The Pedagogy of Liszt- Lecture

7/25/2019 The Pedagogy of Liszt- Lecture

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-pedagogy-of-liszt-lecture 1/16

Temple University

Music 445

Joao Paulo Casarotti

Nov. 28, 2006

Franz Liszt: A Legacy of Teaching



I. Liszt and the “Romantic” School of Interpretation

Many of the sources whose primary topic is Liszt as a teacher are devoted to advice about

specific passages or techniques even though most of them insist that Liszt was not interested in any

sort of unified technique. Some of the studies on this subject offer a detailed catalogue of what Liszt

said in regard to individual pieces. I will demonstrate how Liszt was more interested in people than

in pieces. He was also interested in how his ideas would influence the new ideology of

interpretation.

José Bowen’s article “Liszt the teacher,” primarily approaches “how Liszt’s pedagogy fits in

the history of interpretation and performance.” He bases much of his writing on reports from Liszt’s

students and a rich bibliography of researchers, who previously wrote about this subject. Bowen

points out that “the idea of musical interpretation as a separate art emerged from the eighteenth and

nineteenth century.” Prior to that period, musicians were considered professionals for composing

and performing music. The transformation of social, economical, and political life in Europe brought

many changes to the arts. In regard to music, more specifically music performance, new

technologies for printing music, the development of music notation and patronage, and “the rise of a

musical canon had an equally profound effect.” In addition to all of these changes, during the

middle of nineteenth century, the criticism in music turned its focus from composition to

performance.

Bowen suggests that Liszt played a vital role during this period, because he was “partly

responsible for transforming the touring pianist from a mechanical virtuoso into an interpreter of

musical works” (example Beethoven Sonatas). Bowen points out that during this period, the piano

methods were all restricted to “mechanics of finger position.” According to him, Georg Wilhelm



Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) was the first to “recognize the philosophical problem [of interpretation]

and categorize the different types of performance.” Bowen also points out that Mendelssohn and

the Leipzig Conservatory reflected the first category of interpretation, a “transparent” performance

or “objective school of interpretation” focusing on composition. It “offered as little individuality as

possible.” On the other hand, Liszt was responsible to the “romantic or subjective school of

interpretation… [for prioritizing] expression, taste, a divine energy and for bringing out the music

in a new way: Liszt does not just play the piano; he tells at the piano.”

II. Teaching Periods and their Characteristics

1) Paris (1827-1832)

Liszt started teaching piano at the age of sixteen, when his father died, to fulfill the

responsibility of supporting himself and his mother in Paris. From 1827 until 1832, he taught the

young daughters of the aristocracy. He gave lessons in his students homes and also was appointed

music teacher to a private school for young ladies of Madame Alix. During this period he had a

irregular life style leaving his apartment in the morning and not returning until late in the night. By

the end of 1929 he stated that he taught “ each day from 8:30 in the morning till 10:00 at night…

scarcely hav[ing] time to breathe.” 1 It was during this time that Liszt began smoking and drinking

and became increasingly dependent on both substances throughout the rest of his life. He reportedly

came home late in the evening to find his mother sleeping and his evening meal on the table. He

often slept on the stairs so as not to dirsturb his mother. It is important to mention that during this

period he neglected his piano practice and refused to compose (1827-1829). Another important

aspect of his life during this time was the experience of his first love affair with one of his aristocrat

1 Walker, Franz Liszt: The Virtuoso Years, 131.



students, Caroline de Saint- Cricq, a beautiful 17 year old daughter of Count pierrede Saint Cricq,

minister of commerce in the government of Charles X.

Some of the characteristics of his teaching during this period according to Madame Boissier

were listed in her diary:

• His lessons usually lasted 2 hours and followed the common practice.

• to ilustrate his explanation more clearly he read some passage from a favorite author

pointing out the conection between music and literature.

Method of practicing a new piece

Liszt recommended that his students read through a new piece of music slowly about five

times: the first and second times for accuracy on notes and rhythm values. The third time paying

attention to dynamics indicated or implied as well as to details regarding articulation and accents. He

reccommended the bass and treble be studied separatedly, seeking nuance for each. “The fouth time

looking for points of imitations and hidden themes in the inner parts. The fifth time deciding on

speed and planning on accelerando and ritardando where suitable. He did not require every piece to

be finished to perfectionas long as the mood was understood, and he encoraged his students to read a

lot of music and broaden their experience.”2

Tecqhnique

Liszt recommended exercises for the development of strength and independence of the

fingers, flexibility of the wrist, facility and evenness of the touch and so forth. Although Liszt had

gone through every imaginable book of studies by Clementi, Czerny, Kessler, Herz, Moscheles,

among others; he was of the opinion that studies were unnecessary, provided the exercises were

performed conscientiously for at least two hours daily in all keys ( see example 1)

2 Gervers, from Boissier, 385.



Example 1

Scales

Liszt was against giving a student scale work before he had gained a good deal of physical

strength in his fingers, as he might acquire bad habits. In order to achieve speed, scales were to be

played slowly at first, striking each note with the help of the wrist, the hand extended rather than

rounded, gliding the thumb under and holding the hands tilted inwards. Each sound was to be loud,

full, and weighty.

