Jan Ladislav Dussek
Making the case for a neglected master pianist
Richard Egarr 11:16am GMT 7th January 2013
Richard Egarr is an associate artist of the Scottish Chamber Orchestra and will perform Dussek’s Piano Concerto in G minor, Op 49 with the ensemble on January 17-19, 2013. Here he makes his case for the much-neglected composer:
2012 saw the 200th anniversary of the death of the great pianist-composer Jan Ladislav Dussek (1760-1812). During this year I can guarantee that he was wholly neglected by every major pianist on the planet, except by perhaps a few specialists with an interest in early piano. To my mind this is an utter crime. It is also hugely indicative of the present state of the mainstream piano world and its attitudes toward the performance and promotion of repertoire, both on the concert platform and in conservatories. Surely it must be healthy to seek out and promote artists gutsy enough to play new and excellent unknown repertoire which can illuminate and excite audiences, rather than churning out the same programmes of grindingly familiar pot-boilers played by the latest cloned mega-virtuosi.
I have been a fan of Dussek's music for years, and have done my bit to put him out there. I made two CDs of his complete output for harp and piano (using my 1804 John Broadwood piano), and have insisted that all my students (of both modern and period piano) explore his music. The reasons are simple. He is a composer of the first order. His music is highly skilful, both compositionally and technically, and is incredibly advanced in its musical language. Born only four years after Mozart, his style is highly 'romantic' (for the want of a better word). The harmonic language and keyboard style (particularly in the works from 1790 onward) prefigure those of both Chopin and Schumann - indeed Chopin gave his students Dussek's sonatas and concertos to learn. Its emotional language is highly charged, and his scores are jam-packed with performance indications, demanding a high degree of flexibility and openness of expression.
Dussek is responsible for many hugely important developments in both piano playing and piano construction. As I have indicated, technically and musically his piano music pushes the boundaries of style and technique. He worked closely with John Broadwood to develop and expand the massively important English concert piano in the 1790s. He met everyone of importance and (mostly) managed to insinuate himself into their close company. He was absolutely recognised as the leading player-composer of his generation. He is even responsible for the introduction of pianists sitting in profile to an audience - not (as you would perhaps think) for acoustical reasons, but because his own profile (in his early years) was considered so beautiful that his public demanded such a presentation. His hedonism led to gout and obesity in later life, but it is this delight in over-indulgence which is so delicious in his musical personality.
I totally recommend, urge and beg pianists to explore his solo sonatas, concertos and copious amounts of chamber music. His 30 or so solo sonatas demand just as much recognition as those of Mozart and Beethoven, and in fact represent much more the kind of music that was contemporary and cutting-edge. In my experience, his music has as great a public appeal now as it did in Dussek's time.
I am embarking on a project to perform and record the solo works, and hopefully also the chamber music and concerti. This is music worth getting to know and indulging in. As a final thought, I leave you with this - if you delight in Nigella Lawson, you will love Dussek.
Comments
Absolutely Eliza!
I do not delight in Nigella Lawson but do like what I've heard of Dussek's music and this morning went rumaging through a box of old open reel tapes to listen again to the first JL Dussek I ever heard, on the Third Programme (as it then was); a cheery piano duo played by the excellent Malcolm Binns with Alastair Graham. I thought it very much a precursor of Dvorak's Slavonic Dances or Brahms's Hungarian dances. There's also a recording of a two piano concerto on the tape from a broadcast of what (from the names of the performers) was presumably a Supraphon record.
Unfortunately I cannot abide fortepianos and did get a Dussek recording by Staier some years ago to try and hear more of his music but the sound of his instrument has always defeated me & I've never got to the end of the disc. Sadly therefore I shall not be looking out for Mr Egarr's recordings unless on a modern instrument.
So, still you cannot get it. Let it sound as we like it not as it is. So, we know better than the performer, anyway. (I really liked this "nice modern" Steinway, which, of course, is potentially "nice" only in the hands of a Master and it can be as old as one century ago).
Gongratulations, Mr. Egarr on your excellent project, materialised under your expertise and full dedication on the matter.
Parla
Well I expected that Parla, but as recording was not around in Dussek's time we don't actually know how he played or how his instrument sounded. We do however know from recordings of pianists born in the 19th century, including pupils of Clara Schumann and Liszt and the one or two born in Chopin's lifetime who have made recordings, that they would separate hands and roll chords in music of that period and even alter the text when it suited them. No one does it or would dare do it today: do you advocate we should return to it today because it's authentic? If not, why not? Should modern performances of late 19th & early 20th century orchestral music be played with swooping portamento as Elgar, amongst others demonstrate on their recordings; why not? Do you dismiss this authenticity we can hear with our own ears because, I seem to recall you saying previously that because you consider yourself an audiophile you cannot listen to historic recordings.
You cannot get it that the likes of Eliza & myself cannot listen to the sound of a fortepiano and I cannot abide period instrument performances beyond the baroque. If that's how you and Mr Egarr like it fine, but it doesn't mean it's necessarily correct or that I have to like it. Sir Georg Solti was a pianist and was taken on by Decca as such. He writes in his autobiography that he cannot see the point of playing the Hammerklavier for example on an old instrument: is he and every other pianist who have played and/or recorded a Beethoven cycle on a Steinway, Bechstein or Bosendorfer wrong? Do you refuse to listen to it because it is not "authentic"?
33lp, you are quite right, but wasting your time: you are debating with a mad man. He will never, ever concede the validity of your reasoning. When he likes something, he's right and everyone else is wrong.
I think, Madame Jane, this time, you went a bit too far. By calling me a "mad man", you insult -directly or indirectly- Mr. Eggar first, because I merely supported his project and his dedication to the music of Dusek. If he is so polite not to reply, I feel compelled to ask you as kindly as it can be, to avoid a language that is not necessary and, in any case, far from any reality (as you don't know me, it is a bit "premature", to put it as nicely as possible, to call names to...shadows. You may be surprised, if you ever find out who and what I am, but, in any case, this is not the point here).
By the way, by supporting the project and the period instruments, including the Fortepianos, it does not mean at all that I dismiss the parallel interpretation to modern instruments as well, as an alternative or additional way of performing these works. However, I cannot see why people who dedicate all their lives, expertise, skills, interest etc. in discovering the works, how they were performed and many more details, are not allowed to perform them in their original form. I have quite a few recordings of Dussek in "modern" pianos and they sound as "safe bets". But, if you wish a smooth listening of some of the most daring music (in terms of how the composer dealt with the instruments in hand), go for it. However, you may notice that very few pianists wish to perform music of this period in modern instruments, because they know they intervene in the process of reviving this music.
Finally, 33lp, by performing these works by Dussek on Fortepianos, it does not mean we go back to the past; it means that, by restoring (e.g. reproducing) a Broadwood of 1804, we have the best contemporary, perfect sound of an instrument of the period of the specific maker of Fortepianos. Nobody plays in old, faulty, decadent instruments that cannot function. Therefore, a restored Broadwood can sound as safe, smooth and beautiful as it can gets, but different than a modern Steinway. Is that difficult to comprehend that there is nothing wrong with that, even if you'll never be interested. (I guess that someone has to start performing medieval or Renaissance music with "nice and modern" instruments rather than these awful fiddles, cornets, etc.)
Parla