Michael Finnissy - English Country Tunes

[djealnla]

I saw this posted somewhere on Facebook and thought every pianist should see it. 

[birba]

I must be missing something.  I found it very boring.  The music, at least.  The woman was interesting.

[pianisten1989]

How is this English Coutry tunes?!

[furtwaengler]

It's very dense.

I was just thinking about Finnissy the other day, certain pieces I like, and certain I just don't understand.

It's not more than a curiosity yet, except, I really do like Snowdrift and also the 4th concerto without orchestra, and I do not dismiss the Verdi pieces (or piece...you can tell how well I *KNOW* these...I'm acquainted on sporadic listens. I've not studied the music or seen the scores...if it's music it will say something to people who have not studied it and have not seen a score!). In general I respond more to the added timbres of the orchestra in the actual piano concerti.

But...I don't understand a lot of things that other people who like this music understand, and it just might be that this understanding is key.

[minor9th]

The title is supposed to be an obscene/vulgar pun...

[furtwaengler]

^This reminds me of the composition students at the Brevard Summer Music Camp (or festival or whatever it is) one year putting fliers all around the cafeteria advertising their composition recital. The adds read, "Complete Chamber Music of Peter I. Tchaikovsky" and listed the time and place of the composers concert, hehe. 

[thalbergmad]

I saw this posted somewhere on Facebook and thought every pianist should see it. 

Seeing it is rather nice, but it becomes rather horrific when you switch on the speakers.

I have tried hard over the last year or so not to label pieces of music as worthless turd, but i struggle with this. Giving a piano to the inmates of a top security lunatic asylum would produce a superior piece of music.

Thal

[birba]

You should see, hear, the Verdi transcriptions(?)...      (This little face is trying to hold it in.)

[thalbergmad]

I have just completed a 75 mile bike ride. I have a sore arse and 10,000 mosquito bites.

I rather need something to cheer me up

Thal

[ramseytheii]

I'm curious to know how it matches up with the score.  Can anyone say so, or email me a copy?

Walter Ramsey

[birba]

I know what you mean.  I heard some russian girl doing the same thing on youtube and it sounded more or less the same. 

[quantum]

[nearenough]

Anything goes. You can fool some of the people some of the time. Etc.

[birba]

Thanks nearenough!  You know, this really pisses me off.  I can understand someone writing "music" like that.  A lot of people do it.  BUT, why the hell do you try to transcribe it to the written note?!  Why don't you use another sort of notation?  Something that isn't so specific as "c#" or "b-flat" -  Give the dumb sap who wants to maybe perform your work the lee-way that you obviously permit, since you, yourself, don't play the notes that are written.  There are lots of ways to do this.  Stockhausen, e.g., developed a personal notation to convey what he wanted.  But to publish a piece like this with fly-droppings, pretending to know exactly what you want played, is pure sophism.

[retrouvailles]

Thanks nearenough!  You know, this really pisses me off.  I can understand someone writing "music" like that.  A lot of people do it.  BUT, why the hell do you try to transcribe it to the written note?!  Why don't you use another sort of notation?  Something that isn't so specific as "c#" or "b-flat" -  Give the dumb sap who wants to maybe perform your work the lee-way that you obviously permit, since you, yourself, don't play the notes that are written.  There are lots of ways to do this.  Stockhausen, e.g., developed a personal notation to convey what he wanted.  But to publish a piece like this with fly-droppings, pretending to know exactly what you want played, is pure sophism.

This is why a lot more people are starting to write aleatoric music where the pitch content is only specified partially or vaguely.

[ahinton]

This is why a lot more people are starting to write aleatoric music where the pitch content is only specified partially or vaguely.

A lot of people? Not so significant a proportion, surely?

Notation itself is a very personal phenomenon, given the different ways in which various composers "spell" what they write; so, for that matter, is the matter of intended textual accuracy. That said, I see no reason why Michael Finnissy should write his music in ways other than those in which he does - the sheer difficulty of executing the texts of, say, Song 9, Snowdrift, all.fall.down, Concerto No. 4 or ECT does not qualify as such a reason, given that pianists including the composer have indeed played these works pretty accurately. I admit that I do wonder at times about the notational conventions that give rise to some of what Brian Ferneyhough writes, given the immense problems of reproducing some of the more complex patterns of notes and rests within nested tuplets of which he has long had quite some fondness, but there is, I believe, an argument that one purpose of such notation is to guide the would-be performer towards the composer's intentions to the point at which the very act of struggling to realise them becomes an inherent part of the piece and its performance; I accept that such a modo operando would not suit me as a guiding principle behind the ways in which I'd seek to go about writing anything, but then I'm not Brian Ferneyhough!

