Why did so many great pianist write method books and other published works like treaties? Was it a trend or did it have something to do with prestige and success? If they did not have a method book published did it mean that one was not a succuessful musician or teacher? Also, are all great pianist of today still publishing method books? I got started thinking about this because after reading in chapter eight about yet another method book by Turk, they all seem to be generally stating the same thing. How many concepts on hand position and bench height can there be and are they all relative? Were the ideas of fingure position, "slight movement in the hands and arms," and being relaxed while playing relitively new ideas back then as to not be ingrained in all good pianist yet? Is that why they all needed there own method on these things. I feel as if these ideas of finure position and such have been ingrained in me forever so to have many different method books on the same thing seems repetitive. Yet, maybe it is a good reminder to have it always brought up because I for one am not a master of keeping my wrists and arms still.

I don't see the usefulness of Logier's invention of the Chiroplast. I think the invention would be rather clumsly and in the end could be a handicap rather then helpful. The student would be better off I think to learn from a good teacher who is diligent in keeping them on task rather then an invention.
As for Kalkbrenner and his Hand-guide he struck me as a man who only had room in his thoughts for himself. I think he only wanted to promote his hand-guide in order to promote himself and his success. I got this impression from his conversation with Gottschalk following his debut program.