HPSCHD-L Archives

Harpsichords and Related Topics

HPSCHD-L@LIST.UIOWA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jon Baxendale <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Harpsichords and Related Topics <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 10 Jun 2018 13:40:44 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (42 lines)
I have to admit that Bach on the piano and Moog synthesiser (remember the recordings from the late 1960s by Wendy Carlos?) brought his music  to me in a way that no other media achieved. As a child, I wanted more than anything to play the pieces I had heard: these were the days when harpsichordists were a rarity and few of those that existed had yet to graduate to historical instruments. Using the logic of the harpsichord-only apparatchiks, we must also discount the performances of Landa Wandowska, George Malcolm, Ralph Kirkpatrick et al, since Pleyel and Chickering instruments could hardly be called harpsichords by today’s standards. Yet would any dare to claim that none had anything to say as musicians or that their work wasn’t pioneering because of their choice of instrument. We forget also where such harpsichordists started out. And there are more pianists than harpsichordists who in the world who provide detailed, moving performances of Bach, even if the techniques they employ would have been recognised by Richter, Brahms or the like.

Does this mean that a degree of snobbery is often at play when it comes to Bach on the piano? I think so, although I must also admit that this is a two-way attitude as there are people around who love Bach but cannot stand the sound of the harpsichord or clavichord. Why should we, as musicians, deny them a right to listen to music that transcends time in a manner that Debussy doesn’t - one would never expect to listen to Images on a clavichord (although it might be an interesting experiment). Because of this, I cannot agree enough with Mr Erskine’s comment that it is ‘equally regrettable for Bach to be performed on the harpsichord to the exclusion of other instruments’. 

The thing we need to consider is the degree to which Bach, above nearly every composer, transcends mere instrumentation. In the purest sense of the word, his is absolute music and this  makes him so intriguing since the term is not easily applied to other composers of his period. One might find Grand Siècle music, for example, less palatable on the piano since much of the music is organised differently towards a predominantly melody and accompaniment scheme that loses its impact when heard on anything other than a period instrument. Bach seems to transcend that. For me,  few have much to say when performing his music - pianists or harpsichordists  (and this includes me since I have long-since stopped playing his music on the harpsichord as I have no idea on interpretation or the message I want to convey. Better left, methinks, to better musicians.

Yet, I would still prefer to hear a prelude and fugue played well on a piano by a musician than badly on the harpsichord.

Jon


> On 10 Jun 2018, at 13:07, John Erskine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> 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 .
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
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 .
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ATOM RSS1 RSS2