Who knows about Scriabin's late études?

[j_tour]

I had an idle moment today and flipped through the Op. 65 triad of études:  the Allegretto seemed surprising to me, you know, for Scriabin.  The 65/1 is...complicated, it seems.

And I looked at a bit at the Op. 56 no. 4, which supposedly was composed about 1908.

I haven't had a chance to decontract from work and read through them at the keyboard (although, as usual, some of the notation is a bit unusual, but that's OK), but what's the deal?

It seems to me, at this point in Scriabin's life he was....what was his intention, do you suppose, in this rather late études? 

I can see the exploitation of dissonances, along with a kind of .... almost ... mathematical, yet diabolical scheme (a good example might be the Op. 73 no. 2 prélude LH in sixteenth-note triplets, which has a parallel in the RH in one of these études...I left the score in the car, but one of those).

The mere patterns remind me of many of Chopin's préludes, but combined with a deliberate je-m'en-foutisme.

Is there something more there?  Or have I missed something, as I surely have?

[lostinidlewonder]

It's used to summon spirits. A musical incantation. Or have a read through this for a better answer

https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc407854/m2/1/high_res_d/dissertation.pdf

[lelle]

Yeah, late Scriabin is its own world. All his late stuff was in this kind of style, even if there are hints already in his earlier music.

I think the man was probably a bit crazy.

Have you listened to his late sonatas?

[j_tour]

Ah.  Thanks, both of you.

Yes.  Said with good humor, it's not outlandish to describe Scriabin in his maturity (despite his young age in years) as a kind of mad conjurer.

Sure, I've spent some time with the "Black Mass" sonata:  I found it frightening.  Perhaps not in the metaphysical sense, but for me it's difficult to sight read, even if it probably can be played even by me eventually, if I were a true masochist instead of just a regular degenerate.  It's terrific music, meant as such, but it is a lot.

(LATE EDIT:  I don't know what I was thinking about the "Black Mass" Sonata.  I read it at work, just to kill some time...I must have been thinking about some other piece of music....in fact, I could probably play that.  But I still want to knock down his late Webern-esque miniature-form pieces, including those few late études

As well, although the score is in the car, some odd textual annotations:  "charmes" comes up a few times IIRC, which is odd, also things like "entraînement," which is not that odd, but I don't think I've seen others use that term in music...not sure, it's possible, but I don't recall).

The latest Scriabin I know best is the Op. 74, which I'm still struggling to come up with a way to execute a coherent interpretation, or at least a set of musical ideas that I feel are pleasing.  It's not the notes, but the interpretation that is difficult, IMHO.  Very difficult, I would say:  a great many options.

I still wonder why études at this late in Scriabin's life?  It may be that he did not sense death encroaching on his domain.  They do, indeed, have a formal character about them:  similar to the Chopin of his youth, but extended into more chromaticism. 

Scriabin would not have, I don't believe, used the term chromaticism, nor atonality, but I can't pretend to understand his very particular linguistic habits.

EDIT:  The other odd thing (among many), is, not just his, frankly, nonsensical manner of notation in his works without any key signature, but the notational .... I don't want to presume ... but sloppiness in notating rhythms. 

Again, I yet again left the score in the car, but I believe it's the Op. 67 étude written in 12/16 time...I think IIRC there are some duples against the RH triples in sixteenth notes, but it's not notated in any usual way.

Could equally apply to the Op. 74 no. 4 prélude, but I think that's more clear, even if it's not made explicit.

I wonder if in some way he felt his dark masters prescribing obscurity through syntax, in the manner of Mallarmé in poetry and prose.

Or, I think Adorno somewhere felt that obscurity in certain musical and linguistic works was deliberate, at least in some cases.  He was often wrong, but he did have a few moments of clarity in writing on specific works of music, in particular.  He was also an arrogant dick, but that's just my opinion.

It's used to summon spirits. A musical incantation. Or have a read through this for a better answer

https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc407854/m2/1/high_res_d/dissertation.pdf

Yes, this is very good!  Exactly on point.  I haven't read the dissertation completely yet, but IMHO, this is what a dissertation in the US system should be, and often is not:  focused, direct, and concise.  I shall look forward to reading this.

[anacrusis]

Hey! I just found this channel which highlights the different themes in the late Scriabin sonatas. It gave me new insight into these pieces and Scriabin's world of thoughts:

[j_tour]

I finally got around to reading through Scriabin's Op. 65/2 "Allegretto" étude on the piano (from just looking at the score some weeks prior, that's the one of interest, to me).

Sort of the same relationship to non-student works by A.S. as the Op. 126 is to late Beethoven.  That is, some of the superficial stylistic elements are covered, as well as the voicings and basic harmonic conceits.  Actually, I think it's a charming piece, and therefore I shall play it. 

No, after my superficial sight-reading at the keyboard, I wouldn't call it an "easy" piece, like some of the Beethoven bagatelles, but it's within Scriabin's basic idiom.  Not very many mechanics required, in this one, but a good bit of musicianship. 