Best,

Alistair

[birba]

The composer played the work accurately?!  ACCURATELY?!  Did you listen to him and follow the score while he played?  Look again.

[ahinton]

The composer played the work accurately?!  ACCURATELY?!  Did you listen to him and follow the score while he played?  Look again.

We're talking different performances here; I've heard him play it more accurately than it appears that you have. That said, if others play his music with a reasonable degree of textual accuracy (as is indeed the case), then I do not see that your statement undermines the argument in any event; after all, it is surely worth taking due note of what the pianists that play this music think on the subject. I used to hear the same old chestnuts about Sorabji - you probably have as well - you know the kind of thing - "zillions of random notes" that are impossible of even remotely accurate execution - yet we now know from performances such as those of Powell, Ullén, Amato, etc. that this is nonsense.

Best,

Alistair

[birba]

And we're talking about two completely different worlds.  Sorobji and Finnissy.  Two completely different ways of writing.  Sorobji's works, those few that I know, deserve the most complete attention to detail in writing.  From what I've heard from this Finnissy, it's enough to generally hit in the right direction.

[thalbergmad]

I used to hear the same old chestnuts about Sorabji - you probably have as well - you know the kind of thing - "zillions of random notes" that are impossible of even remotely accurate execution - yet we now know from performances such as those of Powell, Ullén, Amato, etc. that this is nonsense.

Indeed, but there is a good argument that it was worth the effort.

How many pianists would want to waste time "accurately" playing this English Country Tunes crap, when they could create an equally interesting sound by flinging a bulldozer into a room full of harps?

Thal

[gep]

Indeed, but there is a good argument that it was worth the effort.

How many pianists would want to waste time "accurately" playing this English Country Tunes crap, when they could create an equally interesting sound by flinging a bulldozer into a room full of harps?

Thal

Why on earth would anyone want to do that with a perfectly good bulldozer?

[ahinton]

How many pianists would want to waste time "accurately" playing this English Country Tunes crap, when they could create an equally interesting sound by flinging a bulldozer into a room full of harps?

I suppose that the most accurate answer to your initial question would have to be "as many as decide that this is how they might choose to spend some of their time", but I would add to "gep"'s response the question as to why anyone would want deliberately to damage a collection of harps in this way...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

If you compose something that is turd and you want to make a performance interesting, all you need to do is to find some spaced out sexy woman in a black dress to ponce around the piano whilst you hammer it to death.

I assume this was difficult in this case as the producers needed to find a deaf model.

I will be using something similar for the opening performance of my first large scale work, which if anyone is interested is called "A history of pornography in sound".

Tickets for sale at 50 pence, ear muffs supplied. Venue is Raymond Revuebar in Soho.

Thal

[ahinton]

If you compose something that is turd and you want to make a performance interesting, all you need to do is to find some spaced out sexy woman in a black dress to ponce around the piano whilst you hammer it to death.

I assume this was difficult in this case as the producers needed to find a deaf model.

I will be using something similar for the opening performance of my first large scale work, which if anyone is interested is called "A history of pornography in sound".

That's a very old and very well worn joke...

Tickets for sale at 50 pence, ear muffs supplied. Venue is Raymond Revuebar in Soho.

The venue closed in 2004 to become something else and it closed down altogether last year; I therefore hope that you have warned the female performance assistant and sought and received formal planning permission to hold this event in a non-venue.

Good luck!

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

The venue closed in 2004 to become something else and it closed down altogether last year; I therefore hope that you have warned the female performance assistant and sought and received formal planning permission to hold this event in a non-venue.

You obviously used to visit more often than I.

Thal

[ahinton]

You obviously used to visit more often than I.

