Back in 1928, H. A. B Crawford considered the art of improvisation as ‘a closed book’ both to amateurs and professional musicians, even if it was ‘customary for every pianist to include an improvisation in his programme, and it is well known that Chopin, the greatest of all pianist-composers, always did so’ (Crawford 1928). The paradox of brilliant performers able to commit to memory complex pieces without being capable of the simplest development (a modulation or a progression based on the same material) was explained by the lack of need in aural attention or sense of musicianship. Further studies showed how the learning process affects the flexibility of the mind, connecting or disconnecting the creative component to the study of ‘the repertoire’. Some links between Chopin and Bach, especially the importance of The Well-Tempered Clavier, have already been discussed as it comes to compositional elements, tonal organization, and general setting. This contribution elaborates on that information and focuses on a maybe underestimated commonality: both Bach and Chopin were sitting at the keyboard to compose, teach, and deliver their music. Peter Williams considered the WTC, especially the second volume, as a ‘portfolio of pieces, made in more than one copy simply or collectively, not all of which needed to be a final version’ (Williams 2016). The idea of Bach and his circle gathering together examples of different styles, updating (as a sequel) what already explored in WTC-1, and structuring them in the same musical genre is quite appealing for a comparison with Chopin’s Op. 28. Chopin assembles quite a variety of pieces: Etudes (#8, 12, 19, 22, and 24); Nocturnes (# 13 and 15); Impromptu (#3, 10); Marches (#9, 20); Romance (# 17); Preludes (#1, 5, 23); and what we can call hybrids (#2, 4, 6, 11, 14, 16, 18, and 21). All of them share one basic idea, sometimes the hint for a variation, and the lack of a real development. Furthermore, these pieces were apparently improvised-composed within a long time span and constituted a sort of portfolio that was systematized and fully structured only later on. This is similar to what happened for WTC, where Bach (and his pupils) elaborated on a ‘prelude-matrix’ over many years. I will investigate the idea of a standard prelude-type to further improvisation: can Chopin’s preludes be seen as a flexible musical structure, to be extended and given different form according to the player ability and imagination? As suggested by Williams for Bach’s preludes, can we consider such ‘matrices’ for students to be continued or amended as they wished, on paper or in performance? And how this work on the music material provides the learner withy that musicianship on the absence of which Crawford was lamenting?

Improvisation Matrices: a Possible Reading for Bach’s and Chopin’s Preludes?

Massimiliano Guido
2019-01-01

Abstract

Back in 1928, H. A. B Crawford considered the art of improvisation as ‘a closed book’ both to amateurs and professional musicians, even if it was ‘customary for every pianist to include an improvisation in his programme, and it is well known that Chopin, the greatest of all pianist-composers, always did so’ (Crawford 1928). The paradox of brilliant performers able to commit to memory complex pieces without being capable of the simplest development (a modulation or a progression based on the same material) was explained by the lack of need in aural attention or sense of musicianship. Further studies showed how the learning process affects the flexibility of the mind, connecting or disconnecting the creative component to the study of ‘the repertoire’. Some links between Chopin and Bach, especially the importance of The Well-Tempered Clavier, have already been discussed as it comes to compositional elements, tonal organization, and general setting. This contribution elaborates on that information and focuses on a maybe underestimated commonality: both Bach and Chopin were sitting at the keyboard to compose, teach, and deliver their music. Peter Williams considered the WTC, especially the second volume, as a ‘portfolio of pieces, made in more than one copy simply or collectively, not all of which needed to be a final version’ (Williams 2016). The idea of Bach and his circle gathering together examples of different styles, updating (as a sequel) what already explored in WTC-1, and structuring them in the same musical genre is quite appealing for a comparison with Chopin’s Op. 28. Chopin assembles quite a variety of pieces: Etudes (#8, 12, 19, 22, and 24); Nocturnes (# 13 and 15); Impromptu (#3, 10); Marches (#9, 20); Romance (# 17); Preludes (#1, 5, 23); and what we can call hybrids (#2, 4, 6, 11, 14, 16, 18, and 21). All of them share one basic idea, sometimes the hint for a variation, and the lack of a real development. Furthermore, these pieces were apparently improvised-composed within a long time span and constituted a sort of portfolio that was systematized and fully structured only later on. This is similar to what happened for WTC, where Bach (and his pupils) elaborated on a ‘prelude-matrix’ over many years. I will investigate the idea of a standard prelude-type to further improvisation: can Chopin’s preludes be seen as a flexible musical structure, to be extended and given different form according to the player ability and imagination? As suggested by Williams for Bach’s preludes, can we consider such ‘matrices’ for students to be continued or amended as they wished, on paper or in performance? And how this work on the music material provides the learner withy that musicianship on the absence of which Crawford was lamenting?
2019
978-83-64823-92-3
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11571/1319066
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact