1.係Brahms唔係Brahm
2.弄傷手指的是Schumann,唔係Brahms
3.我冇話從技術這道門,就能夠進入那無限崇高的殿堂
我只知道技術不可或缺,
4.vladimir horowitz 20歲之前都係日練夜練,
但佢仍彈到有生命力的音樂:上youtube聽下佢ge mozart sonata ..etc
(當然,除左練琴,佢都有睇經典,研究美術等)
5.我唔知你所謂的'靈性修為' ,
作為你多年的讀者,我只有勸你寫野'實際'一點;
近日發現了一本書:黑白溢彩-荷洛維茲的藝術
這作者的風格'實際'得多,望你學習
6.我開初的動機是批評你對liszt的看法,由始至終我都冇問題
所以你不應該以'你的問題，其實是十分典型'作開頭.
2 comments:
I am not sure sir you understand my intent so I will say it right here: I am speaking on behalf of myself, and meanwhile not commenting on specifically your case (on issues of artistic excellence and assessing various orders of value by it) I am nonetheless thoroughly intrigue by your rather rash response towards Leechard's post.
Think back awhile ago wishing I could respond to you personally earlier, I can only regret if I could type my opinion here instead:
If you have suggested Alkan to us readers, perhaps you have heard of Sorabji. Meanwhile they all are masters, it is rather unfortunate that very few have heard of them nowadays.
They are similar to Liszt in his age, serious musicians with a progressive (or so they have convicted themselves) outlook to artistic expression.
My point is this: meanwhile the pursuit of perfecting technique is important and moreover indivisible to the overall requirement to achievement, the understanding and epiphany towards the idea itself is equally important. (as have written in Leechard's article regarding the way to master Zhuang Zi's ideals)
Your initial comment towards Leechard that (as to the best of my understanding) anyone can achieve similar emotive (?) and sensational wisdom if they can get themselves into relationships (?), and by its experiences (hopefully not intentional) you too, can achieve that ripening of the soul.
This is precisely what Leechard has commented on: 問題是，技巧是不是真的這樣重要？而你以為「容易」的靈性修為，就真的是這樣容易？從技術這道門，
能夠進入那無限崇高的殿堂？(directly quoted from his article)
Now as far as I can see, I can only sense Leechard's question more like an advise, a suggestion: however your response are much more argumentative:
5.我唔知你所謂的'靈性修為' ,
作為你多年的讀者,我只有勸你寫野'實際'一點;
近日發現了一本書:黑白溢彩-荷洛維茲的藝術
這作者的風格'實際'得多,望你學習
Now I happen to read the book too (happened to picked it up at Toronto where the author resided), and thoroughly enjoyed its contents. My question however is this, let us suppose you have the time (and paid the respective effort, let us assume) of Horowitz himself: does that have anything to do with YOUR personal achievement?
My next question is this: suppose you have achieved the same technical and artistic mastery of Horowitz: Which way is more preferable, Alkan, or Sobraji? I would assume you would know plenty of other musicians whom by the flow of time faded into obscurity. Just wondering about your thoughts, that's all.
Hopefully I can hear from you, but I suppose This is not exactly the place to discuss matters like these, especially hijacked from Leechard's space. My apologies.
Richard Si
Pun's feedback
1.聽過Sorabji,冇咩感覺.
2.有才而不聞達者多的是,也沒有什麼不幸.
3.the pursuit of perfecting technique is important and moreover indivisible to the overall requirement to achievement, the understanding and epiphany towards the idea itself is equally important. 我同意
4, 靈性修為 究竟係咩,我好想leechard 解釋一下
5.我一直都唔係話有技巧就大哂,我只覺得leechard 好似 輕視左練技巧過程的艱苦
' 靈性修為' 當然都好難,你想想 剩係'經歷親人離逝的傷痛' 而唔去自殺都已經唔容易.
6.我回應rash,係因為我覺得佢曲解左我的意思.
eg,(從技術這道門，能夠進入那無限崇高的殿堂？)我從來冇這個意思
7.佢寫野唔夠實際,有其他讀者都講過,佢仲話人地一針見血 .
8.about technical and artistic mastery of Horowitz,佢唔一定彈得好alkan
9,plenty of musicians whom by the flow of time faded into obscurity係因為佢地唔夠好,唔識也罷.
Post a Comment