Violin-Viola Pedagogy: Sevcik yes or Sevcik no.

By John Krakenberger Before going into this matter, I want to be fair with the reader: I am unconditionally pro-Sevcik, although I listen carefully to what the opponents have to say, which is, mainly: 1) It is boring, 2) it is unmusical, 3) one can get technique with tudes. If we agree with the latest advances in pedagogy, assimilating playing our instruments with high-competition sport, it is meaningless to talk about point one: Abdominals or knee-bending is not precisely an exciting activity for athletes, neither is the work at the horizontal bar for dancers. As regards the second point, one can play any rhythmic sequence musically, even if repetitive and uninteresting. Dounis, another defender of systematic training, did not allow his students to play his unmusical sequences unmusically . I dont know about Sevcik, but I presume he insisted on the same. And as regards point 3, Etudes are musical pieces. To acquire technique with music is something I reject. Maybe technique comes out winning, but will the music? So, dear reader, if you dont wish to be convinced to become pro-Sevcik, please dont read on. Youd be wasting your time. Let us get started: Otakar Sevcik (1852-1934) was and still is an object of debate. The above three points have been the reason why many pedagogues have rejected his exercises. Others, however, affirm that his studies are the fruit of a genius because they reflect a profound understanding of what playing the violin is all about. I propose to make an objective analysis, in order to incline the doubtful reader one-way or the other. After a career as violinist and teacher in Kiev and Prague, Sevcik taught at the Academy of Music in Vienna until 1919. It is well known that precisely during this period, Vienna was one of the foremost intellectual centers of Europe, where important work on the human mind and body was made. Without the scientific knowledge to which we have become accustomed in our days, Vienna boasted then of the best diagnosticians in medicine, and psychologists, which were to become world-famous. If we look for explanations for these extraordinary exploits we arrive at a single possible conclusion: These were very intelligent people, and above all, acute observers of almost fanatical curiosity. Their minute study of human behavior led to discoveries, some of them sensational, which profoundly influenced the evolution of medicine, psychology and psychiatry all over the world. It was in this environment that Sevcik found himself with the task to write a publication of his methods for learning the violin (later on transcribed for the viola by the English master Lionel Tertis). Many the majority of the methods born during this same period are no longer in use. We must ask ourselves, therefore, how it is that Sevciks work has survived until our days, being in spite of everything the most used text in violin and viola tuition. To reply to this question let us start analyzing briefly what we must demand from a methodology towards a good instrumental apprenticeship: It should go through different phases of learning, thus: 1) Get acquainted with the material, 2) Experiment with the material, 3) Assimilate material, 4) Perfect material, and 5) Automation of material. To get this done within an organic process, one should start of with a simple process, easy to assimilate, which is not the case if for mastering a certain technical aspect you have to learn a whole etude, where the musical line is usually not of masterpiece-value (some etudes are pretty poor, musically speaking). Indeed, 90% of the effort goes into learning the notes and other lateral

aspects, and only 10% is dedicated to the task one wants to get done: Acquire dexterity in this or that technical area. It is for this reason that Sevcik has systemized the apprenticeship: When it comes to the right hand, the melody used to get certain bow strokes right is always the same (you automate that in a short time) and when the left hand is concerned you work on bars or short phrases which can be repeated in seconds, and which are then accelerated by duplicating and quadruplicating the initial tempo. The basic method of Sevcik is to follow strictly the sequence 1) to 5) mentioned in the paragraph above. You can set out comfortably, with time to spare, and as you advance, time gets shorter; things precipitate, and movements get more complicated, taking you to automatism without you noticing it. Since you start out slowly and easily, the perception in your mind is: No problem here and this feeling prevails. That is very important! In another article I mentioned that in the not too distant future it will be the neurologists who will tell us which methods for learning to play the violin are efficacious and which are not: I am absolutely sure that Sevciks methods will get kudos for being the most effective in existence. I have so far alluded only to op.1 & 2 (fingers and bowing, respectively). To give some satisfaction to the enemies of Sevcik Ill admit that the material for beginners (op. 6) is a little on the arid side, not suited for the youngsters of the second millennium. There is plenty of good material for beginners, which is up to date, and which gives the youngsters an incentive to continue studying, including Sevcik when the moment is ripe. Recommendable material for beginners will be part of another article. At this stage I should still mention op 2 N4 (for 4-5th year students) to get a good bowing technique via training of the left-hand wrist. And another indispensable exercise is op. 8, which caters to shifting positions and which, strangely enough, is used in places where op. 1 and op. 2 are frowned upon. I dont understand the logic: op.8 is as schematic as the others. But just as the others enormously useful. I hope nobody gets the idea to work only Sevcik and nothing else. That would be a fatal mistake. The acquisition of a good technique must at all times be at the service of music and should not fill more than half of the students efforts. It is the same with sports: You have to train but you also have to play. Each aspect should get its due. Before ending I would like to repeat an anecdote of the first half of the 20th century: Carl Flesch, the celebrated pedagogue, had an extremely gifted pupil called Henryk Szering. Following his masters request, Szering went through the whole work of Sevcik and those who have heard him I was fortunate to play the Mozart Duos for violin/viola with him will have realized that this helped him to become one of the top fiddlers of the world but that it did in no way damage his musicality, and less still his outstanding tonal quality. Of course there are other ways to learn how to play. The 100.000 dollar question is, with which method do we waste less time. In our ever faster moving world, time is becoming scarcer by the day. If before the age of 18 one has not been able to play all the Kreutzer studies, all the Rode caprices, and the 24 pieces of the op.35 by Dont, having previously overcome the technical difficulties posed, the student will not be able to aspire towards a career of a successful soloist. To get this done, the shortest way is, in my opinion, the one shown by Sevcik. To start playing childrens tunes at the age of 5 is indispensable, and if this brings the will and the pleasure to persevere, Sevcik can be started on as early as with 7-8 years, depending on the maturity of the pupil. You can then begin with Kayser etudes, preparatory of

Kreutzer,at the age of 12. Sevcik makes this possible. I dont know any alternative method that will get us there, except maybe other equally schematic methods such as Dounis. I have no doubt that during the 3rd millennium training methods for sports and learning instruments will converge. What is surprising is that Sevcik found precisely this way almost 100 years ago, and this speaks very well of his intelligence and genius.