1906 view on teaching piano.

[lostinidlewonder]

I like to buy antiques, old music books are of particular interest to me, I recently purchased a book over 100 years old which I found quite interesting and wanted to share some of it with you all.

TO THE TEACHER:
Every experienced teacher has doubtless endured the inevitable trials incident to teaching beginners, chief among which , perhaps, is the difficulty of inducing young pupils to raise and drop their fingers without sluggishness while their eyes are intent upon the music page.

Referring to this particular trial, a recent writing aptly says "I arrived at the conclusion that the pupil ought to be his own watchdog, as it were and see himself play, which is contrary to the universal dictum." And so the competent teacher of today wisely refrains from teaching the beginner to read music until a sufficient amount of prior practice by dictation shall have assured the proper position and movement of the arm, hand and fingers while the eyes are engaged by the music book. This method is well calculated to awaken early interest and to maintain it; for more so than the older custom of endeavoring to teach the proper use of the hands and finger and reading of notes simultaneously.

We assume that beginners in the profession of teaching music, have no prejudice in favor of the old way, will follow our suggestions without question; but some of the older teachers may hesitate to adopt a system so directly opposed to time-worn custom. To the latter we will simply say: Try it and let the results render a verdict.

We urgently recommend (unless the conditions positively forbid and especially if the pupil is very young) that daily half-hour lessons, or practice in the presence of the teacher, be insisted upon, at least during the first three months.

We also desire to impress upon the young teacher the great importance of encouraging, during the earlier stages of musical tuition, the habit of deep, serious thought and careful, critical listening. In other words, do your best to make the pupil use brain as well as hands.

By no means allow the pupil to ignore, in the slightest degree, the directions as to touch, in its varied forms and their applications; or to shrink the difficulties and drudgery of technical exercises, counting aloud, etc etc.

Encouraging the pupil to commit to play from memory all of the more important pieces. As a means to pomote this valuable acquirement, we have found that the following plan brings good results:

First call the pupil's attention to the general plan, form or noticeable features of the peice about to be played; then give warning that after playing the first three of four measures, you will cover the music and require them to play the passage from memory. It is astonishing how a frequent resort to this experiment will quicken the pupil's perception and promote the habit of closely scanning the music when played for the first time.

It may be almost superfluous to add that it is next to impossible to exaggerate the importance of a correct beginning.

Leading teachers now concede that a pupil can be properly taught musically and technically in such a way that much of the drudgery consequent upon old methods will be avoided, while at the same time more rapid progress will be attained; and this, too, while the studies, instead of being dry and uninteresting are made actually enjoyable.

Every effort should be made to awaken the musical instincts of the pupil. The successful teacher will know how to do this by numerous little methods which must be varied to suit the individuality of the pupil. Many players and singers are mechanical musicians because they have been taught too much mechanism and too little music. Care should be taken that the pupil's soul be not smothered in the drudgery of fingering exercises, however indispensable these may be in their proper place.

Music teachers, who are  worthy of the name, make as much money by teaching as do the workers in any other profession. Many a business man does not clear as much money in a year as is earned by scores of hard working competent music teachers, and it is only the lazy, shiftless, incompetent, so called teachers of music who bring public odium on a comparatively lucrative profession. But the possession of talent is nothing unless it is accompanied by energy and industry which gives it a place in the busy world. It stands to reason, that, to secure success in life, the musician, whether teacher or artist, must cultivate the money earning talent like other men. Musicians must learn to take practical views of art life. Whether they are willing or not, the world will force them to learn the hard lesson of life.


TO THE PARENTS:
In the better class of public schools it is now the practice to teach children to read before they have learned the alphabet. A generation ago such a process would have been considered as evidence of insanity, which proves that we are progressing in our educational methods. If, therefore, the plan employed by music teachers of your selection shall prove to be a radical departure from the methods formerly in vogue, remember that this fact may be a strong recommendation of it.

If there be a choice of teachers, you will find that the best results will be attained by employing the most competent instructor; if possible, one of experience and established reputation.

Parents should willingly cooperate with the teacher in enforcing the observance of regular practice hours and doubtless would do so far more faithfully if they could realize how largely a pupil's success and advancement depends upon such parental cooperation.

