Bela Bartok and A Guide To The 'Mikrokosmos' (Volumes One and Two)

Copyrighted
by
Benjamin Suchoff
1957
Sponsoring Committee: Associate Professor Walter Ko"b,
Chairman, Professor Emil Lengyel and
Professor William P. Sears
BELA BARTOK AND A GUIDE TO THE MIKROKOSMOS

v -,
Volume One
BENJAMIN SUCHOFF
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Education in the School of Education of
New York University
s
1>
1956
Pinal Docuasnt' ^
icc.pt.d. .*- MAY 1V1356,
STATEMENT
I hereby guarantee that no p a r t of the document which

I have submitted for publication has been heretofore published
or copyrighted i n the United States of America, except i n the
case of passages quoted from other published sources; t h a t I
am the sole author and proprietor of said document; that
the document contains no matter which, i f published, w i l l be
libelous or otherwise i n j u r i o u s , or infringe in any way the
copyright of any other party; and that I w i l l defend, indemnify
and hold harmless New York University against a l l s u i t s and
proceedings which may be made against New York University by
reason of the publication of said d i s s e r t a t i o n or document.
2 April 1956
Date
Sponsoring Committee: Associate Professor Walter Kob,
Chairman, Professor Bmil Lengyel and Professor
William P. Sears
/^yô-Tr-^t^
An Abstract of
BELA BARTOK AND A GUIDE TO THE MIKROKOSMOS
BENJAMIN SUCHOFF
Submitted in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education in the School
of Education of New York University
193&
1
It was the purpose of this investigation to prepare

a guide to the teaching of Bela Bart6k's Mlkrokosmos, a
collection of l3 progressive pieces and 33 exercises in
six volumes, for the piano.
In addition to a determination of the technical and
musical aspects of the Mlkrokosmos, Bart6k's views con-
cerning the playing and teaching of the piano and his
objectives in the composition of the work were ascertained.
An historical study of the Mlkrokosmos also was made as
a result of the availability of Bart6k's manuscripts and
other unpublished documents on file at the newly-estab-
lished Bela Bart6k Archive in New York City. Other data
were secured from former Bartok pupils and colleagues by
means of correspondence and interviews. In the guide
the pieces are listed by title in numerical order and
the pedagogical instruction for each composition is
given in outline form under four major headings: Tech-
nique, Musi cianship, Bartok's Comments, and Suggestions.
The guide was submitted for validation to a jury of five
prominent pianists and educators.
The principal findings of the investigation are as
follows:
1. The Mlkrokosmos is an approach to piano playing
in the form of a progressive method which represents a
synthesis of Bela Bartok's experiences as pianist, piano
teacher, musicologist, and composer.
2. Bart6k's conception of the piano was in terms of
2
its being an instrument capable of producing sounds ranging

from the most to the least percussive in quality, and he
specified key-striking, the so-called "percussive touch",
as the basic way the piano is to be played.
3. Bart6k's philosophy of performance was truth in
interpretation: neither add to nor subtract from the com-
poser's intention as expressed in the written score. In
accordance with this principle, he was careful to indicate
in the Mikrokosmos exactly how he wanted the work played.
I4.. Bartok's philosophy of performance was extended to
his teaching, and he did not permit deviations without jus-
tification on the part of the pupil. Further, he stressed
musicianship above techniqueJ in fact, he believed that
technique was the means rather than the end in piano
playing
5>. Bartok's objectives in the composition, of the
Mlkrokosmos were to provide pianists with pieces suitable
for concert use and to acquaint them with music written in
different styles, to teach beginners of various ages the
technique and musicianship of the ins trument-'ônf the be* .'
ginning to a certain higher degree, and t<5 acquaint-piano
students with East European folk music by means of graded
transcriptions. Several sources have stated that the
Mikrokosmos was intended to serve as a reference book for
students of composition, but this was never given recog-
nition as an objective by the composer.
3
6. Although forty-five per cent of the pieces and

exercises in the Mlkrokosmos contain examples of interval,
chord, and broken chord playing, the work is essentially
a method for the development of hand and finger indepen-
dence and the act of touch. On the other hand, the Mlk-
rokosmos cannot be considered as a method for the develop-
ment of virtuosity per se (the composer did not intend it
as such) since passage-work for the attainment of velocity
such as trills, tremolos, double-note and chord passages,
scales, and arpeggios are virtually ignored.
7. The tables and figures in the chapter on musical

problems in the Mlkrokosmos indicate the extent as well
as the progressive order of.presentation in terms of such
fundamentals of musicianship as score reading (problems
of rhythm and pitch) and interpretation (problems of tempo,
dynamics, tone color, and phrasing). Aspects of style,
covering such items as melody, tonality, harmony, and
form, are recognized in connection with certain specific
pieces.
To my wife
ELEANOR
and to
VICTOR BATOR
this study is gratefully dedicated
FOREWORD
Some years ago the Bela Bartok Archive was established

by Victor Bator in New York City to assemble, identify,
arrange, and preserve the manuscripts and other documents
written by the composer. The present study represents
perhaps the first work to be based on the unpublished
documents on file at the Archive, and I am indebted to
.Dr. Bator and to Dr. Julius G. Baron, co-trustees of the
Estate of Bela Bartok, for permission to quote from those
sources.
I take this opportunity to express my deep gratitude

for the helpfulness and encouragement of the members of
my Sponsoring Committee at the School of Education, New
York University: Associate Professor.Walter Kob (Chair-
man), Professor Emil Lengyel, and Professor William P.
Sears.
My thanks are also due to Erno Balogh for the many
pleasant hours we spent together discussing Bela Bartok
and for his great interest in the progress of this in-
vestigation; to Ann Chenee for her comments and for per-
mission to quote from the notes given to her by Bela
Bartok in 1944; and to Ruth Klein for the reading of the
manuscript and for many valuable suggestions and criti-
cisms.
I must further thank Nike Varga, my colleague at the
iv
Bartok Archive, for her assistance, translations from
the Hungarian, and correction of the manuscript; and
LouiS' Vaczek, Instructor in Hungarian, Columbia Univer-
sity, for the translation of Zongora Iskola.
Grateful acknowledgement is made to the following
persons who provided me with materials in .one form or.
another during the preparation of this investigation:
David Adams, Malvina S. Balogh, Julius G. Baron, Ditta
Bartok, Peter Bartok, Bjornar Bergethon, Barbara
Berkowitz, Roger Boardman, Arnold Broido, Storm Bull,
Denjis Dille, Dorothy Parrish Domonkos, Wilhelmine Creel
Driver, Ivan Engel, Alice Holtkamp, Elisabeth Lang
Kecskemet!, Dorothy Means, Toni Oelsner, Ann Phillips,
Michael Plantamura, Margit Prahacs, Sandor Reschofsky,
Gyorgy Sandor, Matyas Seiber, Tibor Serly, Halsey Stevens,
Margit Varro, and Lili Balint Weinberger.
In conclusion, I wish to acknowledge again the help

and encouragement I have received from the two who share
the dedication page of this study.
Benjamin Suchoff
Woodmere, New York

