Rostropovich on love and music education

When Mstislav Rostropovich was already an accomplished cellist at age 19, mstislavrostropovichhe began teaching at the Moscow Conservatory:

“But it was also obvious to me that the most important priority was to educate my pupils to love music. And parents should aim to stimulate in their children a love for music and not a love for exercises. Sergey Sergeyevich Prokofiev always said that he was eternally grateful to his mother because she didn’t force him to practice the piano, but, being a good pianist herself, she played marvelous music for him, and a lot of Chopin in particular. As a small boy, he composed his opera The Giant out of love towards music, and not as a revulsion to forced practice and study.”[1]

What is true for music education is true for all education.

Source:
Elizabeth Wilson, Rostropovich, The Musical Life of the Great Cellist, Teacher, and Legend (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 2008), p. 57.

Related:
How great artists became great (Beethoven and Michelangelo).
More on how great artists become great (Liszt).
Yet more on how great artists become great: Rodin.
Objectivism and Montessori education.

2 thoughts on “Rostropovich on love and music education”

  1. An odd connection I know, but I despise the expected recitation of the pledge of allegiance by American school children. It strikes me as so foreign to the spirit of the founding fathers. Reducing their incredible achievement to mindless rote recital is to invite a backlash. It may be relevant to note that it was cooked up by Francis Bellamy, a socialist.

  2. “Music” is rarely defined, being a commonplace in our lives, from awful pop, Musak, country, blues…until we reach “music” per se, “classical music.” That is, serious music composed by geniuses. “Music” is like food, much of it to taste, but always with a nutritional core : order, rhythm, melody and counterpoint. As Mendelssohn remarked, “Music can speak without words and communicate things words cannot,” hence, his LIEDER OHNE WORTE, “Songs without words”, piano pieces. If “music” is the gift of God, then real “music” is what He listens to. Very few composers, it must be assumed, reach that level. But Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Wagner, Schubert and Haydn I think He attends. Let’s not forget Bach, possibly the greatest composer in the Western tradition. Tschaikovski is a personal favorite. And Debussy.

    “Music” in my view must inspire “love.” One must also love music to “understand” it. One must be “musical,” which does not mean non-tone-deaf nor blessed with a boogie-woogie sense of rhythm. African chants, rap music, bee-bop-a-lu-lah barf, and quavering Indonesian cymbals are NOT music, though one might choose to listen to them. One must appreciate that “music” can be classified as dance music, songs, and orchestral music. Also, there is music written for drama, dance, and sheer entertainment. Many of these categories overlap. So the argument of a crackhead that rock ‘n’ roll is music because “you can dance to it” doesn’t hold. Which is not to say that there ain’t no good rock ‘n’ roll, but, who’s to say what “rock ‘n’ roll” is? (The term is ghettoese for fornication) The listener must be able to distinguish the rhythm, the tune, and the harmony of a piece. Counterpoint is a form of harmony. Some cultures are not predominantly music, like the English, who think they are. Most “music” comes from the Continent, mainly from German speaking countries. We also have the French-Italian wing [from the lyre?] and Grieg from the North. Russia is European but singular. I count Dvorak as “German”. The ancient Greeks were preeminently musical, more than their modern counterparts. America is a potpourri. It is as likely to be Protestant-hymnal, Afro-American (including Negro spirituals) and/or Jewish [“Porgy and Bess”]. I think Americans are more likely to compose songs. Canadians also (Gordon Lightfoot fan here). Most Latin American music is dance music, deservedly. Nothing wrong with a tango!

    The earmark of a non-musical person these days, in my view, is someone who “loves the Beatles.” This group was neither rock ‘n’ roll, black or white, English or Scottish, and bogusly original — Lennon’s lyrics are nonsense designed to push dope. The Beatles were the first group to promote peace (through drugs), love (through drugs) and music (through drugs). It is alleged that major drug money promoted them, particularly at concerts. Their music was the precursor of music sold through record albums jackets, artwork spurring sales rather than “Have you heard that new song by…?” Elvis, Buddy Holly, Fats Domino, Bill Haley, Little Anthony, the Platters &c made their way through being heard, THEN being famous.

    QED

    Those who disagree will be thrown into a eternal hell of drummers all playing the same inane tune on snare, kettle, and cymbals!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *