remain utterly still and unemotional?  The men powerful and full of emotion?

My argument stops right here.  My argument is that the reason women play unexpressively is because of gender roles.

But why is it that those gender roles cease when you place people in front of a piano?  I don't know why this is.

[Tash]

i'm so offended! and i totally disagree with your comments on women not being as expresive as men when they play. maybe in the case of asian women (and i don't mean to be racist in any way there, just a difference in culture) don't play as expressively as you said, but that doesn't account for the rest of the female population on this planet.

Maybe part of the problem is the obvious case of physical differences between men and women where men are generally stronger and can therefore play more powerfully and thus can allow more expression to come through, but that doesn't mean that women don't play as expressively. here i'm going to use martha argerich as an example because in my personal opinion i think she plays incredibly expressively, the first time i heard her play on a cd it was chopin's barcarolle and i thought it was the most beautiful thing i'd ever heard- how can that not be defined as expressive as a male? i can't say i've heard it be played better by anyone else.

in my own experience, i put a lot of feeling into my playing and i know that there's a hell of a lot of other ladies out there who play much more expressively than i do so you simply cannot say that women don't play expressively.

can some other females here please back me up?!!

[Motrax]

I don't believe faulty_damper is trying to insult anybody, it's just an observation! Though it is one I must disagree with too.   Perhaps you (faulty_damper) are speaking of students, "girls" rather than "women." But as far as professional pianists are concerned, I have never seen a correlation between sex and style. The most incredible piano performance I have ever seen was by Olga Kern, in fact (she won the Van Cliburn Competition a few years back). Hers is the only performance I have ever been to where I unconciously held my breath.

And now that I think of it, I don't believe your assertion holds true at any age. Of the students under my own teacher's tutelage, I would say that 2 of the 4 girls are very expressive. Furthermore, I would say that a lot of guys older than, say, 15 or 16 (to pick an arbitrary age), tend to equate emotion and expression with speed and volume.

Just my 2 cents.

[janice]

I don't think that there is a difference in the playing of a man vs a woman.  However, my high school teacher said "Don't play like a girl".  (and I do happen to be female, as you can guess by my name!).  I think that faulty Damper was speaking of a 'GIRL', but I think he agrees that there is no difference in the playing of a man vs. a WOMAN.  Is that a correct statement, faulty? Please correct me if I am wrong.

[xvimbi]

I think faulty_damper is right to a large extent. In pretty much all societies, women are generally discouraged to express their own thoughts and desires, and men are encouraged to do so. This includes display of emotions. Some societies are very strict about this, others are more relaxed, but the general trend is obvious. Of course, this is terrible, but I think it does account for the observation. The same is true in all kinds of other activities, such as cooking (how many great female Chefs are there, given the fact that there are much more females who cook?), chess (there is only one female player in the top crop), business, etc.

Looking at professional pianists is not a good way to assess the situation, because those can, by definition, play expressively, otherwise they wouldn't be "good" enough to be professionals. Piano students, I believe, are the right group to examine, and here, I see the same correlation to society as I have mentioned above.

IMO, physical differences are negligible as can be seen by so many outstanding female pianists. By the way, I agree that Olga Kern is one of the most captivating pianists. I was holding my breath too, just like Motrax, until I was blue in my face. What is unfortunate, however, is that I have heard many people (particularly men) complaining about her display of emotions (just check out her reviews on Amazon). I haven't heard anyone complain about any male pianists in this respect.

Women can, intrinsically, play expressively, just as they can, intrinsically, play chess and run companies, but they are not necessarily encouraged in their efforts.

[faulty_damper]

About women pianists:
Yes, there are many who are very good and can play expressively, too.  Mitsuko Uchida is another example whom is probably the best interpreter of Mozart regardless of her gender.  But she's well-known because she can play expressively.  How many women  attain such expression in their playing?  Compared to men?

Of all the pianist of whom are very expressive, tend to be men rather than women.  This could be an ignorant statement through limited observations of people here in the city and not the world but this observation is correct.  I sometimes walk by house and someone is playing on the piano, Chopin.  I immediately know if it is a woman or not because I've heard so many women play Chopin and they all tend to have a particular trait.

Another thing occured to me just now.  About handwriting, men and women write differently.  Just as homosexual men write differently from straight men.  There is a "science" to analyzing handwriting and through that analyzation, much can be learned about the person through their writing.  It's incredibly accurate.  Analyzing handwriting can tell if the person was a homosexual or straight person, persona, how he feels about himself, etc.

I'm digressing now but perhaps the reason women play differently than men is because of psychological reasons isntead of gender roles?  Just as one can tell if a writing is a woman's from a man's, so too can one tell if it is a woman playing instead of a man.  There are "signature" traits that I pick up on that lead me to know if the woman is playing or a man is playing.

[faulty_damper]

I  I think that faulty Damper was speaking of a 'GIRL', but I think he agrees that there is no difference in the playing of a man vs. a WOMAN.  Is that a correct statement, faulty? Please correct me if I am wrong.

No, I say that women play differently than men in terms of expressivity.  Women tend not to venture too far from the notes on the sheet and sound 'confined'.  I am not refering to girls of young age but young women and older women.  I am not commenting on students of young age who are still learning but of students who are very talented and already know how to play.  I think there is a difference between men and women concerning expressivity, not technique/power/

[donjuan]

hehe, Im just waiting for Bernhard to pop out of the shadows and bring up his "intellectual whores" or "Maddox" websites...hehehe!

I believe Faulty is correct on many levels.  I have had many teachers, and the most effective ones are the male teachers.  The female teachers seem to have methodical approaches toward everything, and I may not understand artistic lessons.  Male teachers put words into music and are much more emotional.  I enjoy my lessons more and undestand better almost everything he teaches me.  

Just a thought...how come there are so few female composers?  Is it because of the female roles of the past, which would have never accepted a woman composing?

donjuan

[bernhard]

hehe, Im just waiting for Bernhard to pop out of the shadows and bring up his "intellectual whores" or "Maddox" websites...hehehe!


Just a thought...how come there are so few female composers?  Is it because of the female roles of the past, which would have never accepted a woman composing?

donjuan

Maddox rules!

There are quite a lot of female composers out there. Check it out:

https://www.kapralova.org/DATABASE.htm

Apparently there are over 6000 women composers for which a record exist (plus all the ones those horrible domineering husbands repressed).

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[Shagdac]

I personally have not found the same to be true as Faulty. Most of the women whom I have seen playing ARE very expressive.....just as the men.  I have seen some of both gender who are not.

Also, in society I think the complete opposite holds true. Women are the ones who CAN be expresive and show emotions while men are expected to be the ones who put on the brave front and not show emotion. If a woman sees say for instance a sad movie...it's nothing for  her to start to cry...on the other hand, very rarely would you see a man start to cry at a sad movie. Most men have to put on such a brave front, as not too be accused of being a "sissy" or gay. But women are free to express their emotions because it IS expected.

And yes, there are women that do not play as expressivley as some males....however it works both ways, as I've seen men who play with no emotion as well. I think it is dependant on the individual as opposed to the gender.

S

[xvimbi]

Also, in society I think the complete opposite holds true. Women are the ones who CAN be expresive and show emotions while men are expected to be the ones who put on the brave front and not show emotion. If a woman sees say for instance a sad movie...it's nothing for  her to start to cry...on the other hand, very rarely would you see a man start to cry at a sad movie. Most men have to put on such a brave front, as not too be accused of being a "sissy" or gay. But women are free to express their emotions because it IS expected.

I don't think it's about "showing" emotions, but about "expressing" emotions. True, women are generally more ready to show emotions, whereas men do tend to suppress them. However, when it comes to the artistic technique of "expressing" emotion, I still think there are more men who are perceived to be good at it than women (that is an observation, not an opinion that this should be the case). Compare musicians to movie and theater actors, and even dancers. Throughout the centuries, there have been a lot more outstanding male character actors than outstanding female character actors. Why?

