|
Re: 10-year performances summary
|
Bunita Marcus
|
Sep 27, 2009 09:45 PDT
|
| | Also Piano is very, very difficult to perform and TM less
so. Not easy but there are some problems in Piano which are not really
possible to solve for pianists with only two hands so any solution is
bound to be a compromise. Piano (like SQ1) could almost be thought
of as
belonging to something you might almost call Feldman's 'complex'
period.
Violin and Orchestra has similar problems, as has Neither. All are
from
the same couple of years (1977-79).
|
Maybe I can shed some light on this. I totally agree with the
impossibility of
correctly performing Piano. I don't think Morty cared if it was
playable or not
when he wrote it. He was more interested in how it was put together.
Regarding the 'complex period,' these years were unique in his life
and teachings
and it influenced his music. I began composition lessons with Feldman
in the Fall
of 1976. We immediately hit it off, he was a huge fan of my music. I
challenged him
to be a better composer. Everyday I would come to his place and ask
what he had
composed that day. We talked music and art 24/7. He wanted to
impress me.
He was very open to influence in this period. The "delayed triplet"
of Piano and a few
other works was influenced by Kondo's use of a 1/3 beat. He tried to
imitate things
in my music even taking melodies. In the Graduate Seminars Feldman
taught
we examined under a microscope, every piece of significant composition
composed
in the last fifty years. And hidden in his music closet was every
book every written on serialism.
Feldman was competitive. And realistic too. When he saw how much
trouble Aki
Takahashi had with his large intervals, he promised her he would never
go over a ninth again.
The later works are all very playable. Likewise, when he wrote Palais
for me he took into
account my crippled fingers.
Later Morty became interested with variations on pitch and the long
piece. Still you are right
to call these years the compex period, a time of new influences, new
experimentation,
and of Morton as a serious teacher.
Bunita Marcus
On Sep 24, 2009, at 4:27 AM, John Snijders wrote:
| | If you don't mind, let me try to suggest a possible solution for this
apparent puzzle.
We (being the Ives Ensemble) have recorded both string quartets and
have
performed SQ2 a number of times. We haven't performed SQ1 in concert
yet. The reason is quite simple: SQ1 is to all intents and purposes
practically impossible to perform well live. The piece poses such
enormous technical demands on the players and there are so many
physically impossible jumps that, even though with careful editing
it is
possible to make a recording of it, we don't see a way yet to give a
passable live rendition of the piece.
SQ2's most difficult characteristic is the length, but that is
something
you can overcome. Technically the piece isn't even close to the
problems
SQ1 poses.
As for Triadic Memories v Piano: I performed both of them several
times
and I think that TM, for the simple fact that the piece is a complete
concert in itself is in some way easier to program than Piano. Also TM
is perhaps musically somewhat more accessible - Piano is a strangely
complex piece. Also Piano is very, very difficult to perform and TM
less
so. Not easy but there are some problems in Piano which are not really
possible to solve for pianists with only two hands so any solution is
bound to be a compromise. Piano (like SQ1) could almost be thought
of as
belonging to something you might almost call Feldman's 'complex'
period.
Violin and Orchestra has similar problems, as has Neither. All are
from
the same couple of years (1977-79).
If someone has an alternative view I'd be interested to read it.
Best,
John
David Toub wrote:
| |
I have no idea why SQ1 is performed so much less often than SQ2,
except that perhaps SQ2 is looked upon as a testament to a string
quartet's endurance, and maybe that serves as an incentive. Both are
amazing works. In all honesty, For Christian Wolff is probably more
of
an acquired taste than For Philip Guston. Both are great works, but
there is more diversity in FPG than in FCW, at least in my opinion,
and that diversity might make FPG more interesting for many
listeners.
I'm still trying to figure out why Triadic Memories is performed more
often than 1977's Piano.
Best,
David
|
John S.
|
|
|
 |
|
