I'm sorry if this question sounds immature... sometimes I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Interpretations
Moderators: Classitar, pied_piper, Phineas
Interpretations
Should a performer play the piece as the composer intended, or should the performer play it as they feel? I was playing "Andante et Scerzettino" by Taffanel for an informal recital, and played it with a dark emotion and a bit of anger in the first movement, because that is how the piece sounds to me. An older flutist's opinion was that I should play it the way Taffanel wanted it to be - romantic. I have no problem expressing different emotions when I'm playing - I just felt a little differently about the piece. I realize they are many different interpretations to many different pieces, but I was wondering if it was only proper to play a piece the way the composer wanted it to be? Because I always thought that a musician should his own type of emotion when playing. I don't feel romantic at all when playing it XD
I'm sorry if this question sounds immature... sometimes I have no idea what I'm talking about.
I'm sorry if this question sounds immature... sometimes I have no idea what I'm talking about.
A lack of professionalism makes room for creativity. That's my excuse >.>
IMHO, when I am the soloist, or doing a recital, I play things my way. It all depends on the purpose of why you are performing the piece. If you are showcasing yourself, then play what you feel. If this is for an audition, you may want to play it as close to what is written as possible.
People may disagree with me, but written music is nothing more than a guide when you are playing a solo. Most top soloists do not have a music stand in front of them when they perform. They just play from memory. Often, not playing exactly what is written.
Phineas
People may disagree with me, but written music is nothing more than a guide when you are playing a solo. Most top soloists do not have a music stand in front of them when they perform. They just play from memory. Often, not playing exactly what is written.
Phineas
-
fluteguy18
- Posts: 2311
- Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 3:11 pm
Play it exactly as written. But... there is often a LOT of room for personal interpretation. This is especially true in Baroque music. In Baroque music the composer often left a lot of things unsaid and to the discretion of the performer. My personal taste with Baroque music is to bring out the harmony and voices (counter point, fugue etc.) in the music.
Romantic music (in my opinion) is always really dramatic in both style and by the way it is written. So if you play it as written, you're already half of it already. The rest is personal taste.
Play it how you want to, but follow the music exactly. The only times that I think that it is okay to change things is in the position of playing as a soloist. In those instances I think it is okay to change subtle things if you are doing so to make a point within your personal interpretation.
Romantic music (in my opinion) is always really dramatic in both style and by the way it is written. So if you play it as written, you're already half of it already. The rest is personal taste.
Play it how you want to, but follow the music exactly. The only times that I think that it is okay to change things is in the position of playing as a soloist. In those instances I think it is okay to change subtle things if you are doing so to make a point within your personal interpretation.
I think there is value in both. Who is your audience? What are you trying to do?
Playing it as the composer intended:
Being able to play it as the composer intended is a very good skill to have and is essential if going the university/classical performer route. Play what the composer intended if your performance is being judged (audition, jury, competition). Also, do this if this is what your audience expects (particularly, if they paid.) From a temporal perspective, it's very interesting to see how music has changed over time.
Playing it as you feel:
I also think we should all have the freedom to play as we feel. Particularly, when playing for ourselves or an audience who is looking for a more soloistic performance than traditional performance. Throughout time, composers have taken musical ideas from others and played around with them. I find this quite interesting.
Ideally, you develop the skill to play the piece with it's traditional interpretation, but then choose whether or not to play it as originally intended. Greg Patillo is a good example of someone who is a skilled flute player in the traditional form, but has gone to perform pieces with his own interpretation. I attended one of his performances, and it was one of the most engaging performances I'd ever been to.
Bach's Bouree from Suite in E Minor for Lute BWV 996 (Written for Lute not Flute)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob0N9AG1kj4&feature=fvw
Jethro Tull's Interpretation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2RNe2jw ... re=related
Greg Patillo's interpretation of the Jethro Tull version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMxobGPj ... re=related
Regardless, it's all music. I like all of the versions.
Playing it as the composer intended:
Being able to play it as the composer intended is a very good skill to have and is essential if going the university/classical performer route. Play what the composer intended if your performance is being judged (audition, jury, competition). Also, do this if this is what your audience expects (particularly, if they paid.) From a temporal perspective, it's very interesting to see how music has changed over time.
