5. Mar, 2015

Reproduction or Copyist VS Artistic Interpretation

Recently I consider how to create and increase my performance activities as much as possible. In Germany I encountered with some concert halls or theaters which reject classical music performances but accept drama programs or exclusively new music without distinction of musical genres (rather ignoring the difference of each genre, I think). I also heard that there are also some concert halls where rejects all musical concerts and suggested musicians to play only at the smallest salon even with popular programs.

There I and some musicians thought that they were trying to make themselves survive longer with their own measures (there the name of the proposer has never been exposed to the concerned performers). Of course we can accept the order by the theaters or concert halls if we need change programs to realize a concert.

In Belgium I learned during my real concert experiences that the choice of the composer for the concert program could decide the number of the audiences already before the concert. And there I also had several experiences of premiere concert projects.

In these cases, how do they think on the performers for classical and modern music with the same music instruments, as the musical reproducers, copyist as well as other musical genres, or artists for each own interpretations (whether with or without ironies) ? And who's the first, the Composers, Performers, Copyist, Transcribers, or the Audience? And what's the purpose of the concerning performers, to perform classical music (or also other genres' music programs when necessary) with own artistic interpretations, just to reproduce the composers' new or existing works, or just for own egoism or narcissism?

In my own case, sometimes I choose my own programs with my preference and sometimes the organizer decided them and asked me to perform certain works. There there aren't particular conflicts between me and my concerned because we always understand the purpose of each concert program and agreed ourselves each other, finally and fortunately. Mostly I was happy to accept to perform each of demanded choice since the most of them are corresponded with my favorite works or which I practice the most.

There I also have another, but positive question ; Is the musical performance artistic or artisanal ?

The opinion whether we listen and research the precedent performance as a training method has been always discussed calmly and enthusiastically, especially for the violinist(s) in classical music. Some professors told me yes and some another professors told me no. Some performers rejected recent performers' recordings and some another performers rejected only the historical recordings, contradictively. Naturally all of them have certain reason, purpose, interests, own sentimental questions or manipulations for the common and (the real) pure purpose of "to practice well to prepare well to perform well and to continue well, etc.", even we had better to consider how to make time to practice our repertoire as much as possible, seriously.

Are those questions also the questions of "Artistic Brandalization" ? If yes, why do many of them reject the reproduction or copying or the succession of one of the best performer's school methods such as Fubay, Vieuxtemps (also Sivolli, Acquille Paganini and Wieniawski ?) - Ysaÿe, Auer - Dubois, Heifetz, Zimbalist, Elman, Milstein - Grumiaux, Francescatti, Eto and others, recently ? I think it is never only the question of our preference or choice.

With those questions and daily musical performance we never have to be stuck in Violin Music domain, at least.