For whom do you play ?

[m1469]

Hi everybody who takes the time to read this   .

I have been thinking on this thing for probably a few years now, and I finally can articulate it (kind of a big thing for me)!

I find that when I have somebody to truly share "my" music with, it matters more to me how I prepare it.  I feel very guilty about this, however, because the purist in me says that....

1.  I should treat it with equal care and consideration no matter what
2.  I should love playing just as much even if it is only for the spiders and crickets in the walls of the room
3.  You know... all of that stuff

I can't help but feel as though I am perhaps missing something essential if I am so tied to wanting more to share it than put so much work in and simply keep it to myself.  I think maybe it is just fear or something....

Anyway, Ted's posts have stricken me along these lines because it seems to me that Ted takes more joy "simply" in the sounds and the acts of creating them on the instrument than preparing it for any one thing (please forgive if I am offending in any way).  It is so pure to me and fascinating, essential I believe.  But, I also want to share this purity with people and this very desire seems to change things.

It is a moral dilemma I have.  I do not wish to be "selfish" (it is simply how it makes me feel) yet I want to stay pure.

Do people have thoughts on this subject? 

m1469

[anda]

i'm not sure i can understand correctly & completely your post, so i'll just answer your topic question: for anybody. i don't care if they're musicians or amateurs or even ignorants, all i care is that they listen to what i have to say (play) - i mean, that's why they came, right? truth is, and i am ashamed to admit it in front of anybody who has heard me live, i play better on stage - i mean, this is as good as it gets, i don't even have the excuse "i played poorly because i'm afraid to get on stage, but i'm actually better than this".

i like playing on stage, i feel great (though my hands are shaking and my blood pressure is somewhere around 200), and i guess the simple fact that i really want to be there, i really want to play, i love the work i'm playing (i never play works i can't have a personal relation with) and i want so bad for everybody to see how wonderful this work is that i end up playing quite well (compared to myself, of course)

you say you play better for professionists. i don't, and that's probably because i focus on emotional (vs. intellectual) level relations with the audience. the most important thing for me is that anybody who  has been in the hall should be moved somehow, should feel something.

just one more thing (and this is the reason i almost never participated in competitions): i can't play to a hostile/frozen audience, i need an audience emotionally available, i need to play to people willing to accept the present i have for them - a wonderful work. of course anybody is free to hate my playing - but not a priori.

i hope i didn't digress too much

[m1469]

No no, you did not digress at all.  This is actually an exact thing I was after even if I was unclear (sometimes I really don't know if I am or not).  I appreciate very much your feedback.

[jason2711]

Generally, I change who i play for should the situation demand it.  Since I tend to spend long hours in an empty house playing the piano away, i've learnt to cope without an audience.  However, even in competitions, i play to make both the audience and adjudicator identify with my playing and appreciate it, and that includes any musical 'illiterate' there as well.  Even if they are supposed to take a cold view on it, any adjudicator or examiner that is taken away by what you play is going to be impressed.  Although this rarely happens for me (but when it does, its great ) i tend to play to the music, and just use it as an opportunity to unleash those hidden emotions inside, so even if its downstairs on my home piano after school or in a public performance, i'll make sure i enjoy it.  Generally enjoyment is felt by the audience when you perform.  If you're loosing the enjoyment factor, either take a break or start new pieces which you can identify with/ feel.

When playing in front of my non-musical school friends, i would have generally played to impress, using virtuosic passages to show off.  Now I've learnt that whatever I play will impress them (except the ones who think that the piano is stupid... heathens), so i play what i want to play, rather than think i know what they want to here.

[dlu]

Who do I play for?
Myself

[vivacelife]

Who do I play for?
The music itself. Respect the music and play it as best as you could.

[lostinidlewonder]

I play for several reasons. For living people and the dead I think it is a good sign of respect for the composers if you play their music. I imagine sometimes, it is so interesting that what we play now, the composer himself/herself also did something similar many years back with their own fingers. It is like, a frozen space of time on a piece of sheet music. And when we explore that on our lonesome piano practing journey, we are opened to a channel of the composers life and the actualy physical action that they where experimenting with and created in their music at that time.
To me, that fact is awesome and amazing.

I also feel that music has a close connection with Emotion/Spirituality. The mind and soul cannot help but be effected! So in that case, i always play for God, as a form of worship, even if the peices played have mortal stories behind it, the sound of music always seems to stretch into that plane of godlyness. I guess, those that experience shivers down the spine when they hear something amazing, that is the experience i am trying to emphasise. What insipres that feeling? It is a rush of emotion, something outside of the body maybe casues it.

I insipre myself many times to master music and carry on because i know what i play i will be playing for thousands of staring eyes in the future. So i better do a good job of it while i study, so when i study often i have thoughts of how will this be done in concert, and how can i make it good for the audience. So they are physically not with me while i study, but i know that eventually they will be, to see the end result of all my study.

If you have a piano buddy who you can regulary meet up with and jam with on the piano that is an amazing friendship to develop! Advertising in local papers is great for that. You could also organise weekly or monthly get togethers of a group of musicians in your city/town. Food/drinks whatever, and rotate that though the group of people as to which house you will be doing it at.

You find that you will insipre each other to learn more. I keep saying to all my students, the more musicians you know and make friends with, the better you will become! It is the same in life i guess, the more you mix with people who teach you good stuff the more it will rub off onto you.

But with music you are never alone. The music itself is a being!

[timothy42b]

I think this question is far more profound that it might appear at first glance.

There can be so many levels to the response - but I'm out of time today.

One thought though:  the idea that pianists play mostly alone, and hardly ever, maybe never for an audience, is really unique to piano.  No other instrument I'm aware of has this concept and I'm still struggling to understand what I hear on this forum.  Trombonists (I am one and know many) practice mostly because they wouldn't be able to gig with out it; it is a means to an end.  The solitary trombonist, perfecting his skills in the practice room while never intending to play at dances, win a symphony audition, jam at the club, or do concerts in the park - just doesn't exist. 

more thoughts, but I've got to run. 

[ted]

Hello m1469,
                      Firstly yes, I am a very different sort of pianist and musician. I have a psyche completely incompatible with performance, and my musical aesthetic is very different from normal to say the least. However, I have always known myself pretty well, and decided very early in life that I would remain an amateur (against the advice of some) and support my creative musical freedom by earning my living in another way. The years have proved this decision correct.