Playing it as you feel:
I also think we should all have the freedom to play as we feel. Particularly, when playing for ourselves or an audience who is looking for a more soloistic performance than traditional performance. Throughout time, composers have taken musical ideas from others and played around with them. I find this quite interesting.
Ideally, you develop the skill to play the piece with it's traditional interpretation, but then choose whether or not to play it as originally intended. Greg Patillo is a good example of someone who is a skilled flute player in the traditional form, but has gone to perform pieces with his own interpretation. I attended one of his performances, and it was one of the most engaging performances I'd ever been to.
Bach's Bouree from Suite in E Minor for Lute BWV 996 (Written for Lute not Flute)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob0N9AG1kj4&feature=fvw
Jethro Tull's Interpretation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2RNe2jw ... re=related
Greg Patillo's interpretation of the Jethro Tull version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMxobGPj ... re=related
Regardless, it's all music. I like all of the versions.
I suppose it also depends on whom you are playing for....
If you are playing for yourself, by all means, express yourself...
If you are playing for an audience it depends on the audience (if you happen to know the people, which, I understand, is not always possible)... If you know they are open-minded, again feel free to give the piece your own interpretation. But if they come to the recital expecting something and you know them to be sort of conservative, you are probably better advised to stick to the score as it is written...
If you are playing for yourself, by all means, express yourself...
If you are playing for an audience it depends on the audience (if you happen to know the people, which, I understand, is not always possible)... If you know they are open-minded, again feel free to give the piece your own interpretation. But if they come to the recital expecting something and you know them to be sort of conservative, you are probably better advised to stick to the score as it is written...
Thank you all very much for your opinions.... this helps me out a lot.
C_otter: Thanks for the example. I like all the versions too... but Jethro's has to be my favorite, haha
I'm playing this piece at the NFA convention in Anaheim... and I really wasn't sure if I was to be showcasing myself or to just play it as it was written. I think I'll go ahead with the latter. But I was a little befuddled because I was playing the Taffanel with as much drama as I could, but the teacher still desired a more romantic feel... I don't really understand how to perform something romantically.
Also, does the way you are standing affect how you show off the piece? I was also told that I should be physically moving more with the piece and to hold my stature in such a way that made my presence dominant. I think I phrase that strange... but should you physically be more in motion with the emotion music you are conveying?
And wait.... do you have to actually make physical changes to the piece when conveying a certain emotion? Because I thought in order to play something, let's say, "happy", you had to feel happy. Ugh I know that sounds so stupid but I've always done it that way, and was never told wrong... yet. But I don't know...
C_otter: Thanks for the example. I like all the versions too... but Jethro's has to be my favorite, haha
I'm playing this piece at the NFA convention in Anaheim... and I really wasn't sure if I was to be showcasing myself or to just play it as it was written. I think I'll go ahead with the latter. But I was a little befuddled because I was playing the Taffanel with as much drama as I could, but the teacher still desired a more romantic feel... I don't really understand how to perform something romantically.
Also, does the way you are standing affect how you show off the piece? I was also told that I should be physically moving more with the piece and to hold my stature in such a way that made my presence dominant. I think I phrase that strange... but should you physically be more in motion with the emotion music you are conveying?
And wait.... do you have to actually make physical changes to the piece when conveying a certain emotion? Because I thought in order to play something, let's say, "happy", you had to feel happy. Ugh I know that sounds so stupid but I've always done it that way, and was never told wrong... yet. But I don't know...
A lack of professionalism makes room for creativity. That's my excuse >.>
It is possible your teacher is talking about the Classical music period. Ludwig van Beethoven is a very popular romantic period composerHeirii wrote:But I was a little befuddled because I was playing the Taffanel with as much drama as I could, but the teacher still desired a more romantic feel... I don't really understand how to perform something romantically.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ro ... _composers.
Well, you really do not have to move much, but it makes for better showmanship.Also, does the way you are standing affect how you show off the piece? I was also told that I should be physically moving more with the piece and to hold my stature in such a way that made my presence dominant. I think I phrase that strange... but should you physically be more in motion with the emotion music you are conveying?
And wait.... do you have to actually make physical changes to the piece when conveying a certain emotion? Because I thought in order to play something, let's say, "happy", you had to feel happy. Ugh I know that sounds so stupid but I've always done it that way, and was never told wrong... yet. But I don't know...
Phineas[/quote]