[Smt-talk] Theory impacting performance
Joel Lester
joellester at aol.com
Fri Jul 6 09:07:43 PDT 2012
Dear all,
May I interpolate a "commercial" announcement into this e-conversation?
My article "Performance and Analysis: interaction andinterpretation" (in The Practice of Performance, John Rink, ed., CambridgeUniversity Press, 1995, pp. 197-216) provides several instances of multiple recordingsby renowned performers of works by Mozart, Chopin, Schumann, and Johann Straussthat do or do not project various analytical assertions made about those piecesby theorists, and also briefly considers some of the issues about how we might know what aperformance projects, and about what those differences between performances and analyses might signify.
Joel Lester
Mannes College of Music
-----Original Message-----
From: John Snyder <JLSnyder at uh.edu>
To: Eric Knechtges <eric.t.knechtges at gmail.com>
Cc: smt-talk <smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org>
Sent: Thu, Jul 5, 2012 11:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Smt-talk] Theory impacting performance
Dear all,
I'm not sure if this is what Prof. Knechtges had in mind, but I'll put my
oar in anyway.
One issue that comes up in any introduction to large forms is the complex
nature of sonata form: the binary tonal structure overlaid with a three-part
thematic plan (simplified, of course, for expediency). And one of the many
pieces that throw that problem into sharp relief is Mozart's KV 545, first
movement. Viewed as a three-part design, just where is the recap? Can it
really be a recap in THAT key?? And so on and so forth. For a performer,
that question becomes quite audible in that a decision must be made as
to whether to mark or bring out in some way this (alleged) recapitulation.
There are many recordings, with lots of gradations. Two that I find very good
but very, very different with respect to this particular issue are those by
Mitsuko Uchida and Christoph Eschenbach. I won't say here whose
recording seems to illustrate which view of the form, and I certainly
cannot begin to speak to either performer's influences or thought processes,
but a comparison, after the class has wrestled with the issue in
analysis, ought to provoke a lively discussion.
With best wishes,
John Snyder
Eric Knechtges wrote:
Dear collective wisdom,
This is an incredibly broad question (and non-specific on purpose), so I'll gladly accept any and all suggestions you would like to send.
I'm interested in specific examples of where a specific theoretical understanding of a piece of music has a direct and audible impact on one's interpretation of that piece in performance, especially in situations involving some ambiguity. This could manifest itself on any level. If this could be supported by references to different recordings showcasing competing interpretations, even better. My goal is to stimulate discussion among my undergrads about valuation and evaluation of different interpretations, and why analysis is an important piece of forming a personal (and "correct") interpretation.
Please feel free to take whatever tack you wish in responding. Even if you don't know of any accompanying recordings, anything is welcome! I'd like to focus on examples in purely instrumental music, but vocal music excerpts are certainly welcome as well.
Thank you!
Eric Knechtges, DM
Assistant Professor of Theory/Composition
Northern Kentucky University
_______________________________________________
Smt-talk mailing list
Smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org
http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org
--
John L. Snyder
Professor of Music Theory and Musicology
Moores School of Music
University of Houston
713-743-3143
JLSnyder at uh.edu
_______________________________________________
Smt-talk mailing list
Smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org
http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org
-----Original Message-----
From: John Snyder <JLSnyder at uh.edu>
To: Eric Knechtges <eric.t.knechtges at gmail.com>
Cc: smt-talk <smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org>
Sent: Thu, Jul 5, 2012 11:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Smt-talk] Theory impacting performance
Dear all,
I'm not sure if this is what Prof. Knechtges had in mind, but I'll put my
oar in anyway.
One issue that comes up in any introduction to large forms is the complex
nature of sonata form: the binary tonal structure overlaid with a three-part
thematic plan (simplified, of course, for expediency). And one of the many
pieces that throw that problem into sharp relief is Mozart's KV 545, first
movement. Viewed as a three-part design, just where is the recap? Can it
really be a recap in THAT key?? And so on and so forth. For a performer,
that question becomes quite audible in that a decision must be made as
to whether to mark or bring out in some way this (alleged) recapitulation.
There are many recordings, with lots of gradations. Two that I find very good
but very, very different with respect to this particular issue are those by
Mitsuko Uchida and Christoph Eschenbach. I won't say here whose
recording seems to illustrate which view of the form, and I certainly
cannot begin to speak to either performer's influences or thought processes,
but a comparison, after the class has wrestled with the issue in
analysis, ought to provoke a lively discussion.
