HT's

[Les Smith]

On Fri, 13 Mar 1998, Michael Jorgensen wrote:

> Hi John,
>      This logic of yours makes perfect sense.  Even most music played by
> advanced pianists was written during the common practice period prior to
> 1900 which suggests a form of well temperament.  Virtually all classical
> period works were written in keys of four sharps or four flats or less. 
> (I'm sure someone will probably find an exception, please let me know
> what work it is). 

Hi, Mike.

I guess a lot depends on how you define the "Classical Period". If that
includes Beethoven, then his 24th sonata--the one which followed Opus
57--is written in the key of F# major--6 sharps. Similarly, part of the
Adagio movement of Opus 106, is also written using the same key signature.
Db--five flats--was not an uncommon key for Beethoven. You also find part
of the 31st Sonata written in the key of Ab minor. Although, for reasons
known only to Beethoven, he chooses to use only 6 flats in the key sig-
nature, itself, and chooses to write in all the F flats as they occur in
the course of the piece. Also, one in general finds a much richer harmon-
ic texture in all of Beethoven's later works, especially in the fugue
movements in the later sonatas. I won't belabor the point, the music is
there for those with an interest in such things to analyze for themselves.

However, since no one seems to have brought up this point regarding the
Beethoven sonatas and the subject of key specificity, I would draw you
attention to the edition of the sonatas edited by Hans Von Bulow, Liszt's
son-in-law. If you check out his notes to the last movement of Opus, 57,
you'll find a curious comment regarding the at-first-strange-looking
fingering given, which differs markedly from what you will find in any
other edition. Hans explains that the fingering is given specifically
because it will facilitate the transposition of the movement into other
keys! Gasp! Could it possibly mean that pianists used to play Beethoven
Sonatas in keys other than that in which they were originally written.
YOU BET IT DOES! Of course, that dreaded international terrorist organi-
zation know as the CMP--that's the Classical Music Police--want to sur-
press such radical ideas, because they won't rest until every pianist in
the world plays every single piece of music ever written in exactly the
same way--the same notes, fingers, rhythms, tempos, dynamics, expression
and pedal marks, etc. It wasn't always that way, as Hans's comment sug-
gests. While we're on the subject, allow me to toss in a couple of
comments on Bach, too.

As a youngster, I started out with the two and three part inventions.
All of them. From the beginninng, I was taught that Bach was the origin-
al "swinger" and that the inventions were to be regarded as interesting,
fun-to-play, technical and rhythmic exercises written in a contrapuntal
style. I was also taught that they were NOT to be regarded a key-spe-
cific and that their true value lay in transposing them into other keys.
That is to say that the major key inventions were to be transposed to
all the other major keys and all the minor keys inventions into the other
minor keys. Not transposing them was regarded as the equivalent of a
student playing the exercises of "The Virtuoso Pianist" only as written,
and not transposing them through all the keys in order to to reap the
maximum benefit from them. 

Later, when I progressed to the 48 preludes and fugues of the WTC, they,
too, were presented to me as NON-KEY-SPECIFIC! That is to say that they,
too, were meant to be transposed into other keys. Although Bach wasn't
my primary are of interest, I played many of the 48 in keys other that
just that in which they were originally written. In this respect, I was
by no means unique. First, the teachers who taught me to do this, had
been taught that way by THEIR teachers. Secondly, over the years, I have
both known and done pianowork for both pianists and teachers far more
adept at transposing Bach (and others!) than I, who both played and
taught him (and others!) this way.

This idea is hardly new. When Liszt fell under the spell of Paganini,
and set out to do technically for the piano what Paganini had done for
the violin, part of his standard practice routine consisted of everyday
selecting a different prelude and fugue from the WTC and then playing
them through all twelve keys. Thus, more than 150 years ago, Liszt was
already playing all 48 preludes and fugues from the WTC through ALL the
keys. Impressive? You bet! Impossible? Hardly. Worthwhile? Absolutely.
Dangerous? Definitely--if the enforcement division of the Classical
Music Police ever get wind of what you're up to, you could be in BIG
trouble. 

The CMP have been around a LONG time. They were there to complain when
Brahms played  Chopin's "Minute Waltz" in double notes; when Carl
Tausig played the LH of the "Revolutionary" etude in octaves; when
Godowsky started combining the Chopin etudes and playing two of them
at the same time (!) (no longer in print, those interested should be able
to find copies of his transcritions in a really large library); and even 
when Horowitz dared to make changes in something like the ending of
Liszt's 6th rhapsody. And the list goes on and on. 

Somewhere along the way, people seem to have forgotten that many of the
great pianist/composers of the past were absolute masters of improvisa-
tional, extemporaneous playing, some rarely playing even their own works
exactly the same way twice in a row! What you see written down on a page
of music a century or two later is ONE way of playing it. The Classical
Music Police would have you believe that it is the ONLY way of playing it. 

Stagnant, petrified, ossified, god-awful boring and predictible as it
has become, Classical music really isn't dead. It's just that through the
never-ending efforts of the CMP in ensure that the same tired old pieces
will always be played in the same old, tired, mind-numbing ways, that
those forced to listen to the same things over and over and over again
eventually get to a point where they  wish that THEY WERE DEAD, and
then just stop listening altogether. One can hardly blame them. 

Les Smith
lessmith@buffnet.net