[faulty_damper]

Susan, I think you read me wrong.  I said that when it concerns art, men are more expressive than women.  However, in society, women are expected to show emotions whereas men are supposed to suppress them.

Also, women are more sadistic than men are.  Whip me!  This is cultural fact proven to be true almost all of the time in experiments.  Poor puppies.

The puppies experiment involved shocking the puppies with an electrical current by pressing a button.  Each time the button is pressed, the electrical current increases thereby causing the puppy more pain.  The women in the test would continue to shock the puppy when the scientist told them to do so even though some women were breaking down and crying and did not want to do it anymore.  They pressed the button far more times than did men in the same experiment.  Men would stop far sooner when they realized that they were causing the puppies pain.

The catch?  They puppies were not shocked very much at all.  The people in the experiment only thought the puppies were being shocked more painfully each time.

Another similar experiment:  Instead of puppies, it was a real person who was faking being shocked.  Women went way further with the button pressing even after the person being shocked was having a heart attack from the shock.  The men stopped when the man was having chest pains and would refuse to do the experiment.

So what do these experiments mean?  The analysis from the cultural standpoint is that women were more complicit with following the rules than men were.  They obeyed the instructions of the scientists more than the men.

So back to music and music expression:
Women are less free to express themselves in music than are men because they follow the rules of the sheet music instead of using the sheet music as a guide.  Please argue against this assessment if any evidence shows that this is not true.

[donjuan]

I second faulty
donjuan

[Tash]

ok i've been thinking and i realised that i really can't say whether what faulty is saying is true or not because i haven't ever taken into consideration what gender the pianist was and can't remember if the men or women appealed to me more.

and then i thought that even though women tend to appear to be more emotional, it's more just sad crying blah, but i think men can express greater emotions, eg. getting angry going nuts, no offence to those who don't i'm doing  relaly general assumption here and basically have no idea what i'm talking about.

and also with male composers, yes there are so many more well-known than female, so maybe men are able to relate more to the composition since it's coming from a male mind? eg. in art, male painters who painted female nudes drew them from a perspective of awe and mystery of this goddess sensuously lying on a bed or whatever. however you don't get this from females because they are female so nothing is a mystery and they now do it in more feminist manners and the atmosphere of female nudes painted by female artists is completely different from the way male artists paint female nudes. so could the same be with music?

does that make sense? by the way, with the puppy story if i was put in that situation i don't think i'd keep pressing the button cos that's just mean

[Clare]

I don't know. I think we are all slightly on the wrong track.

I could see how people may think that on the whole men play more 'emotionally' than women though I haven't made up my mind whether I agree with that. If I do decide to agree with that, I would say that there are numerous noteable exceptions in both genders.

Anyway, if I do decide to agree, I don't think the reason is because women are better at showing their emotions in life and so don't need to show them when playing piano. I think the real reason is that women downplay their achievements. My piano teacher has mentioned that there is generally an enormous difference in the way girls and guys approach their piano lessons (of course, all people are different but I gotta generalise here). Take two typical students of the same standard. They are going to learn a new piece. A girl may say, "Oh - I can't do this! It's too hard!" and doubt her abilities. A guy might say, "Cool!" and launch right into the piece with confidence.

I know I am afflicted rather badly with the girl disease of extreme underconfidence. I think that whenever a girl plays drily, the reason is more likely to be an issue of underconfidence rather than an issue of inability to express well.

OK, well, that's my idea. I hope I've added something to the discussion.  

