I spend a certain amount of time on the internet like every young woman of my age and lately a good chunk of that is on r/piano. Sometimes it’s interesting and occasionally, it feeds my soul with new music. But there are recurring themes and one of those themes is the value of Ludovico Einaudi’s music.
These discussions tend to be polarising. It is clear that an element of the music world seems to despise what he does; they have the right. Taste is very subjective. You see a similar reaction to one of the key pieces from the movie Amelie as well; it’s obvious that many people look down on it. I understand that people might not like the music. I don’t like Bartok and my tolerance for Prokofiev can be a bit limited on the piano side although there is some orchestral stuff which is mindblowing.
But here’s the point: it’s one thing not to like music and quite another thing to look down on the composer. Einaudi is dismissed as too simple, too simplistic, not very sophisticated often by people who deign not to play any of his music. I tend to disagree. In one respect, Einaudi touches many, many more people playing the piano that many classical interpreters of the time.
I’ve often felt that the critic minded world of art, writing and music have missed a key factor in the objective of art, writing and music – they do not exist in a vacuum separate from an audience. I will freely admit that I can sit alone to the world at a piano and play music to my hearts content but ultimately if I want to do it professionally, I need something that a lot of people are going to buy. My audience is never going to be the critics who take a more gate keeping approach to music.
Meanwhile, we constantly bemoan how few people are interested in learning music. It’s ironic really.
Einaudi has made the piano very popular. His sheet music is selling. His concerts are selling out. His music is touching the hearts of a lot of people. If your argument against that is that his audience is unsophisticated, then I think you are somehow missing the point. Music remains popular over 100s of years because it taps into people’s hearts. For this reason I’m not sure it’s safe to say he will be completely forgotten. People’s times come and go.
I haven’t learned any of his pieces through. I’ve worked on one (Una Mattina) from time to time; it’s readable and it feels beautiful to play. I’ve heard one or two classical pianists acknowledge that their views on his music started to change when they actually started playing his music. I find that interesting. It suggests sometimes that the self styled sophisticates who look down on modern piano music that is targeted at the masses are perhaps in themselves not adequately sophisticated to understand the appeal of music that is targeted at being heard and enjoyed rather than being challenging.
One of the things I love about Tiersen’s music for the film Amelie is even today – twenty plus years after the movie came out – it is inspiring teenagers to play the piano.
I kind of think that’s more important than forcing Mikrokosmos on kids who don’t want to learn it. The objective of learning music is not to be the greatest pianist on the planet; there isn’t ever going to be one despite the regular arguments I see again on r/piano. It’s about giving people pleasure in the activity so that they do it all their life. There are health benefits to playing an instrument especially as people get older.
It’s not different to sport: disregarding the kids who are not going to win your school medals means you are failing those kids who need healthy habits for their lives.
In this context, I wonder how much more credibility Einaudi might have with the criterati if he was just less successful.