MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944584146 · doi:10.34064/khnum1-50.04

Composer – Artist: The role of pianist Hsu Fei Ping in the creative activity of Huang An Lun

2018· article· en· W2944584146 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tian Song

Bibliographic record

VenueProblems of Interaction Between Arts Pedagogy and the Theory and Practice of Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Technologies in Various Fields
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPianoPing (video games)MusicalGeniusPerforming artsCreativityArtTheme (computing)Visual artsPsychologyLiteratureArt historyComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. The article is dedicated to the creative communication of two outstanding Chinese musicians – a pianist Hsu Fei Ping and a composer Huang An Lun. Complete mutual understanding facilitated their communication. Practically in all his programs, the pianist included the music of Western European and Chinese composers. Critics especially noted that Hsu Fei-Ping had the musical penetration, brilliance and poetry of interpretations. Among many Chinese pianists, he was recognized as the best interpreter of piano works by Huang An Lun. This musician has a special role in the work of Huan An Lun, being not only the “addressee” and the first performer, but also the inspirer of many composer’s opuses. The context of the creative intercourse of Huang An Lun and Hsu Fei Ping is also interesting because some of the composer’s works were written on the initiative of the outstanding Chinese pianist. Objectives. The purpose of the article is to reveal the role of the outstanding pianist Hsu Fei Ping in the creativity of Huang An Lun and the features of his performing interpretation the composer’s piano works. Methods. The research methodology necessary for disclosure of the selected theme is based on an integrated scientific approach combining the principles of musical-theoretical and performing analysis. Results. Hsu Fei-Ping is rightfully regarded as one of the most brilliant Chinese pianists who made themselves known in the 20th century. In this paper the life and career of the musician is considered, a general assessment of his creative achievements is given. It is argued that the creative cooperation and friendship of Hsu Fei-Ping with his compatriot and peer Huang An-Lun was due to life circumstances. The fate of both musicians had many common “points of intersection”: both musicians were of the same age, both in their youth showed uncommon interest in learning national and western musical art. The Cultural Revolution became a tragic watershed in their lives, which, however, made it possible to get even closer to the folklore environment and to feel the pain and suffering of the Chinese people at that time. Both musicians left China in the 1970s, having received education and achieved success in developed western countries: Hsu Fei-Ping – in the USA, Huang An Lun – in Canada. It is quite natural that the communication of such bright individuals, who have gone through the difficult path of development, provided an opportunity for mutual creative enrichment. The pianist promoted Huang An-Lun’s piano music in Israel, the USA, Canada, Russia and other countries, recorded CDs with works by the composer. In 2001, in Shanghai, and then in Hong Kong, discs with a recording of the piano cycle of Huang An-Lun’s “30 Pieces in the Popular Cybei Style” were released. In the same year, he recorded in Moscow the disc with Third Dance Poem, op. 40, by Huang An Lun. Hsu Pei Fing played the piece at the Rubinstein International Piano Competition in Israel, where he became the winner. In 1990, the piece by Huang An Lun created a similar sensation at a festival dedicated to the music of contemporary composers at the Walter Concert Hall in Toronto. A few years later, Hsu Pei Fing performed the piece at Carnegie Hall in New York. The largest composition by Huang An-Lun dedicated to Hsu Pei-Fing was Concerto No. 2 in C minor op. 57 for piano and orchestra. Its premiere took place on June 12, 1999 at the stage of the Shanghai Music Hall. The Shanghai Symphony Orchestra was conducted by Huang An-Lun himself, the piano part was performed by Hsu Fei-Ping. With the Russian Philharmonic Orchestra conducted by Konstantin Krymets, the pianist performed the second edition of the Concerto. The poem for piano and orchestra “Gulangyuy” op. 66 was written in memory of Hsu Fei Ping. The composer embodied in music the image of the birthplace of the outstanding Chinese pianist, Gulangyu Island, also known as “Piano Island”. Conclusions. Hsu Fei-Ping was for Huang An-Lun a kind of “beacon” in the field of piano music. Most of the composer’s piano works were focused on the phenomenal pianism of his friend. Being an outstanding performer of the West European classical and romantic repertoire, Hsu Fei Ping remained in the memory of musicians, first of all, as the inspirer and the best interpreter of piano works by Huang An Lun. The image of this remarkable pianist is captured in “Dance Poem No. 3” op. 40, Concert No. 2 in C minor op. 57, Poem for piano and orchestra “Gulangyuy” op. 66. Hsu Fei Ping brilliantly embodied in his performance one of the main ideas of the work of Huang An-Lun – the theme of man’s collision with forces of reality hostile to him. At the core of his performing drama is the conflict between the sinister, aggressive and lyrically quivering human beginning. It is represented by the pianist through the sound realization of various types of melodies, rhythms, textures, and the richest timbre palette. Hsu Fei Ping’s deep interpretations of Huang An Lun’s music, built on maximum polarization of images and expressive means, are the best confirmation of the mutual enrichment of the artistic worlds of two musicians, whose creative ways and convictions evolved in a similar way, which allowed them to understand each other completely.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.342 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProblems of Interaction Between Arts Pedagogy and the Theory and Practice of EducationSame topicAdvanced Technologies in Various FieldsFrench-language works237,207