With our modern system of teaching beginners, there is no reason why children in good health may not begin their musical studies at the age of six or seven years, especially if circumstances permit the pupil to take daily lessons, which should certainly be done at the outset, if possible.

It is a mistake to expect great results simply because a child displays unmistakable talent. Parents should remember that without the talent for hard work natural gifts are practically worthless.

Among other things that indicate the advisability of an early beginning, is the fact that school duties are likely to crowd hard after a child reaches the "teens" and later the demands of society are more or less exacting. Moreover, when children being early, music becomes a part of their school life; and, by the way, when the summer vacation comes let it be a vacation in music also.


1906, P . F  Banes

extracted from: Cornish's Practical Instructor





A few things that startled me and really made me think where:

- For the first three months of a beginners musical study they should be having daily 30 minute lessons with a teacher.
      You may have to have a lot of money to afford this but to me this opens a new concept of what it means to have a musical lesson. It is certainly something that I will mediate upon and try to provide such a service since it is non existent in most places in this world where piano is taught.

- A student is taught to read words before reading letters and be their own watchdog
To me this means teach a student many pieces before you get them to learn to sight read. This is a technique I have used ever since I started to teach piano. However how to draw a student into thinking how to read music is important. But I liked this way of explaining how it works, you learn to read the words before you read the letters, that is you learn to play musical pieces with both hands for a while then later on you go back and start learning how to read simple music. I guess this also hits at the core of my own musical training which started at the age of 3. I barely knew the alphabet let alone being able to read music, thus I never learnt to read music not until I was around 8 years old or so. But I have 5 years of learning pieces and i could play quite a lot of simple 2 handed pieces. Reading after that was a real uphill struggle, so I think that you need to introduce reading fairly early on however being able to get pieces under your belt first are of greatest priority.

Being a their own watchdog means that they are not looking at the sheet music to begin with but are more interested in looking at their own hands for their first few pieces. This is something I discovered early on while teaching, to get the beginner to look away from the sheet music and be more interested in what their hands are doing.



If anyone has opinion on what was said above or has any other old piano methodology extract they can share it would be wonderful.

[starlady]

If you have a Kindle, you can get the e-book "Piano Mastery" for free. It's a collection of talks with the great pianists and piano teachers of 1913. The interviews originally appeared in the magazine Musical America.  The material is sort of repetitious, but the price is right. 

What struck me in the interviews was 1) they reflect a very high level of public and popular interest in the piano  and 2) this public was very open to, even enthusiastic about, contemporary music.  There are stories of people from small towns travelling far (in horse-carts?!?) to hear recitals, and all the fans waiting impatiently for the new Rachmaninof or Paderewski piece.  I don't think this happens so much anymore.


--s. 

[scottmcc]

I thought the idea of being one's own watchdog went further than you stated above, that the student should be trained early on the be sufficiently critical of their technique, and to recognize when they were playing correctly or incorrectly, and not depend on their teacher to point out every little thing.  to me this is a critical skill.

I also agree with starlady that the general public interest in the piano has waned since the early 20th century.  it used to be a near-requirement that a middle class home had a piano, and I would hazard a guess that fewer than 10% of houses in America today have an instrument (but I can't say i have an exact statistic).  ask yourself, when you go to a friend's house for a dinner party, does someone spontaneously take up the piano to provide a few moments entertainment between courses?

and finally, I'd be a lot more interested in contemporary classical music if it sounded at all like the music of rachmaninoff or his contemporaries.  I'm sure others would as well.

[fleetfingers]

A few things that startled me and really made me think where:

- For the first three months of a beginners musical study they should be having daily 30 minute lessons with a teacher.
      You may have to have a lot of money to afford this but to me this opens a new concept of what it means to have a musical lesson. It is certainly something that I will mediate upon and try to provide such a service since it is non existent in most places in this world where piano is taught.

- A student is taught to read words before reading letters and be their own watchdog
To me this means teach a student many pieces before you get them to learn to sight read. This is a technique I have used ever since I started to teach piano. However how to draw a student into thinking how to read music is important. But I liked this way of explaining how it works, you learn to read the words before you read the letters, that is you learn to play musical pieces with both hands for a while then later on you go back and start learning how to read simple music. I guess this also hits at the core of my own musical training which started at the age of 3. I barely knew the alphabet let alone being able to read music, thus I never learnt to read music not until I was around 8 years old or so. But I have 5 years of learning pieces and i could play quite a lot of simple 2 handed pieces. Reading after that was a real uphill struggle, so I think that you need to introduce reading fairly early on however being able to get pieces under your belt first are of greatest priority.

