Performer's obligation to premier of unknown works

[faulty_damper]

The best thing an artist can do for an unknown composer's works is to make the best damn recordings of them.  This means it must be technically flawless, artistically and musically expressive according to the composer's intent.  To do otherwise causes the audience to think the works undeserving of attention, dismissed as an academic exercise.

Imagine if Jonathan Powell introduced Alkan's works... and Hamelin never came along to perform them.  Would Powell's lack of technical mastery and musical expression cause us to continue to ignore Alkan?

The above was an obvious example.  His Sorabji is just as bad.  But what about performances that are close, but not quite there?
Here's a composer's works that you probably haven't heard of: Jean-Amédée Lefroid de Méreaux.

A world premiere recording of his etudes... and it's played like a technical exercise.  There's clearly music inside the notes, but it's difficult to hear them due to the sloppy performance; he clearly struggles in some of the etudes.

Even for well-known composers, their unknown works deserve the same level of polish.  Leslie Howard comes to mind with many never-heard performances of Liszt's works.  He makes even well-known compositions sound like key dawdling.


If the music is worth being accepted into consciousness, then performances must match the music.  It shouldn't be tossed at us without the necessary polished presentation.  It can't just be good enough to get through the notes with the appropriate speed and dynamics.  It must be music, with all the intricacies and expressiveness that only a real artist can bring out. 

[j_menz]

If the music is worth being accepted into consciousness, then performances must match the music.  It shouldn't be tossed at us without the necessary polished presentation.  It can't just be good enough to get through the notes with the appropriate speed and dynamics.  It must be music, with all the intricacies and expressiveness that only a real artist can bring out. 

I must be missing something of your point. Surely this is true of premieres in the same measure it is true of any performance. Are you suggesting a different or higher standard?

If your purpose is to simply criticize the playing of Howard and Powell, then so be it, but that is hardly interesting.

I note in that latter regard our own Alistair Hinton has had Powell premier one or more of his works. I seem to recall that he was pleased with the result. Perhaps he might pipe in and confirm?  We would have here the advantage of a composer's view of a premiere by Powell, something which is denied us in the case of Alkan or Liszt.

[faulty_damper]

Any composer would be pleased to have ANYONE perform their works.  They won't hold them to very high standards and will actively praise them in the public eye even if the performance was below the realm of what musicians call music.  This is especially true for modern works since few musicians hold an interest in performing them when even having one bad performance is better than none.

I was mostly referring to dead composers' works, however, but mainly to avoid aggressive arguments by alive composers praising the musicians who have performed their works in the past.

[fnork]

I don't quite understand what in your eyes makes Hamelin the wonderful saint who only does excellent recordings of lesser-performed works. Some of his atrocities with Medtner come to mind, and also more standard works like the Scriabin sonatas...

[starstruck5]

You would probably need to be the Valentina or Berman to have the chops to play the Mereaux -and a lot of free time to learn them -You must remember that a lot of Etudes in the standard rep were learned in youth -and by the time a performer is in their 20's, these pieces are ususally polished like new brass -so to be fair to Katsaris, he probably hasn't been playing them for a long period -I may be wrong, that is the impression I get -

[thalbergmad]

If anyone has the fingers to cope with Mereaux it would be Katsaris.

No doubt there are some below par recordings of unkown works, but to balance the equation, there are a hell of a lot more of known works, so I don't really see the problem.

Thal

[iansinclair]

Seems to me that there is a more general sort of rubric which we can draw from all of this -- that is, if one doesn't understand the "why" of a work, whether it is technical (some etudes, for instance) or demonstrating a particular compositional feature -- most of the Bach Art of the Fugue, for instance -- or trying for an emotional or impressionistic impact (some Chopin Nocturnes; most of Debussy, etc.) perhaps one should hold off playing it in public until one gains a better understanding?  Sheer technical brilliance -- except, again, for some etudes -- will not compensate for a shallow interpretation.  Of any piece, unknown, new, or otherwise.

And I'm not quite sure that the old Hollywood adage -- any publicity is better than no publicity -- quite applies; a weak or sloppy interpretation of a new work may doom it for years.

[richard black]

Speaking as someone who has given a few premieres (of works by composers living and dead), I would say there is more of a 'moral imperative' to give a good performance of new/unknown repertoire, simply because if I play, for instance, Beethoven badly I look like a fool, whereas if I play Denis ApIvor badly I risk making him, not me, look like the fool.

And there is indeed something of a plague of poor 'first ever recordings' around these days as lots of performers realise it's the easiest way to get their name on a CD cover and cheerfully sight-read the stuff to microphone with scant regard for musical niceties. Mostly correct notes is often about as good as it gets.

[j_menz]

Speaking as someone who has given a few premieres (of works by composers living and dead), I would say there is more of a 'moral imperative' to give a good performance of new/unknown repertoire, simply because if I play, for instance, Beethoven badly I look like a fool, whereas if I play Denis ApIvor badly I risk making him, not me, look like the fool.

I hadn't quite considered it in this light. A well made point. Thanks.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Hey J Menz, what works have you premiered? 

[j_menz]

Hey J Menz, what works have you premiered? 

None in the general sense.

I have thought further about this, though. I think it is important to remember that in any performance it is highly likely (college auditions/exams aside) that there are some, possibly many, in the audience for whom ones performance is a "personal premiere"; the first time they have heard the piece, and possibly the first time they have heard anything by the composer. And that that is true even if the concert consists entirely of repertoire warhorses. 

Does not our obligation to these people equal that in any "official" premiere?