Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum Just for those totally devoted to Chopin

Does anyone else have this problem? It seems that the screen jumps around after I reach a certain point. Maybe it's a built-in device to keep posters from writing short novels.

Kathleen

Hello All:

It's a beautiful day here in the Midwest of the U.S.

I confess that I really have not been playing, for all intents and purposes, for about 10 months. I won't go into the reasons because they are boring and don't offer up any excuses for me.

Anyhow, Mike (Cruiser) from Germany and I have decided to put the 48.1 aside for about 10 years!! and concentrate on something we actually might have the ability to play. We decided on the lovely Op. 27, #2 nocturne. What I like most about it, aside from its lovely melody, is that it is to be played very slowly and dream-like. Now I can do "slow" fairly well. But I still have trouble with not practicing slowly enough. I have this desire to speed up as soon as I think I know a measure or so well.

Now please don't mention the metronome because it drives me crazy.

So I have come up with a possible solution. I am going to memorize as I go along. I've really never done this much. I put the sheet music in front of me as a "crutch." I never really read it, but I like it there as a security blanklet. But the problem is that I can never play anything when asked to, if I am at my brother's or sister's because I do depend on that sheet music to help me get started. What is really humbling is that all my brother's children (all in their 20's and 30's) can play by ear. They inherited this from their mom.

So far I have memorized the first three lines and I tap my foot at a pace that I believe will help me achieve the correct tempo later on.

If you are not familiar with this nocturne, here it is, played buy Solomon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8sodC0Thj4&feature=related


Any hints or tips will, as always, be appreciated.

My best to all,
Kathleen

Dzien dobry Kathleen. Jak pani sie miewa?

Honestly, I don't know if 27/2 is any easier than 48/1. Each has its own challenges. 27/2 maybe just a tiny bit easier to reach a certain stage.

Kathleen (and Cruiser)-
What a terrific piece to take on! You will find lots of challenges, as LisztAddict said, but it will sound very nice almost from the beginning. And unlike the 48/1, in my opinion at least, the difficulties in the 27/2 are pretty evenly spread out through the entire piece- there will be no unpleasant surprises in later sections. In fact, I think some sections of the first page are among the most difficult.

This may seem obvious, but you will need lots of solo left hand practice (in addition to HT), in order for the LH to really flow evenly and smoothly. Also, you will find lots of thirds and sixths to challenge you here; if those need shoring up, there are some Hanon exercises in thirds and sixths which may help you (as they did me). Take the ornaments slowly at first, and when you get to the difficult 48-note run- just take it VERY slowly, for a long long time- don't even worry about speeding it up until you are quite confident with it. (After more than one year, I'm just now getting it closer to where I want it to be.)


Kathleen, I don't really understand how memorizing it as you go along will help you with the problem of not practicing slowly enough; maybe I misunderstood something (?) But if you're doing this in order to have something memorized "just in case" you're asked to play: wouldn't it be easier to just take copies of the sheet music with you, when you go to visit, so that you'll have it on hand? There's no shame in playing from the music!

I've given up on the idea of having a memorized repertoire ready to perform at any given time- it's just not going to happen. I might have a short piece, or fragments of longer pieces, ready to play but not much more than that. If I knew I was going visit someone with a piano, and if I thought I might be asked to play- both highly unlikely- I would bring my sheet music with me and have it available.

I would be hesitant to try and memorize so soon in the process of learning a piece- I'd be afraid that I'd memorize the notes but not the dynamics. But of course, you need to do what's best for you. I would feel more comfortable allowing the memorization to occur naturally, with time and repetition (and given that I need a gazillion repetitions to learn a piece- it does happen, even if it doesn't stick!) But use whatever methods get you back into playing regularly

Hi Kathleen,

I agree with Chardonnay. If you get away from the music too soon, you may find that you've overlooked several important details. I have found this with the Barcarolle. I memorized (or so I thought!) a section too quickly and recently discovered several glaring mistakes - I missed a tie, played a wrong chord inversion, and had an accident with an accidental!

Although I'm familiar with the piece, I've never studied it, so I'll refrain from offering any specific advice.

It's a gorgeous piece. I'm sure you and Cruiser will enjoy learning it.

Witaj Dziękuję , LizstAddict: Jesteś wspaniały! Thank you for taking the time to greet me in Polish. I admit I had to use a Polish dictionary to translate. Are you preparing to go to Poland next year? I truly hope so. This just might give me the shove I need to really start looking into the details. My sister and her granddaughter have expressed a desire to go, so I wouldn’t be traveling alone. From what I have gleaned from the forum, it doesn’t appear that anyone (with the exception of you) are planning the trip.

