Exam progression, or gradually learning more and more challenging music for external evaluation, is deeply ingrained not only into the psyche of piano teachers, but more broadly into education as a whole. From the beginning of time, or at least since the onset of music grades, piano pedagogy in the UK and Commonwealth countries has relied heavily on examination syllabuses for a sense of structure and order. While it is clearly essential to have guidelines and posts as a means of bringing order to the vast range of repertoire, an unhealthy obsession with a system of progression can be just as undesirable as having no system whatsoever. Perhaps there is nothing more harmful for music (and indeed for many other fields of endeavour) than the ingrained belief that harder equals better. We are not moved to tears specifically because a piece has lots of challenges. In music, less is often more.
Invariably, exam systems have to present repertoire in an ascending order of difficulty. In general, key signatures appear with more accidentals as we move up the grades. The earliest tests begin with music that is spartan and bare in terms of notes. We are then taken through the ladder system of grades, with music from contrasted periods and styles set that systematically contains more and more notes as it proceeds. It's as though we are being told: ‘OK, you managed to play a piece by Beethoven with three flats and marked Moderato for your Grade 4. But now, can you survive in a piece by Mendelssohn for Grade 5 that has four flats and needs to be played even faster?’
While it is exciting to collect more and more prestigious certificates with impressively high marks, there is a danger that if we move towards Grade 8 (Parnassus) too quickly, we will stop enjoying the journey. If we do not leave enough time to cultivate comfort, ease, understanding and inspiration as we practise, then the grades risk becoming challenges with trials and tribulations. For those in a hurry, the exam ladder may sadly prove more and more painful the higher it is climbed.
Having said that, we should remember that for many young musicians the exam system is inspirational. If the tests are presented and utilised as part of the ongoing development rather than exclusively as a fixed curriculum, then they are worth their weight in gold. Experienced and talented teachers use examination boards wisely. Pupils and parents alike often take pride and feel a sense of achievement as they take their practical exams. When presented holistically, it is easy for students to grasp the concept of repertoire becoming steadily more and more challenging.
Frustrations
Dangers come when pupils and parents fixate on exams as the only means available for measuring and developing musical achievement. Clearly this is not what grade tests were designed to encourage. No board would insist that a syllabus functions as an exclusive curriculum for study. Sadly, this can be challenging to explain. Parental delusion is not so uncommon. Many find it hard to appreciate how touching the performance of an elementary piece can be. I have lost count of the number of occasions when I have witnessed disbelief, and at times anger, from parents at local music festivals when an adjudicator has picked a winner who played an easy piece beautifully over their own children who played more ‘difficult’ pieces. The fixation on level of difficulty blinds them to appreciating performances of music that may be modest in terms of technical demands, but which has been played with quality and care. Invariably, it is hard for such parents to comprehend that it is infinitely preferable for performers to play easier pieces with sensitivity and stylistic awareness than to struggle through advanced music.
Pupil peer pressure
Too many young players feel that they can only improve as pianists if they continuously practise, prepare, and perform more and more difficult music. They become distracted by the exam results and ‘level’ of other pianists of their own age. Without a steady climb through more and more challenging material, they feel the praise they crave for their own performances will not be forthcoming. Progress will not be acknowledged by society, peers, and university entrance officers. Though this makes competitive sense and also tallies with academic subjects and education generally, it is clearly grossly misguided. Music is not sport; neither is it an academic discipline. In piano performance, listeners are moved not by levels of difficulty but by beauty of sound. Communication, artistry and connection are everything. Whether or not a piece is technically demanding is ultimately of secondary importance to the nature and quality of the playing that connects (or does not connect) the performer with the listener.
The flip side
Along with the idea that players need harder and harder pieces to play, as they continue their studies, comes the equally dubious concept, still sadly evident in certain circles today, of ignoring certain areas of pianism and musicianship until a specific grade or level of attainment has been reached. Progression risks stifling growth if guidelines and difficulty levels are too rigidly adhered to, as in ‘You cannot be expected to play from memory at your age,’ ‘Don't try and use rubato in the early grades,’ or ‘Don't ornament your Bach until you are at Grade 8 or higher’. Before contemporary composers began to challenge the norm over the last few decades of educational music publications, even pedalling was often frowned upon if used by an elementary player! I have even heard teachers stress how important it is not to teach staccato in the early years, as legato has to be the important approach from the first lesson.
But surely tutorially imposed limitations are negative and restricting? Most of us would agree that it is entirely positive and exciting for fledgling players to enjoy pushing their creative potential as far as they desire. By limiting horizons with rubato, characterisation, voicing and so on, we are limiting artistic growth. All our students are different. They all have specific needs and motivations at various times. Inspiration, instincts, and specifics relating to the stage a particular piece is moving towards will determine the flow of suggestions. We cannot know in advance how receptive a particular student will be to new concepts and techniques. It is therefore impossible to make a generic decision over whether a Grade 3 pupil explores ‘jeu perlé’ in a Clementi sonatina or leaves practice of this touch for a later stage.
