I heartily agree with Mimi and those who have already posted messages in support. Even if we, the subscribers to this list, were completely agreed (and clearly we are not), that would still give us no right to dictate to pianists or the world how they may or may not play Bach. Neither we nor anyone else is a ‘Bach police force’.

If we love and admire Bach, our first wish is surely for that superb music to be as widely performed and enjoyed as possible. If a professional pianist (or an amateur guitarist, or...) takes pleasure, and gives pleasure to his or her audience, by performing Bach on a piano, that must in essence be a good thing. The only regrettable thing, surely, is when that is done with any arrogant attitude. I can vividly remember a volume of Bach (professionally edited) that I possessed in my youth, which had a whole section in the introduction headed ‘advantages of the modern piano’ – coming after a patronising section grudgingly admitting that early instruments had ‘a certain antique charm’ but still had to be condemned as being ‘incapable of nuance’. That, of course, seems outrageous today. (Indeed, it seemed pretty outrageous to me even when I first read it as a boy of thirteen or fourteen decades ago.) How ironic, if some harpsichordists now take the same attitude! It might well be seriously regrettable for Bach to be performed on the piano to the exclusion of other instruments; equally regrettable for Bach to be performed on the harpsichord to the exclusion of other instruments.

Three cheers for the clavichord is surely a shout so far absent from the discussion, though much needed: that dimension to the arguments is profoundly important for Bach and his milieu, surely.

Of course an historical instrument is more authentic than a modern instrument: that does not make the use of modern instruments unacceptable. It isn’t ‘right’ to play Bach on a harpsichord: it is simply that doing so will reveal things about the music, and about cultural history, that many of us find fascinating and believe to be important. That is surely not to be confused with making performance on the modern piano into some sort of moral offence.

I speak as a mere amateur: but there are lots of us amateurs trying to play and enjoy Bach, and we have our rights. Unless we have unlimited money, we cannot own or gain access to all the supposedly correct instruments. Are we to be denied the right to play Bach unless we own a harpsichord? And surely we know enough about authenticity now to understand that it’s by no means a simple matter of harpsichord versus piano. Are we to be denied the right to play Bach because we only own a single-manual Italian instead of a double-manual German? Once authenticity becomes too purist, and accompanied by this dangerous moral slant, it becomes restrictive instead of what it surely should be - which is inspiring.

And (as a mere amateur, but one who, despite being of comparatively advanced years, is still learning and still happy to be taught) I have one simple question, please, for any who care to answer it: how many works for harpsichord did Bach actually write? (I am sure I don’t need to hammer the points behind the question... )

John Erskine (UK, unfortunately – but currently in the Netherlands and much enjoying the visit)


::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Note:  opinions  expressed on HPSCHD-L are those of the  individual con-
tributors and not necessarily  those of the list owners  nor of the Uni-
versity of Iowa.  For a brief  summary of list  commands, send mail to
[log in to unmask]  saying  HELP .
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::