[dj]

i personally would say that it's all physical....guys are more powerful and have bigger hands....it's that simple.

you look at the most well known female pianist, martha argerich, and she plays with a ton of emotion and is capable of hitting the notes quite hard, but the tone quality just doesn't even come close to matching up with someone like horowitz. why is this? it's cuz horowitz is a guy! he's got guy hands and guy muscles, and quite simply, that translates into a fuller sound.

it's no insult to females. there are several female pianists who are quite a bit more accomplished than several male pianists....it's just girls are not built like boys and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

[xvimbi]

i personally would say that it's all physical....guys are more powerful and have bigger hands....it's that simple.
...
it's no insult to females. there are several female pianists who are quite a bit more accomplished than several male pianists....it's just girls are not built like boys and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

I don't even remotely believe that strength, or more general, male vs. female physiognomy, has anything to do with it. For example, it does not account for the same observation about actors. The question how much strength one needs to get full sound from a piano requires a different thread.

[dj]

I don't even remotely believe that strength, or more general, male vs. female physiognomy, has anything to do with it. For example, it does not account for the same observation about actors. The question how much strength one needs to get full sound from a piano requires a different thread.

ok well strength was probably not the best word i could have used, because, as i said, i do think it is possible for female pianists to hit the notes quite hard. buy being built differently, i didn't mean just stronger. athletic would probably have been a better word....in sports, the strongest person does not always win, it is the more athletic. and if you compare female athletes to male athletes, well it's not much of a comparison.....i think that a lot of the things that make guys better athletes than girls (coordination, speed, power.....basically all things testosterone-related) also help them get better sound out of the piano.....again, this isn't cuz guys are better than girls, we're just built differently.

[faulty_damper]

According to expiraments, men have faster reflexes than women.  However, this has little to do with playing the piano as reflexes have little to do with playing.

[Shagdac]

Lawrence,

I agree that women are "expected" to show their emotions more....that's because it is what we see all the time....women showing emotion. And yes, I DO agree that men can display their emotions while playing, but not necessarily MORE than a female. It depends on the pianist not the gender.

Also, I definately don't agree that women are more sadistic than men, no way. I too have an example to share.......A large group of employees were in our ops room and we were about to view the video on the internet where that poor American soldier was beheaded by Iraq terrorist (you probably know the clip I'm referring to), they even showed it in the public schools around here....anyway once it began everyone was watching, but the women in the group were all noticebly uncomfortable..as the "act" started..myself and all but 1 female left the room in a hurry, and couldn't bear to watch the whole thing. Not one man left. Most of us "females" were in tears and very upset by what we had just seen at the beginning.

Another example.....I know of NO females that inflict pain upon themselves by cutting. However I know of many males I don't know of any female who likes pain inflicted on themselves or another.

Maybe in different cultures women are stronger and more aggressive than what I have seen, but I know (and I am only speaking for myself and women I know of)...I am not only one to show emotion, but I'm very expressive as well. In general men do not...however men who perform in the arts are more expressive and demostrative in letting it show. Which is great. But to say that one is more than another I don't think is true.
I still say it depends on the individual.
Just my thoughts.

S

[faulty_damper]

Susan,

I'm saying that in social interaction, women are more emotionally expressive but when it concerns the arts it is the opposite.  Men are expected to be less emotional in social interaction but are expected to be more free in the arts.

On sadism, I said that they continued to shock the puppies and man.  Sadism was not the proper word in this case but there was some humor in using it.

On masochism, I think more women cut themselves than men.  I have no evidence to support this opinion, however, just based on the fact that women suffer from depression at greater numbers.

About the video, perfect example of how men and women are supposed to behave.

[Shagdac]

Okay, Guess I don't entirely agree, but I definately see your point. I just though it was kind of a general statement, but I'm sure you'll agree there are exceptions.

......of course we're depressed. It's from not being able to show our emotions!!!
(just kiddn')

S

[Spatula]

Well it's rather funny,
I HIGHLY recommend you to get the book
"CLASSICAL MUSIC 101 A Complete guide to learning, and loving classical music" by Fred Plotkin.  I really like this book, and its for sale for $18.95 US or $27.95 CDN I know that's a steep price for a book but it does discuss VERY briefly on the differences.  Actually it says that there's really not all that much different between the gender/sexes.

Thinking about it now, I found that Martha Agrerich's playing was just as emotionally charged and fantasic as Horowitz's, if not better.