Over the years I have been the object of much rebuke from relations and friends, firstly because they see me as a massive under-achiever (in other things than music too) and secondly because they consider me selfish. To the first charge I plead guilty in the pragmatic sense but I refute the second. I have as much desire to share and exchange ideas as the next person. However, the usual, and more social, channels of musical activity are not open to me. I find performance thoroughly repulsive, and to attempt to write out the sort of musical ideas I have takes roughly a hundredfold of the time it takes to create them. It is largely a matter of common sense. Do I want to leave a pile of scores behind on the slim chance some people in fifty years time may enjoy them ?  I don’t think so. Do I want to expend enormous and embarrassing efforts of self-promotion trying to force my music onto people ? Again, what on earth for ?

I do make lots of private recordings; I do write out the occasional piece – if it fits notation, which isn’t very often lately; I do enjoy correspondence with one or two very gifted contemporary musicians; I do give any of my scores and recordings away to anybody free; I do help the odd player to get the same constant enjoyment from music I take for granted. So selfish overall ? No, I don’t think so. Different ? Yes, very.

So I am not sure to what degree my personal example can shed any light on a general plan. What is supremely happy for me may not be for you or many others. The only general advice I can dish out is not to worry about “shoulds”, “ought tos”, “rights” and “wrongs” when it comes to releasing whatever music you have within. Make the choice to be happy; claim the right to feel good through music – Aleister Crowley's infamous “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law” is actually a pretty good maxim in art.

 

[ted]

I might add that you are more perceptive than most and that the question is not trivial. Yes, for me the sound is everything, not who wrote it, who plays it, what the world thinks of it - nothing except the sound, the moment and its consequences in my brain. If it's any help, I have always been able to see beauty in small things very easily. That leaves open the question of whether I and people like me, are simply satisfied with what the world calls the artistically mediocre. Huxley dealt with this issue very cleverly in Island and in various essays. To transport me probably takes a tiny fraction of what is necessary to transport a first-rate concert artist. Does this mean I am satisfied with practically anything ?  This business of constantly "seeing the universe in a grain of sand" - is it an excuse for not striving, a reason to be a happy pig instead of a wretched Socrates ? And if so, does it really matter ? Why would I want to strive when the gates of heaven open at the touch of a chord ? (Not quite that simple, but you know what I mean).

Your question is both interesting and deep. I tell you what though - I don't think I'll worry about it too much - feeling good is good enough for me (who on earth said that ? Somebody or other famous - can't remember).

[m1469]

Ted, thank you very much for your responses.  I will admit their content to be quite provocative for me, thus, I am in thought about them.  I am very curious about a few things you mention, however, my thoughts thus far are not currently formed enough to comment more than this in this moment.  Simultaneously, your responses are bringing for me more conclusive thoughts and a sense of peace to previous questions.

m1469

[bernhard]

I always find myself in agreement with Ted's excellent posts and ideas.

Just to add something perhaps different.

I often find myslef playing for those who are not there. For instance, my last teacher who passed away several years ago. Or friends I have not seen for many years. Very often the actual audience pales and disappears to make space for this ghost audience. Which by the way I am not that eager to play to. (that is, if they were there, I would be probably playing for other absentees, if that makes any sense).

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[jazzyprof]

I often find myslef playing for those who are not there. For instance, my last teacher who passed away several years ago.

That's very interesting, for I very often find myself playing for my mom who passed away a couple of years ago.  Perhaps it's not so much playing for her as being reminded of her as I play.  It happens most often with slow Bach pieces like the Sarabande from the French Suite #5, the Menuet II from Suite #1, and the Sinfonia #5.  I get all teary eyed .   Most of the time, however, I just play for myself, even when there is an audience.   

[m1469]

Ted,

As I read through your posts again, I find myself deeply wishing to dig at almost everything you are "saying".   The more I dig, the more intricate and complex the thoughts become.  Many things become related and it gets difficult for me to address a single aspect without addressing a complexly dimensional figure.   In thinking about your responses, two questions come to mind.

1.  What am I?
2.   How does the "answer" to this first question affect my piano playing?

In thinking on this here:

This business of constantly "seeing the universe in a grain of sand" - is it an excuse for not striving, a reason to be a happy pig instead of a wretched Socrates ? And if so, does it really matter ? Why would I want to strive when the gates of heaven open at the touch of a chord ? (Not quite that simple, but you know what I mean).

I must let myself mention a few things.  As you mentioned of yourself, I also have always been able to easily see beauty in very small things.  I am one who is constantly seeing the universe in a grain of sand, so to speak.  It is not this simple however, as I am sure that you must know.  When I behold these glimpses into the universe, whether it be in a vast panorama or literally in a grain of sand, it is much more than this one thing that I am "seeing".  Just typing these thoughts on this subject in this moment, heighten for me this sense which percieves such things and opens wide doors to deeper creativity.

An excuse for not striving?  I suppose I do not understand the direct relevance.  If anything, these glimpses engage my desire to learn more and they increase my hope to gain in opportunity to glimpse further.  Within every glimpse, there is always a corner that has not yet been turned.  How could one consider this as the state of being a "happy pig" ?  I just truly do not know.

This question, "does it matter ?" is largely unanswerable, although I believe you did not actually mean for me to answer it anyway.

While I do indeed understand the gist of what I think you mean when you ask "Why would I want to strive when the gates of heaven open at the touch of a chord ?", I would say two things. 

1.   I don't think it is a matter of desire as much as I think it is a matter of fear.
2.   You have never stricken me as someone who simply does not strive.

I suppose it is simply about curiousity.  'What happens when I mix Red with Blue?'  My very curiousity will not let me rest on any one thing.  My very curiousity propels me into exploration.  You also, do not strike me as being uncurious.

It dawns on me that if one can glimpse the universe within a thing such as a grain of sand, and if one can easily see the beauty in such a thing...what I am suddenly takes on a different purpose.  If "I" am as a grain of sand by which the universe can be glimpsed, then I suppose for me, "feeling good is good enough for me" has a different depth to it than I would have otherwise thought.  Knowing what "I" am more clearly defines who I am, and should I consider my playing as for "myself", this also has a much different meaning.