December, 1955
v
CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION 1
Purpose of the Investigation and
Statement of the Problem 1
Signifipance of the Problem 2
Related Literature 4
Procedure' in Collecting Data 6
Projection of the Hypothesis 9
BELA BARTOK 11
BARTOK AS PIANIST 21
The Concert Artist: 1903-1945 28
The Piano Style 38
Summary 45
BARTOK AS TEACHER 47
The Principles of Piano Teaching . . . . 53
The Pedagogical Works . 57
I. Zongora Iskola (Bartok-Reschofsky) 58
II. Bach; Thirteen Easy Little Piano
Pieces (Bela Bartok, editor) . 6l
III. Bach; WeTTl-Tempered Clavier (Bela
Bart6k, editor) 62
IV. Beethoven: Sonatas (Bela Bartok,
editor) 64
Other Specifics of Piano Teaching .... 64
Summary . 66
HISTORY OF THE MIKROKOSMOS 69
The Manuscripts 86
Errata 89
Transcriptions 93
Recitals and Recordings 94
Summary . . . . . _ 97
OBJECTIVES OF THE MIKROKOSMOS 100
Summary 113
vi
CONTENTS
Chapter Page
VJI. TECHNICAL PROBLEMS IN THE MIKROKOSMOS . . . 116
Touch-Forms 117
Staccatissimo 117
Legato - Non-Legato 118
Tenuto . . . 118
Handbewegung '119
Agogic Variations 120
Dynamic Variations 122
Touch-Form Frequency 123
Position, Motion and Fingering Problems 127
Interval and Chord Playing 134
Hand Independence and Part-Playing . . . 138
Polyphony Between the Hands 138
Touch-Form Combinations 140
Dynamic Contrasts . . 144
Part-Playing 147
Passage-Work and Embellishments . . . . 149
Miscellaneous Problems 153
Pedalling 153
Ensemble Playing 155
Velocity . . . 157
Summary 159
VIII. MUSICAL PROBLEMS IN THE MIKROKOSMOS . . . . 163
Fundamentals of Musicianship 164
Notation . . . 164
Expression 174
Aspects of Style 178
Tonality 181
Harmonic Principles 183
Structure 184
Summary 187
IX. RESUME" 190
General Summary 190
Conclusions 194
Recommendations 195
X. SETTING UP THE GUIDE 198
Format of the Guide 198
Validation of the Guide 200
vii
CONTENTS
Page
BIBLIOGRAPHY 206
Published Sources 206
Unpublished Sources 212
Music 214
Recordings 2l4
APPENDIX
A. INTERVIEW QUESTION LIST 217
B. CHECK-LIST AND COMMENTARY SHEET 219
C. GUIDE TO THE MIKROKOSMOS .- 223
Foreword 224
Introduction . . . . 226
(1) The Relationship of the
Mikrokosmos to General
Educational Theory 226
(2) The Mlkrokosmos and Trends in
Piano Teaching 228
(3) Bartok's Principles of Piano
Teaching 229
(4) Bartok's Ideas Concerning Piano
Playing 230
(a) Percussive Touch-Forms . . . 231
(b) Non-Percussive Touch-Forms . 231
(5) Bartok's Ideas Concerning
Musicianship 232
(a) Dynamics 232
lb) Rhythm and Tempo 232
(c) Phrasing 233
How To Use The Guide 234
I. Format and Definition of Terms . 234
II. Designations and Abbreviations . 236
Annotations and Commentary on each of
the 153 Pieces and 33 Exercises in
the Mlkrokosmos
Vol. I: Nos. 1-36 (Ex. 1-4) . . . 238
Vol. II: Nos. 37-66 (Ex. 5-18) . 259
Vol. Ill: Nos. 67-96 (Ex. 19-31) 285
Vol. IV: Nos. 97-121 (Ex. 32-33) 310 .
Vol'. V: Nos. 122-139 332
Vol. VI: Nos. 140-153 350
viii
ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Page
1. Scale of touch-form percussion in the
pedagogical works of Bela Bartok . . . . 119
2. Agogic variations of touch-forms used in
the pedagogical works of Bela Bartok . . 121
3. Percussive touch-forms in the Mlkrokosmos,
by volume 126
4. Non-percussive touch-forms in the
Mlkrokosmos, by volume 128
5. Hand position in the Mlkrokosmos, by
volume 130
6. Motion in the Mlkrokosmos, by volume . . 132
7. Fingering problems in the Mikrokosmos, by
volume 135
8. Interval and chord playing in the
Mikrokosmos, by volume 137
9. Polyphony between the hands in the
10. Percussive touch-form combinations in
the Mikroko smos, by volume l4l
11. Percussive - non-percussive touch-form
combinations in the Mlkrokosmos, by
volume 143
12. Accompanying figurations in the Mlkro-
kosmos, by volume 145
'13. Dynamic variations between the hands in
the Mikrokosmos, by volume 147
14. Part-playing in the Mikrokosmos, by
volume 149
15. Passage-work and embellishments in the
ix
ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Page
16. Use of the damper pedal in the Mlkrokosmos,
by volume
17. Ensemble playing in the Mikrokosmos, by
volume
18. Order of appearance of note and rest
values in the Mlkrokosmos, by volume . ..
19. Order of appearance of meter signatures
in the Mikrokosmos, by volume
20. Syncopation patterns in the Mikrokosmos, by
volume
21. Key signatures and accidentals in the
Mikrokosmos, by volume
22. Maximum number of accidentals contained in
any of the pieces comprising the Mikro-
kosmos, by volume
x
TABLES
Number Page
I. Percussive touch-forms in the Mikrokosmos 124
II. Non-percussive touch-forms in the
Mikrokosmos 127
III. Hand position in the Mikrokosmos 129
IV. Motion in the Mlkrokosmos . 131
V. Fingering problems in the Mikrokosmos . . . 133
VI. Interval and chord playing in "the
Mikrokosmos . .' 136
VII. Polyphony between the hands in the
Mikrokosmos 139
VIII. Percussive touch-form combinations in the
Mikrokosmos ' 140
IX. Percussive - non-percussive touch-form
combinations in the Mikrokosmos 142
X. Accompanying figurations in the Mikrokosmos 144
XI. Dynamic variations between the hands in the
Mikrokosmos 146
XII. Part-playing in the Mikrokosmos 148
XIII. Passage-work and embellishments in the
Mikrokosmos 151
XIV. Use of the damper pedal in the Mikrokosmos 154
XV. Ensemble playing in the Mikrokosmos . . . . 157
XVI. Metronome markings in the Mikrokosmos . . . 159
XVII. Meter signatures in the Mikrokosmos . . . . 166
XVIII. Subdivision of the beat in the Mikrokosmos 168
XIX. Syncopation patterns in the Mikrokosmos . . 171
XX. Key signatures and accidentals in the
xi
Mikrokosmos 173
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Purpose of the Investigation and Statement of the Problem

. The purpose of this investigation was to prepare a
guide to the teaching of Bela Bartok's Mikrokosmos, a
collection of 153 progressive pieces and 33 exercises in
six volumes, for the piano.
In addition to a determination of the technical and
musical aspects of the Mikrokosmos, other 'problems re-
quired solution if a satisfactory guide for piano teachers
was to be the result. For example, what were Bartok's
views concerning the playing and teaching of the piano
and how do they relate to the Mikrokosmos? What were his
objectives in the composition of the work? What pertinent
data can be obtained from an historical study of the
Mikrokosmos? And how shallthe guide be set up so that
it may serve as a reference book for aspiring and prac-
ticing piano teachers?
It was not the purpose of this investigation to educe

the distinctive or characteristic mode of presentation,
construction, or execution of Bela Bartok's music. On
the other hand, stylistic elements determined by other
investigators were considered and applied in terms of
their pertinency toward the technical and musical
2
understandings requisite for interpretation of the

Mikrokosmos.
The investigation was not concerned with the de-
termination of Bela Bartok's status as a composer, or
with the worth of the pieces comprising the Mikrokosmos
as music, per se. Furthermore, biographical details
were restricted to those necessary for the solution of
the specific problems.
It was not within the scope of this investigation
to determine the readiness of the piano student to under-
take any or all of the pieces of the Mikrokosmos, or to
compare the work with other materials of music instruction.
Significance of the Problem

When Bela Bartok began the composition of the Mikro-.
kosmos in 1926, he continued the tradition of composers
writing teaching pieces which counted among their charac-
teristic and consequential works. Certain compositions
such as the Etudes of Schumann, Chopin, and Debussy were
sparsely edited by their creators, and this led to the
posthumous publication of these works in the form of
annotated editions and teaching guides which were designed
to aid the pianist and piano teacher. Bartok himself was
active as an editor of keyboard repertory, and his. edi-
tions of Bach and Beethoven contain lengthy instructions
1. Anonymous, "Bela Bartok's 'Mikrokosmos'," Tempo (New

York), April, 1940, p. 5. See also Francis D.
Perkins in the New York Herald Tribune, 25 April
1940.