The extent to which anyone might be persuaded that this may seem "obvious" to you should be duly tempered by the fact of my having extracted the following information from the ubiquitous Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Revuebar...

"The Raymond Revuebar (1958 - 2004) was a theater and strip club in Brewer's Court, situated in the heart of London's Soho  district. For many years, it was the only venue in London that offered full-frontal, on-stage nudity of the sort commonly seen in other cities in Europe and North America. Its huge brightly lit sign declaring it to be the "World Centre of Erotic Entertainment" made the Revuebar a local landmark...

...The Raymond Revuebar was the creation of property magnate and magazine publisher Paul Raymond. The theatre was formerly the Doric Ballroom. When it opened on the 21st April 1958 it offered traditional burlesque-style entertainment, which included strip tease, and was popular with leading entertainment figures of the day. The Revuebar was one of the few legal venues in London to show full frontal nudity; by turning itself into a members only club it was able to evade the strictures of the Lord Chamberlain's Office which then barred models from moving. Over time, it moved towards striptease only and by the 1970s was staging big-budget sex shows of the sort seen in continental clubs like Paris' Crazy Horse.

Performers were mostly female, with a small number of male dancers. Shows involved a mixture of solo striptease acts mixed with simulated boy/girl and girl/girl sex. These were packaged together as a show know as The Festival of Erotica which ran for many years. There were two performances nightly, at 8:00pm and 10:00pm.

During the 1990s, audiences dwindled. Competing table dancing clubs such as Spearmint Rhino and Stringfellow's offered a more intimate experience for patrons, and with Soho was becoming more of a venue for gay nightlife the Revuebar was looking increasingly dated. The name and control of the theatre (but crucially, not the property itself) was bought by Gerald Simi in 1997 who reconfigured the show as a more conventional striptease revue. Gradually the theatre's fortunes waned, with Simi citing rising rent demands from Raymond as the cause.

The Revuebar closed on 10 June 2004 and became a gay bar and cabaret venue called Too2Much, designed by Anarchitect. In November 2006, it changed its name to Soho Revue Bar, where it was the home of popular club nights including Trannyshack and hosted frequent special events including the West End Gala performance of the musical Elegies for Angels, Punks and Raging Queens on 1 December 2008. On 29 January 2009, the Soho Revue Bar closed."

I humbly submit that what this might tell you or anyone else about my visiting arrangements is, at best and most, broadly analogous to the aurally perceptible musical content of John Cage's 4'33"; what it doesn't tell anyone here is why you have apparently chosen this ex-venue for a première performance of a work that is arguably as non-existent as the venue itself.

Never mind!

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I defer to your greater knowledge on such establishments.

Thal

[nikolasideris]

I quite feel upset everytime I read in a forum (cause it rarely happens in real life) such ugly comments about a composition, about a composer, about a work of art in general.

The issue of an accurate performance of a score, is worthy of discussion, though. Regardless of the works' aesthetics. A composer who works on notation (because today there's other ways possible) knows that his/her intentions will be transfered via the score. Incidently it should be noted that the performer should also be aware that his/her intentions on the music will be transfered to the audience, via their (the audiences') own perception and experience.

If a composer (especially of such notable status of Finnissy) decides to create such an amazingly difficult score he has his reasons. I have created scores which are very difficult for solo piano, and one a few which are impossible. But I also had my reasons (I was working on my thesis about music technology is concert hall music and I was debating the whole idea of recording vs live. So in the end I reached to a point of creating music played for samples alone...).

It's difficult to actually know when a composer wants accuracy or not (especially when graphic notation comes into play, or aleatoric music), but the reply to why one should attempt to play such a piece (accurately) lies to the musical taste of the performer, his/her connections to the composer perhaps, money maybe, or a given choice for an exam/audition/other.

[ahinton]

I defer to your greater knowledge on such establishments.

There is no need to do so, since the only "knowledge" that I have imparted here is in the form of facts reproduced from Wikipedia and my only reason for repeating them here was to point up the lack of current performance venue with the name that you have cited as an intended one for a première performance of a work that you allege to have composed and the identities of whose proposed performer and performer's female assistant you have declined to provide for reasons best known to yourself.

Did anyone exclaim "welcome to Thalbergian fantasy-land"?...

