Eurhythmics Essay.pdf

Eurhythmics Essay Rodger Sessions’ book, ​The Musical Experience of Composer, Performer, Listener h ​ as some definitely interesting ideas. He has some strong ideas, and some that conflict and contradict each other. In this essay I will compare and contrast his opinion on three main topics, composer, performer, listener, to my experience as those things in general and as a eurhythmics student. I will start with composer, as he does. I have what I consider more than average (for a non composition major) experience as a composer. I remember jotting down notes on a staff I came up with when I was but a little tyke, so I guess that’s when I began being a composer. I wrote a piece for violin solo and string orchestra that my school performed in middle school. I also took composition classes at Mannes pre college. Manu assignments had specific guidelines but I think I always composed something I wanted to compose anyways. At the end of a semester faculty performed student compositions. I have experience with pieces I composed not being performed exactly as I intended, which to me is ultimately not a big deal. As a eurhythmics student, I feel that I am a composer more often than outside of the classroom. We often improvise, which is to me, on the spot composing. We also have composition projects which we have specific instructions for, but again I think I always end up saying something I want to anyways. After taking this class, I do think when I compose I am more aware of what I want every note to mean and where the music is going.

Sessions’ opinion on what a composer is, and should do, seems to me to be very narrow. He believes that everything a composer writes in their score is precisely determined to “demand” their image from the performer (Sessions, 70). He believes this to be true to the extent that if a person performs a “crescendo where a diminuendo is indicated, he is playing as surely falsely as he would should he sound #F where the composer has asked for G” (Sessions, 74). To me this is quite ridiculous. There are numerous occasions where the composer made a mistake, first of all. The composer might have misjudged the proportional sound an orchestra will have to a soloist, and the performers needed to adjust. Sessions has this idea that the composer’s work is sacred, and must be followed to a T. Also, in regards to playing a crescendo instead of a diminuendo, perhaps that is what the performer in that moment was feeling, and interpreted, does that mean they are as incorrect as if they played a wrong note? Something interesting he mentioned that I’ve noticed about myself is that when he talks about composers and musicians that “have tones moving in their head all the time” (Sessions, 53). Most of the time I do find myself thinking notes, usually random repertoire but sometimes my own creations. Now onto performer. My general experience has been ever since I was about five years old. Not until I was older did I think about things like interpretations and musical flow. It was during mid performance of a concerto during high school I decided I wanted to pursue music. Whenever someone asks me why I am studying music, my first response is usually that I find it amazing that I, and anyone, could play the same piece a

hundred times and each time it will be different in some way. To me, that is what draws me to music. There is no one right way to play a piece. As eurhythmics student, I think I have become even more aware of trying to make something of every note I play. Making sure every phrase has direction. In class we often talk about “you the performer” as Mr. Neely says. Sessions’ comments on performer are very contradictory. My overall impression of his thoughts are that he thinks the performer’s job is to firstly do justice to the text by the composer. He says that a performer should “re-create” using their “imagination” (Sessions, 74). However I find this to be contradictory to his remarks that the score markings must not be changed, and that a piece must be played in a certain way, that there is one correct way of playing and interpreting a passage (Sessions, 13, 14). How can he talk about a performing having personality and imagination when he spouts nonsense about correct and incorrect ways of interpretation. He writes: “many an otherwise excellent performance is ruined by inadequate attention to what [cadence] implies” (Sessions, 12). This is right before he says he is ‘distressed’ to hear Beethoven quartets played a certain way versus the, in his mind, correct way. I don’t understand why both cannot be valid interpretations. In eurhythmics we have discussed that as long as the performer truly feels a phrase a certain way, and conveys it well, it is a valid interpretation. I don’t know who died and made Sessions the king of correct interpretations. He comes across as very arrogant. I do think that that for most pieces of music, there are a few ways of incorrectly playing it. But to say there is only one correct way is absurd.

My general experience as a listener of music is, I think, varied. I believe I’ve listened to fair amount of genres, and subgenres. Music was always playing in my house since I can remember, whether it be classical or other. Something noteworthy that has impacted the way and accessibility to which I have listened to music, is the medium. I remember growing up with cassette tapes. Then after was the CD, and today we have digital media we carry around in our phones, not to mention things like YouTube and Spotify. Something I have always enjoyed doing is listening to multiple performances of the same piece. I always like to hear many different ways that are possible to play something. This is something that has been enhanced by eurhythmics. I believe I am much more attuned now to what both the performer and the composer are doing when I listen to music now. A lot of the things Sessions says about the listener I don’t think make sense. “Any judgement in the absence of love is sterile and therefore false” (Sessions, 96). Isn’t it possible to judge something if you don’t love it? Or even further, isn’t not loving something itself inherently a judgement? He also describes four stages of listening; hear, primary response, understanding, discrimination. I mostly agree with this outline. Something else he mentions that doesn’t sit right with me is the idea that a critic is a different level than a listener (Sessions, 97). I believe that everyone's a critic of everything.

Bibliography Sessions, Rodger. ​The Musical Experience of Composer, Performer, Listener