Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
In the area I live in, there is only one music teacher (she teaches piano and flute) in the yellow pages of the phone book.
I received this response from a reader who wishes to remain anonymous for the time being:
Thank you for a beautiful response to Carl’s remarks.
I was reminded by Don Hilsberg that Lucile Lawrence told him that Salzedo was always exploring and evolving as an artist. The National Association of Harpists which presented most of the mass harp concerts you refer to certainly included harpists other than his protegees. As for pulling strings to get his students jobs, I wonder if he even had to, considering that they were coming from the Curtis Institute and turned out to be generally wonderful. As for atmosphere, it was other musicians and critics who took Salzedo most seriously and had the greatest respect for him as an artist. That’s all his fault, all right. He was a great artist. Virgil Thomson ranked him as highly as Wanda Landowska, whom he considered the greatest musician alive. Sure that’s going to make some people uncomfortable. It’s not easy to be an innovator. Dare we waste any time being resentful of such people? Maybe he wasn’t a generous person to colleagues, or sensitive or something. His personality is beyond reproach, because he’s gone. There’s no way to really know it now.
As far as his editions go, he did redo transcriptions by Renie and Hasselmans to suit his interpretation and style. So have lots of other harpists. He also created public school harp instruction programs in Philadelphia. A lot of harpists have benefitted from that. I know Grandjany students who were excluding of harpists from other schools. What goes around goes around. Of course Salzedo would not have destroyed the harp society, Grandjany himself nominated Lucile Lawrence to be the first president. But then, they were friends, all of them. It was the students who could be so vicious to each other. Lucile Lawrence always spoke generously of her colleagues and treated them graciously, whether they received it that way or not was up to them. At least that’s how I know it.
It’s the idea “French” harpists have that he completely “rejected” the tradition that is interesting and the crux of many issues. Why do they see any change as rejection? Isn’t that incredibly traditionalist, conservative, and hidebound resistant? Or it perhaps because he wasn’t Catholic? What were they expecting him to do or be? Then what would Tournier have been, had Salzedo not changed or left France? Or is it Beaux Arts against Art Nouvea/Deco/Moderne? Reactionary against Liberal? Women against Man?
There were indeed many schools of piano playing, the Leschetizky being one of the most famous. A more recent one was created by Dorothy Taubman. The finger position/shape and manner of “attack” could be quite different. Some played with flat fingers, some rounded, some arched, all with quite different results in sound and more suited to some music than others. Even within France there were several schools. There is a wonderful book on French Pianism that gives a great perspective on this. It is so much like the harp. What is different is that we seem to lack tolerance, and tend to want to lump everyone together, which seems parochial. Perhaps it’s because there are so many fewer of us. There are also schools of singing, flute playing, ballet dancing, etc. Whenever there is a great teacher a school tends to follow. I have seen harpists succeed whose technique defies their anatomy, perhaps they won’t last as long, time will tell. There is a great variety in approaches, and similarity with the Salzedo school I see happening because some of its ideas like raising have spread. I would just like to restate that I see Salzedo as a French school, another one alongside the others. I have a direct lineage to Hasselmans, DeBeriot/Chopin and other great French musicians and composers. I feel my music-making, performing or composing, is more French than American. Except that Lyon & Healys come from Chicago.
Que tal gusto en saludarlos, mi nombre es Fernando Farfan, escribo desde la Ciudad de Campeche en Mexico, soy un musico amateur que me he dedicado a tocar el piano y teclados sin embargo siempre he tenido inquietud por aprender a tocar el arpa, hasta hace poco es que he podido investigar un poco en el internet respecto a los diferentes tipos de arpas que existen y quisiera adquirir alguna economica y de tama?o peque?o o mediano para empezar a tocar y practicar, desgraciadamente no he encontrado en internet alguna que no sea costosa ya que las unicas que he encontrado medianas y economicas son de otros paises (como Pakistan) y el costo en envio a Mexico es alto.. me gustaria saber si alguien sabria donde puedo adquirir aqui en Mexico o en algun pais hermano cercano algun arpa economica, les agradeceria mucho su apoyo.. gracias.
Que tal?
Aqui de nuevo saludando a todos los arpistas latinos.
