I have watched a few videos on YouTube featuring Robert Durso. In a few of these, he related an anecdote about problem areas on piano which really I found very insightful! I’m sure there’s lots we can take away from this so I thought it worth giving my own two cents.
For anyone not knowing the name, he is a part of the Golandsky Institute which continues the work of Dorothy Taubman. I’d just like to stress that this article is not about the Taubman Approach an I am not subscribed to the Institute.
First encounter
This anecdote comes from him recounting the first time he played for Dorothy Taubman. As part of this encounter, she asked him if, in the piece he had played, there were any passages that, despite lots of practice, didn’t feel secure. This is what really started to ring bells in my head!
How often, in fact, is it the case that there are weak spots in our pieces? I’m not necessarily even talking about ‘difficult’ bits. Some things, we just expect to be challenging. For example, if there is a big passage in double octaves, then I guess most of us would find this daunting. I believe even the amazing Martha Argerich once commented that her octaves weren’t as good as they could have been following one of her performances (and I’ll bet that nobody would have noticed)!
In a such a passage, we can sort of expect that we’re on risky territory. However, what about those things that we really can’t explain? Things that aren’t on the face of it that difficult, yet don’t feel as secure as they should. As I was letting what Dr Durso said sink in, I could think of lots of examples of this in my favourite pieces, some of which I first learned 30 years ago!
Dr Durso then went on to discuss how, in that single lesson, Dorothy Taubman was able to help him fix those things, just by doing something slightly different. Interestingly, it wasn’t about ‘rebuilding’ technique. It was more about approaching specific problems from a different angle.
Rebuilding Technique?
I’ve seen countless accounts of teachers proudly writing about how they had to ‘rebuild’ a student’s technique from scratch. However, paraphrasing what he has said in multiple interviews, the general rule he applies seems to be ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’. So, if we can play something as we want without tension, then there is little value in trying to do it differently. However, where we are struggling with something, then we should perhaps consider a different approach.
Clearly, there are some things that will just take lots of work! However, there also comes a point where no amount of work will change things. The real trick I think is knowing how to spot the former from the latter!
Fairly obvious things
I have noticed for example that if I have a passage where I keep playing a ‘wrong note’, then work alone rarely fixes it. Instead, I will likely need to do something different! This might be something as simple as alignment. Simply allowing the hand to align itself better behind the pinky might bring that digit perfectly into position. It might be consciously choosing to play a certain white key from within the black key area (which we’re generally taught to avoid). This might avoid a twist that causes issues later on. I’m sure you get the idea.
Much more subjective things
However, what about a passage where we have a limitation? I feel here there is perhaps far more crossover. Let’s go back to octaves. To some extent, there will be no miraculous technical fix. To even aspire to play octaves like Martha Argerich or Yuja Wang, then there is years of work required. I’d find it very hard to believe that either of them woke up one day and thought, oh, if I just do this, then I’ll be able to play Liszt’s Erlkönig in an effortless manner.
Indeed, Martha Argerich in an interview that I translated in this article said that she still found octaves difficult. Despite her ‘technique’, being able to play octaves as they present themselves in a given piece is still ‘difficult’. So, definitely, we’ll need more work!
However, if we aren’t using an appropriate technique, then no amount of practice will get us beyond whatever limitation we have – be it speed, stamina or tone.
Who to believe?
This is where it starts to get tricky. There are so many different views on what is ‘good technique’ – and often these are contradictory. Penelope Roskell made this comment in her book ‘The Complete Pianist’ (which I’m currently working my way through). I think one major reason for this is that one size does not fit all. Many schools of technique seem to originate from a principle that playing in a certain way works for one, therefore, it will work for everybody else.
However, I have discovered that some bits of advice are nothing short of disastrous where others are game changing. Even worse, such advice often comes from very accomplished pianists. This is why I concluded that the trick is to try things out carefully for ourselves. The more angles from which we look at a problem, the more likely we are to work out how to fix it! Luckily, there are lots of great resources available to us these days thanks to YouTube. I have my own ‘go to’ channels.
There are also great online resources, such as the Online Academy (to which I’m a subscriber).
So, wherever we do have a problem spot, let’s consciously think as to whether this needs more work (work harder) or different work (work smarter).