Do I want to leave a pile of scores behind on the slim chance some people in fifty years time may enjoy them ?  I don’t think so. Do I want to expend enormous and embarrassing efforts of self-promotion trying to force my music onto people ? Again, what on earth for ?

I suspect there is no logical reason in "earth" toward any subject.  But to me, your last question in the quote just above invites an unearthly response.  For this, there may be reasons.  I for one am quite grateful that somebody decided to write the 48 Preludes and Fugues for reasons that go beyond Earth.  I for one am quite grateful to you for your willingness to have responded to my thread.  But, to what end?  Who knows for certain?


Although my thoughts on all of this are quite unfinished, I have realized something here.  I guess either way, whether I am performing for only myself or for others, it comes down to what it is that is satisfying for me.  In this I think I can do as you say here:

Make the choice to be happy; claim the right to feel good through music

And I thank you for taking the time that you have.  I should probably just go practice instead of thinking about why I am practicing.


Thanks,

m1469

[m1469]

I always find myself in agreement with Ted's excellent posts and ideas.

Just to add something perhaps different.

I often find myslef playing for those who are not there. For instance, my last teacher who passed away several years ago. Or friends I have not seen for many years. Very often the actual audience pales and disappears to make space for this ghost audience. Which by the way I am not that eager to play to. (that is, if they were there, I would be probably playing for other absentees, if that makes any sense).

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

Yes, this makes a lot of sense.  It is very interesting actually because it makes me realize that I have only once played for a person who was actually sitting right there, and it was a very memorable and other-worldly experience actually. 

In your scenario above, where the ghost audience takes the place of the actual audience, I am of course curious as to what happens when the two are one (obviously not someone who has passed away, but perhaps a friend who one has not seen for some time who happens to come for a listen) ?  It seems it would exponentially increase the power of the experience as with what I experienced during that one time I mentioned.  I wonder if it is possible to truly play for an entire actual audience with the same kind of love and consideration one might feel for an individual ?  (Curiousity  ).

Thanks,
m1469

[Bob]

I guess I've done that too, playing for people that aren't there.

On a slightly different note....  I've also find myself playing as someone else.  Sometimes that has made it easier to get into the piece -- Stop being yourself, be this other person and play like they would.

[ted]

m1469:

There are two important differences between us, namely that you practise and perform and I do neither. These differences are probably sufficient to account for many things. Perhaps I was being overly abstract so I shall take a specific example to illustrate precisely what I mean by the "grain of sand" analogy.

I find myself moved, transported and excited (I can get excited on occasions !) fully as much, most often more so, by my improvisation and even by the output of my algorithmic composition programmes than by Bach preludes and fugues. Whatever this fact says about me in the eyes of others, particularly musicans, does not change the reality of that fact. In the same way I can be moved and transported by an abstract, organic or natural form (the grain of sand) much more easily than by, say, a structure of architectural form such as a cathedral or a Beethoven sonata.

Now to learn to design cathedrals and write sonatas requires much scholarship and even more rules. What I meant about the happy pig was why would I go through all that grind if the result doesn't do any more for me than simple organic forms and sounds ? Essentially the issue with composing for posterity faces the same reasoning from a different angle.

I cannot imagine what you mean by the words "fear" and "unearthly" in the musical context you use them; I'll have to pass on that one.

I suppose I do strive in a certain sense of the word. I have made several hard and sincere tries to be a wretched Socrates. I took a course of lessons in composition from a leading musician here - a man of immense knowledge and scholarship whom I respected on this account. (Cost me an arm and a leg too !) He simply could not tell me why I should struggle with orthodox, architectural forms when I was so obviously transported by musical "grains of sand".  I asked the question several times and the result was a blank groping for an answer and a request for me to play more improvisation and give him some of my scores (Not what I was paying him for !)

After that episode, about twenty years ago, I haven't bothered trying to learn any formal music. I hope that explains the rather too abstract analogies I was using before.

Cheers,
Ted. 

[quasimodo]

Hi all,

The question "Who do you play for?" might be interpreted by two different ways. m1469 asks it as "specific playing": I take some scores and I play them. But it can also be heard as more general and then become more or less similar to "Why do I play?", "What is/are my purpose(s) about playing the instrument?"

Lately I had a violent controversy with someone on another forum because I were being provocatively pointing out that performing always involves a dose of narcissism. I know it sounds odd, even stupid at first sight. But here is the point: you cannot become a good musician if you are not able to make your own judgement on what you do. Since you’ve decided to walk on the stage and play, let’s say Chopin’s Impromptu N°1, it means that you assume (judge) by yourself that you have reached a level of knowledge of this piece which allows you to submit your interpretations to the world’s hearing and then let people validate (or maybe invalidate!) your assumption that you’ve learned the piece to an acceptable level of performance.

In other words, the audience is a kind of “mirror” which is going to reflect (or not) the initial judgement you had about your playing of your repertoire, which recalls more or less the legend of Narcissi. So my approach tends to consider that a soloist-musician always plays for him/herself, to some extent.

But then comes another point, Narcissi used a river’s water as a mirror and as he founds himself beautiful, he wanted to look at his image more closely until he fell in the river and drowned himself. So, the musician who contents himself with the only satisfaction of being confirmed in his skills by the public is lead to drawn himself in the deep waters of musical auto satisfaction.

Then some higher motives are needed to fulfil musical accomplishment and there are several possibilities: you might perform a piece in order to give credit to the composer, or with a purpose of communion with the audience in the love of music, or like Bernhard and Jazzyprof to the memory of missing or dead persons, or just for the respect of the persons who paid for their seats to hear you play (some kind of customer/supplier relationship !)

[xvimbi]

In other words, the audience is a kind of “mirror” which is going to reflect (or not) the initial judgement you had about your playing of your repertoire, which recalls more or less the legend of Narcissi. So my approach tends to consider that a soloist-musician always plays for him/herself, to some extent.

IMO, the performer should enjoy his/her playing AT LEAST as much as the audience, so yes, I would agree with the narcissim argument, although perhaps a true musician revels in the beauty the music, not so much in his/her own playing (somewhat related, of course, but different nevertheless). If we want to put some phsychological attributes to why a performer is playing for the public, I would suggest the concept of "exhibitionism".