Personally, I find that women are better at improv and men are a slightly bit better at getting at the heart of the music when they have mastered it.  But that is a VERY BROAD generalization, so no flame wars please.

[squiggly_girl]

I think the real reason is that women downplay their achievements. My piano teacher has mentioned that there is generally an enormous difference in the way girls and guys approach their piano lessons (of course, all people are different but I gotta generalise here). Take two typical students of the same standard. They are going to learn a new piece. A girl may say, "Oh - I can't do this! It's too hard!" and doubt her abilities. A guy might say, "Cool!" and launch right into the piece with confidence.

I know I am afflicted rather badly with the girl disease of extreme underconfidence. I think that whenever a girl plays drily, the reason is more likely to be an issue of underconfidence rather than an issue of inability to express well.

I'm with Clare on this! Women are naturally more reticent, less likely to risk making a mistake, more likely to downplay or undervalue their own achievements. Men are generally the risk-takers, tend to overvalue their own achievements and from that position of confidence (arrogance, even?), may interpret music more freely and with less inhibition about making mistakes. They accept the music on the written page as a signposting rather than a handrail.

Clare's own post is actually a case in this very point. At the end of her argument she writes...

OK, well, that's my idea. I hope I've added something to the discussion.  

Her arguments are not put forward as confidently as if she were a man. If an average man had voiced her theory they would recognise that it WAS a valid and interesting argument and made sure that everyone knew about it!

See what was posted directly after Clare’s. Not a reply, but the bulldog sentiment of dj. Interesting to see the ideas in Clare’s post were then railroaded by the whole physicality issue and consequently not re-examined carefully. A perfect analogue for the quiet and understated expression of a woman compared to the bombastic and flamboyant interpretions of the man!

[xvimbi]

See what was posted directly after Clare’s. Not a reply, but the bulldog sentiment of dj. Interesting to see the ideas in Clare’s post were then railroaded by the whole physicality issue and consequently not re-examined carefully. A perfect analogue for the quiet and understated expression of a woman compared to the bombastic and flamboyant interpretions of the man!

Hey, give me some credit! I immediately railroaded dj's post, and I am a guy! Some guys are sensitive, you know. And I was putting forward similar arguments as Clare, but a lot earlier!  :-/ Flamboyant, bombastic? Who is flamboyant?!

[Clare]

xvimbi - yes, you were saying similar things to me. You get credit!

Just to let you know, the sentence at the end of my post which ended with the   was supposed to be a joke about being self-effacing. Don't worry - I'm not that timid!  

[willcowskitz]

I'm with Clare on this! Women are naturally more reticent, less likely to risk making a mistake, more likely to downplay or undervalue their own achievements. Men are generally the risk-takers, tend to overvalue their own achievements and from that position of confidence (arrogance, even?), may interpret music more freely and with less inhibition about making mistakes. They accept the music on the written page as a signposting rather than a handrail.

Naturally?  No.  The environment, cultural norms and expectations shape women into this form.  Its a model just like the "How to be a good wife" mentality from fifty decades ago.

Its hilarious how, whenever good old gender war rises, whoever is being the defendant at the time will practically only strengthen all the stereotypes made of them by idiosyncratically going into the topic with so much emotion and personal satisfactory needs involved.  There's a book called "You can't rape a man", it concludes how women are still being devalued to men because there's a cultural learnt relic of gender role distinction in every female's head that at it's best only creates an inferiority complex towards males.  Its the 21st century, please stop acting like victims and its more probable that women of the next decade will take their equality as self-evident and trivial.  Whole subject of genders, that rises again and again, is very tiring and dull.  Aristoteles (the most overrated philosopher of them all) stated that a Woman is an incomplete Man.  Will we please already straight and forward ridicule this, or are we still fighting windmills just for the sake of it?

[bernhard]

I may be wrong here, but what about this as the ultimate gender difference:

Male pianists hum, female pianists don't.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[Spatula]

 There's a book called "You can't rape a man"

I would feel very sorry and pitiful for whomever this man would be if or when it happened.