With best wishes,
John Snyder
Eric Knechtges wrote:
Dear collective wisdom,
This is an incredibly broad question (and non-specific on purpose), so I'll gladly accept any and all suggestions you would like to send.
I'm interested in specific examples of where a specific theoretical understanding of a piece of music has a direct and audible impact on one's interpretation of that piece in performance, especially in situations involving some ambiguity. This could manifest itself on any level. If this could be supported by references to different recordings showcasing competing interpretations, even better. My goal is to stimulate discussion among my undergrads about valuation and evaluation of different interpretations, and why analysis is an important piece of forming a personal (and "correct") interpretation.
Please feel free to take whatever tack you wish in responding. Even if you don't know of any accompanying recordings, anything is welcome! I'd like to focus on examples in purely instrumental music, but vocal music excerpts are certainly welcome as well.
Thank you!
Eric Knechtges, DM
Assistant Professor of Theory/Composition
Northern Kentucky University
_______________________________________________
Smt-talk mailing list
Smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org
http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org
--
John L. Snyder
Professor of Music Theory and Musicology
Moores School of Music
University of Houston
713-743-3143
JLSnyder at uh.edu
_______________________________________________
Smt-talk mailing list
Smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org
http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org
May I interpolate a "commercial" announcement into this e-conversation?
My article "Performance and Analysis: interaction andinterpretation" (in The Practice of Performance, John Rink, ed., CambridgeUniversity Press, 1995, pp. 197-216) provides several instances of multiple recordingsby renowned performers of works by Mozart, Chopin, Schumann, and Johann Straussthat do or do not project various analytical assertions made about those piecesby theorists, and also briefly considers some of the issues about how we might know what aperformance projects, and about what those differences between performances and analyses might signify.
Joel Lester
Mannes College of Music
-----Original Message-----
From: John Snyder <JLSnyder at uh.edu>
To: Eric Knechtges <eric.t.knechtges at gmail.com>
Cc: smt-talk <smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org>
Sent: Thu, Jul 5, 2012 11:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Smt-talk] Theory impacting performance
Dear all,
I'm not sure if this is what Prof. Knechtges had in mind, but I'll put my
oar in anyway.
One issue that comes up in any introduction to large forms is the complex
nature of sonata form: the binary tonal structure overlaid with a three-part
thematic plan (simplified, of course, for expediency). And one of the many
pieces that throw that problem into sharp relief is Mozart's KV 545, first
movement. Viewed as a three-part design, just where is the recap? Can it
really be a recap in THAT key?? And so on and so forth. For a performer,
that question becomes quite audible in that a decision must be made as
to whether to mark or bring out in some way this (alleged) recapitulation.
There are many recordings, with lots of gradations. Two that I find very good
but very, very different with respect to this particular issue are those by
Mitsuko Uchida and Christoph Eschenbach. I won't say here whose
recording seems to illustrate which view of the form, and I certainly
cannot begin to speak to either performer's influences or thought processes,
but a comparison, after the class has wrestled with the issue in
analysis, ought to provoke a lively discussion.
With best wishes,
John Snyder
Eric Knechtges wrote:
Dear collective wisdom,
This is an incredibly broad question (and non-specific on purpose), so I'll gladly accept any and all suggestions you would like to send.
I'm interested in specific examples of where a specific theoretical understanding of a piece of music has a direct and audible impact on one's interpretation of that piece in performance, especially in situations involving some ambiguity. This could manifest itself on any level. If this could be supported by references to different recordings showcasing competing interpretations, even better. My goal is to stimulate discussion among my undergrads about valuation and evaluation of different interpretations, and why analysis is an important piece of forming a personal (and "correct") interpretation.
Please feel free to take whatever tack you wish in responding. Even if you don't know of any accompanying recordings, anything is welcome! I'd like to focus on examples in purely instrumental music, but vocal music excerpts are certainly welcome as well.
Thank you!
Eric Knechtges, DM
Assistant Professor of Theory/Composition
Northern Kentucky University
_______________________________________________
Smt-talk mailing list
Smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org
http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org
--
John L. Snyder
Professor of Music Theory and Musicology
Moores School of Music
University of Houston
713-743-3143
JLSnyder at uh.edu
_______________________________________________
Smt-talk mailing list
Smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org
http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.societymusictheory.org/pipermail/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org/attachments/20120706/fa7331ee/attachment-0004.htm>
More information about the Smt-talk
mailing list