[quasimodo]

IMO, the performer should enjoy his/her playing AT LEAST as much as the audience, so yes, I would agree with the narcissim argument, although perhaps a true musician revels in the beauty the music, not so much in his/her own playing (somewhat related, of course, but different nevertheless). If we want to put some phsychological attributes to why a performer is playing for the public, I would suggest the concept of "exhibitionism".

I agree. But, once again, it should not be reduced to those, narcissism and exhibitionism.

[xvimbi]

I agree. But, once again, it should not be reduced to those, narcissism and exhibitionism.

Of course not. Those are just two of many reasons.

[m1469]

Ted, thank you for your reply once again.  Mainly, I have just been somewhat enthralled with what I can manage to comprehend as your approach to what you do because there is a seeming purity about it that I adore. 

There are two important differences between us, namely that you practise and perform and I do neither.

Perhaps this brings about an element that tends to shade things differently for me.  (Which is actually part of my whole point).

Thanks,
m1469

[m1469]

Quasimodo,

I feel that what you bring up is quite accurate and important.  Everything you present about Narcissi seems to me very relevant to playing/performing in general as well as to this specific discussion.

I realize more now about what this all means to me... and although I find resistence within myself at this moment to say the things I am about to say, I find that I  will say them anyway.

Should one reduce musical creation as well as the "performance" of it to strictly composer, performer, audience -- there would probably not be anymore to be said than what has already been said.  But this is not all it is for me.  Much like life, to me, is not simply that which is seen between the cradle and the grave, although from a very "real" perspective it may appear to be this way.

My angle now (and before) about "who do you play for"  has to do with the deepest issues of life.  For me they are quite related.  'Who do you live for' is at this point essentially asking the same thing.  This for me, is not an entirely earthly question, which is part of the whole issue at hand.

Basically, I feel that I am now mentally grapling with an issue that has dimensions to it.  On the surface, the issue of performing and "who do you play for" appears as  an arguably dry and even somewhat purposeless act and inquisition.  However, there is more about it than meets the eye.  I actually have no idea at this point if I am venturing off into some distant world of thought unaccompanied... I simply cannot tell anymore.

Most easily stated, I suppose it is a matter of the "heart".   In this moment, it is as simple as 'my heart tells me to live, my heart tells me to play, my heart tells me to perform'.  It is built into my very core, I did not put it there.  Now should I fulfill the requests of the heart, deeply I see nothing which is Narcissist about it, nor exhibitionist about it for that matter.  I am simply doing what is built into my very being to do.  It is almost not even a choice after a certain point because the only other option would drown me.  Now, when one takes this out in public, there is of course this surface view which inculcates a possibly trivial aspect of it all.  Much like reducing life to what is seen between the cradle and the grave and all of the details this may include.

I don't think I am making any sense anymore.  And I surely don't feel like I can accurately and justly express in words what it is that I am feeling.... thanks for your time

m1469

[m1469]

I guess I've done that too, playing for people that aren't there.

On a slightly different note....  I've also find myself playing as someone else.  Sometimes that has made it easier to get into the piece -- Stop being yourself, be this other person and play like they would.

Bob this is quite interesting actually.  It is a good thing to consider.

[ted]

Should one reduce musical creation as well as the "performance" of it to strictly composer, performer, audience -- there would probably not be anymore to be said than what has already been said.
That's precisely what is so wonderful to me about improvisation, m1469. It merges that particular unholy trinity, largely of Western historical and social manufacture, into the immediate musical experience of the eternal present, into the awareness of what Elgar called "the other place", what Huxley called a visionary landscape of the mind. It just occurred to me that that might be what you meant by "unearthly"; if so I now understand what you were saying.

[m1469]

Should one reduce musical creation as well as the "performance" of it to strictly composer, performer, audience -- there would probably not be anymore to be said than what has already been said.
That's precisely what is so wonderful to me about improvisation, m1469. It merges that particular unholy trinity, largely of Western historical and social manufacture, into the immediate musical experience of the eternal present, into the awareness of what Elgar called "the other place", what Huxley called a visionary landscape of the mind. It just occurred to me that that might be what you meant by "unearthly"; if so I now understand what you were saying.

 

[The Swede]

To all native english-speakers:

Should the question not be:

Whom do you play for?   

/ The Swede, always sticking to the subject

[timothy42b]

So.

(following the narcissistic thread:  play for an audience but be the authority on deciding what is intended and how, enjoy the purity whether they do or not.  I've exaggerated for effect.  Nor do I claim this is profound, I'm thinking out loud.) 

Conclusion:  Everyone who posts here is a fine sculptor, to use the wood analogy.  Nobody is a carpenter, not even a finish carpenter, certainly never a construction carpenter.  Artists, not craftsmen, ever. 

That being the case, there is little incentive ever to play in or for the public.  You all play for the art.  Maybe I am starting to understand.

I however see myself primarily as a craftsman and would rather please a drunken audience or assist a worship service than produce transcendental art experiences.  That does not mean I discount musicality or creativity but changes the focus somewhat. 

Which is within the reach of the average student? 

What did Bach do?  My thought is he played for church services and wrote lesson material, some of which we now think is inspired.  His music was the MEANS to an end and it turned out to be genius; much of ours IS the end. 

[ted]

Tim:

Your post has given me pause for thought. I dislike drink, drunken people and religion, so your particular examples are unfortunate for me. Nonetheless I see clearly the validity of the general point you make, correct me if I misunderstand it, that art should support life and life should not support Art with a capital A, either collectively or individually. Of course I quite agree; life, people and the world are much more important than somebody privately meditating with piano sound, whether upwards to nirvana or downwards to idiocy.

Your example of Bach is also good because he appears to have had no difficulty merging the celestial regions of his own aesthetic with the craftsmanship, livelihood and everyday social activity of his time; in that respect he was very lucky. Creators such as Ives, Delius or Alkan present an altogether different picture.  What inwardly transported them was either wholly or partly incompatible with the social application of craftsmanship.