After more playing around with the "Black Mass" sonata, it's probably about that level of mechanics:  some wide leaps, yadda yadda, and some "interesting" chord voicings. 

[lostinidlewonder]

No 1 and 3 just bite into your ears and have a wonderful effect, no 2 is much more subdued and not near the quality of the ones surrounding it imho. No 3 repeated chords and melodic lines are just so orgasmic and No 1 use of 9ths are very memorable.

I overall find his Sonatas very diffficult to contain and make understandable for general listeners, it is just too over the top and lengthy. With his etudes you can present his musical language and contain it for the general listener, their curiosity can be held for that time but I feel the Sonatas simply lose a lot of people because it can sound like musical ramblings which go on and on.

[j_tour]

No 1 and 3 just bite into your ears and have a wonderful effect, no 2 is much more subdued and not near the quality of the ones surrounding it imho. No 3 repeated chords and melodic lines are just so orgasmic and No 1 use of 9ths are very memorable.

I overall find his Sonatas very diffficult to contain and make understandable for general listeners, it is just too over the top and lengthy. With his etudes you can present his musical language and contain it for the general listener, their curiosity can be held for that time but I feel the Sonatas simply lose a lot of people because it can sound like musical ramblings which go on and on.

Well, yeah.  I finally read past the first ... like seventeen bars of Op. 65 no. 3 (when the triplets begin in triumph, marked "Impérieux") at the keyboard.  I think I can hear what that's about on the piano.

I guess there's no accounting for taste.  There are other things I'd rather play, though, even just reading through it.  Although, that's a good example of that kind of thing.  I never learned how to appreciate too many open-voiced chords at the middle of the piano:  just a prejudice, really.  But that's clearly an example of how to do it. 

But, I'd put the Op. 65 no. 1 in a different category:  if I could read the Op 65/1 at speed (or somewhat) I might change my tune, but it's somewhat complicated.  That, all the different "moods" AS demands, and, the triplet 16th ninths in the RH...I could do it, but I'd have to practice it. 

I find the challenges of the Opp. 67, 73 more novel to me.  The Op. 74 too, but whereas I have that under my hands, it's a problem figuring out how I want to interpret it. 

Whereas the Op 65/2, to me, is kind of a new "sound" for Scriabin, in my mind:  a nice, light little Allegretto...and yet!  Of course it has all the usual derangements, and the metrical complications, but I pick that one out of the triad of Op. 65.

I like the irony of it:  "ah....allegretto.  From one of Mozart?  or perhaps a delicious rondo for the ladies!  NO....wrong!!!  Scriabin!  drops mic, in the house!"

Well, that's the way I intend to play it, anyway, at the keyboard.  I don't recall hearing these, although I must have after starting this thread, at least on youtube, from due diligence.

I wouldn't know what to say about AS's sonate:  I like the "Black Mass" because of its demented perversity.  And, also, I can mostly read it without getting much of a headache. 

It's very much unlike the bravura nonsense that AS grew up on.  Very austere.

I still find it odd that AS seemingly wasted time on études this late in his life, when he was composing brilliant miniatures for piano solo, but I think my speculations above in the thread are adequate.

Thank you for reminding me (via your reply, implicitly) about the kid's thesis or dissertation:  I still haven't read all of it.  I have an e-book of American TV "star" Vampira's biography to read.   But now I recall.

[j_tour]

Oh.  It seems I've never actually heard a recording of these before:  just sight-reading at the keyboard and away from.

I may have to alter my priorities a bit about the Op. 65 études.

This is Richter playing this triad (toward the end of the clip).  There are other recordings, of course, out there, but I don't much like listening to music, and I knew Richter would have at least something interesting.

His relaxed pace of the Op. 65/1 is much different than I was inclined to conceive of the piece.  And the strong pedalling of the Op 65/3 relieves the piece of the monotony and blandness of the open chords in the middle register.  As does the quicker pace:  when I see "Impérieux," I'm thinking a kind of regal, mid-Beethoven sort of thing, like trumpets and fanfare at mid-tempo.  It is better taken much quicker.

I don't think Richter took the "Allegretto" indication seriously for the middle étude:  it does indeed sound limp and boring the way he does it.  There should be a strong rhythmic pattern.  Perhaps Richter did not enjoy the sound of the maj7 chord, and was deliberately sabotaging his effort.  Voiced as a "shell" with just root and maj7:  it's a bebop sound, and it rules.  So suck it, Richter! 

I'll still do the Allegretto according to my conception, but hearing an example, whether it's exemplary or not, renews my interest in the first étude of the set.  Of course I'd have to practice it, still (hint:  I don't like to practice, I'd rather just read it off the page, but it has to be done), but it's not the blazing ninths in the RH I had in mind.  Evocative?  Of something, I suppose.

Oh, whoops, there are metronome markings.  Didn't notice those!