Best,

Alistair

[mephisto]

I assume this was difficult in this case as the producers needed to find a deaf model.

I am not sure if I agree completly, but this is surely a very funny comment Respect!

[thalbergmad]

There is no need to do so, since the only "knowledge" that I have imparted here is in the form of facts reproduced from Wikipedia

OK, we believe you.

Thal

[minor9th]

My tolerance for this kind of stuff had dropped dramatically over the years. At one point I was into Xenakis, Fernyhough, Boulez, et al, but now I'm good only up to Sorabji (he's dense but melodic--a great combo!), Tippett, Wolpe, maybe Wuorinen, but after that, it ceases to be "music" for me.

[furtwaengler]

I don't know if there can be and "et al" after a list of composers like Xenakis, Fernyhough, and Boulez. These three are incredible different sound worlds from each other, and at least Xenakis and Boulez are *FAR* removed from Finnissy. I have to say this, because Xenakis and Boulez are two of my very favorite composers, and though I don't demand that anyone else respect them, it does annoy me a bit when they're all lumped together as if they're all in the same boat. 

[nearenough]

I am probably out of my league here with all the clever and well composed comments. I question the concept of music, literature and art. When does pretense and fakery become art? Is art qua art something enjoyable, intellectual, stimulating, worthy of anything or some of it just junk? I honest can't tell in some cases (here) and am daunted by the fact there ARE certain geniuses out there who are out of my understanding.

For example Saint-Saens, I read, could transpose entire symphonies into different keys on the spot. Horowitz could sight read and probably remember very well most stuff he encountered (he used to play through entire operas). Rubinstein sight read a concerto-like piece overnight on a train trip and played it from memory the next day (possibly something by Franck). Josef Hoffman (dammit, I can never remember whether it's Hofmann or Hoffman or Hoffmann) heard Rachmaninoff play a new composition and played it from memory the next night. I personally listened to a music student sight read Ravel's Jeux d'Eau (?sp) and Ginastera's Sonata. My piano teacher could name every note out of sight of a random smashed chord I played.

So is Sorabji and Finnissy art or noise? Is it supposed to be enjoyed and is it enlightening and satisfying, or does it remain a suspect irritant and  crafted by a pretender to provoke and annoy? If it is "aleatoric" and random, why bother to write the notes at all? Just play random notes. I can do it.

Is Jackson Pollock (and many many more) a real artist or a pretender who stimulates critics to analyze and sift it endlessly as to how "arty" it is according to their lineup of art criteria, to hell with anyone actually enjoying it? Flat versus perspective. Read ArtForum for endless writing on the subject. Is "art" supposed to be enjoyed? Who knows? Yes, I know of the breaking of the rules of the establishment and the sacrosanct salons' rules and correctness. Who really cares?

James Joyce? Does anyone *really* enjoy his stuff or do they read it just to keep up? I did, just to say I did. (The Bible and the Koran are at the opposite end -- nonsense "holy" drivel supposed to impress).

So is Finnissy a really impressive genius or some kind of pretender? "Country Tunes" Ha! A sense of humor to be sure! I honestly don't know but I get a real kick out of hearing and seeing the wicked and impossible crazy quilt of playing (the young woman with the instant hand crossings and torrents of notes all over the place is a real hoot!) Whose word can I take that any performance is accurate? Is the world full of honesty or is there a lot of BS around?

Cheers and keep listening. N

[minor9th]

I don't know if there can be and "et al" after a list of composers like Xenakis, Fernyhough, and Boulez. These three are incredible different sound worlds from each other, and at least Xenakis and Boulez are *FAR* removed from Finnissy. I have to say this, because Xenakis and Boulez are two of my very favorite composers, and though I don't demand that anyone else respect them, it does annoy me a bit when they're all lumped together as if they're all in the same boat. 

I didn't mean to imply that they have similar styles at all...they just write equally thorny music (for me and many others) in their own unique ways. I still get a kick out of some of Xenakis' orchestral music.

[furtwaengler]

I get you. 

My love for Boulez is more intellectual then my love for Xenakis, which in the end may be the same kick you get out of his orchestral music - but I *really* do get a kick out of his orchestral music! Boulez though is incredibly precise and often times even beautiful to my ears...a very unique world. The orchestral expansions of the Notations are ravishing, and I think as great as anything that's been written in music history.

