Chapter 14

In general, I disagree with placing as high importance on technical studies as the Russian conservatories did. The example that during their exams, students would not be permitted to play their repertoire piece if they failed the preceding technical portion is horrible. Lhevinne’s analogy of speaking simple phrases before acting is not entirely applicable to technical proficiency before repertoire. It might be impossible to act without being able to speak simple phrases; yet, the inability to play scales or arpeggios does not have to preclude performing difficult pieces. There are infinite ways to practice scales and arpeggios. If, for example, someone cannot play a G# minor scale in double sixths in contrary motion and inversions at a fast tempo, it does not mean that they will not be able to play a difficult composition well. Yes, scales and arpeggios are important, but they are not important enough to constitute the “backbone of daily work” for the first five years of study, as they were in leading Russian conservatories. A better backbone would be Bach…………………

I think it is sad that when a student asked for advice on fingering Rubinstein would not help (p. 295). If he wanted the student to think for himself, he could at least guide him or give some ideas/options for the student to work out on his own. Fingerings must take into account the type of sound desired - which may require more or less finger or arm involvement - as well as facilitating musical phrasing, such as which notes should be accented. "Easy" fingerings are not necessary good fingerings. I was really surprised that such a respected pianist would not help a student with such an important element of playing.

Rubinstein’s manager wrote, “The moment he arrived in his hotel room, Rubinstein would begin to practice. He never slighted a single audience, no matter how small, by neglect or carelessness. He studied and worked, studied and worked continuously. How his constitution stood the immense strain is remarkable. Yet there was never a complaint. His was the most lovable disposition imaginable.” (p.291) This description explains why there are so few truly remarkable pianists: not many are willing to work and study continuously; and of those who do, even fewer love their work as much as he did.