Being a their own watchdog means that they are not looking at the sheet music to begin with but are more interested in looking at their own hands for their first few pieces. This is something I discovered early on while teaching, to get the beginner to look away from the sheet music and be more interested in what their hands are doing.

Thank you, lostinidlewonder, for sharing this with us. I found it interesting.

Didn't Bernhard, the 'Great One', who everyone is always referencing on this forum, teach daily lessons? I have always been intrigued by the idea and have recently begun teaching a neighbor's son on a daily basis. It never seemed practical with my other students, but when this neighbor asked me to teach her 7-year-old, I asked her if I could try my experiment with him. It's interesting that they only suggest it for the first 3 months, though. My guess as to the reason for the daily lessons with a teacher is to start the beginning student with good habits and training in the proper way to practice, and perhaps 3 months is sufficient time to establish a good routine. It is then probably assumed that the student will continue on in the way he was trained.

If I remember correctly, you have mentioned before that you teach beginning students their pieces by rote, and I do the same. I initially began with a Suzuki teacher, so that's how I learned, and I know from experience that it is a good way to do it - for many reasons. But, I don't delay the teaching of reading for very long.

I usually wait until they can play 3-4 pieces with two hands before introducing reading. It usually takes about 2 months. Because sightreading skills are always going to be a couple of levels below what one can play by spending time on a piece, I feel that it is best to separate reading and performance. Kids are capable of playing pieces more advanced than what they are able to sightread, and they should be encouraged to do so.

Thanks again for posting this! If there is anything else interesting in that book, please share again.

[lostinidlewonder]

If you have a Kindle, you can get the e-book "Piano Mastery" for free. It's a collection of talks with the great pianists and piano teachers of 1913. The interviews originally appeared in the magazine Musical America.  The material is sort of repetitious, but the price is right.  

What struck me in the interviews was 1) they reflect a very high level of public and popular interest in the piano  and 2) this public was very open to, even enthusiastic about, contemporary music.  There are stories of people from small towns travelling far (in horse-carts?!?) to hear recitals, and all the fans waiting impatiently for the new Rachmaninof or Paderewski piece.  I don't think this happens so much anymore.  

Thanks for mentioning this book I will certainly have to find it. I still think that there is some kind of public interest in piano playing and in fact I think today it is easier to make a living from music than back then. Holding any sort of concert these days however requires a lot of good marketing, you can be the best pianist in the world but if you don't have the complete package (that is a business musician as well as the artistic musician) you pretty much can't get anywhere.

I think the piano stars have always fallen behind the singing stars no matter what era you lived in. Today we notice it even more obviously but I think that most people would be interested in hearing a good pianist rather than a good rock band. The good rock band is even harder musical life than the good pianist. People have such a strong preference for music these days you just can't cut it unless you write something people didn't know they needed. But pianists are like masters of an old art, and those who can package their concerts to suit their audience will go far these days.

I thought the idea of being one's own watchdog went further than you stated above, that the student should be trained early on the be sufficiently critical of their technique, and to recognize when they were playing correctly or incorrectly, and not depend on their teacher to point out every little thing.  to me this is a critical skill.

I agree with your extension on the idea of being a watchdog wholeheartedly, I think they mentioned this by saying playing with your "Brain" not just the body. It seems that the early beginners where taught to read music and not look at the hands very early on which to me seems a very tough way to begin piano, I thought that highlighting this old methodology was however an interesting idea. I think that sheet music in those days where a lot harder to get your hands on, this book I have for instance cost $1.50 which in 1900's probably is around $80 today. So sheet music was a luxury and expensive probably a reason why beginners had to read straight away.

I also agree with starlady that the general public interest in the piano has waned since the early 20th century.  it used to be a near-requirement that a middle class home had a piano, and I would hazard a guess that fewer than 10% of houses in America today have an instrument (but I can't say i have an exact statistic).  ask yourself, when you go to a friend's house for a dinner party, does someone spontaneously take up the piano to provide a few moments entertainment between courses?