Likewise, I would assume there exist thousands of ordinary nonentities like me who are moved very deeply by sounds mostly anathema to social interaction. I do not kid myself I am playing for "Art", that would indeed be narcissistic, perhaps an overly pejorative term for this thread. The question was about who I play for and I answered frankly that, owing to the highly individual nature of the sounds which make me happy, I mostly play for myself. I sometimes wish it were otherwise; sometimes I wish I could be satisfied with normal musical channels. But I just do not enjoy them and therefore I must fit my oddities into life as best I can while at all times preserving complete freedom in music. The onus is on me to do that, not on life to underwrite my perversity.

I see craftsmanship per se as being another matter altogether. I am not a musical primitive and I have written all sorts of things in conventional modes of craftsmanship (there will be a few on the Pianoworld CD if you're curious). I try to use craftsmanship all the time. It's just something which builds up over the years regardless of how intuitive you like to think you are.

[m1469]

I have just hopped out of bed, after having been lying there reflecting on my practice of the day.  I had a big break through today, one that I hope to expand on in days to come.

Anyway, I have been thinking on these words...

Ted:

The only general advice I can dish out is not to worry about “shoulds”, “ought tos”, “rights” and “wrongs” when it comes to releasing whatever music you have within. Make the choice to be happy; claim the right to feel good through music

I think that I was able to do this today.  For whatever it is worth, I simply wish to share how the help which has been provided for me in this thread has gone so far...

I had been recording something a few times through.  Things were going ok, but during  one time through in particular, something happened... I started to enjoy myself  .  Recognizing a shift in attitude I immediately decided to pay attention.  I realized then and there to consciously enjoy what I was doing.  I believe I claimed something very valuable for myself here.  All of the  “shoulds”, “ought tos”, “rights” and “wrongs” simply melted away from my thought.

I was palying something from memory, and instead of "trying to remember" what was next and all this stuff... I found myself thinking... 'oh yes, I love this part here where the dynamics are soft and my left hand has contrasting articulation with the right hand' and 'oh yes, isn't it fun that this repeats and here we are in the exposition again'... etc. etc.  My point being that I suddenly was sitting there simply enjoying the sounds and everything involved with the creation of them, rather than being worried about all of it.

Consequently, when I listened to the recording of it, there was an entirely different quality to the music, an improved quality.

Overall, this was an entirely new type of enjoyment for me, or at least one that I have all but forgotten since I was a little girl.  A new way of looking at what I am doing, and why.  It seemed to open up a whole new musical experience for me.


Again, for whatever it is worth... but thanks 

m1469

[ted]

m1469, I am so pleased that something I have posted has helped you. The fact that you talk about feeling as “a little girl” says it all. That is exactly the state I was describing and to use that original phrase you must have experienced it. Always treasure it. All the musical learning, technique, fame and money in the world cannot replace it and without it they are worth nothing. If it has happened to you once it can happen again. It won’t always occur on demand because old habits die hard, but if you fan the flames you will get it back – might take a few years of course but that doesn’t matter. You’ve made my day.

Ted.

[Bartolomeo]

Hi m1469

I don't play for any one particular reason.  It depends.

There is a piece that I played for my grandmother's funeral, a work she had, some years before, requested be played when that occasion came to pass.  I continue to play that piece, and each time I do it, I do it for her.

When I play alone in an empty church, or when practicing at home, I variously play for my own enjoyment, for the sake of the music itself, and for the glory of God.

When I play in a worship service, I in general play for the congregation, in the hopes of facilitating their worship and strengthening their faith.  Occasionally, for preludes and postludes, I play more for the sake of the music or the glory of God.

When I rehearse with others, I am in general playing for the sake of the music.

When I play at a funeral, I am chiefly playing in hopes of providing comfort to the beraved.

If I am playing at a party or for friends, I'm usually doing it in hopes that they'll enjoy it and find it uplifting, or at least facilitative of whatever sort of mood they want to be in.

When I play for my tape recorder, it is generally because I feel like I need a dose of humility.

I don't know.  My responses seem so different than everyone else's.  I really love music and put a lot into it but I've come to see it as but one aspect of humanity and try not to let it become too much of an end in itself.

[whynot]

Wow, a deep and fascinating thread.  I really should be practicing! but couldn't tear myself away.  Bartolomeo, you wrote my own thoughts.  I play for oh-so-many different people and situations, and I have different philosophies for and feelings about each one.  I can relate to every example.  Meanwhile, the all-knowing Bernhard (I'm not being facetious, I am a major new fan) also hit the nail on the head with the ghost audience.  I have a G.A. of my own that I've never told anyone about...  NOW I must practice.       

[m1469]

m1469, I am so pleased that something I have posted has helped you. The fact that you talk about feeling as “a little girl” says it all. That is exactly the state I was describing and to use that original phrase you must have experienced it. Always treasure it. All the musical learning, technique, fame and money in the world cannot replace it and without it they are worth nothing. If it has happened to you once it can happen again. It won’t always occur on demand because old habits die hard, but if you fan the flames you will get it back – might take a few years of course but that doesn’t matter. You’ve made my day.

Ted.

Wow thanks, you are quite encouraging.  I certainly will treasure it and I appreciate so much what you write here:

All the musical learning, technique, fame and money in the world cannot replace it and without it they are worth nothing.

You're right and this is something to remember for sure.  I suppose getting caught up in those things and thinking about those things, rather than remembering what you are talking about, is a sure killer to the more innocent aspects of the music making experience.

I might add, that finding a sense of joy and innocence is something that had been starting to come around again for me, just very, very recently.  What the big thing was for me about this particular experience that I mentioned above, and upon thinking on your comments, is that it IS becoming something I can call on more and more.  It feels like a place that I can find and go to and expand from.  I hope this lasts the rest of my life, but I certainly hope gaining better control in this area is something that I can really encounter in each practice session.

Thanks again, Ted. 

Thanks to many people who have taken the time to reply, I really appreciate it!

m1469

[Dikai]

hmm... don't laugh at me, but i always have this weird fantasy, imagining myself being my favorite pianist (different for different composers), and performing a grand concerto on stage, and having a big ending, and everybody stood up and applaused.  well, loving to play piano is a step closer to this fantasy...

however, while i'm listening to music is a bit different, it's usually for loving the sound of music, all the different voices will ring in my head, and make me cry.  such beautiful music i'd rather not play myself, just in case if i ruin it.

[andyng85]

To Whom do you play for?
-Myself

Who do I play for?
-Myself
 

[galonia]

To all native english-speakers:

Should the question not be:

Whom do you play for?

/ The Swede, always sticking to the subject

Well, if we're going to be picky about sentence structures and so forth, then the question should really ask, "For whom do you play?"

However, in answer to the question (even if incorrectly formulated, the meaning of which was clear), I always thought I play for myself.  Then a few days ago, I was practising and my mother thought it was a recording, and told my father to turn off my CD player because obviously I'd accidentally left it on.  That made me feel really good about my playing and I've started wondering how important are other people's opinions to me?

[m1469]

Well, if we're going to be picky about sentence structures and so forth, then the question should really ask, "For whom do you play?"

(Oh man! Well I apparently don't know !!!  So I will change it again and leave it, and if it does not make everyone happy, then use your imaginations to correct it  )

BTW- thanks for your continued replies people 

[tocca]

Interesting thread!

For whom? Well, as others have said: It depends on the situation. Sometimes i play for my dead parents, just like Bernhard said. Feels comforting hearing other saying the same.
Often i just play for myself, because i enjoy it, it makes me feel better.

To tell the truth, there are times when i play just trying to impress!    Thoose are almost always the times when i make the worst performance.  Trying to hard, playing more advanced pieces than i really can handle and so on.
It was more common when i was younger though, but i can still find myself doing it. Makes me feel stupid afterwards.

[m1469]

So.

(following the narcissistic thread:  play for an audience but be the authority on deciding what is intended and how, enjoy the purity whether they do or not.  I've exaggerated for effect.  Nor do I claim this is profound, I'm thinking out loud.) 

Conclusion:  Everyone who posts here is a fine sculptor, to use the wood analogy.  Nobody is a carpenter, not even a finish carpenter, certainly never a construction carpenter.  Artists, not craftsmen, ever. 

That being the case, there is little incentive ever to play in or for the public.  You all play for the art.  Maybe I am starting to understand.

I however see myself primarily as a craftsman and would rather please a drunken audience or assist a worship service than produce transcendental art experiences.  That does not mean I discount musicality or creativity but changes the focus somewhat. 

Which is within the reach of the average student? 

What did Bach do?  My thought is he played for church services and wrote lesson material, some of which we now think is inspired.  His music was the MEANS to an end and it turned out to be genius; much of ours IS the end. 

Okay, I had to calm down a little before I could really read your post here, and Ted's following.

I found myself becoming ruffled at your writings only to realize two things:

1.  What you say is true of me, at this point in my life.
2.  This very truthfulness bothers me deeply.

What you are writing about somehow gets to the heart of my very purpose in having started this thread.  My point is that I do not have a sense of peace in what it is that I am doing.  What I observe in Ted's writings IS a sense of peace about what he does and this catches my attention.  I constantly feel conflicted as to how I am to direct myself and, besides my discomfort with this confliction, what turns out is largely and simply an unfocused-feeling pursuit of "musical greatness"...  and I fear it to be, perhaps, largely and utterly useless.

One of the things that I specifically grapple with is that one of my most beloved teachers used to tell me, in my greatest times of doubt, to "play for the sake of the music and to follow my heart."  That it is not about me.  This is all fine, and indeed true as far as I can see it, but I notice in myself that this does not fully cut it when it comes to getting down and dirty in my study and work.  I observe in myself that I have far greater motivation when I prepare for a specific purpose in mind, or a specific someone, especially when these things or people have great meaning to me already.  I feel somewhat conflicted over this very thing because I wonder if contrary to what I would like to believe about myself, in the end I am not "pure" enough to do it all simply "for the music."  If this is true, I would like to figure out how to better "serve" in the ways that I can.

I cannot explain right now the connection for me between what you wrote with what I am writing now.  But thank you very much for your thoughts.

m1469

[ChristmasCarol]

Love this thread,
I believe that we ARE sound, we exist as a frequency.  The sounds that invite us, that bring us back to the piano again and again are those which our total being vibrates to, such as a tuning fork.   In the book Mind Games: The Guide to Inner Space by Masters, Robert E. L., and Houston, Jean, there is a visualization that I had read aloud to me once that takes one into a relaxed state to listen to a piece of music.  It opens every pore, cell, etc. to the sound.  Changed me really.  I heard music differently thereafter.  When considering the audience or the purpose of playing, I think that the whole of you is brought to the experience.  The more you are your individual self, the better you play, and the more I want to hear you play.   Sometimes I play just for me.  When I have an audience I play to my ghosts, until I feel the audience and whether or not they can truly "hear" me.  If they can, then we are off to a response driven performance.  If not, I play for my imaginary audience.  I used to play for this audience when I was only five.  I always feel a bit strange when people complement my playing, as though I can't relate to their opinion, nor am I seeking it.  And yet, it would be a drag to have no response.  Tis an emotional issue to be sure.  Thanks for creating this thread.
      

[m1469]

Love this thread,
I believe that we ARE sound, we exist as a frequency.  The sounds that invite us, that bring us back to the piano again and again are those which our total being vibrates to, such as a tuning fork.   In the book Mind Games: The Guide to Inner Space by Masters, Robert E. L., and Houston, Jean, there is a visualization that I had read aloud to me once that takes one into a relaxed state to listen to a piece of music.  It opens every pore, cell, etc. to the sound.  Changed me really.  I heard music differently thereafter.  When considering the audience or the purpose of playing, I think that the whole of you is brought to the experience.  The more you are your individual self, the better you play, and the more I want to hear you play.   Sometimes I play just for me.  When I have an audience I play to my ghosts, until I feel the audience and whether or not they can truly "hear" me.  If they can, then we are off to a response driven performance.  If not, I play for my imaginary audience.  I used to play for this audience when I was only five.  I always feel a bit strange when people complement my playing, as though I can't relate to their opinion, nor am I seeking it.  And yet, it would be a drag to have no response.  Tis an emotional issue to be sure.  Thanks for creating this thread.

Okay ChristmasCarol, this makes a really huge amount of sense to me right now.  I suppose this addresses my question 'what am I':

I believe that we ARE sound, we exist as a frequency.

I would largely agree with you here.

Something that I have been thinking about after having read your post here is that I am again trying to fit my thought around something with more than one single facet (as I have basically mentioned before).  I have realized that along with all of the "for whoms" in the shorter term (including the totality of human life), I am also searching for the ultimate "for Whom" (yes, I suppose the "G" word).  I suppose this is why I brought up the whole thing about who do I live for and this and that.