En esta ocasion quisiera aprovechar este foro para anunciar el nuevo CD “Fu? un sue?o – Viaje entorno al Arpa Andina” de un amigo que ha dedicado su vida a la musica y de tiempo atras ha realizado trabajos de investigacion sobre la musica de Arpa Peruana.Su nombre es CLAUDE FERRIER y ha tenido una trayectoria muy interesante, para esto me tome la libertad de anunciar su pagina (previa autorizacion de ?l, claro!) para que conozcan un poco mas sobre su trabajo en relacion con esta musica:
http://musicaperuana.com/arpa/
El tambien cuenta con una pagina en la que habla sobre su formacion profesional:
http://www.swiss-music.net/ferrier/En cada pagina estan los links para ponerse en contacto con el por si desean mayor informacion acerca de su trabajo o por si estan interesados en una copia de su nuevo proyecto.
Saludos Afectuosos desde Mexicali, Baja California, Mexico.
Atte.
Valentin CaballeroHere is the response from a guitarist of over 20 years on a worship team that has a son who plays harp. What you or any other instrument plays is entirely dependant on what combination of instruments are playing and what your role among those instruments is to be. The problem with the harp (and piano as well) is that the instrument includes such a wide range of notes. If you have a bass player, your low notes will be stepping all over what he is doing. The middle of the instrument is all in the vocalist’s and guitar’s range. You can add many fills in the upper range, but if you have a flute, you may be in trouble there. In the worship setting, it is key to remember to do only that which serves the congregation to enhance their worship experience. We follow the addage: “Less is more.” Concentrate playing as little as possible, but make what you play count. That goes for everyone else.
Dear Robin,
Please suggest to your sister that she take a look at Western
Kentucky University in Bowling Green, Kentucky.There has already been discussion of this within the Salzedo community, and I feel you are unlikely to be able to come up with a comprehensive or definite answer to this question at this point in time, due to the passing of so many of his students, and as an observer. It was of course, Lucile Lawrence, who wrote the Method for the Harp based on Salzedo’s teaching at that time, with his input and compositions. Without the input of the people who were part of the creation of the method, your conclusions are not going to be able to be complete.
Our right arms do touch the sounding board (lightly) in the first octave. We were taught not to rest it on the board. Please bear in mind that Salzedo was a bit short, playing on the largest harps. That has an effect on one’s positioning The “Rigidity” you speak of is a result of individual teachers attitudes and practices.
. The film that was shown at the conference I believe also contained passages from “Flight”. “Whirlwind” would certainly show his technique as well.
But what is your purpose in this? What are you trying to show or accomplish?
As a vital, dynamic artist, Salzedo did some things differently perhaps, at different times in his life, and taught differently to some people and at different times. For instance, with Margarita Czonka, one of his latest pupils, he developed an opening outward gesture instead of the raising. It suits her personality uniquely.
The elbow position question usually seems to be the main sticking point. Both Lucile Lawrence and Salzedo himself, according to her and photographs, had a position that was elegantly tapered, at times high, and at times low, depending on the passage being played. Perhaps Miss Lawrence didn’t use the best possible wording in the method about the arm position. If you look at the top of the arm as parallel to the floor, the lower part is angled downward, on my arm at least. There are passages needing extra leverage for pressure in which I will raise it a bit more. I lower my arm to play a series of octaves or harmonics. I lower it if I am very tired. Beginners will tend to drop their arms, throwing off their hand position, because their muscles aren’t developed sufficiently, hence the repeated instruction “elbows up!” If they don’t continue their studies long enough they may never move beyond that command, or the teacher may not out of habit or other reasons.
The essence of the Salzedo method is in the results: tone quality, projection, facility, fingering/phrasing/articulation, interpretive style.
I know you didn’t want my response on this string, but I want to respond to the other responses.
Why do some “Grandjany” harpists play with bent inward knuckles and some with rounded knuckles? How does his notation symbol system work? Why do French harpists reject Salzedo as part of their tradition but not Grandjany, when they both emigrated from home? How does the Attl technique function? How do Russian harpists circle their thumbs instead of closing them? Life is full of variations, I guess.
I think the point of studying a method is to reach your individual best. Music is a collective language and the culmination of all who came before us. Learning how they did things gives us something to measure ourselves against and a point of reference for our individual whims and caprices. I know that if I had stayed in Minneapolis and never studied with Lucile Lawrence and Alice Chalifoux, I would be a very mediocre player of limited ability and conception, if I were even still playing. They helped me to dedicate myself, and to be at least a pretty good player. I have built on what they taught me and brought myself up to what I never thought possible for me. I think that is the beauty of good method. A good method is also flexible and accomodating to all interpretative requirements. A great actor is not bound by their method, but supported by it. The ones who are “method” actors are limited in their scope and choice of roles. These forums have helped me to pinpoint my thoughts, so I appreciate the discussions, even if they have been at times unnecessarily contentious. It has certainly been educational. Thank you all.
