Étude, Brute? The case for Chopin
commentarymagazine.com
Étude, Brute? The case for Chopin
1–10 of 37 posts
Re: Étude, Brute? The case for Chopin
#2The headline is not apt, the piece is not really making a strong case "against" Chopin. There is a slight attempt to build up some illusion that Chopin was once not held in high esteem. Well, that is a very weak argument indeed, as he was a child prodigy touring Europe in his teenage years, and then subsequently was very well known to the other famous romantic composers, most of whom thought he was a true genius of melody, finesse, and a master of chromaticism and narrative piano writing. Look no farther than Liszt's storied relationship with Chopin, they played together at salons and gatherings, they played each others works. Similarly, the Schumanns loved Chopin's work. He achieved a very high fee for teaching as well, there were numerous very wealthy Parisians eager to have training with him. Furthermore, there was and is a very, VERY strong tradition of classical pianists playing his works. Consider Debussy's performance of the fourth ballade at his conservatory, when it was stated he performed it as if "without hammers". So, no, there is no case against Chopin's mastery, this headline is click-bait.
The linked article is really a pseudo-book review of the recent biography "Fryderyk Chopin: A Life and Times" by Alan Walker.
Re: Étude, Brute? The case for Chopin
#3I usually see this idea of a heroic great artist (compared to artists who presumably don’t have what it takes to merit being mentioned) in discussions around classical music. When people talk about visual art, there is more focus on the quality of the work, and the artist’s distinct voice. Consider an example: a work by Picasso looks like Picasso made it, and that’s what gives it its value. By contrast, derivative works that merely copy another artist’s style are usually not held in high esteem. Chopin’s work scores very well according to quality, and his distinct voice usually makes it obvious that the piece you’re hearing is a Chopin. The visual arts are a lot better at allowing more artists to become established than the classical music world is for composers.
This may be a consequence of the properties of the creations. People who want to listen to a concerto will share the experience with many others, and typically won’t be able to buy it all just for themselves. People who want to be involved in the contemporary art world can and often do buy physical works of art for themselves, and it doesn’t matter whether or not the artist could convince a theater of people to pay to sit down together and appreciate it for 30 minutes. If art patrons want to buy physical pieces for themselves, you need a bigger pool of artists to serve them; but if you want to fill opera houses, it’s better to have a few artists that everybody has agreed to like.
Re: Étude, Brute? The case for Chopin
#4I tried reading this - but the website sent me through an endless loop of signing up for the free newsletter to unlock the article (which I tried various times).
That said, this line certainly raised an eyebrow for being pretty sensational:
>Of the well-known composers of the 19th century, Fryderyk Chopin (as his name is spelled in Polish, his native tongue) is the only one whose complete works continue to be played regularly—indeed, without cease.
When was the last time you heard his piano trio performed outside of a music school, for instance...?
Re: Étude, Brute? The case for Chopin
#5Content marketing piece for a book.
Re: Étude, Brute? The case for Chopin
#6This author perhaps doesn't realize Chopin wrote concertos!
Re: Étude, Brute? The case for Chopin
#7I usually see this idea of a heroic great artist (compared to artists who presumably don’t have what it takes to merit being mentioned) in discussions around classical music. When people talk about visual art, there is more focus on the quality of the work, and the artist’s distinct voice. Consider an example: a work by Picasso looks like Picasso made it, and that’s what gives it its value. By contrast, derivative wo…
On a slightly related note, Chopin was also a highly technically proficient pianist, much like Paganini on the violin. There were great many amazing composers back then, but technicians of the instrument were perhaps rarer?
In any case, I imagine that the last century has perhaps produced the most technically proficient musicians on possibly every instrument, across all genres. Sometimes I'm blown away by some of the younger players and their flawless technique.
Re: Étude, Brute? The case for Chopin
#8I tried reading this - but the website sent me through an endless loop of signing up for the free newsletter to unlock the article (which I tried various times). That said, this line certainly raised an eyebrow for being pretty sensational: >Of the well-known composers of the 19th century, Fryderyk Chopin (as his name is spelled in Polish, his native tongue) is the only one whose complete works continue to be played…
And what about Chopin's first Piano Sonata? I've only ever heard that once. I think it only gets played...never???
Re: Étude, Brute? The case for Chopin
#9I tried reading this - but the website sent me through an endless loop of signing up for the free newsletter to unlock the article (which I tried various times). That said, this line certainly raised an eyebrow for being pretty sensational: >Of the well-known composers of the 19th century, Fryderyk Chopin (as his name is spelled in Polish, his native tongue) is the only one whose complete works continue to be played…
Yeah, it's hard to take anything in this article seriously when you're one line into it and the premise:
"Of the well-known composers of the 19th century, Fryderyk Chopin is the only one whose complete works continue to be played regularly"
...is incorrect. There's not a single composer whose "complete works" get regularly played, and even given Chopin's fairly small catalog (for a major 19th century composer) there are plenty of marginal works that rarely get performed. Considering his long and respected career as a music critic and author, I'm kind of surprised to see Terry Teachout's byline on this.
Re: Étude, Brute? The case for Chopin
#10The headline is not apt, the piece is not really making a strong case "against" Chopin. There is a slight attempt to build up some illusion that Chopin was once not held in high esteem. Well, that is a very weak argument indeed, as he was a child prodigy touring Europe in his teenage years, and then subsequently was very well known to the other famous romantic composers, most of whom thought he was a true genius of m…
As a pianist, the suggestion that Chopin or his études are not held in high esteem for both technical and musical merits is simply ludicrous.
His technique paved the way for Liszt and Debussy études, and Godowsky expanded their utility. Most technique after him is influenced by him in some way.