HURRAH! A tiny anniversary of project "My Villa-Lobos Journey". We shall not linger upon the fact, that the celebratory 10th week of active blogging began with two days of lying on the couch with a nasty stomach fly..
This week it's all about study no 3. I have played it on earlier occasions, so the 2 days of no practise were more or less cancelled out by my forehand knowledge. This is the first of the studies, where I lean more on the 1928 manuscript, than on the 1953 edition. Quite simply, the reprise of the musical material becomes more interesting and serves as more of a comment or reflection upon the opening statement, when fewer bars are repeated. I have tried to imagine how the difference came about; Villa-lobos sitting across from his publishing agent, going over the material. The publisher looks at study no. 3, and sends a kind (and economically aware) thought to his typesetter. He then suggests, that the study might not suffer terribly from a simple da capo marking, rather then having to typeset more or less the whole thing twice, just to be able to show the changing of select repeats. Could it be, that the study would still stand quite strong, even with this slight reduction in complexity of form, and in working hours for the typesetter. In my mind, Villa-lobos pulses heavily on his cigar a few times, before accepting the change...
Once again, I have stumbled upon an internet ressource, that has enlightened me on the relation between the 1928 manuscript and the 1953 publication, as well as on other manuscript sources and the contents of these. It is an article by Stanley Yates, from the days when the debate on different versions of the studies burned the hottest in 1997. http://www.stanleyyates.com/articles/hvl/hvl.html. Worth a read I believe.
Yates also writes about the fingerings of Villa-Lobos, of which there are many more in the 1928 manuscript, than in the published version, and i would like to give a few remarks of my own on the subject. His fingerings can give an interesting insight into how the man himself payed the guitar, and what musical elements he gave higher priority. This in turn gives an insight into which elements he himself found to be the most important ones. Personally, however, I find, that fingering is a very personal thing, reflecting the strenghts, and attempting to disguise the shortcomings of the individual. What is an obsiously brilliant fingering to one guitarist may be utterly impossible to another, and each must find for himself, that solution which enables him to best realise the score. This is why, I would be cautious to blindly adopt the fingerings of any composer, even one as obviously capable on the guitar as Villa-Lobos. For instance, there is much to suggest, thathis fourth finger was, in comparison to mine, superhumanly strong. i couldn't possibly hope to realise his fingerings in a manner that would be worth listening to. I might benefit from practising then at home, alone. But I would not wish for anyone else to overhear it. Furthermore, I find, that what makes it continually interesting, to hear new interpretations of old warhorses is the fact, that the prformer dives into the piece, and drawa out that which fascinates him. The good performer researches various sources and knows the versions and people that came before him, but ultimately, he must portray the music from where he stands.
And now for the video. Although I modified fingerings to spare my quite human fourth finger of public humiliation, it still felt like quite the fourth finger marathon to record...
Etude no 2 from Thomas Lyng Poulsen on Vimeo.
Direct link to video
Ingen kommentarer:
Send en kommentar