Finnissy is a curiosity, Fernyhough too...and I don't like to close doors on curiosities. That Finnissy is so confined to solo piano is part of the problem...it might hide some of that perceived skill...the piano concertos are a totally different experience.   

[ahinton]

So is Sorabji and Finnissy art or noise? Is it supposed to be enjoyed and is it enlightening and satisfying, or does it remain a suspect irritant and crafted by a pretender to provoke and annoy? If it is "aleatoric" and random, why bother to write the notes at all? Just play random notes. I can do it.

There are three issues here.

Even if one assumes for the purpose of this discussion that (musical) "art" and "noise" are - or are generally reckoned to be - mutually exclusive, the question as to whether or not Sorabji and Finnissy is "supposed to be enjoyed" and "enlightening and satisfying" will inevitably elicit different answers from different listeners; some will say that it is neither of those things, some that it probably is one or both of those things but does not register with them and others will simply answer in the affirmative. We all react differently to all stimuli, not just musical ones, so the fact that we'll all have different takes on Sorabji and Finnissy, or Haydn and Mozart, or Boulez and Barraqué, or Ockeghem and Tallis is par for the course, as indeed it should be and always has been and will be.

Whether or not Sorabji's and Finnissy's work is - and is intended to be - "a suspect irritant and crafted by a pretender to provoke and annoy" is quite another question that is far more loaded than the first to the extent that it presupposes the risk of a wilfully negative and destructive attitude on the part of the composers that merely asking the question cannot and does not justify. Why would or might this be the case in the first place? In other words, why would Sorabji and Finnissy be motivated to choose to seize upon the act of musical composition in the hope of achieving such ends? In Sorabji's case, such a notion would seem especially fatuous in the light of his having done nothing to encourage performances of his music for almost half of his life, with the inevitable outcome that no one was either irritated or enlightened, provoked or satisfied or indeed given enjoyment or annoyance by any of it!

You write "If it is "aleatoric" and random, why bother to write the notes at all?" but, since it isn't, the question does not apply! Rather than simply accepting my word for that, however, why not have a look, for example, at the scores of Sorabji's Gulistan and Piano Sonata No. 4 and then listen to recordings of them respectively by Charles Hopkins and Jonathan Powell (or even both works played by Powell if you prefer - all splendid performances) while you follow with those scores and then decide for yourself and tell us here if you really still believe that thes works are inherently "aleatoric" and that the correct notes as written by the composer are therefore not of especial importance. Both pianists have stressed the vital importance of playing what Sorabji wrote; might you therefore allow for the possibility that they each knew what they were talking about?

Is Jackson Pollock (and many many more) a real artist or a pretender who stimulates critics to analyze and sift it endlessly as to how "arty" it is according to their lineup of art criteria, to hell with anyone actually enjoying it? Flat versus perspective. Read ArtForum for endless writing on the subject. Is "art" supposed to be enjoyed? Who knows? Yes, I know of the breaking of the rules of the establishment and the sacrosanct salons' rules and correctness. Who really cares?

Again, it is unreasonable to expect the same answer to your question about Pollock from everyone. To begin with (and this applies also to Sorabji and Finnissy equally), how could you expect identical responses from those who have and those who have not experienced the work previously? Familiarity or otherwise are not of themselves actual judgemental criteria, of course, but they nevertheless remain factors that influence responses - indeed, it could hardly be otherwise - and, since we all have to experience everything for the first time, our own individual reactions, both positive and negative, will often be different first time around to what they are tenth time around.

James Joyce? Does anyone *really* enjoy his stuff or do they read it just to keep up? I did, just to say I did. (The Bible and the Koran are at the opposite end -- nonsense "holy" drivel supposed to impress).

I rather suspect that you would not believe anyone who answered this question affirmatively because you have already permitted yourself to become predisposed to a presumed inevitability of the opposite answer; that, however, is not only your prerogative but also your problem in that it detracts from rather than enhances your argument.

So is Finnissy a really impressive genius or some kind of pretender?

