I've noticed a pattern both here on v.com and elsewhere on social media -- lots of students posting about the repertoire they've done, which includes lots of stuff that's fast, and practically nothing that's slow, other than perhaps a stray Thais Meditation or one of the Beethoven Romances. That includes only learning the first movement of a concerto, or only learning the outer/fast movements of a concerto. In general, this is all teacher-assigned repertoire.
This was the way that I learned as a child, too. (I didn't even learn Thais. I only learned a Beethoven Romance because I auditioned for a youth orchestra that had a requirement for a slow work as well as a fast one. But I bypassed every slow movement of a concerto as well as pretty much every other slow work that students are likely to be taught -- no Vitali Chaconne either, say.)
I'm curious what the teachers think about this practice -- why it's done, and it's pros and cons -- and for all players, what everyone thinks about how well their sequence of repertoire has served them in the long run.
(A sideline to this is teachers who choose most repertoire specifically for competition reasons, which may mean constantly focusing on highlighting the student's strengths while incidentally improving weaknesses, rather than deliberately targeting weaknesses -- better in the long term for the student, or dangerous?)
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.
Violinist.com is made possible by...
Discover the best of Violinist.com in these collections of editor Laurie Niles' exclusive interviews.