I know in my family we do play the piano at parties held at our home all the time But gone are the days of people spending long hours drinking and singing songs while the pianist accompanies them all. Now we just put on the CD and it sounds like a live band is in your own home and you can even have the best singers in the world sing while you dine. The gramophone just didn't have the same feel huh?

Nowadays however I do notice that A LOT more people are taking piano lessons than in the past. That is because we live in the Information Age and specialist knowledge is valuable. But you wont be able to pack a stadium with 20,000 people cheering you on while you play a piano solo concert like the famous singers draw. That is not to say that it wouldn't be possible, you would have to have the right idea though. No one yet has regularly held piano solo concerts which draw such a grand audience.

and finally, I'd be a lot more interested in contemporary classical music if it sounded at all like the music of rachmaninoff or his contemporaries.  I'm sure others would as well.

I agree and I think part of the fact lies in how great composers think. I believe that the composers of the later 20th and now the 21st century could indeed write like the old masters but choose not to. Most composers like to have their own voice, explore and develop ideas, thus they would never like to sound like any of the old greats because that had already been done. It would be a good challenge to see if composers of today could actually mimic the greats of the 17th, 18th, 19th and early 20th century keyboard writers I have heard some modern examples on radio but they never really are memorable enough!

Didn't Bernhard, the 'Great One', who everyone is always referencing on this forum, teach daily lessons? I have always been intrigued by the idea and have recently begun teaching a neighbor's son on a daily basis. It never seemed practical with my other students, but when this neighbor asked me to teach her 7-year-old, I asked her if I could try my experiment with him. It's interesting that they only suggest it for the first 3 months, though. My guess as to the reason for the daily lessons with a teacher is to start the beginning student with good habits and training in the proper way to practice, and perhaps 3 months is sufficient time to establish a good routine. It is then probably assumed that the student will continue on in the way he was trained.

I would be greatly interested if you post a thread relaying your experience with this type of lesson and how the student benefits differently from this as opposed to the general weekly lessons. I was considering daily lessons would have to target different musical ideas every time, it would not be like weekly lessons where you have the overall view of their work and aim to improve multiple issues at once, perhaps with daily lessons we would focus on things like;
1) technical exercises and practical theory
2) Musical expression
3) Fingering and technique
4) Repertoire selection, time management and goal setting

It would be also good to simply allow the student to practice on their own in the teachers presence and interjection by the teacher only happens if something is going wrong without noticeable movement in the correct direction. Sometimes I let my weekly students show me how they practice, it sometimes reveals a huge amount, some students are very good at following instructions but when left to their own devices without guidance they are very insecure and sometimes simply have no idea where to start.

If I remember correctly, you have mentioned before that you teach beginning students their pieces by rote, and I do the same. I initially began with a Suzuki teacher, so that's how I learned, and I know from experience that it is a good way to do it - for many reasons. But, I don't delay the teaching of reading for very long.

Yes, I do not get early beginners to read normal sheet music simply because they need that experience of pieces first, the coordination is so important to work out first I found. But you are right in warning you shouldn't leave it for too long. Often with students of mine I will write passages of sheet music on a piece of paper with just letters which go up and down like sheet music, but I do not define note length quality that is done by ear. I like this way because it gets them to start using their brain to read the logic of sheet music but not actually have to read music notes to gain the early basics of reading.

I had about 5 years of playing with about 50 or so easier pieces under my belt before I started to learn to read music, but I found it an incredibly difficult process which I pretty much abandoned because I learned predominantly through muscular and sound memory. It was not until I was in my late teens that I decided that I needed to improve my reading and started recreating my main method of learning music. This prompts me that developing correct learning habits is very important, that is getting to sight reading as soon as possible and getting to understand how sight reading effects our memory as a whole.