That aside, I am grateful for your advice on the 27,2. I think I was lulled into thinking it was a lot easier than it is. I admit that part of that might be the tempo of the piece. But it does have a few sections that demand great technique (I have none, as I have so often stated) and the tempo does pick up here and there. It is surprising to me that it just might be as difficult as the 48.1. Yikes, what have I gotten myself into?

Chardonnay: What was I thinking? (Was I thinking?) Yes, I can certainly see my sitting at the piano in my brother’s home and playing the nocturne from start to finish, by memory!! If I could, I would belong on the stage with LisztAddict. Also, when I hit those final notes, I KNOW that the room would be empty. I don’t know where I picked up the love for classical music (especially Chopin) when absolutely no one in my family shares the same passion. Thank you for the advice about the left hand and the Hanon exercises (gosh, I hope I haven’t burned that book), and most of all…taking it all very slowly. I still have to remind myself that I am playing for myself and not some mythical audience somewhere. If I can keep this in mind, it will be of immeasurable importance. Now that we know you are playing it, we can come to you for HELP!

Hedi: I am so happy that you have posted. So many of the newbies who do, are never heard from again. Your suggestion about not trying to win some kind of race with this one is so important. Going too fast and playing too quickly can easily lead to a minor disaster. And I thank you also, for there is nothing more valuable than getting advice from people who have or are going through the same experience.

I am not discouraged that it may take me the rest of my life to get this one “under my belt,” as they say. I have nothing to do with my time (retirement is wonderful).

To all of you:
I am so blessed to have people such as you, who are willing to share not only their time but their knowledge and experience. I know this sounds trite, but you all are true friends, in the real sense of the word.

The best life has to offer you,
Kathleen

Chopin was on Jeopardy again, today. Oh how that man moves around.

The category was "Words That Begin and End with E."

The question: Chopin wrote a Revolutionary one.

Answer ---

Yippee! A game show question that I can answer without Steven's help!

Dang, I guess écossaise wouldn't have been accepted.

Steven

Did any of the contestants answer properly?

Some thoughts:

One of the things that discourages me is the high performance standard set in fine music. As I look back, my own playing seems so imprecise and inferior, unworthy of deigning to attempt xyz. I could work on it, develop it, but the level of dedication to perfect it seems to require a full-time commitment to the exclusion of the realities of life. Perhaps this has set the piano as a performance medium upon an elite pedestal whose unattainability relegates it to the rarefied environs of Parisian aristocratic nostalgia.

The ghosts of these environs nevertheless do haunt, and act upon the mind like a drug. The entranced listener is lured ever closer with the tantalizing prospect of attainability, like an infinitely convergent series in mathematics inching ever closer to its goal, but never...quite...attaining it. The solution, as it were, remains enshrouded in a fog of mystery.

The music - hearing it, the attempt to "own" it, is simultaneously a cause for hope and despair, a salutary metaphor for Chopin's life, and for our own.

Greg,

In my opinion, perfection is unattainable. I consider it an idealization that doesn't really exist in our earthly realm except as an abstract concept.

I think that music—the incorporeal embodiment of it, at least, as represented on paper—is perfect. We, however, are not; a "perfect" performance may be heard in our heads while reading a score, but it's not going to happen at the piano.

While no two real-life performances are the same, and one may be "better" than another, none ever reaches perfection. Strive instead, then, to pursue excellence and practice skillfulness. That's the best any of us can do!

Steven

Hi Kathleen,

> If you are not familiar with this nocturne,
> here it is, played buy Solomon.

As in interesting aside, my father's two piano teachers were coincidently both pupils of Solomon and they were of the opinion that of the nocturnes he played, his performances were comparable to Solomons' - with 15/2 be indistinguishable - so I feel quite privileged to have grown up listening to these renditions and have them burned into my brain - however unassailable those mental performances will remain to myself...

I'm still making progress with op 9/1 (which he didn't play)...

Heidi: It does boost our ego a bit whenever we can answer one of those game show questions correctly. (Sorry Stephen…the “question” was Chopin wrote a Revolutionary one of these.” ) If the word “revolutionary” wasn’t capitalized, then maybe your answer might have been accepted. However I don’t recall any of his ecossaises being considered “revolutionary.” I believe these were lively dances in the Scottish style. Several composers of the time wrote them. I know you are just pulling our leg/s. BUT a very intelligence response, just the same.

