When you are thinking about a
musical career I don’t think you cross off any aspect of it. Your repertoire
will include concertos, sonatas and recital pieces1. Cellists may
well have the goal of becoming a soloist but role models from the past show how
you don’t just play with orchestras and piano accompanists as a soloist but you
can also play chamber music. Many of the greats like Casals and du Pre have played
in chamber ensembles. So it has always been the case that chamber music has
been a component of a solo cellist’s repertoire. Everyone benefits from having
a diverse repertoire because realistically you won’t have enough engagements to
perform as a soloist. So it’s important to have variety in your repertoire and
musicianship skills so you can respond to a range of opportunities.
Young cellists all learn the solo
repertoire, including concertos and recital pieces, irrespective of whether
they wish to specialise in solo, chamber or orchestral playing. This is because
they need to perform concertos, sonatas and shorter recital pieces in order to
pass exams and auditions at all levels for a place (Undergraduate/Postgraduate)
at a conservatoire. For instance, to audition for a place on the Royal College
of Music undergraduate cello course, you need to demonstrate you can play
“First movement of a concerto” and “A contrasting piece of your own choice”2.
Again, for a place on their taught postgraduate course, you need to prepare a
“First (or significant) movement from a major concerto from the 19th or 20th
century” and a “A contrasting piece of your own choice”3. You will not need to demonstrate your ability
to play chamber music with others or play within an orchestra for these main
degree courses. The only other musician you are allowed to have playing with
you is just the one accompanist:
“The only people in your audition
room will be you, your accompanist and the audition panel.”4
The same is true of the Guildhall
school of Music, with a few additions. For the undergraduate degree in cello,
you again prepare “The 1st movement from a concerto in the standard repertory”
and “One contrasting piece of the candidate's own choice.”5 In
addition, you should prepare a listed study from the Popper High School of
Cello Playing. Obviously the solo repertoire is still taught at undergraduate
level and seen as an important way to assess proficiency in cello playing
because to progress onto their postgraduate degree for Advanced Instrumental
Studies, you again need to play “The first movement of a concerto from the
standard repertoire with cadenza” and “The first movement of a duo sonata (with
piano) written after 1800” in your audition6. Indeed, the extra
element to prepare here for postgraduate study involves demonstrating you can
play without any accompaniment at all: “One movement of unaccompanied Bach”7.
As far as I can see, there are no chamber music qualifications or degrees at
these two conservatoires. If you want to specialise in chamber music, you take
an optional module/s eg Guildhall School of Music but this is only if you already
have a fair amount of chamber music experience and are part of an ensemble,
then you put your ensemble forward for consideration for a postgrad option.
Afterwards, auditions for joining an orchestra require performing a concerto as
a soloist eg Haydn. So the solo repertoire remains highly relevant, even for
those who become orchestral players. It is the solo repertoire that is the staple diet for a cellist, not chamber music. The solo cello repertoire, including concertos,
sonatas, recital pieces and unaccompanied pieces are also generally considered
to be the best music written for the cello. For the top 10, see:
If a cellist doesn’t learn these,
s/he is missing out on the best cello music ever written!
So, just like everyone else, I
learnt a core repertoire of concertos and recital pieces eg Waldesruhe
(Dvorak), Vocalise (Rachmaninoff), The Swan (Saint Saens), sonatas and unaccompanied pieces eg Bach Suites. The
purpose was to perform them with pianists or otherwise. I loved technique be it
Sevcik for the violin or Feuillard, Franchomme and Popper for the cello. I was
even taught some interestingly difficult exercises made up by Rostropovich. At
a young age it was all about technique and performance (including reading the
score carefully and interpreting how to play what’s written in it) because
these are physical skills that are very demanding so it helps to train your
fingers to be capable of complex dexterity. The history and musicology behind
the music can be learnt just as easily and better when an adult. I think
history does play a part in understanding a piece but it doesn’t warrant a deep
study of it at a young age. This can be incorporated as and when relevant later
to acquire a deeper appreciation of a piece of music and examine how to play it
authentically. This is, however, difficult to ascertain because original first
publications of scores did not always reflect the composer’s wishes and some
were more vocal than others about how representative the score was of their
intentions. There is no one objective source to consult which tells us exactly
what the composer wanted. Some composers were more prescriptive compared with
others who preferred the instrumentalist to have more freedom of
interpretation. There are also many different arrangements which, by
definition, do not replicate the original score and vary in how much they take
the composer’s possible wishes into consideration eg in expression markings. Some
pieces are transposed for a different instrument. While some are transposed for a related instrument eg violin to cello, others are unrelated eg horn to cello. Transposing, especially between unrelated instruments, means the instrument, as well as the musician, will express the
music very differently from the instrument for which it was originally written.
So when we refer to authentic renditions of a piece, what do we mean? What is
and isn’t completely authentic is itself open to interpretation.
Furthermore, there’s nothing
wrong with reinterpreting the score and giving it a new, fresh approach. Some may
view this as being almost a cross-over style but I think all musicians,
classical or not, have made the pieces their own in some way throughout the
ages. It’s unavoidable. Much as a writer has their own voice so a musician has
theirs. Therefore, the way musicians interpret a piece of music will vary from
person to person. Even classical drama eg Shakespeare is often given a
contemporary interpretation. We don’t think a contemporary production of a
period play is automatically worse simply because it isn’t an historically
authentic production. We value the new light it sheds on the play as much as
productions which re-enact the original play and the staging of it. Many of
‘the greats’ in the past approached cello pieces in this way eg Casals’ unique
interpretation and recording of the Bach Suites. Singers are expected to make
songs in their repertoire their own so why shouldn’t instrumentalists? I’m not
saying never be authentic but it’s not entirely realistic to be so since we
haven’t lived in the composer’s era or often even close to it!
To answer my question, I don’t
think chamber music is dead and never has been but neither is it a staple diet for musicians. Many musicians try to be part
of a chamber ensemble in the same way as most tennis players play doubles, at
some point in their career, not just singles. Is it necessary to play chamber
music? No, it isn’t. Just as a few top singles tennis players opt out of
doubles it’s perfectly fine for a soloist eg cellist to do likewise and opt out
of playing regularly in chamber ensembles and orchestras. They are not less
good musicians or tennis players because they haven’t done so. They may well
prefer to focus on one specialisation be it singles for a tennis player or as a
soloist for a musician. It’s not something everyone wants to do but if they do
then their focus may yield unique insights into the solo repertoire. Similarly,
top tennis players, especially on the men’s tour, don’t play doubles eg Nadal
but he brings something special to the court much as Serena Williams does in
the women’s game.
It’s the musician’s choice. Music
is a creative process not an academic pursuit so a literal interpretation is
not as paramount as expressing an unique voice and providing listeners with an
aesthetic experience.
1 Based on my comments
on Steven Isserlis’s post ‘Some good news, amidst somewhat surreal times?’
7/3/2017 available at:
3 ibid
4 ibid
6 ibid
7 ibid
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.