However my early bias to muscular and sound memory certainly has effected me in present time for the better as well so maybe there really isn't a right or wrong way. When I was younger I would slowly learn a phrase but as soon as I knew the notes I never had to read again. I liked that power, that I only had to read a passage once and then I had it. Of course I had to keep practicing until the note errors and fingering errors vanished but I didn't need the sheet music to guide me once I had read it from it the first time. Now however as my reading improved that effort becomes impossible, I can't simply sight read a piece one time and then throw away the sheets and play it again, there is too much information to digest, however I found that it requires multiple sight reading attempts for the memory to automatically occur. When studying now I never look at my hands while the sheet music is up, you learn the notes then you can forget them. But that forgetting process stems deep within my muscular and sound memory, the conscious memory of sighting the music seems separated (in that you sight read without forcing the memory) but together (eventually the muscular and sound memory can't be ignored) . That is from existing in conscious memory efforts for long enough the muscular and sound begin to attach themselves to it without you really knowing, but then you are left with  parts of the score that are not automatically being learned so then you know which parts to focus on.

.... sightreading skills are always going to be a couple of levels below what one can play by spending time on a piece, I feel that it is best to separate reading and performance.

An extremely important point and something which I hold very close to me while teaching as well.

.... anything else interesting in that book, please share again.

Certainly.


The importance of a proper position at the piano should be thoroughly impressed upon the pupil at the outset. The stool or bench should stand quite firm with no tendency to rock and of sufficient high to bring the elbows a little below the level of the upper surface of the white keys when the arms hang naturally at the sides.

Attention called to the alternate groups of two and three black keys, thus locating the C's and F's, will soon enable the pupil to name the white keys without hesitation.

Assuming the pupil to be a child, no further mental labor, other than that above suggested should be required for a first lesson but that of holding the right hand in a proper position and the use of the fingers in playing a simple exercise dictated to the pupil. This preliminary fingering drill may be done on a silent keyboard.



Preparatory to what may be called "finger touch", i.e with no arm or wrist motion, have the pupil close the hands into fists, with considerable strength of grip and thus call attention to the constricted, cramped feeling of the wrists as something to avoid. Then, opening the hands freely, to the feeling of release and ease in the relaxed muscles, as something to maintain.

Now holing the right hand (palm down) move each finger from the knuckle joint, slowly and lightly many times in succession, naming them by their respective numbers.  (image of hand with finger numbers 1,2,3,4,5 as we are all used to). This is known as "foreign fingering" and is in almost universal use to the exclusion of the so-called American, in which the thumbs are indicated by  'x" and the fingers, proper, 1,2,3,4. No doubt the American is quite as consistent as the foreign, but the fact that much music of foreign publication is used in this country renders it advisable, as a convenience to American pupils, that our own publications should conform to those of the "old country".


Facility in playing scales, or scale passages, depends largely upon proper looseness of the wrist, and curving of the fourth finger, thus affording the necessary space between the hand and the keys so that the thumb can easily and quickly pass under the hand in readiness for its next position. The wrists may turn out slightly, but not so far as to cause the projection of the elbows. Beware of this too common fault. The proper position of the fingers is assured if only the fourth (which seems to control the others in this respect) is properly curved.

[m1469]

Thanks for posting this, Lostinidle.  I, of course, have lots of thoughts, but it seems I would have to write out hoards of my own (current) philosophy in order to truly respond to what is written!  I could say it's interesting to note what was considered necessary in terms of technique at the time, vs. what may be considered under scrutiny now.  Even in my own 10 or so years of teaching, I've undergone severe changes in what I think is important and what should be a first priority.  

I will say that I became so curious about Bernhard's posts regarding everyday lessons, that I actually had a Father and (adult) daughter coming to me for lessons 5 days a week a few years back.  At that time, I had decided that's how I was going to start beginners and people with certain special needs (that's a long story).  I didn't get any other takers besides those two, and had a number of people not wish to sign on with me because of it.  The father even graduated to three times per week for 20 minutes, and then eventually two times per week for half an hour.  I think the daughter went to three times a week at some point, too.  I didn't actually have enough of that kind of student to know for certain what the true comparisons would be with a standard half-hour a week, but from the little I did do, it was not astoundingly different to me.  In fact, my own frustrations towards my students were remarkably the same; I still wanted them to love something they actually just didn't and in fact had no intention of seriously pursuing long-term.  Right now, my own "philosophy" is that this is the key ingredient no matter what kind of lesson setup I've got going.

Also, the way I had it set up, and as I vaguely understand Bernhard to have run his own lessons, at the very beginning people just take 10-15 minute lessons everyday.  So, you don't charge any more than you would for an hour a week, actually.  All along, the charge is the same for the month (or however you charge).