We reach a controversial issue

In my opinion this piece is an impressive piano poem but it also still is a etude (that is, a pedagogical piece written in order to learn to overcome a difficulty). In my humble opinion, the opening is intended by Liszt to exercise finger independence while achieving a convincing musical, expressive result, using just one hand (just like Paganini Etude no. 1, except for in that case it's played by the left hand). I used to play that way but I must admit that while I tried hard, I never achieved to play the tremolo soft enough so now I play tremolo with left hand and melody with right hand.
Claudio Arrau was a fanatic of playing everything as it was written, respecting the very exact way the distribution of notes at hands on the score. His argument was that arranging the original distribution of hands changes the color. In fact, listening to his Chasse Neige rendition we perceive how strong sounds the opening tremolo. While I usually agree with that Arrau statement, I think that there can be some exceptions and the final musical effect must have priority. While I usually love Arrau's playing, I'm not specially fond of his beginning of Chasse Neige.

I'm thinking now about Alfredo Casella. He said that while respecting the score, the pianist isn't obligated to suffer useless difficulties and he cites the reduction on one note of a very, very fast chord in Schumann Etudes Symphoniques. Its up to the performer to decide if the jumps that follow the tremolo passage are a useless difficulty that can be arranged/facilitated or they have a expressive value on their own that must be respected. In this case, I really think that the effect changes completely by eliminating the jump with the help of the left hand. You eliminate the risk but you also eliminate a fluctuation in rhythm due to the jumps that may be intended by the composer. This is a very personal choice. You decide.