0
written in considerable detail. In addition, he and

Sandor Reschofsky wrote a piano school intended as a
manual for teachers of beginning pianists.
The Mikrokosmos is in the category of unedited music
although it contains some instructions in its Preface
and Notes'. In fact, Bartok states in the Preface that
"the first three volumes differ from a 'Piano Method' in
the traditional sense by the absence of any technical
and theoretical description and instruction. Every teacher
knows what is required in this respect and is able to give
the earliest instruction without reference to a book or
method."
In apparent contradiction to this statement of the

composer is the fact that he himself wrote and published
certain pedagogical works. As a further indication that
a comprehensive study leading to the preparation of a
guide should be of value is the fact that there exist a
considerable number of books, articles, and theses by
other investigators which, discuss technical and musical
aspects of the Mikrokosmos from a pedagogical viewpoint.
There is also the evidence of statements which have been
made to the investigator by certain piano teachers and
by the publisher of the Mikrokosmos (Boosey and Hawkes),
all indicating a need for an English-language manual to
accompany Bela Bartok's Mikrokosmos.
1. Zongora Iskola. Budapest: Rozsavfllgyi es Tarsa,

4
Related Literature
Among the unpublished sources in the Bela Bartok
Archive are the various drafts of the Mikrokosmos, pro-
grams, letters, lecture notes, and other documents which
provided data used in this investigation.1 Another
unpublished source is the notes Bartok gave to Ann
Chenee during a series of conferences in which the com-
poser discussed the pedagogy involved in each of the
pieces and certain of the exercises comprising the
p
Mikrokosmos.
Mention is made above of the composer's piano school
(Zongora Iskola), his editions of Bach and Beethoven
piano works, and his Preface and Notes to Mikrokosmos.
Other published sources stemming from Bartok himself
include a brief account of certain events occurring during
his formative years-? and two recordings of excerpts from
the Mikrokosmos.
First witness reports and translations of Bartok
letters germane to this investigation are contained in
biographical studies by Halsey Stevens^ and Serge Moreux.6
1. The Mikrokosmos drafts include Sketches, Intermediary

Drafts, and Einal Copies (see Bibliography for a
comprehensive listing). It is perhaps worthy of
mention that the investigator has been active as re-
search associate in the Archive since 1954.
2. In July, 1944. The notes were given to the investi-
gator in July, 1953.
3. Bela Bartok, "The Life of Bela Bartok," A Memorial
Review (1950), pp. 7-10.
4. Columbia Records ML4419 (for piano solo) and Remington
Records R19994 (for piano duet, with Ditta Bartok).
5- The Life and Music of Bela Bartok (1953) .
6. Bartok (London: HarvTll Press, 1953).
5
Jttrgen Uhde's handbook parallels the investigator's

study in terms of purpose. The book, limited to the
analysis of less than one-quarter of the pieces com-
prising the Mikrokosmos, is concerned primarily with
musical problems. Vernon H. Taylor's doctoral disserta-
tion 2 contains analyses of certain pieces from the
Mikrokosmos in terms of contrapuntal structure, and
Marya Sielska's master's thesis-^ discusses technical and
musical problems in the Mlkrokosmos to a certain extent.
Her study did not consider Bartok's views concerning
piano playing and teaching. Its value lies chiefly in
the tables of frequency she has drawn and in the lists
of forms, scales, modes, rhythms, and terminology she has
compiled.
As regards an interpretation of Bartok's instructions

concerning the act of touch, the writer relied on. Otto
Ortmann's scientific studies of piano technique as basic
references.
First witness reports concerning Bartok as pianist,
piano teacher, and composer were secured by means of
1. Bartok Mikrokosmos Spielanweisungen und Erlauterungen

(19547: ; ;
2. Contrapuntal Techniques in the Music of Bela Bartok
" U950).
3. Bartok's Mikrokosmos: An Analysis of its Technical
Difficulties (1947')
4. The Physiological Mechanics of Piano Technique (1929)
anoTTfae Physical Basis of Piano Touch and Tone
(1925) . According to Carl SeashoTeÎrT'S'earch of
Beauty In Music, 1947, p. 136), the laTter is "The
best available book on the subject for musicians."
6
correspondence1 and interviews.
Procedure in Collecting Data

A preliminary step in arriving at conclusions with
reference to Bartok's views about piano playing was the
study of his early training and subsequent career as a
concert pianist, based on the assumptions that the train-
ing he received and the results he produced in the
concert hall might reflect, to a certain extent, his
principles of piano playing. A second step was the
analysis of Bartok's pedagogical works in order to
determine whether his views on piano playing were con-
tained therein. First witness reports were also evalu-
ated, and the results obtained from collation of all
pertinent data were expressed as Bartok's views concerning
the playing of the piano.
First witness reports referring to Bartok's teaching

methods were analyzed and the composer's pedagogical
works were reexamined for specifics of technical and
musical instruction. A comparative study was then made
of the recorded data so that a determination could be
made of Bartok's basic approach to the playing of the
piano in terms of touch.
1. Ditta Bartok (the composer's widow), Ivan Engel, Storm

Bull, Wilhelmine Creel Driver, Sandor Reschofsky,
Matyas Seiber, and Margit Varro.
2. Erno Balogh, Julius G. Baron, Peter Bartok, Ann
Chenee, Elisabeth Lang Kecskemet!, Dorothy Parrish
Domonkos, Gyorgy Sandor, Tibor Serly, and Lili
Balint Weinberger.
7
The study made of Bartok's- unpublished documents

also disclosed certain data of perhaps sufficient im-
portance to warrant their inclusion in a separate
chapter, "History of the Mikrokosmos." This chapter
traces the dates of origin and conclusion of composition
of the Mikrokosmos, outlines errata in the published
volumes of the work, and notes programs, transcriptions,
and recordings made of its pieces by the composer.
Further, the data reveal what was perhaps Bartok's
original intent in the composition of the Mikrokosmos.
The primary sources were studied to determine Bartok's

statements concerning his objectives in the composition
of the Mikrokosmos. The next step was the assembly and '
arrangement of the opinions of fifty first witnesses,
analysts, and teachers of the work. Then, the composer's
stated objectives and their validation in terms of the
extent of agreement among other sources were noted.
Certain sources concerned with the playing and teach-
ing of the Mikrokosmos in particular and the piano in
general were reviewed to determine those aspects of piano
technique considered basic in the training of piano
students, and the data resulting from their collation
were further studied and assembled into ten categories.
As a preliminary step, an instrument in the form of
a master chart was devised. Each piece and exercise in
the Mikrokosmos was analyzed according to the ten cate-
gories as determined above, and the resulting data were
8
entered in appropriate columns. Analyses of the Mikro-

kosmos made by other investigators were condensed and
added to the chart. The compiled data were then compared
to consider the extent of agreement in terms of the spe-
cifics of piano technique appearing in each exercise and
piece. Cases of disagreement were evaluated in conjunc-
tion with the Mikrokosmos manuscripts and Bartok's
unpublished notes concerning the work, and untenable
opinions were discarded.
The next step was the construction of tables, graphs,

and figures illustrative of the specifics of piano
technique to be found in the Mikrokosmos. The tables
which are included in the investigation are comprised of
vertical headings (in columnar form) consisting of type
(of problem), volume (one column for each), total, and
percentage. Pieces and exercises in the form of their
numerical designations in the Mikrokosmos are entered in
appropriate columns; sub-totals, totals, and percentages
are computed; and the results are expressed in the tables
as italicized numbers. Sub-total percentages (i_.e_., the
percentage of pieces and exercises concerned with a
particular problem in a given volume of the Mikrokosmos)
are expressed in the form of bar graphs as pictorial
evidence of the progressive nature of the pieces compris-
ing the work. Other figures appear as illustrations of
the touch-forms used in the Mikrokosmos.
Sources concerned with the playing and teaching of