I have to admit that while the game show Jeopardy is considered the “thinking man” show, it does, every so often, slip from this pedestal. I didn’t like the word “Revolutionary” used to describe Chopin’s etude. For it was not of his liking to assign names to his works. I think a better way to word this “question” would have been something like: Chopin composed many of these, which were meant as exercises by this students to strengthen their technique. A bit wordy, I know, but more correct than the original question. BTW, Hedi, one contestant rang the buzzer first and had the correct response. So I don’t know what the other two would have said.

Oh, the final Jeopardy question was truly surprising, The category was French Classical Music, During the commercial, I racked my poor overworked brain and could only come up with two French composers. I know there had to be others, but I only remember these two: Ravel and Debussy. I thought to myself that a question pertaining to either of these composers would be easy (for, don’t forget, these contestants were chosen for their knowledge in a wide variety of fields.) After the commercial, the final question was asked: (and I have to paraphrase here because I don’t remember Alex’s exact words): This song, which consisted of repeated variations on its theme, is heard a total of 17 times, each time increasing in tempo and pitch. I couldn’t believe that they would choose such an easy questions as the final one. Again, the contestants were intelligence and knowledgeable. But this question could “almost” be answered by anyone who had even a limited knowledge of classical music. Goodness, it was even used as the background music for the classic movie: Ten. It was a real surprise that only one contestant had the correct answer (and she spelled it correctly also). I do not mean to sound like a snob, for I don’t consider myself that smart or intelligent. But gosh, for a final question, this was just too simple.

Oh, and then I believe I heard Alex pronounce the composer’s name as “Ravel,” as in rhyming with Babel. Yikes…WRONG!

Dear Greg and Stephen: How I love your “egghead” dissertations. (And you know I use the term “egghead” with only the greatest respect). My own opinion is pretty trite and nothing new.

I think it is admirable and even a good idea to strive for perfection. But it is healthier and more reasonable not to expect it. Enjoy and take pride in the music you can create and remember even Chopin never played a piece the same way twice. I think we can surmise from this that he was striving for perfection each time he played but never reached it. And that’s good enough for me.

Hi LaValse: What a magnical childhhood you have had. It's no wonder you can play with such expression and nuance. Continued best wishes with the 9/1.

Best to all,
Kathleen

Kathleen,

I have to admit that I wish you wouldn't use that term. I think that we are all intelligent and reasoning individuals here; such a label creates a distinction that I feel is artificial. I'm sure I've been called far worse things in settings where I truly was out of my element, but it makes me feel like an outsider here, too, when I would like to feel—by virtue of the special passion we all share—that I'm among peers.

BTW, I'm curious if people of faith regard the concept of "perfection" to be exclusively in the domain of the divine—and if it wouldn't be hubris bordering on blasphemy for one to have the temerity to strive to attain it. If humans are by nature imperfect, can any human endeavor be done perfectly? It's interesting that while we take for granted that "nobody's perfect"—a shibboleth that transcends cultures—we still treat perfection as a goal rather than being the best we can be.

I just don't think perfection exists except as a concept. Like the "infinitely convergent" mathematical series Greg mentioned, I have thought of a hyperbola—approaching but never reaching its asymptote—as a metaphor for perfection. I honestly think that by striving for it, we set ourselves up for failure (or, at the least, disappointment) because we can never reach it.

I believe that striving for perfection is ultimately antithetical to our enjoyment of simply "being in the moment" with the knowledge that any effort we make with a skillful intention is a worthy one. That process, and finding satisfaction in the result of it, is good enough for me.

Steven

Oh, my goodness, what a lot of fascinating ideas, far more than I can follow up on!

"Can any human endeavor be done perfectly?" Great question, and the mathematical models mentioned seem apropos.

Another metaphor that often comes to mind when I'm practicing is Zeno's paradox--
http://www.mathacademy.com/pr/prime/articles/zeno_tort/index.asp
--I feel like no matter how far I travel I’ll never reach the finish line. It’s certainly feeling that way as I continue to work on 48/2 for our e-cital. (I’ve lost track of any thread in which the nocturne e-cital is being discussed--?)

Perfection may be the province of the Divine, but we all have a spark of divinity within us, and perhaps we can come closer and closer to expressing that spark.