In noting with passing interest that Sorabji seems now to have been tacitly exculpated here(!), I can answer only that you must decide for yourself if so you choose but, in so doing, you should at least try to inform yourself as best you can by considering the available evidence - the scores, the recordings, the performers' work, the critics' and others' views and the rest; as in court cases, the most appropriate judgement can be reached only after due consideration of all available evidence.

Whose word can I take that any performance is accurate?

Your own, if you can read a score well enough (and you don't have to feel able to do this first time around in all cases either, since we obviously don't all have the ears of Boulez and the sight-performing ability of Ogdon).

Is the world full of honesty or is there a lot of BS around?

Yes! (to both, of course)...

One of the problems with the kids of issue raised here is that declaring that the work of Sorabji, Finnissy or whomsoever simply doesn't register with one or that one does not enjoy listening to some or any of it is an entirely different matter from damning such work as "crap", turd" and so on, because the former concerns issues of personal tastes - likes, dislikes and the rest - whereas the latter is mere insult that conveys nothing to anyone in the form of credible and understandable value judgement; if certain works are to be condemned in a public arena, they and their composers deserve at the very least some kind of well-thought-out explanatory justification for the negative assertions of those doing the condemning rather than mere statements that they are "crap" or whatever.

Best,

Alistair

[birba]

You write "If it is "aleatoric" and random, why bother to write the notes at all?" but, since it isn't, the question does not apply! Rather than simply accepting my word for that, however, why not have a look, for example, at the scores of Sorabji's Gulistan and Piano Sonata No. 4 and then listen to recordings of them respectively by Charles Hopkins and Jonathan Powell (or even both works played by Powell if you prefer - all splendid performances) while you follow with those scores and then decide for yourself and tell us here if you really still believe that thes works are inherently "aleatoric" and that the correct notes as written by the composer are therefore not of especial importance. Both pianists have stressed the vital importance of playing what Sorabji wrote; might you therefore allow for the possibility that they each knew what they were talking about?

Which is exactly what I wanted you to do regarding Finnissy's own interpretation of country tunes.  Again, I ask, why doesn't he specify for those who want to learn his music, that accuracy in notes does not count.  Someone who opens up that score and would like to perhaps partake in his radiant art, will be put off, unless they're the likes of Ursula Oppens or Jonathan Powell.  A simple explanation from the composer about what he wants might suffice, since his musical notation doesn't.

[ahinton]

Which is exactly what I wanted you to do regarding Finnissy's own interpretation of country tunes.  Again, I ask, why doesn't he specify for those who want to learn his music, that accuracy in notes does not count.  Someone who opens up that score and would like to perhaps partake in his radiant art, will be put off, unless they're the likes of Ursula Oppens or Jonathan Powell.  A simple explanation from the composer about what he wants might suffice, since his musical notation doesn't.

Well, don't you think that it would be wise first to ascertain directly from the composer some viable and credible evidence of the extent to which he may regard testual accuracy in performance of his music as paramount? Sorabji didn't expect absolute 100% note-perfect accuracy from his performers (a note-perfect public performance of Opus Clavicembalisticum, for example, would be an almost impossible goal), but he remained sufficiently concerned to avoid the risk of misinterpretation on this and other grounds to be motivated to impose unprecedentedly severe strictures on public performance of his music for some four decades. It would make sense to get onto sure and certain ground about the composers' expectations in regard to textual accuracy in performance before making bald pronouncements about it - and, even then, can one be sure that the composer is right?(!)...

People who do not have the pianistic gifts of Powell, Ullén, Amato, Hodges et al may well be equally discouraged upon opening the scores of Medtner's E minor or B flat minor sonatas, Alkan's concerto for piano solo, the Chopin/Godowsky Études, Szymanowski's Second Sonata, etc., but that makes no difference to what either those composers or their listeners have a perfect right to expect in terms of performers' textual accuracy.

I accept in principle that a composer who writes in certain challenging ways but nevertheless expects near-100% textual accuracy may on occasion risk falling foul of over-optimism, but that's another question altogether.

Best,

Alistair

[birba]

But then, WHY did he play it like he did?!

[nearenough]

Not endorsing the performance of his "works" Sorabji made his stuff even more desirable to acquire and play, for those who fell for it.

The more people talk about Lady Gaga the more they want to see her and the more transmogrifying jarring and preening cacophany they will underwrite.