The point that you make about believing that we ARE sound, and that we exist as a frequency is quite interesting to me on many levels.  Ultimately I believe that all of life and existence are together one grand symphony, held together by profound principles of "harmony".   So, I suppose an answer to an ultimate "for whom" would be for me, to this largest and all encompassing Music (my ultimate "religion").  I suppose even an answer to "why" could arise for me here, and would be simply because it is what one is made to do/be.  This is how I feel in my deepest, deepest parts.  I suppose that ultimately, this is enough for the daily "grind" of it all.

Where I think I get lost at times is in trying to find the practical applications of all of this.  What I appreciate in this very moment from what I have read within people's generous replies is that these practical aspects are more clear to me right now along with a bigger picture.  Somehow in this moment I can glimpse some things quite a bit more clearly than before, and though it is only a glimpse, I will cherish it nonetheless (and will need the memory of it when this moment passes).

I feel genuinely moved that people have taken such consideration on this subject...  thank you so much...

m1469

[m1469]

Yes, I brought it back up 

So here it goes...

Once again, Ted, things you have written have hit me.  I thought about messaging you privately, but then I decided that what I have to say probably falls under the topic(s) of this thread (perhaps only in my head and I really don't feel like explaining the connection right now).  Besides, maybe somebody will learn something.

Two very big things have hit me just recently:

1.  What it is Ted, about how you describe your experiences with music, is that you really seem to be able to be in the moment.  Now, without putting any sort of qualitative words on it as "good" or "bad" etc., it strikes me deeply as something very important.

The other thing that strikes me about it is, it seems it is not even a "discipline" for you.  It just comes naturally.  You have never, it seems, gotten caught up in all of the "where is this going..."  mumbo jumbo.  How ever do you achieve this ??  I realize this is a stupid question, because if it is natural, then probably there is little explanation as to how one does it, one just does.  So perhaps I am asking then, is this truly natural for you ?  It also dawned on me that this is probably something that expands to the rest of your life as well... am I correct?

2.  In playing for an individual the other day, I experienced something interesting.  While I felt physically in control, capable and comfortable, I started to really hear my mind.   All I could hear were doubts, questions, fears... that had little to do with those actual moments of playing, and more to do with a perception of possible future moments of... "life".  I realized this tape plays in my head very often, probably not just about what I am doing with piano, but for some reason, especially there at the piano.  I also realized that this gets COMPLETELY in my way.  It is like a humungous wall that I feel like I don't know how to climb over, or bust through.  Even when I became aware of it, I could not seem to get rid of it.  It wanted me to fail (funny enough, my playing still went on well enough).

Even more frightening is that I think that I am scared to be rid of it because it just plain seems like me , and much of my experience at the piano.  So the same voice asks from this side of the wall, 'what do I become without it ?'  Either way, maybe I will never amount to anything at all.  This voice says though, that at least if I am struggling or fool myself into struggling, there appears to my consciousness to be a logical reason for "not amounting to anything."

What's better... not amounting to anything even at one's best, or not amounting to anything fighting for it the whole time?  I don't think there is any comfort in either one, or not much anyway.

So what if I allow it to all come easily, what's the difference anyway ??

Well, here's another one of my twisted posts... uhhhgg...

m1469

[mound]

The point that you make about believing that we ARE sound, and that we exist as a frequency is quite interesting to me on many levels.  Ultimately I believe that all of life and existence are together one grand symphony, held together by profound principles of "harmony".   

This is exactly true.  There is a really really great book by a sufi mystic that goes to length at describing just this. I highly recommend it to any musician. (I've read it a few times over now, a drummer friend of mine currently is borrowing from me)

The Mysticism of Sound and Music (Shambhala Dragon Editions)
by HAZRAT INAYAT KHAN

Enjoy

-Paul

[ted]

m1469:

To tell the truth I’m not very good at this sort of analysis but I shall do my best.

One key to your last post, it seems to me, lies in the expression “amounting to something” and what this precisely means to you. In the conclusion to your post you seem to circumscribe yourself with an impossibility, to shoot yourself in the foot by implying that you will never “amount to anything” whatever you do.

If, by way of experiment, I enquire of myself regarding “amounting to something”, I find little meaning in it except that which might be given to the phrase by other people talking about me – and to the nature of that (in music) I am completely indifferent.

Please pardon the directness of this next casual statistical observation. Why are there so many negative words in your feelings about your music ?  “Doubt”, “fear”, “humungous wall”, “wanted me to fail”, “frightening”, “scared”, “struggling”, “fighting”, “no comfort”…… and the daddy of them all – “I will never amount to anything at all”.

Again, there is a difference between you and me in that music has never given me a truly bad moment – I mean that quite literally.

Let me make one thing quite clear though. I am no stranger to work and discipline in both life and music. I have worked very hard at my playing and my music over very many years; I have put in an enormous amount of time at the piano and no doubt wasted many hours going in wrong directions, both physically and mentally. There would seem to be an essential difference between objective failure, meaning a well defined end, for one good reason or another, has not been gained, and subjective failure, which is a complete emotional undermining of the personality. The former is just a pragmatic and necessary stepping stone in learning anything; the second is a thoroughly destructive emotional problem.

I probably cannot tell you how to look at roses while you are playing; I do not think I have the ability to teach it. If you must seek it out, read Huxley’s “Island” – he came as close to explaining it there as anybody ever has. Try treading more lightly on your music – it’s all a bit of a cosmic joke really you know.

 


 

[m1469]

Okay.  In many ways now, I am finding myself right back at the very beginning of this thread !  How the ___ did that happen ??

One key to your last post, it seems to me, lies in the expression “amounting to something” and what this precisely means to you. In the conclusion to your post you seem to circumscribe yourself with an impossibility, to shoot yourself in the foot by implying that you will never “amount to anything” whatever you do.

You're right.  This is a key.  It means something quite precise to me, quite profound and quite deep.  But the bottom line is, I become discouraged.

And the following is what I was implying seems to come naturally for you, and I perhaps presumptuously and wrongly became curious if it was a personal life-trait, a "talent" if you will, or if you had to train this within yourself (as it seems you have not had to do).