Somewhat related: I was intrigued by heidiv’s comment a while back that Chopin’s pen must have been guided by angels. Numerous composers have said that they felt as if the music was being dictated to them and they only wrote it down, that they weren’t really responsible for creating it. (The Chopin voice says in one of the Leslie Flint recordings that he was aware during his life of receiving help and inspiration from beings greater than himself.) Various interpretations of what was “really” going on when these people were composing are possible, of course, but I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to say that whenever humans create any kind of art, we are tapping into the Source that creates everything including ourselves. And that Source is inside us as much as it is anywhere.

My theory is that truly great artists, Chopin being one of course, are better at listening to what that Source tells them than most of us, and that the intense practice and study they engage in then helps them to bring it through into the material world. Our MR would say that what they’re listening to is no more than their genetic heritage and the sum of the artistic productions they’ve been exposed to, but I do think there’s something beyond that as well. At any rate, the ability to be open to inspiration is critical, no matter where it comes from.

(I prefer to think of myself as a nerd rather than an egghead. Was that nerdy enough for you?)

I concur with the comments on 27/2, to the as-yet-limited degree that I’ve managed to learn it.

Just recently I’ve (at last) tackled reading Chuan Chang’s “Fundamentals of Piano Practice.” I’m reserving judgment on it thus far-- though I’m relieved to see that the practice methods Chang considers wrong are not what I do! One thing he recommends is memorizing first rather than last, for whatever it’s worth.

I notice that Chang mentions that Chopin taught this or that, with the implication that if Chopin taught it, it MUST be right!

And I thought I had mentioned at some point that I AM planning to go to Poland next year. My daughter wants to go too. In order to accommodate her, it would be better for me to go in August, when there will be a cluster of concerts and such, rather than in October for the big competition. But if other Chopaholics are going, I would certainly like to go at whichever time they will be there.

I kind of like the idea of a Revolutionary Ecossaisse. I'm trying to picture it.... brings "Braveheart" to mind!

Elene

It might interest some to know that the Amish (Pennsylvania Dutch) women still make their quilts entirely by hand. Every one of thousands of stitches is remarkably the same size and precisely placed. Knowing how difficult this is, I asked an Amish woman once how she achieves such perfection. She told me that into every quilt is woven one purposefully "wrong" stitch to remind them that only God is perfect, humans are flawed.

Regardless of one's religious beliefs, I see many parallels between spending 6-12 months working on a quilt and 6-12 months working on a difficult piano piece. Now, I can't envision myself purposefully adding a few wrong notes (that usually happens automatically ), but when the wrong notes happen I view it as part of the human experience. We're not robots, and our playing wouldn't touch a listener if we acted like robots.

Greg, we classical musicians are so hard on ourselves. It comes from a lifetime of pursuing excellence, of agonizing over the minutiae of a piece, of having a teacher point out our mistakes for an hour a week for 30 years. Perhaps in mathematics or computer programming, one must be absolutely precise - one wrong symbol make the program or equation worthless. Not so with music. Music is a living, breathing entity. You may never play as well as your favorite concert pianist. But is that really your goal? Imperfection is part of the human experience. It's the journey, not the destination.

Heidi

That's an interesting question. From a theological perspective, speaking as a Calvinist, I'd say no; rather the opposite is true. Reason: man was created with the Imago Dei. Though the doctrine of the Fall, depravity is if not absolute, at least total, meaning impacting every part of our being. None of us are exempt from its tragic effects, none of us are "holy" and in a position to condemn our fellow members of the family of man. We all, likewise, can see what is good, true, noble, beautiful, and we all know we fall short, to our deep despair, but can nonetheless see the promise, the ideal. To strive for what is good and noble in all areas, music included, and to ascribed to God the glory for the achievement insofar as it is an expression of His gift and shows a very dim, imperfect manifestation of His perfection and excellence, brings glory to God.

The struggle for perfection, then, is emblematic not only of Chopin's life but of redemptive history as a whole.

This is an honest and heartfelt answer. I hope this answers your thoughtful question.

Moslem artists and artisans do exactly the same thing. Only Allah is perfect.

And Navajo weavers apparently do this too.

I'm afraid I don't have to consciously TRY to put imperfection into my work-- though I've written a few poems that I think could be called perfect, within the limitations of their form.

(By the way, it's not unusual, even today, to do quilting by hand. Though the "English" might be likely to stitch the bindings by machine.)

My understanding is that Chopin's perfectionism caused him considerable suffering. No one could meet his standards, most especially himself. The world itself did not meet his standards, and so it caused him pain. Or rather he caused himself pain.

Perfectionism can paralyze. But in the case of Chopin's work, at least we get the benefit of it.

Elene