Too bad Liberace died so prematurely; he could have floated down on a solid gold piano, clothed in layered capes of a thousand endangered species playing Finnissy with Fur Elise as an encore to the bug-eyed crowd.

[andhow04]

i want to weigh in with a personal expereince of mine, generally i am reticent to share more than my recordings but this one reloates to some ideas of this topic...

i had two years of private study with a well known and well connected composer in europe.  this included study of the normal repertoire, unusual repertoire and this composers own works which i performed.

one piece in particular was a very long piece (80 minutes and about 100 pages) written in a very complicated way, often in three or four staves, with torrential amounts of notes, spread out all over the piano.  i was entrusted with this score, and given some months (!) to learn it back home (usa).

i came at it, without questinoning anything, from the standpoint of it was a mountain to scale; in other words with enough work i assumed without second thoughts, that i could learn and play the notes. after all, if it was written down by this person who i respected so much and adored, it must be possible, and if this person gave it to me to learn, they must have known i could do it.

i worked and worked and worked, and was not able to play the piece as was written.  a month before the performances back in europe, i called, and was actually in tears confessing that i couldnt play it. the composer tried (mostly in vain) to calm me down and told me just to do what i could and bring it back.

so there wasnt much more i could do, but i kept tapping away at it for a month.  then before the concerts we had some lessons, maybe a weeks worth.  id dint know what to do and asked if i could just play it, very very slowly.  this was refused and i was asked to play the piece as though for a concert.

with my back against the wall, i did.  the first ten or so pages were slow anyways, and i could play them. then it started becoming impossible.  so i threw my hands around the keyboard, imitating the general visual contour of the music (in my mind this was the same as giving up completely and admitting failure).  in the 80 minutes the piece alternated between slow and fast sections, so the pattern always held, i played the notes in the slow ones, and just threw myself around in the fast ones, feeling like a jerk the whole time.

afterwards, this composer was full of compliments.  in the week that followed we worked on small and seemingly unimportant details, like louder here, softer there, or how to voice this bar, that bar, etc., and then endless work of writing in pedal indications and the like.

never once was the subject of the notes brought up, ie to play the notes as written on the page.  it was never brought up to tell me to doit, and it was never brought up to say that it didn't need to be done.  the clear indication was, it didn't need to be done, but that had to be left unspoken and not admitted publicly.

i dont know anythign about this compoeser in this post and never saw any of his scores, but looking at the video from my own experiences, i find it highly doubtful that the notes he is playing are notes that he wrote down on any page.  i dont feel as some do, any animosity towards this or the music though.  

but i will say that when this happened to me in europe, i did maybe lose some respect for the person that put me through it.  maybe you can tell but this is ac omplicated issue for me and i am generally loathe to criticize, but after having struggled so hard, and lost all my faith in myself and felt so miserable, to have the whole problem just be glossed over was not really acceptable for me.

it made me realize, or mabe just confirmed what i always thought, that we cant allow ourselves as pianists to be slaves to composers (ravel said that pianists are slaves).  they are humans too and they make mistakes and maybe even lie in their music.  its the slave mentality that actually can cause people to close their mind.  if you think you have to play every note what is on the page, yo uwill be closed off to composers like this one, who make it impossible to do so.  or the composer i knew, who made it impossible to do so, but could never admit it in public (maybe thats the case with this composer too, i dont know).

keep an open mind about everything, even the possibility of not being literal with a score, or being too attached to the things written in there.  otherwise all critical thinking and creativity will wither and atrophy, and then whats left of your own soul? whats left of your own individuality?

[birba]

Very interesting.
I've had a couple of similar experiences in my life.  One was a quintet written by a student of Sciarrino, an Italian composer very much in vogue in the 50's and 60's, and still considered one of the most important italian composers of the 20th century.  This student was considered one of his best and he composed a quintet to be performed for the italian radio.  I didn't enjoy learning it, but it paid well and I wanted new experiences.  At one point, I saw that there were notes that were even too low for a Bosendorfer.  I pointed it out to him, and he was quite surprised that the piano didn't have those notes!!!!!!!!  He just said play them an octave higher...
Another experience was with Bussotti, another italian contemporary composer very much in vogue during the 80's and 90's.  It was his opera "Phaedre".  I just couldn't make sense of his writing.  But, it was my job, so I did the best I could.  During the first rehearsal, I got lost and just sort of felt my way through, thinking all the time "Well, he's going to protest me and I'm going to  be fired..."  But, to my amazement, afterwards, he complimented me on my playing.  I slowly came to know this man and his music.  Nothing like I had ever heard in my life.  It was almost a continuous extemporaneous evolving of sounds. 
But, he, too, didn't indicate anywhere in his music that the notes were only an idea and not to be considered literal.