An alternative approach
We should always remember that immersive, deep study of even the simplest of pieces is deeply satisfying for musicians at all stages. Give yourself time to love each note on the page, no matter how simple. This in itself leads to intense, detailed, artistic progress and fulfilment, often at the very highest level. If a pupil has managed to play a Grade 3 piece in a broadly accurate manner but without variety of colour and without convincing phrasing, it may well not be in their best interests to rush forward on to Grade 4. In such cases it could prove more inspiration to continue study with other Grade 3 pieces. Too often students will give up their instrumental studies simply because they find the pressures of coping with challenging repertoire too much. This is extremely sad, and completely avoidable if we move away from graded progression and look at artistic development as something much more subtle and meaningful.
Working at a lower level of difficulty affords students the opportunity to expand and develop their artistry without feeling pressurised over processing notes or coping with potentially uncomfortable and strenuous physical demands. Ironically, and most importantly, working at refinements and improvements on ‘easier’ repertoire will lift that repertoire up a grade or two. If students can play fast pieces faster, with impressive articulation and added shading, they can turn what may be set by an exam board as an intermediate piece into a high-grade showstopper. With slow music, the ability to play with beautiful tone and imaginative voicing and pedalling can transform a beginner's miniature into material suitable for a concert artist. Dance music played with subtle accentuation and rubato will also appear freshly minted.
A multi-grade performance exam?
As an antidote to traditional exam progression, it would be fascinating to propose a new performance certificate format to boards. So here goes: Introducing the ‘Multi-Grade Performance Exam’! For this recital, candidates are required to present a programme of their choice, but not to label it with a graded number on the entry form. The grade would be determined by the playing presented on the day! The examiner would decide what grade the candidate had attained. Afterwards the candidate would receive detailed feedback on the quality of their playing – but with no mark as such. Instead, they could proudly show a certificate that stated something along the lines of ‘This is to certify that X attained Grade 7 standard of playing on piano in an examination held on Y at Z’.
There are numerous pieces in the repertoire which can be considered multi-gradable. Here are some which could be chosen by candidates, with final results indicating if the pieces had been performed at Grade 5, Grade 7 or diploma level:
- J.S. Bach: Aria (Theme from Goldberg Variations)
- C.P.E. Bach: Solfeggietto
- Czerny: Étude Op. 299 No. 1 (The School of Velocity)
- Beethoven: Für Elise
- Grieg: Arietta Op. 12 No. 1
The celebrated theme of Bach's Goldberg Variations appears on its own in the Anna Magdalena Notebook and so could be played, with minimal or no ornamentation, by a Grade 3 player. Of course, if you add more ornamentation and play with some stylistic understanding, a case could be made for viewing the music as a Grade 7 option. Ultimately, most listeners will experience the piece in the concert hall or on a recording, played by a professional artist. If a candidate is able to recreate the music with the requisite spacing, ornamentation and beauty of tone comparable to Hewitt, Schiff or Gould, then of course an examiner could say that the performer was worthy of diploma or post-diploma status.
C.P.E. Bach's Solfeggietto may not quite reach the heavenly heights of the Goldberg theme, but it can change in perspective radically, depending on how it is played. It has been tackled at moderate speed by Grade 4 players, not without success. If you play Solfeggietto a little faster and lighter, it morphs into a Grade 6 or 7 set piece. But if you try for the fastest tempo possible, with articulation as displayed by Vladimir Horowitz in his celebrated recordings of Scarlatti, then it emerges as a post-Grade 8 bravura showcase number. Changes of speed and articulation do similar things to the first of Czerny's Op. 299 studies in the School of Velocity. Play it slowly and legato and it works at Grade 5/6; play it faster, and it seems to belong in the post-Grade 8 category at the very least.
Für Elise was a piece that my first piano teacher often set pupils just after they completed Grade 4, and indeed it is often managed successfully by intermediate players who are not quite ready to tackle a full-scale sonata allegro. But if care is taken to pedal with subtlety in the opening, then voice the first F major episode with refinement, as well as manage the A minor arpeggios on the closing page with neat leggiero, then it could well be argued that this celebrated bagatelle emerges as material more appropriate for Grade 8 players to tackle. Of course, if it is fully internalised and played with quasi-improvisatory wistful fantasy, then it is music for Wigmore Hall rather than for the classroom.
Finally, we should consider slow Romantic miniatures. The first of Grieg's lyric pieces, Arietta, Op. 12 No. 1 is a favourite intermediate grade choice, but of course it has been recorded by artists of the calibre of Emil Gilels and Walter Gieseking. This piece, along with Chopin's ‘Raindrop’ Preludes (Op. 28 Nos. 4, 6 and 14), may be suitable for students preparing for Grade 5–7 exams, but if the highest standards of artistic endeavour are aimed for, then they become far too difficult. It is all about perspective. I was horrified to note that the third movement of Schubert's great A major Sonata D959 has been set for Grade 7 recently, as this sonata is one of the towering masterpieces in the repertoire.
Ultimately, though, multi-gradable repertoire choices reflect personal preferences and motivations. Is it better to leave late Schubert till later (it has been set for FRSM) or to play it at pre-diploma level? Of course, in the happiest of contexts this music will inspire and motivate less experienced players so that they can then work on refining tone, pedalling, voicing, rubato and line with the highest standards and at the highest level. That ultimately is what all our pupils should be doing, regardless of level of difficulty. The pursuit of excellence and the highest standards is what makes music-making so motivational, fulfilling and magical. That has nothing to do with passing a particular grade milestone or not.