If, by way of experiment, I enquire of myself regarding “amounting to something”, I find little meaning in it except that which might be given to the phrase by other people talking about me – and to the nature of that (in music) I am completely indifferent.

I was not implying that you lack discipline and hard work but rather, standing in appreciation of the fact that it seems you have a natural sense of satisfaction, and delight in what it is that you do.  It baffles me actually.

Please pardon the directness of this next casual statistical observation. Why are there so many negative words in your feelings about your music ?  “Doubt”, “fear”, “humungous wall”, “wanted me to fail”, “frightening”, “scared”, “struggling”, “fighting”, “no comfort”…… and the daddy of them all – “I will never amount to anything at all”.

Pardon granted.  The truth is, I don't know why there are these negative things.  It definitely was not always this way, I know this for sure.   Over the years I have many a time turned to the piano for solace.  I have been doing this since I was a tiny child. 

I suppose where I get into trouble now, is in wondering what it all means to me and my life.  Whether it has any importance at all in a large picture.  I don't know.   I think I am thinking too much though.

Anyway, I shall take your advices.  I will learn to tred more lightly, if I can.  I will read the book you recommend.  Thanks.

[timothy42b]

Please believe I intended no criticism at all with my comments.

I was only trying to express that my approach was another possibility, not by any means a superior possibility.  Just different.  My approach, mostly based on my experiences with brass instruments and voice, seems so different that I've struggled to understand the approaches I've seen here. 

I do think you have noticed that goal directed playing, playing FOR somebody, helps a bit with enjoyment, discipline, dedication, etc.  It seems you fear this is wrong, because you think your motivation should be some purer and higher ideal.  I think you are being too harsh with yourself.  I think it is not only natural but useful to play FOR others at least some of the time.  Inspiration may take over at other times. 

I have a performance in three weeks.  It is demanding music, slightly above my ability.  For this reason I am setting the alarm early, getting in two practice sessions before going to work.  (actually three, I rotate piano and trombone)  This is pure goal directed motivation, if I don't put in the extra time I'm not going to play the way I need to, and the others are depending on me to handle my part.  If I play well, nobody will notice;  if I play badly it will hurt the entire show.  There is pressure here that does not come strictly from the desire for pure musicality - but perhaps some will happen, along with the effort. 

[m1469]

I am not offended at all.  I appreciate different perspectives actually, your thoughts help me clarify what it is that I am trying to do and they encourage me to consider different angles of approach in doing it.

I do think you have noticed that goal directed playing, playing FOR somebody, helps a bit with enjoyment, discipline, dedication, etc.  It seems you fear this is wrong, because you think your motivation should be some purer and higher ideal.  I think you are being too harsh with yourself.  I think it is not only natural but useful to play FOR others at least some of the time.  Inspiration may take over at other times. 

You are quite helpful really,  thanks a lot and may the force be with you in your up and coming performance 

m1469 Fox

[Torp]

I realize as my first post on this forum I have not perhaps gained the 'time in grade' to have my words taken as seriously as others, but thought I'd post all the same.  I started to respond to this post with one idea (paragraph 2) and then was quickly taken over by another thought (paragraph 3).  In an effort to start again more coherently I began with paragraph 4.  When it was all said and done, I decided to post them all, disjointed as they may be.

Music is a form of communication, a dialogue, a language if you will.  Like most forms of communication, the reasons for its expression can be varied.  Just like you might find a preacher standing on the corner of a busy street professing to any who will listen, with the message oft times falling on deaf ears, the impending end of the world, you might find music being played by those who feel they have an important message to share.  This message too might fall on deaf ears.  The validity of the expression is not diminished because no appreciated it.

There are probably as many varied reasons to express ourselves as there are humans in the world.  Some people express themselves because they feel they have something important to say.  Some people talk to themselves.  Some even answer themselves.  Others express themselves because they have found acceptance and belonging through their ability to express themselves in profound and moving ways.  A five year old draws a picture of a house and a family because s/he wants to put into permanence something important in their life.  While technically not as competent as a master of painting, the works holds just as much validity.

As many reasons as there are to have a conversation there are reasons to play.  There are times we talk to ourselves, sometimes to berate, other times to praise.  This internal dialogue is often private and intensely personal.  We wouldn’t think of sharing these thoughts with others.  Sometimes, playing music can be just the same.  There are other times when what we have to say warrants (perhaps demands) a public display.  We live in a community of humanity.  Sometimes we seek belonging.  Sometimes we seek validation.  Sometimes we seek challenge.  Sometimes we want to share a part of what is important to us.  We want to express our views about the world and our place in it.  This can be done through music, through poetry, through writing, through…..fill in the blank.  While what we have to express may be intimately personal and our reasons for sharing may or may not be narcissistic, we can gain a sense of belonging with our fellow community by sharing that which is most personal to ourselves.

Jef

[whynot]

Torp, I loved everything you said.  m1469Fox, I wasn't ever going to post anything again after being trounced by the interloper a while back, but as you can see, your threads really hit people at a deep place and everyone wants to be involved.  You have such an open heart, it's impossible for many of us not to respond.  So, for whatever it's worth, here's what I think...

I think there are so many facets to who we are, what we do, and why we do it, that we can never sort it all out.  Still, it's important to keep trying (the "examined life" etc.), so I'm with you there.  Now--I hope it's okay for me to venture here--it sounds to me like you feel you must know the "why" before you do the "thing", and I don't think that it's necessary.  Actually, I don't think it's even possible much of the time.  I could talk about that all day, but that's really one point in a nutshell. 

My other point is, you sound as if you feel guilty about your motives for playing and the fact that you work harder when it's for other people than when it's just for yourself or the music.  But working hard to serve other people IS noble.  Certainly, there can be survival-type self interests present too, like "I don't want to sound unprepared," but there's more to it than that for you.  You clearly have a great love for people, I would guess even people you don't know.  So to invest time and effort in what will eventually be a gift for some of those people is a pure motive, indeed.  AND... if you imagine being a composer who gets to know that what he or she wrote will be continue to be played for others long after it's written, even long after death, what that would mean to that person, you know that every time you work on a piece or perform it is a gift to the composer, as well.  So keep thinking all you want, but don't let that stop you from playing--EVER.