22-07-2013, 14:02
I can't really call it improvisation. A classical musician is called to be as faithful to the composer's musical message as possible. These musical works are masterpieces, as Michelangelo's David in Florence. And we can't really strike up variations which depart from what the guy (in this case the great Debussy) really felt, wanted or intended. It's like re-sculpting part of the statue. But there is much debate over the issue. It's a question of personal confrontation, also. Every composer was a product of his time, his place of origin, his aesthetical upbringing, his character and his genetic code. An interpreter is also. So that's why we're supposed to read extensively on these guy's biographies in order to get leadway on what they wanted to hear. Playing Mozart with heavy technique or banging the keyboard is out of the question. That just wasn't him, or his time at that. You can bang Beethoven though, but not always. No romaticism involved in Bach, either. And the subtleties of touch need experienced acoustic fine tuning. For example, I may suggest you listen to Debussy's Claire de Lune played by one of his greatest interpreters, the german (surprised?) Arthur Geiseking, and then listen to the same piece interpreted by another, say, Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli. Both great pianists, but the italian just doesn't get it (on Debussy). He's big on Chopin. Geiseking was a Debussian, by all means. Opera? Listen to the Nessun Dorma (Turandot, Puccini) interpreted by Placido Domingo and then by Jose' Cura'. Then tell me which one of these guys renders Cavaradossi's desperation to the utmost. Sorry for the wordy answer. But just a few words ar hardly enough.