9
the Mikrokosmos in particular and the piano in general

were also examined to find out those aspects of musician-
ship considered basic in the training of piano students,
and the data resulting from their collation were further
studied and assembled into five categories. The same
procedure was followed, and tables, graphs, and figures
were constructed as described for aspects of piano
technique above.
The guide which forms the greater part of the
appendix of this investigation is intended to serve as
reference material for both aspiring and practicing
piano teachers, and it represents the articulation of the
investigator's educational background, pianistic train-
ing, and experience in teaching the Mikrokosmos with the
data resulting from the study of the foregoing specific
problems. The preparation of the guide was based on two
assumptions: that the piano student can begin the study
of the Mikrokosmos and that the work is a graded collec-
tion of piano pieces (it was intended as such by the
composer). The guide was submitted for validation to
five authorities in the field of piano pedagogy.
Projection of the Hypothesis

The hypothesis upon which this investigation and
its resulting guide is based is that the Mikrokosmos
represents a specific method to teach an approach to the
piano. The data presented in this study verify the
10
hypothesis and, what is perhaps of greater significance,

indicate that the Mikrokosmos also represents a synthesis
of Bela Bartok's experiences as concert pianist, piano
teacher, musicologist, editor of works from the standard
keyboard repertory, and composer. In that case, the
reader may ask, what is the significance of Bela Bartok?
The ensuing pages attempt to provide an answer.
CHAPTER II
BtfLA BART6K
To commemorate the end of the first fifty years of

the twentieth century, the editors of Etude canvassed
the opinion of composers, musicians, music editors and
music journalists from all parts of the United States to
determine the ten musicians who they considered were the
most potent musical forces in this century. The musi-
cians selected were Bartc'k, Debussy, Gershwin, Hindemith,
Prokofieff, Ravel, Schoenberg, Sibelius, Stravinsky, and
Toscanini.2
It has been noted that since Mozart no major composer
other than Bartok has come so quickly into general recog-
nition and acceptance solely as a result of the interest
his music stirred up by the accident of his death.5
Another source, concurring, states that musicians have
long regarded Bartok as one of the greatest figures of
our time. Cecil Gray terms Bartok "the complete musi-
cian, to a greater extent than anyone since Mozart."5
1. Etude, January, 1951* pp. 9-10.

2. Ibid., p. 9.
3. Peter Yates, "Musical Chronicle - Bela Bartok,"
Partisan Review (June, 1949), p. 644.
4. Douglas Moore, "Homage to Bela Bartok," Modern Music
(1946), p. 13.
5. Musical Chairs, p. 179.
12
The composer also has been cited as "taking first place

in every sphere of music except conducting."1
Devoted son to his widowed mother, twice a husband
and father, ardent nationalist, and writer of a voluminous
correspondence, Bela Bartok was, in addition, able to
pursue a varied musical career. He was active as a con-
cert pianist, music "educator, composer, musicologist,
student of languages, and author of books and articles on
music. Any one or two such interests might have been
sufficient, perhaps, for a musician of lesser ambition
and creative energy. Bartok, however, despite a frail
constitution and slowness of acclaim, worked at all with
fervor and imagination.
The youthful Bartok was, first of all, a devoted

patriot and militant nationalist. He was deeply aware
of the political climate of his times. At the end of the
eighteenth century the Magyar nation had become almost
exclusively a people composed of peasants and landed
gentry. The aristocracy was to a great extent Germanized;
indeed, German was the official language in business and
society. In the nineteenth century, the lesser gentry
rallied around Lajos Kossuth, a vehement nationalist,
who attributed Hungary's ills to the policy of the Habsburg
Monarchy. The Hungarian Republic was proclaimed in 1849,.
and Kossuth was elected Governor-President. The Austrian
1. Denjis Dille, "The Life of Bela Bartok," A Memorial

Review, p. 11.
13
Emperor, Francis Joseph, called on Czarist Russia to put

down the uprising, upon which the Russians entered
Hungary and forced the Magyars to capitulate.-1-
The longing for independence from the Crown reached
its peak at the turn of the century. Public opinion
demanded Hungarian commands in the Army, a Hungarian coat-
of-arms, and a Hungarian national anthem. Bartok, then
a student at the Royal Academy of Music in Budapest, was
among those ardent nationalists who were urging complete
Hungarian!sm.2
In 1902, his last year at the Academy, Bartok began

the composition of Kossuth, a symphonic poem depicting
the events in Kossuth's struggle against the Habsburg
Monarchy. Bordering on the Lisztian concept of Hungarian-
ism (i..e_.j gypsy music), Kossuth led to a dead end in
Bartok's search for a new way to "create something spe-
cifically Hungarian."^ He suspected that what was then
considered as true Hungarian folk music was in reality an
urbanization of music of peasant origin.^ His examination
of Kodaly's collection of peasant songs, which appeared
in 1905., provided him with the incentive to begin his own
1. C.A. Macartney, Hungary, pp. 88-96.

2. Zoltan Kodaly, "A folklorista Bartok," Uj Zenel Szemle
(Budapest, 1950). English translation printed by
the Legation of the Hungarian People's Republic,
Washington, D.C., April 5, 1951, p. 1.
'3. Bela Bartok, "The Life of Bela Bartok," A Memorial
Review, p. 8.
4. Not, as Liszt held, that peasant music was a crude
imitation of gypsy music.
14
collection of Hungarian, Rumanian, and Slovakian peasant

songs.1 The results of this and other folksong research
appear in two widely-known books: Hungarian Folk Music
(London: Oxford University Press, 1931) and Serbo-Croatian
Folk Songs (with Albert B. Lord. New York: Columbia
University Press, 1951). These, together with other
books and articles on folklore, music, and musicians,
led to his being known and acclaimed internationally as
a musicologist.
Bartok's .research into folk music gave him "the
impetus to find a truly Hungarian style."2 The principle
underlying this style is the assimilation of the idiom
of peasant music to the extent that its use becomes sub-
conscious, "a musical mother-tongue."5 To do so, Bartok
states, "One must have lived it by direct contact with
the peasants... one must see and know the environment in
which these melodies have their being."^ According to
one source, the folk effect in Bartok's music can be
traced in the composer's entire musical expression and
in every part of his musical material.5
Bartok composed or transcribed more than 100 works
for piano, voice, chamber groups, symphony orchestra, and
1. Zoltan Kodaly, op. cit., p. 1.

2. Bela Bartok, "Digging for Folk Music" (as told to Joan
Poster) j, Musical Digest (1928), p. 37.
3. Bela Bartok^ "The Influence of Peasant Music on Modern
Music," A Memorial Review, p. 71.
4. Maurice Halperson, "Bela Bartok Explains Himself,"
Musical America (1928), p. 9."
5. Bence Szabolcsi, "Bartok es a nepzene,"tfjZenei
Szemle (1950), p. 43.
15
the theater. Among his better-known compositions are

the six string quartets, Cantata Profana, Concerto for
Orchestra, For Children (85 piano pieces), and Mikrokosmos
(153 progressive piano pieces). The increase in the
number of sales of the Mikrokosmos since its publication
in 1940 points to the growing popularity of the work
among pianists and piano teachers.2
Almost all of Bartok's compositions are in published
form, and every year an increasing number of recordings
and performances of his works is listed.'5 To this should
be added the growing number of books, magazine articles,
and unpublished theses concerned with his music, all
constituting evidence of the interest in and significance
of this "Janus of Modern Music.
As an author, Bartok wrote fourteen books and more
than 65 articles on music and musicians which have
appeared in Hungarian, German, English, American, Rumanian,
Italian, French, Dutch, and Spanish periodicals. The major
portion of his writings was devoted to musicological
1. According to the chronological listing compiled by the

investigator and others for the Bartok Archive.
2. Letter from Boosey and Hawkes (New York Office) to the
investigator, 22 October 1953.
3. In his article "Making Music with Bartok," (The Long
Player, October, 1953* p. 12), Joseph Szigeti states
that in 1943 the Associated Music Publishers
Directory listed nine recorded works by Bartok. Ten
years later the number of recordings had increased
to forty-five. Szigeti adds: "Sans commentaire 1,"
4. Appellation by Goddard Lieberson (The Columbia Book
of Musical Masterpieces, p. 23). According to C.M.
Gayley (Classic Myths,~pp. 60-bl), Janus was the
Roman god of beginnings - especially of good begin-
nings which insure good endings.
16
subjects, including: "Comparative Music-Folklore," "A.

Schoenberg's Music in Hungary," "Richard Strauss's
Elektra," "Zoltan Kodaly," and several articles on
Liszt.1
Bartok's significance as a pianist and music edu-
cator is the subject of the two following chapters of
this study. It can be mentioned here, however, that he
was known among music critics and musicians as a ranking
pianist, a composer of pedagogical works, and a teacher
of concert pianists long before he established residence
in the United States in 1940.2
Bart6k's career was characterized by a life-long

struggle with poor health and constantly recurring finan-
cial difficulties. He never weighed more than 116 pounds
and sometimes as little as 87.^ Because of this he
required a special regimen, a simple diet and much sleep.4
In 1940 imminence of a Hungarian alliance with the. Axis
precipitated his "self-imposed" exile to the United States.
He left his native land willingly sacrificing his pension
from the Hungarian government, his income from the sales
and performing rights to his compositions, and his earnings
from an established concert career. He arrived in the
1. Halsey Stevens, The Life and Music of Bela Bartok,

P P . 345-349. ;
2. According to Szigeti (op. cit., p. 10), Bartok's con-
siderable attainments as a pianist are almost for-
gotten beside his stature as a composer.
3. Erno Balogh, "Bartok in America," The Long Player
(1953), P. 22.
4. Erno Balogh, interviews with the investigator, July-
August, 1954.
17
United States on October 29, 1940 with the understanding

that his family would be solely dependent upon his future
earnings here.
It seems incredible that the man who had been lauded
throughout Europe should find in this country our foremost
musicians neglectful in the performance of his works, our
press critical, and the public lacking in response on the
o
rare occasions when his compositions were played. In
the spring of 1943 Bartok found himself in a desperate
situation; high fevers had sapped his strength so that he
could not turn in bed and there was only enough money
remaining to provide several weeks' food for the family.
When the doctor predicted that Bartok could not last more
than six weeks unless a change occurred, Erno Balogh pre-
sented the circumstances concerning the composer's plight
to the American Society of Composers, Authors and Pub-
lishers. ^ The Society "took over" the Bartok case and
spared neither money nor effort to prolong his life. He
lived for two more years and during that time wrote his
last four masterpieces: Sonata for Unaccompanied Violin,
Concerto for Orchestra, Concerto No. 3. for Piano and
Orchestra, and Concerto for Viola and Orchestra.4
1. Erno Balogh, "Bartok in America," The- Long Player

(1953), PP. 20-21. :
2. A more detailed account of Bartok's difficulties as a
pianist and teacher in the United States is presented
in the following chapters.
3. Erno Balogh, op. cit., p. 22.
4. Lpc. cit..
18
A little more than a year before his death in

September, 1945 Bartok was asked by his publisher, the
firm of Boosey and Hawkes, to participate in a promotional
scheme devised to stimulate sales of the Mlkrokosmos. It
was suggested to Bartok that he give lessons on the peda-
gogy of the method to a "typical American teacher," after
which the latter would write articles and present lectures
to other music educators concerning the value of-the
Mikrokosmos in piano pedagogy. Erno Balogh suggested that
Ann Chenee,1 one of his pupils in piano repertory, be
engaged for the purpose. It is perhaps interesting to
note Bartok's reaction to the scheme, as reported by
Chenee:
Bartok was ill and was composing at that time.

I was under the impression that he did not
care whether the Mikrokosmos was promoted or
not. His remarks to Balogh were to the effect
that he was not interested in what the' pub-
lisher did with his music; that his composi-
tions spoke for themselves and if they did not
catch on then, they would later. As a result
of this attitude he came to my studio the
first time reluctantly; he could not under-
stand why his method required promotion.2
Bartok's prediction to Balogh concerning the Mikro-
kosmos has come true if the number of recordings of this
work made in the United States is a criterion.3
1. Then President of the Piano Teacher's Congress of New

York.
2. Ann Chenee, interviews with the investigator, July,
1954/
3. Excerpts from the Mikrokosmos for piano solo and duet,
string quartet arid symphony orchestra are in the
following recordings: Allegro 4012, Bartok 303,901,
Colosseum 1025, Columbia ML 4419, London LL759, and
Remington 199-94.
19
In December, 1944 Bartok's'Concerto for Orchestra

was given its first performance in Boston where the com-
poser was present to receive the acclaim of the audience.'
"The performance was excellent...Kousseyitsky is very
enthusiastic about the piece, and says it is 'the best
orchestra piece of the last 25 years' (including the works
of his idol Shostakovich])"1 Following the Boston triumph,
Bartok was commissioned to compose a seventh string
quartet, a viola concerto, and a duo-piano concerto. His
income from royalties and performance fees, about $1400
in 1944, began to rise; he signed a three-year agreement
with Boosey and Hawkes, commencing in 1945, which called
for an advance of $1400 per year in addition to his earn-
ings from sales and performances.2 Ten months later he
died of leukemia.
Bartok was honored repeatedly during his lifetime.
His outstanding honors include: Chevalier of the Legion
of Honor (France, 1930); Member of the Academy of Science
(Hungary, 1934); and the honorary degree of Doctor of
Music (Columbia University, 1940).5 in 1945 the people
of Budapest elected him a member of the New Hungarian
Parliament. In 1951 nine streets, roads, or squares in
different precincts of Budapest were named after him.5
1. Halsey Stevens, op. cit., p. 102.

2. Ibid., p. 103.
3. Ibid., pp. 74-92.
^ The New York Herald Tribune, 27 September 1945. Bartok
was one of four exiles chosen for' Parliamentary seats.
5. Joseph Szigeti, op. cit., p. 12.
20
Bartok assumes more and more a major position in the

evolution of twentieth-century music. Indeed, "He may
well be one of those found to form a major part of the
music of the future. His work shows every trend in that
direction."1
1. Norman Demuth, Musical Trends in the Twentieth Century,

p. 276.
CHAPTER III
BARTOK AS PIANIST
Bela Bartok was born on March 25, l88l, in Hungary,

"in a small place called Nagyszentmiklos, which now,
together with the whole county of Torontal, belongs to
Roumania."1 Bartok describes his childhood with this
brief account:
My mother gave me my first piano lessons when
I was 6 years old. My father, who was the
head of an agricultural school, was gifted
musically and active in many directions. He
played the piano, organized an amateur
orchestra, learned the 'cello in order to
play in the orchestra, and composed some dance
music. I was 8 years old when I lost him.2
Fuller descriptions of Bartok's early years were
written by his mother, Paula Voit Bartok, in 1921 and
1922.2 At the age of a year and a half he brought his
mother to the piano to play a piece he had listened to
the day before. He shook his head until she played the
compositjon he wanted to hear. At the age of three
Bartok was able to beat a drum in time to his mother's
piano playing; if she changed rhythm, he would stop

Review, p. 7.
2. Loc. cit.
3. The original account appears in Bartok Bela levelei
(edited by Janos Demeny), pp. 203-217, and in a
translated, abridged form in Halsey Stevens's
biography of Bartok, pp. 4ff.
22
momentarily and then begin again in the new rhythm. At

four Bartok, using one finger,.played as many as forty
songs on the piano, all of them from memory.1
According to Paula Bartok, his first piano lesson
took place on his fifth birthday, March 25, 1886. Scarcely
a month later, Bartok and his mother were able to play a
four-hand piece for his father. The child's recurring
illness interrupted the lessons, and it was not until he
was seven that it was discovered he had absolute pitch.
After his father's death, the family moved to another
house in the same town, and his mother gave piano lessons
to support the family. Bartok resumed his piano studies
under his mother's guidance; however, she could not induce
him to count aloud the rhythms he felt instinctively.2
In 1889 the family moved to Nagyszfllltis, in northern
Hungary, where Bartok began composing music for the piano.3
He performed there for a local organist and choirmaster^
who predicted a brilliant future for the young pianist
with the result that Bartok and his mother went to the
Royal Academy of Music in Budapest for a professional
opinion. Karoly Agghazy, pupil of Liszt and a teacher at
the Academy, heard the boy play, and, as a result of the
audition, Agghazy wanted him as a pupil. But Paula Bartok

p. 4.
2. Ibid., p. 5.
'3. Bela Bartok, OJD. cit., p. 7.
4. Christian Altdorfer, credited by Bartok as having dis-
covered the latter's talent.
23
decided against a change, since her son was completing

his studies at the local intermediate school. The next
year Bartok entered the Gymnasium at Nagyvarad where he
lived with his aunt. Here he took piano lessons with
Ferenc Kirsch, a composer and choirmaster, who concentrated
on teaching Bartok brilliant display pieces. 1
Bartok returned to Nagysztfllfls in April, 1892, and
on May 1 made his first public appearance as a pianist,
playing the first movement of Beethoven's C_ Major Sonata
(Op. 2, no. 3 ) 2 and his own composition, The Danube River.
For his efforts, the eleven-year old pianist received much
applause and seven bouquets, including one of candy.3
,In 1893, the Bartok family settled in Pozsony where
Bartok studied piano and harmony with Laszlo Erkel, acquir-
ing a solid grounding in the music of the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. He attended orchestral concerts
and operas, composed music, and played chamber music in
several private homes. In addition, he had the opportunity
to play the piano music of Liszt and Wagner as part of the
musical programs given in the city. He took Ernst von
Dohnanyi's place as organist in the Gymnasium chapel, and
earned fees for accompanying the cellist Biermann.
1. Halsey Stevens', OJD. cit., p. 6.

2. According to Otto Gombosi (in his unpublished, incom-
plete Bartok biography in the Bartok Archive;, p. 13),
Bartok told him in 1942 that it was this opus, not
the Allegro from Beethoven's 'Waldstein' Sonata, that
was played at the concert.
4. Ibid., p. 9.
24
When my education at the Gymnasium (high school)

was concluded the question arose at which
musical academy I should continue my studies.
In Pozsony, at that time, the Vienna Conserva-
tory was considered the sole bastion of serious
musical education, but I took Dohnany's ad-
vice and came to Budapest and became a pupil
of Istvan Thoman (in piano) and of Hans Koessler
(in composition)-. 1
Bartok's autobiographical account omits mention that
he was offered free tuition and a scholarship from the
Emperor's fund to study at the conservatory in Vienna as
a result of an audition played there in December, 1898,
and that he was to have been admitted to the Academy of
Music in Budapest without examination as a result of an
interview with Thoman in January, 1899. The next month
Bartok became very ill and was unable to practice until
his arrival in Budapest .the following September. Despite
Thoman's promise, the director of the Academy refused to
admit Bartok unless he passed the required entrance
examination. Although the young pianist had been away
from the keyboard for more than six months, his playing
of a Beethoven sonata for the faculty jury resulted in
his assignment to an advanced class.2
After the first week in his new lodgings in Budapest,
Bartok wrote to his mother about the poor condition of
the piano there; that "everything rings and buzzes, the
pedal squeaks, etc."-? He was constantly being interrupted
1. Bela Bartok, op_. cit., p. 7.

2. Halsey Stevens, op. cit., PP. 10-11.
3. In an interview with the investigator, 8 January 1955,
Gyorgy Sandor remarked that Bartok had supersensitive
hearing; he used to spend many minutes looking for
objects that vibrated sympathetically with the piano
25
by uninvited persons' requesting him to "play something"

during his practice periods. Then, in October, he suc-
cumbed to a bronchial infection and was forced to return
home to convalesce.
Fully recovered, Bartok returned to his piano study
with Thoman who, it has been reported, was considered one
of the outstanding piano teachers in Hungary at that
time.2 Beginning in January, 1900 Bartok attended con-
certs, operas and receptions, and on January 21, 1900
wrote to his mother about a recital played by the cele-
brated pianist, Emil Sauer.
... I have heard Sauer and seen him... he
played in a truly magnificent style. That
one piano could produce such unusual sono-
rities scarcely seemed possible... What is
striking is his comportment. He lifts his
hands a yard in the air, wags his head from
side to side, ponders over each piece; then,
as if realizing he must play something, he
attacks it. At the end, he raises his hands
high up and then lets them fall on his knees
-.perhaps these mannerisms are what attract
the ladies.2
During his vacation in August, Bartok was stricken
with pneumonia. Upon the advice of a physician, Bartok,
accompanied by his mother, went to the Italian Tyrol to
convalesce. It was not until January, 1901 that the
young student was able to resume practicing; shortly
thereafter he returned to the Academy to finish the year.5
while Sandor was taking private lessons with him at

the Bartok home in 1930.
1. Halsey Stevens, op_. cit., p. 12.
August, 1954. Balogh was a pupil of Bartok from
1909 to 1915.
3. Serge Moreux, Bartok, pp. 22-23.
4. Halsey Stevens, op. cit., pp. 13-14.
26
In September he began preparation for his first

public concert at the Academy on October 21, 1901. A
review of the recital stated:
First Bela Bartok played the Liszt B-minor
Sonata with a steely, well-developed tech-
nique. This young man has acquired extra-
ordinary strength. A year and a half ago
his constitution was so weak that the
doctors sent him to Merano lest the cold
winter harm him - and now he plays the piano
as thunderously as a little Jupiter. In
fact, he is today the only piano student at
the Academy who may follow in Dohnanyi's
footsteps.1
In 1900 and 1901 Bartok's attention was directed
towards his development as a pianist, and he did little
in the way of composition.
I did not at the time grasp Liszt's true
significance for the development of modern
music and only saw the technical brilliance
of his
v
compositions. I did no independent
work for two years, and at the Academy of
Music was2 considered only a first-class
pianist.
It was during this time, Bartok later related to a
pupil, that he received an accolade from his piano
teacher. When Thoman was a pupil of Liszt, the latter
kissed him on the forehead after Thoman had performed
particularly well. In similar fashion, Thoman kissed
the young Bartok, saying, "This kiss is handed down from
Liszt'"^
Bartok received his first fee, ten gold pieces, for
a recital given at the Lipotvaros Casino on December 14,
1. Ibid., p.^15.
2. Bela Bartok, op_. cit., pp. 7-8.
3. Erno Balogh, op. cit.
27
1901. He appeared as an accompanist in March, 1902,

and his next performance at the Academy, in December of
that year, resulted in his being hailed by a newspaper
critic as "a new, extraordinarily strong talent, before
whom unquestionably a brilliant career lies."1
He went to Vienna in January, 1903 for a recital
at the Tonkunstlerverein, and he played Richard Strauss's
Ein Heldenleben which he had transcribed and committed to
memory in its entirety. A few months' later he returned
to his native town, Nagyszentmiklos, after an absence of
fourteen years, to play the first formal recital given
there.
It was the custom at the Academy of Music for each
student to undergo an examination in his area or areas of
specialization in order to receive the diplomas attesting
to his competency. It has been stated that Bartok "left
the Conservatoire endowed with all the due diplomas but
without having passed any examinations which would serve
to establish his reputations as a virtuoso and composer."^
The statement was based on a letter Bartok wrote to his
mother on May 25, 1903: "To the greatest wonderment of
my fellows I was not required to undergo even the small-
est" examination, all the authorities agreed there was no
point to it."^ The inaccuracy of the conclusion becomes

2. Ibid., pp. 17-18.
3. Serge Moreux, op. cit., p. 33.
4. Loc. cit.
28
evident upon inspection of a letter Bartok wrote to his

mother earlier that spring, from Budapest: "My success
[at the public examination concert] was brilliant, the
applause colossal; they called me back 7 or 8 times.
Professor Herzfeld, Hubay, Mihalovich, all were very
well satisfied; even Szendy too congratulated me, saying
that I played very beautifully."1 Bartok's letter con-
cerning his exemption from examination was in reference
to the diploma in composition.2
In a subsequent interchange of letters with his

mother, Bartok vetoed her suggestion that he continue his
piano studies with Emil Sauer in Vienna.5 His decision
was to spend the summer of 1903 working on repertory with
Dohnanyi, whom he admired greatly as a pianist.
The Concert Artist: 1903-1945

.Although Bartok played the fifth Piano Concerto of
Beethoven at the Konzertverein in Vienna, on November 4,
1903, he considered his December recital in the Berlin
Bechstein-Saal of utmost importance in his quest for a
concert career.
The very significant Dec. l4 is over: my first
real job of clearing accounts in the course of
a concert. What I most feared - that my strength
1. Halsey Stevens, op_. cit., p. 18.

2. At the time of his graduation from the Academy, Bartok
had produced what is perhaps an unusual quantitative
and qualitative output for a composition student.
3. Apparently Sauer's showmanship repelled the young
pianist (see letter in Stevens, op. cit., p.19).
4. According to Erno Balogh, op. cit.
29
might not be equal to it - didn't happen; after

the concert I was so little tired that I could
have played another program from beginning to
end. The Study for the Left Hand went splen-
didly; the greater part of the public were most
impressed by this. The hall was quite 2/3 full
... Two 'celebrities' were in the audience,
Godowsky and Busoni. The latter came to the
artist's room after the third part, introduced
himself, and congratulated me;...he expressed
admiration that I, who have such a fine left-
hand technique - as he heard in the Study -
still played the Chopin C-minor Etude so satis-
fyingly...1
Moreux adds that Godowsky, "a pianist adored by two
continents," exclaimed that the Study sounded as if it
were played by three hands, and prophesied great things
of Bartok.2
A favorable review of the concert was given by the
critic of the Vossische Zeitung:^
Bela Bartok, the newly-discovered pianist...
aroused interest; he stood out among his
innumerable colleagues who year after year
attempted to win the attention of the pub-
lic... His playing includes those spiritual
qualities without which a performance re-
mains only a display. If he succeeds in
making his tone production more varied and
colorful, we will then be able to class him
among those pianists whose future holds
great promise.4
An analysis of Bartok's pianistic style seems to

indicate that he succeeded in overcoming the deficiencies
noted by his critic:
La deuxieme qualite technique du pianiste
Bartok etait une sonorite a la fois grasse
1. Halsey Stevens, op. cit., p.- 20.

3. Halsey Stevens, 0. cit., pp. 20-21. See also p. 309
for Stevens's notes concerning this review.
4. Loc. cit.
30
et precise d'une palette de nuances tene-

ment etendues qu'on la pourralt comparer
& celle de Walter Gieseking, a mon sens
actuellement le premier pianiste du monde..,1
It is perhaps curious to note a revised comparison
made by the same analyst four years later: "Bartok's
second quality as a-pianist was a tone at once so rich
and precise - a range of shades of colour so exactly
differentiated that it might be compared to that of
Alexander Borowsky."2
Bartok played a series of concerts in England in
January, 1904 and, after his return to Hungary, devoted
himself to composition and made his first notation of
Hungarian peasant music.^
In August, 1905 he participated in the Prix Rubin-
stein competition as a pianist and composer. Although he
was not successful in either category (Wilhelm Backhaus
won the prize for piano playing), he did not think it
"extraordinary" nor was he "hurt" by the results of the
piano competition. On the other hand, he was disappointed
in the way the adjudicators "handled" the composition
award.
According to Zoltan Kodaly, until the age of twenty-
four Bartok's first and main interest was the piano, and,
1. Serge Moreux, Bela Bartok, sa vie, ses oeuvres, son

langage (l949T7~p. &9.
2. Serge Moreux, Bartok (1953), P- 145.
4. Bela Bartok, hSome Early Letters," A Memorial Review,
p. 13.
31
along with it, composition.1 It was not until 1905 that

Bartok added a third interest, that of folklorist: "I
felt an urge to go deeper into this question [of Hungarian
folk songs] and set out in 1905 ""to collect and study
Hungarian peasant music unknown until then."2
The year 19.05 was also notable in terms of Bartok's
development of his fourth capacity, that of linguist.
Prior to this time, Bartok began the study of English
while a student at the Academy of Music in Budapest (he
already read, wrote and spoke German and Hungarian flu-
ently) . During his stay in Paris for the Prix Rubinstein
he started to study French. A year later, he took up
Spanish at a time when he accompanied the thirteen-year
old Hungarian violin prodigy, Vecsey, to the Iberian
Peninsula. That same year (1906) he studied the Slovak
language during his collecting of Slovak songs. He con-
centrated on Rumanian in 1908.5
It was only the necessity of earning a living that
kept Bartok at the piano in those early days of folk-song
collecting:
I am to play for the writers' group there
[Pressburg] on Sunday [Nov. 1906] that is
tomorrow. It's a great nuisance. I have
hardly touched the piano for six months, so
for two weeks now, I've been forcing my
fingers to play the nullities I know by
heart. I had a piano sent to me in Gomor
1. Zoltan Kodaly, "A folklorista Bartok,"tfjZenei Szemle

(1950), p. 1.
Review, o. 8.
3. Zoltan Kodaly, op_. cit., p. 3.
32
county... But to the devil with exercises!

They are the last things I want to waste my
time on. I should have preferred to collect
as many songs as possible... 1
When Istvan Thoman resigned from his position as
teacher of the advanced piano class at the Budapest
Academy, Bartok assumed his former teacher's duties:
"When an appointment to the chair of piano teaching at
the Academy of Music in Budapest was offered to me in
1907 I considered this a happy event because it enabled
me to settle in Hungary and to continue my studies in
musical folklore."2
It has been stated that when Bartok was twenty-six
and a professor, he never played a program in which his
own compositions were not included.-5 His works, however,
provoked adverse comment. When the New Hungarian Musical
Union, formed by Bartok, Kodaly, and other young musicians
to perform contemporary Hungarian music, collapsed for
lack of support and interest, Bartok temporarily withdrew
from public life in 1912.^ He continued teaching piano
classes at the Academy, composing, editing editions of
Bach, Beethoven and other composers, and collecting folk
music until 1919. In September of that year, he applied
for and was granted a six months leave of absence from
the Academy of Music because of ill health.5
1. Serge Moreux, Bartok, p. 78.