Octaves

Liszt recommended that octaves be repeated twenty to forty times on the same note, traversing

the scale, graded from pianissimo to fortissimo. These were to be practiced entirely from the wrist,

never stiffening nor forcing with the arms. Octaves in chromatic and diatonic scales were also to be

played from the bottom to the top of the piano, five to eight times in succession, in all the keys and

with varying dynamics, every morning. This was to be done in arpeggios, both plain and broken, on

common chords, and seventh chords. Staccato octaves were to be attacked with energy, lifting the

hand well on each, in order to acquire a free and supple strength and finally great speed and

fortissimo tone.



Repeated Chords

To succeed with repeated chords the student was told to begin very slowly to avoid stiffness,

working always from the wrist with all possible force, and increasing speed as skill and agility

improved. Liszt urged the wisdom of making haste slowly.

Nuances

While working on the previously mentioned exercises students paid close attention to every kind

of nuance. Liszt did not encourage mechanical study but he wanted the expression of nuances to

become a habit, and suggested a plan for practicing this (see Example 2).

Example 2

Liszt’s Posture at the Piano

Liszt position on the piano was very erect, with head thrown slightly back. His hand position was

neither rounded nor flat, but altered flexibly according to need; his hand not “quite” but free. He

believed that a too-rounded fingering produced a dry tone and that flatter fingerings would provide

more facility. He advocated a relaxed hand positioning, allowing the hands to fall flexibly from the

wrist on to each note.



Analyzing a Piece

Liszt required his students to have a great deal of patience with analyzing a piece. He demanded

fine degrees of shading and exactness of expression. He would sometimes make his pupil begin the

same fragment again ten times until it approached his conception of it more nearly. His interpretation

did not depend entirely on the inspiration of the moment; he worked them out searching in advance.

He believed in marking everything on the score so as to be ready for all possible nuances. He taught

that measure is to music what rhythm is to verse, and that the beat should not be overemphasized.

Romantic music should be animated or held back according to the mood, but the classics should be

performed in a more restrained manner, with more regularity of tempo. His students were

encouraged to look beyond the bar line, and to consider a musical phrase as similar to a spoken one.

It is important to point out that Liszt chose the career of a teacher instead of performer, due to the

emotional problems he endured as a result of the loss of his father and the loss of his first love. He

rarely performed or composed during those years (1827-1832). An interesting fact remains that a

newspaper advertised the young Liszt was dead due to his absence from the public. He interrupted

his teacher career abruptly after recovering from his emotionally obscure period and returned to

practicing in 1832, which led to a fuller concert schedule in 1833.

In 1835 Liszt taught for few months at the newly founded Geneva Conservatoire of Music and

considered writing a piano method, but he soon found himself in Paris competing with pianist

Sigismund Thalberg, who arrived in Paris in the autumn of 1835.



2) Altenburg (1848-1861)

In 1848 Liszt settled in Weimar under the patronage of the Grand Duke, Carl Alexandre in a

large house on the outskirts of the city, called the ‘Altenburg.’ There Liszt began seriously collecting

pupils and disciples at a rapid pace. Han von Bülow, Carl Tausig, Joseph Joachim Raff, Peter

Cornelius, Karl Klindworth, Alexander Ritter, Hans von Schellendorf Bronsart, William Mason, and

many others.

During Altenburg period, Liszt worked with small and selected numbers of students in his home

and never charged money for a lesson. These lessons were taught in an informal enviroment, for an

irregular period of time and it seemed as though his students became part of his family (Example

citation- page 9, 10). His students had free access to his home and were always present in Liszt’s

social and cultural life. Liszt’s philosophy stated that “the education of an artist was an integrated

whole.”3 Liszt “wanted to bring out what was unique in each piece and in each student”

4 and he did

not apply a single technical method, his attention was exclusive to each student. Bowen mentions

that “the legacy from these years was hardly a piano school, but a movement devoted to new music

and new ideas. Technique was hardly a concern to these musical professionals.’’5 Interpretation was

associated with the “fraternity of artists, the relationship of music to society and the role of artist in

both.” Liszt wanted “more than simply teaching new generations to play the piano in a new way, he

wanted to change the way music was written, performed and consumed.”6

The fact that Liszt did not charge for lessons and had an informal teaching enviroment (mostly

during his first period in Weimar) demonstrates that Liszt taught for pleasure. He did not have a

serious responsibility and financial dependency upon his teaching. On the other hand, during his first

3 Bowen, 9.

4 Ibid, 9.

5 Ibid, 10.6 Ibid, 11.



years of teaching in Paris, Liszt taught by necessity and used the “common practice” or, in other

words, a method. In my opinion, this fact can be explained, not only by the fact that he was still

immature (16 years old) and did not have much experience teaching, but also primarily for the

responsibility of supporting himself and his mother in Paris. In fact, teaching in the common practice

garanteeded a large amount of students for the young professor and gave him his first experience

teaching. In summary, during the Weimar period, the fact that Liszt was then a consegrated, and

experienced performer, and composer allowed him the opportunity to develop his own style of

teaching and his school of interpretation.

