Argues that the twentieth century established concert pianists' unique creative authority, highlighting its cultural significance.
This paper argues that the twentieth century constituted a distinct historical epoch inwhich the performing musician — above all the concert pianist — established anindependent creative authority that had not previously existed. Drawing on thephilosophical history of the musical work-concept (Goehr), the social history ofbourgeois concert culture (Weber, DiMaggio, Levine), and the cultural history ofrecorded music, it traces the structural conditions that made the pianist a figure of publicsignificance: the paradox built into the Werktreue ideal, the emergence of interpretationas competitive criterion, the European–American divergence in concert culture, and thethree-phase role of recording as a music-dedicated medium. The argument culminates ina revised reading of the Philips Great Pianists of the 20th Century box set (200 CDs,1999) as the crystallisation of a simultaneously contracting and intensifying specialistculture — the last flowering of the civilisation of interpretation rather than its mereepitaph. This paper is the first of a two-part study; the companion paper traces thestructural logic of performer independence into jazz and Vocaloid culture.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Franny Philos Sophia (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: