Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Black Note Etude

by Lewis Carroll


`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.



"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"

He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought --
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.

And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!

One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.

"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.


`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

Hey, holystorm, Well! You've stirred up a storm! Hee hee.

You are not to be faulted for your use of the word 'song'.

I was fortunate to have a band director in high school who pointed out the distiction right off the bat, and he made sure we were clear about it!! Hee hee.

I gather that by now you see that the word "piece" is the jargon. In classical music a "song" is a "piece" written for human voice (the greatest instrument of all!)

Anyhoo...

The black key etude may well be one of the easiest to master. It was indeed the first one I was taught.

Sam,

Nothing to do with Lewis Carroll this time round: though still a British cultural reference. A little googling will provide the answer. Nevertheless let me offer you my most enthusiastic contrafribularities.... and I shall return interfrastically

- Michael B.

geese guys, you have no excuse, you are obvously already on the internet...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sing

substituting 'piano' for 'violin' seems somehow right to me for 1d, and 2a and 2b seem to apply as well. I'm sure many of you have other opinions though...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=song

Not as clear unforunately, but it does mention short whatever that means.

tenuki: The part that says "a short musical composition with words?" The whole affair is very clear. A piece of non-vocal music is not a song. At least not in common English usage as it stands today. Perhaps in a few years it might be, via the influence of internet downloading terminology, mp3 players, etc.

Also for Bernard to state that the word 'piece' is 'jargon' is also erroneous[1]. If you ask any educated English-speaking non-musician how to term a non-vocal composition and one of his/her first responses would be 'piece.' The word 'piece' is common usage, and not at all classical music jargon. Indeed, the (mis)use of the word 'song' is a much better candidate for being jargon, seeing as appears to derive from internet downloading / mp3 tagging terminology, where music files (and by extension the music itself, regardless of its vocal/non-vocal content) are referred to as 'songs.'

- Michael B.

[1] Jargon is technical or specialised language used by a specific group of people (trade, profession, hobbyists, etc), and is thus usually not considered common usage. Though of course lots of jargon enters common usage over time: 'song' for non-vocal music may be yet another case.

Jabberwocky is an example of creative use of language, not of "creative" use of language. The first is interesting - Russel Hoban, James Joyce, Anthony Burgess; the second is sloppy, arrogant and tedious. The first has been produced by first-rate minds, the second by lazy would-be intellectuals. Was it Humpty-dumpty.....?

John

Come on mr H4xOr, lighten up. I was _supporting_ your position and trying to be funny. Yes it quite clearly says 'with words'. duh.

tenuki,
Sorry, your attempt at humour was lost on me. And I shall attempt to adopt a lighter[1] tone from now on

- Michael B.

[1] Though I cannot for the life of me see what there is to discuss in this matter! ....Nurse! NURSE!!!

If you ask any educated English-speaking non-musician how to term a non-vocal composition and one of his/her first responses would be 'piece.'
Define "educated". The responses, after all, will vary depending on what type of education you are speaking, as well as what level of education (on the subject, particularly) one has. [1]

-Random break for the sake of breaking.

[1]What purpose do your "footnotes" serve? [q*uote]Oh, my god, a footnote! *whispers* He must be edumacated... [/q*uote]

No.

Say no to needless semantics.

deleted

can we get back to the black key etude?

what was that orange rolling about?

Sh-h-h-h-h Be quiet, I'm listening to a song.

I always thought 'piece' sounded funny too. Sculpters and painters call their creations 'pieces'and that sounds wierd to me too. what should we call what we're playing? I don't know uh how about "music"?

Pieces of what?

Uh... music?

Derulux: Did you consult Mr Google for the phrase "common English usage" and realise your rather basic error? Or have you been too busy making feeble attempts to criticise the formal aspects[1] of a post, rather than its content?

And before you ask, I could define the word feeble if that helps...

- Michael B.
[1] I like the use of footnotes[2].
[2] It prevents a build-up of parenthetical comments in the main text[3], and gives the reader the choice of reading a shorter version, and/or consulting below for more detail.
[3] Something I'd have thought an 'educated' person such as yourself might have noticed and appreciated .

So you're saying that the guy who got his GED and now works at Firestone in West Philly will have the same response as a History of Music professor with a Ph.D. from Juilliard? :rolleyes:

Define response please.

Derulux, if you can honestly say you would tell people that you would like to "sing them a song", and expect them to expect you playing a piano piece, then by all means, call pieces for songs.

if you can honestly say you would tell people that you would like to "sing them a song", and expect them to expect you playing a piano piece, then by all means, call pieces for songs.
NO. I don't believe "sing" accurately describes a piano, but I do believe that, for shorter pieces, song is certainly a more-than-acceptable substitute.

[1] I like the use of footnotes[2].
[2] It prevents a build-up of parenthetical comments in the main text[3], and gives the reader the choice of reading a shorter version, and/or consulting below for more detail.
[3] Something I'd have thought an 'educated' person such as yourself might have noticed and appreciated .
Ok, that cracked me up.

Define response please.
I didn't use the word response in the text you quoted. Reread the post, please.