Sumarry of Characteristics of the Altenburg period:

• Small number of students (group of 5 or 6 students)

• Informal enviroment

• Participation in Weimar artistic life.

3) Hofgärtnerei (1869-1886)

Liszt left Weimar in 1861, but in 1869 he was contracted again in the court gardener’s house, the

Hofgärtnerei of Weimar, where he stayed until 1886. During this period he also worked in Rome

and in the Royal Academy of Music in Pest. This final period provides even better documentation

for his students.

Liszt’s lessons during the last part of his life formed more of a routine (4 pm until 6 pm) during

three days a week. These lessons“became more formal and standardized in format and became



performances in their own way.”7 Liszt worked with classes between ten and twenty five students

(although in the summer Siloti mentioned that they reached thirty to fourty students) from all “ranks

of society,” where visitors were welcome. All of his lessons were free for admission and had a

“liberal admission policy” as well as a“lack of method.” As Bowen notes for Liszt, “art was never

separate from society… and he set up his masterclasses thinking first about the people and only then

about the art.”8 Another important aspect of Liszt’s lack of method was relayed by Silotti, one of his

former students. Silotti suggests that Liszt never indicated to his students the repertoire that he would

like them to work on. In fact “Liszt’s teaching was not on a particular repertoire or technique, but

rather a way of understanding music,”

9

a method of interpretation.

Bowen points out that Liszt did not give much attention, in his lessons, to technique itself. Liszt

did not accept “students that did not have sufficient technical skills,” he expected a “very fine

technique” and recommend students with insufficient technique skills to study at the

conservatoires(Example- citations-page 20 ). In fact, Liszt had an “unique technique” for his time

and, of course, this developed beside his uncommon talent and the auxiliary practice of Carl Czerny,

who “ made Liszt drop his entire repertoire and play nothing than mechanical exercises and scales

(example- citation – page 21).”10

This preference of working with students who were technically

secure, demonstrated that Liszt was just interested in working and developing the art of

interpretation.

7 Bowne, 11.

8 Ibid, 16.

9 Bowne, 17.10 Ibid, 22



Sumary of charachteristics of Hofgärtnerei period:

•

During this period he divided his time among Weimar, Rome and in the Royal Academy

of Music in Pest.

• Lessons formed more a routine schedule (4 pm until 6 pm) three days a week. They also

became more formal and standarlized in format and became performances in their own

way.

• For the lessons in Weimar, Liszt had two pianos in his room, a grand piano Bechstein

“Model D” and an upright piano from a local Weimar maker, G. Hohle.

• Liszt worked with classes between ten and twenty five students from all ranks of society,

where visitors were welcome. All of his lessons were free for admission and had a liberal

admission policy and lacked methodology.

• Liszt’s teaching was not for a particular repertoire or technique, but rather a way of

understanding music, a method of interpretation.

• Examples- citations page 13, 14, 16, 25

• Selection of Performer (Examples- citations page 17, 18)



• Liszt did not give much attention, in his lessons, to the technique itself. Liszt did not

accept students that did not have sufficient technical skills, he expected a very fine

technique and recommend students with insufficient technique skills to study at the

conservatoires. He believed that technique was an individual matter; hands come in

different shapes and fingerings or techniques. He was to state that regarding a technique

one must work for oneself.

• (Examples- citations 20, 21)

• Liszt did not aprove of unnecessary body movement (Examples- citations page 23, 27)

•

Liszt was an early practitioner of the modern idea of “learning” over “teaching”.

• His greatest “triumphs were characterized not by praise of his technique, but his ability to

guide listeners to an understanding of the music. His teaching method was an attempt to

conect students with the inner life of music”11

11 Bowne, 30.



III. Liszt Students







IV. Reference

Bowen, José Antonio. “Liszt the Teacher.” JALS: The Journal of the American Liszt Society

52/53 (Fall 2002/ Spring 2003): 1-43.

Fay, Amy. Music Study in Germany. New York: Macmillan, 1896.

Grindea, Carola. “Liszt’s Legacy (as Teacher).” Piano 10(March/April 2002): 11-16.

Göllerich, August. The Piano Master Classes of Franz Liszt 1884-1886: Diary Notes of AugustGöllerich. trans., ed., and enlarge. Richard Louis Zimdars. Bloomington: Indiana University

Press, 1996.

Roberts, Stefan. Chopin and Liszt: A Comparison of their Teaching and Influence on Piano Playing. http://www.musicteachermag.com/chopinliszt.htm (accessed April 5, 2006).

Ullyot, Marianne. “Chopin and Liszt Teaching.” JALS: The Journal of the American Liszt

Society (1981): 39-42.

Walker, Alan. Franz Liszt: The Virtuoso Years 1811-1847. Ithaca: Cornell University Press,1987.

________. Franz Liszt: The Final Years 1861-1886. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997.

________. Reflections on Liszt. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005.

Documents

The Pedagogy of Liszt- Lecture