The music critic Henry Finck
(1854-1926) once wrote that �if all piano music in the world were to be
destroyed, excepting one collection, my vote should be cast for Chopin's
Preludes�. This short statement succinctly captures the genius in these
twenty-four gems, and anyone who is familiar with the preludes is left
to wonder why they are not heard more often in concert halls. A similar
mindset is shared by a Chopin scholar, Jeremy Nicholas, when he writes
that �Even on their own, the 24 Preludes would have ensured Chopin�s
claim to immortality�. In spite of their brevity � and, sometimes,
technical ease � they are by no means simple pieces. From the
sight-readable to the transcendental, all impart a significant musical
idea and take a true virtuoso to render well.
Perhaps, however, the best
single word to describe Chopin�s preludes is �enigmatic�. They have
earned mixed reception from Chopin�s contemporaries and most ardent
followers. Robert Schumann, who uttered the now-famous �Hats off,
gentlemen � a genius!� gave the following criticism on the preludes: �I
would term the preludes strange. They are sketches, beginnings of
etudes, or, so to speak, ruins � individual eagle wings of all disorder
and wild confusions.� As for more positive criticism, Liszt said that
these same pieces �are compositions of an order entirely apart... they
are poetic preludes, analogous to those of a great contemporary poet,
who cradles the soul in golden dreams and elevates it to the regions of
the ideal.� And like the poems of a �great contemporary poet�, the
preludes engage the listener wholly in not a picture or a mental image,
but a complete experience; each presents a distinct, discrete musical
idea. It is truly a measure of Chopin�s genius that this can be
accomplished.
Certainly, one must admit
without any reservations that the preludes are strange pieces. Nowhere
else can one find such a diverse collection of music so strange and yet
so at once entrancing.
As such, they are also
wonderfully fascinating and exceptionally hard to master. They are a set
of extremely diverse pieces which, taken as a whole, encompasses nearly
all of Chopin�s stylistic quirks. Thus, to play the whole set demands an
intimate familiarity with Chopin�s style. To master one is, relatively
speaking, simple. To master the entire set is to have captured the
spirit of the master�s music, and is exceedingly difficult.
The differences of the
preludes aside, many bear similarities that are too immediately apparent
to be accidental. Take, as an example, the entire Preludes No. 2, 3, and
24. Even though the musical ideas of these three pieces are completely
different, their structures are remarkably similar. Each of these three
features an incessant left hand ostinato pattern that continues
throughout the whole piece. These patterns, though intended to act as
accompaniments, also perform the not insubstantial task of underscoring
the tone of the entire piece. How do they do this? The pattern, be it
chillingly morose, lively and jaunty, or fatally impassioned (Preludes
No. 2, 3, and 24 respectively), begins several bars before the melody is
introduced. This is but one example of how the preludes are at once so
similar and strikingly different.
The claim is not
infrequently made that the preludes were inspired by those of Bach�s
Well-Tempered Clavier. There may well be some truth to this
statement. Chopin is known to have admired this masterpiece for its
perfection of form and harmony, and is rumored to have pored over it in
the months before his first prelude was composed. However, even if this
is the case, there are crucial differences present that emphasize that
Chopin was no mere derivative or acolyte of Bach. Firstly, most
importantly, the precise mathematically calculated perfection of form
and harmony in Bach�s preludes is broken here. It is instead replaced by
more Chopin-esque harmonies and an abundance of whatever it is that
makes Chopin�s music so special and timeless. Secondly, the arrangement
of the preludes is different. In the WTC, the preludes are
arranged chromatically � No. 1 is in C major, No. 2 in C minor, No. 3 in
C-sharp major, No. 4 in C-sharp minor, and so on. Chopin�s preludes are
instead arranged based on the circle of fifths � No. 1 is in C major,
No. 2 in A minor, No. 3 in G major, No. 4 in E minor, and so on.
The last major difference is
the very intent of the preludes themselves. In the Well-Tempered
Clavier, the preludes are intended as introductions to the fugues.
They are not intended to stand alone � they are nothing without the
fugues to complement them. Chopin�s intentions with his preludes, in
contrast, were vague at best. They certainly were not intended as an
introduction to anything, and are perfectly capable of existing as
twenty-four individual pieces. However, there is evidence that they
should be regarded as one collective entity instead of twenty-four
discrete ones. As examined above, there are common themes tying all the
preludes together. So perhaps it could be said that the preludes are
intended as introductions to each other? The last is a fitting
conclusion, no doubt. But one certainly cannot provide an
etched-in-stone opinion of Chopin�s intent; the interpreter must decide
what the preludes as a whole mean.
When considering these
preludes, it is of the utmost importance to note that Chopin was
strictly opposed to programmatic music. When Robert Schumann crafted
elaborate stories about each part of Chopin�s Op. 2 � a set of
variations on a passage from Mozart�s Don Giovanni � Chopin
derisively commented, �I could die laughing at this German�s
imagination.� Programmatic music was simply not part of Chopin�s musical
ideology; it had never occurred to him that music could represent
images. Such was not his intent; his music represented abstract ideas
and feelings, transcending visual, earthly images. Despite this,
however, two eminent musicians have sought to give programmatic titles
to the preludes. Hans von B�low nicknamed them in English, while Alfred
Cortot nicknamed them in French. As shall soon be seen, these two
artists sometimes differed greatly in their notions about these pieces,
and embraced completely different ideals when nicknaming the pieces. It
is worth noting that Cortot�s original nicknames are in French, and have
been translated here for English readers; as a mere student, I am afraid
that my French skills simply fall short of doing complete justice to
Cortot�s poeticism!
As a final point to note,
Chopin did not write technical difficulties for the sake of writing
technical difficulties. Unlike Liszt, who notoriously sought to make a
great portion of his compositions incredibly difficult, Chopin did not
consciously do this. If the piece is difficult, it is because it could
not possibly have been written in any other way. There was no intent to
make the piece hard just for the sake of its being hard; the mechanical
difficulties of Chopin are as much a part of the music as the musical
qualities themselves are. Chopin used only as much technical difficulty
as was needed to express his ideas, and none beyond that. This is why
his preludes vary so greatly in their technical demands (among other
things).
After reading through the
analyses (or even before), the reader is encouraged to develop his or
her own understanding of the piece and what it is supposed to convey.
This analyst holds it as self-evident and essential that an analyst be
guiding and not overly didactic. The purpose of music � especially
Chopin�s music � is to allow one to develop one�s own feelings about it,
and the analyst should not prevent this in any way. I do not seek to
interpret for the readers, but merely to offer my own opinions on the
matter so that they will be in a better position to make their own.
It is strongly recommended that one either be familiar with the preludes or
have them playing while perusing the analyses. Words alone cannot
possibly describe adequately these wonderful jewels.
Preludes
Intro | Op.28 No.1-8 |
Op.28 No.9-16 |
Op.28 No.17-24 |
Op.45 & posth