[pianowolfi]

Imagine Brunelleschi as a composer. Just for instance. I know he was an architect.
He did things that were considered to be impossible by his contemporaries. But everything he did needed to stay. And he knew this perfectly. And it did stay for centuries and still does.

[ramseytheii]

Imagine Brunelleschi as a composer. Just for instance. I know he was an architect.
He did things that were considered to be impossible by his contemporaries. But everything he did needed to stay. And he knew this perfectly. And it did stay for centuries and still does.

I think this viewpoint is applicable only so far as the lack of scientific knowledge is concerned.  Do we today, in an age awash in a torrent of books describing the minute physical occurences in piano playing, and in an age where piano music by Liszt and Scriabin is considered de rigeuer for pianists, truly lack a huge body of knowledge when it comes to piano playing?  I seriously doubt it.

Probably the most fundamentally innovative piano works in the past few decades have been the Ligeti etudes.  They illustrated a very difficult problem, by and large playing polymetrically, in a very focussed, in many ways simple, and above all artistic way.  They presented difficulties that may have been hinted at in previous works (there are also precedents for Liszt's Transcendental Etudes, and Chopin's Etudes) but that Ligeti totally condensed and made into a singular problem.

But nobody complained about the impossibility of the etudes.  In fact people rose to the challenge, and dozens of pianists play these with relative facility.  Even though they are too difficult, I would say for the majority of piano players, they are proven to not be impossible.

But the fact is, that if composers are writing music that they themselves can neither play the notes for, or hear whether or not the notes they wrote down are the notes being played by others, it is not our lack of scientific knowledge about piano playing that puts us at a disadvantage.  I don't disagree with the notion that musicians should always strive to the highest achievement, but when that notion is used to make idolatry of a composer, and not see actual irrationalities, I think it becomes counter-productive for everyone. 

Walter Ramsey

[gep]

Not endorsing the performance of his "works" Sorabji made his stuff even more desirable to acquire and play, for those who fell for it.

Which explains the 40 or so years of not a note being played in public of his music, and only bit by bit more after that.
I cannot play Sorabji, or anything else for that matter, but the fact that a total and utter layman as myself can "fall" for the music of Sorabji and find much to enjoy and admire therein (and in loads of other "difficult" "modern" "etc" composers) may perhaps serve as an indication that his music is accessible to the ordinary layperson IF said layperson discovers a taste for it and is willing to LISTEN (which is a PROCESS, as opposed to hearing!)

The more people talk about Lady Gaga the more they want to see her and the more transmogrifying jarring and preening cacophany they will underwrite.

Only those willing to let themselves be steered that way and have their tastes developed by others, as you seems to want to do too...

Too bad Liberace died so prematurely; he could have floated down on a solid gold piano, clothed in layered capes of a thousand endangered species playing Finnissy with Fur Elise as an encore to the bug-eyed crowd.

And this load of nonsense is intended to be...? An indication of your unwillingness to allow other people tastes unlike your own? Enjoy your deafness; I like to hear new things!

gep

[nearenough]

gep: Enjoy your deafness; I like to hear new things!

N: You are easily amused.

[ahinton]

gep: Enjoy your deafness; I like to hear new things!

N: You are easily amused.

It is unclear what you mean by this, but clearly you are easily bemused...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I wonder why the girl eventually crawls under the piano.

Doe she think there is an air raid??

Thal

[ahinton]

I wonder why the girl eventually crawls under the piano.

Doe she think there is an air raid??

If so, might it be thought that she was enacting something to do with My Parents' Generation Thought That War Meant Something from Finnissy's A History of Photography in Sound?

Best,

Alistair