The role of perfection in classical music
Posted by: mikeeschman on 28 March 2009
When you first develop an interest in classical music, and begin the search for the music that speaks to your soul, one of the issues that is brought into stark relief is the issue of performance practice. If a performer's execution is less than perfect, but his conception of the piece is illuminating, how does that affect the value and the meaning of the work itself?
In other types of music, this issue is generally not paramount, because performers of other musics typically do not develop the range of technical mastery that is typical of classical musicians.
But it is a central issue in performances of classical music, precisely because some performers have literally achieved perfection. In achieving that perfection, have these performers diluted, distorted or otherwise damaged the musical meaning of what they play?
The first thing that occurs to me is that a player who plays perfectly has the option of playing any music they like, any way they see fit, whereas a player with technical deficiencies must craft an interpretation with his deficiencies in mind, so that his flaws inflict the least amount of damage to the message of the music. The performance habits of all musicians quickly become second nature, and stamp there character on every performance.
As a listener, i am excited to hear a flawless performance, in part because perfection is an exciting concept that is rarely encountered in human life. I am stunned and elevated to a high state of hopefulness and joy at the appearance of the pristine and flawless.
If I have a central belief that colors and guides every one of my listening sessions it is this : a good performance stands outside time and space in its own sphere of influence, and puts your being in direct spiritual contact with the composer at the moment of creation, with the performer acting as the medium that establishes and allows this communication.
Technical flaws stain that communication. If you attended a performance of Hamlet, and the actor portraying Hamlet spoke with a lisp, you might conclude that the lisp added to the power and the emotion of his performance. If you did, i would call that a wrong-headed idea. For me, clarity in speech is central to the character of Hamlet. It is important for me to hear what Hamlet says.
One of the things that happens when you hear a perfect performance is that your idea of what is possible emotionally in that piece of music is expanded. Broad, dramatic strokes that had moved may seem trite and overblown in the light of perfection. Nuance and subtlety can achieve a finer level of graduation, and stand out clear and undistorted in the perfect performance. This is simply not so otherwise.
For these reasons, the recordings that I cherish most are the perfect performances. Anytime I want to hear a flawed reading, it is available to me. I want to taste, and bask in the presence of the perfect while I can. These perfect performers have elevated their understanding and emotion to a higher plane.
It takes everything to the next level.
Long live perfection :-)
In other types of music, this issue is generally not paramount, because performers of other musics typically do not develop the range of technical mastery that is typical of classical musicians.
But it is a central issue in performances of classical music, precisely because some performers have literally achieved perfection. In achieving that perfection, have these performers diluted, distorted or otherwise damaged the musical meaning of what they play?
The first thing that occurs to me is that a player who plays perfectly has the option of playing any music they like, any way they see fit, whereas a player with technical deficiencies must craft an interpretation with his deficiencies in mind, so that his flaws inflict the least amount of damage to the message of the music. The performance habits of all musicians quickly become second nature, and stamp there character on every performance.
As a listener, i am excited to hear a flawless performance, in part because perfection is an exciting concept that is rarely encountered in human life. I am stunned and elevated to a high state of hopefulness and joy at the appearance of the pristine and flawless.
If I have a central belief that colors and guides every one of my listening sessions it is this : a good performance stands outside time and space in its own sphere of influence, and puts your being in direct spiritual contact with the composer at the moment of creation, with the performer acting as the medium that establishes and allows this communication.
Technical flaws stain that communication. If you attended a performance of Hamlet, and the actor portraying Hamlet spoke with a lisp, you might conclude that the lisp added to the power and the emotion of his performance. If you did, i would call that a wrong-headed idea. For me, clarity in speech is central to the character of Hamlet. It is important for me to hear what Hamlet says.
One of the things that happens when you hear a perfect performance is that your idea of what is possible emotionally in that piece of music is expanded. Broad, dramatic strokes that had moved may seem trite and overblown in the light of perfection. Nuance and subtlety can achieve a finer level of graduation, and stand out clear and undistorted in the perfect performance. This is simply not so otherwise.
For these reasons, the recordings that I cherish most are the perfect performances. Anytime I want to hear a flawed reading, it is available to me. I want to taste, and bask in the presence of the perfect while I can. These perfect performers have elevated their understanding and emotion to a higher plane.
It takes everything to the next level.
Long live perfection :-)