2. Bela Bartok, op. cit., p. 9.
5. Halsey Stevens*, op. cit., pp. 47-58.
33
Beginning in 1920, Bartok returned to public life as

a concert pianist, both at home and abroad. His recitals
in Budapest were triumphs. He played Beethoven and Liszt,
for the most part, and he was considered a great pianist.1
A pupil of Bartok states: "In the years that I studied
with him, from 1923 to 1929 in Budapest, Bartok was
considered among the front rank of Hungarian pianists,
even above Dohnanyi. He played mostly Beethoven, few of
his own compositions. His recitals were sell-outs; tickets
had to be procured weeks in advance for good seats."2 An-
other pupil states that Bartok played in radio concerts
as well as in recitals, and that he gave his concerts as
a pianist rather than as a composer-pianist from 1920 to
1930.5
Bartok's international success as a virtuoso composer
began in 1922 when he played in England and France. In
1923 he had further successes in the same countries as
well as in Czechoslovakia, Holland and Germany, and the
"'next year another tour of the continent was made. Italy
and Sicily were visited in 1925.
Gyorgy Sandor reports an amusing conversation he had
with Bartok in 1933 or 1934, concerning the composer's
1. Elisabeth Lang Kecskemeti, interview with the investi-

gator, 21 December 1954. Lang was a pupil of Bartok
from 1913-1917.
2. Lili Balint Weinberger, interview with investigator,
21 December 1954.
3. Lajos Hernadi, "Bartok Bela, a zongoramuvesz, a peda-
g6gus, az ember,"tfjZenei Szemle (1953), p. 2.
4. Serge Moreux, op. cit., pp. 141-142.
34
performance of his Piano Sonata (1926) at a later Italian

concert. Sandor had spent six months practicing the
Bartok Sonata until he felt able to perform it at a forth-
coming concert in Italy. When he announced this intention
to Bartok, the latter remarked: "If you play it there,
play the last movement only, because the Italians threw
tomatoes at me when I played the whole Sonata I"1
In 1927, after a visit to Russia, Bartok came to New
York and played his Rhapsody for Piano and Orchestra with
the New York Philharmonic Orchestra under Wilhelm Mengel-
berg. A few weeks prior to the concert, Cesar Saerchinger
wrote from London: "Bartok1s pianistic gifts would have
made it easy for him to become a successful virtuoso...
as a pianist Bartok is possessed of extraordinary tech-
nical powers placed at the service of an encyclopedic
musical mind. In his own country he ranks close to
Dohnanyi as an interpreter." A review of the concert
was laudatory in terms of the composer's pianistic skills:
... The piano part of the concert is difficult

and original in its technique. Mr. Bartok
played as the composer-pianist with a born
instinct for the keyboard, with a poetry of
conception and at times a fury of virtuosity
and elan astonishing in a man of his modesty
and unostentation.5
The next year (1928) Bartok played his First Piano

Concerto in Cincinnati, Fritz Reiner conducting. Tibor
1. Gyorgy Sandor, interview with the investigator,

8 January 1955.
2. Letter to the New York Herald Tribune, 4 December 1927.
3. Olin Downes, The New York Times, 23 December 1927.
35
Serly, who played viola in the orchestra that afternoon,

reports that "absolute silence followed the performance;
a few handclaps were heard when Bartok came out for one
bow."1
The Pro-Musica-sponsored American tour brought
Bartok to San Francisco, Los Angeles, Portland, Seattle,
Denver, Kansas City, Chicago, St. Paul, Philadelphia and
Boston, and he prefaced certain recitals with a short
lecture in English on the problems of the contemporary
p
composer in relating his art music to folk music. He
returned to Europe by way of South America, where he met
Heitor Villa-Lobos (in Brazil),3 and he repeated the per-
formance of the Piano Concerto in Berlin. The audience
response was similar to that in Cincinnati according to
Hernadi:
I attended [the concert] and it was excellent...
but the applause was cold and there were some
boos. I talked to Bartok afterwards and told
him of my anger. Bartok replied, "Why are you
so angry? If someone buys a ticket to a concert
he has the right to boo as well as applaud."
After a while, Bartok added, "I myself would not
boo if I did not like something."4
In 1929 Bartok gave concerts in the Soviet Union and
in Switzerland, and the next year he played an hour-long
recital on the Budapest radio station, including some two-
piano works with Hernadi.
1. Tibor Serly, interview with the investigator, 21

December 1954.
4. Lajos Hernadi, op. cit., p. 4.
36
I was his partner then, and he told me that

he did not think it would be right for him
to play the primo always, so we changed seats
alternately."" Bartok said, smilingly: "The
listeners now can guess who is playing the
primo." I don't think the audience had to 1
think too much about who was playing primo1
From 1929 to 1931 Bartok recorded some of his works,
as pianist and accompanist, for Columbia Records and His
Master's Voice.2 In 1932 he played the First Piano
Concerto at the Salle Pleyel, with the Paris Orchestral
Society Orchestra under the direction of Pierre Monteux,^
and the next year played the Second Piano Concerto in
Amsterdam, Frankfurt, London, Vienna, Strassburg, Stock-
holm, Winterthur, and Zurich.^
Bartok gave up his Academy of Music professorship
in 1934 and devoted himself to the study of folk music.
According to Hernadi, he did not resume his concert
career until he participated as pianist in the 1936 con-
cert commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of Liszt's
death,5
Bartok left Hungary in 1937 for another series of
concerts and broadcasts in Holland, Belgium, France,
England, and Switzerland, returning to Basle the next
year for the premiere of the Sonata for Two Pianos and
Percussion. Concerts in Luxembourg, Holland, Belgium,
and England followed, and Paris was revisited in 1939
1. Loc. cit.
2. Halsey Stevens, op. cit., pp. 74, 335-338.
3. Serge Moreux, op_. cit., p. 143.
37
for a rehearsal of his Violin Concerto with the violinist,

Zoltan Szekely. Later that year, Bartok's mother died,
and he decided to make his residence in the United States
until the war ended. In October, 1940, he arrived in
New York with his wife, Ditta. A series of Town Hall
concerts was followed by Bartok's receipt of the honorary
degree of Doctor of Music from Columbia University on
November 25
At the beginning of the new year, the Bartoks made

a transcontinental tour of the United States, playing
piano recitals en route, and in March Bartok began the
study of the Milman Parry collection of Yugoslav folk
music, under a grant from the Alice M. Ditson Fund and a
stipend from Columbia University. To augment his income,
he sought playing engagements for the season of 1941-1942.
These were difficult to obtain; Bartok had to be content
with an orchestral concert, three duo-piano recitals, and
four solo performances. At the close of 1942, his grant
from Columbia University terminated, and on January 21,
1943 he played his last public concert, with the New York
Philharmonic Orchestra under Fritz Reiner. Bartok's last
public appearance was made on May 7, 1944, when he was
interviewed at the Brooklyn Museum for an Ask the Composer
broadcast over Station WNYC. 2 Not quite fifteen months
later, on September 26, 1945, Bartok died of leukemia in

2. Program File, Bartok Archive.
38
the West Side Hospital in New York City.
The Piano Style

A characteristic of Bartok's' piano playing throughout
his lifetime was his deportment while at the keyboard.-1-
One of his colleagues recalls a concert he gave at the
Academy of Music in Budapest:
This is where, as a little girl, I first heard
him... He played some Bach, Beethoven, Schumann's
F* Minor Sonata, and a few of his own composi-
tions. To be sure, I would not remember this
program so distinctly if it were not for the strong
impact that emanated both from his playing and his
personality... Indeed, he struck me as being
utterly detached from anything that has to do with
outward appearances.2
Another report offers a more detailed description of

Bartok at the keyboard:
His piano playing was concentrated and precise,
without unnecessary flourishes. His posture
and playing apparatus were as one with the piano.
Every tone or note was concentrated essence. He
had emotion but it never penetrated his concen-
tration in performance. This resulted in his
playing looking like it was made out of one piece
of stone, with dimensions and purity characteristic
and convincing only for him, no one else...5
It has been stated that Bartok was under tension
when playing, not relaxed, and that he was very precise
and accurate at the keyboard, carefully watching everything
1. Erno Balogh and Gyorgy Sandor remarked to the investi-

gator that Bartok's basic concepts of piano'playing
did not change in the years they knew him.
2. Margit Varro, Lecture Notes (unpublished, given at the
Wisconsin Conservatory of Music on September 29,
1950). Varro taught piano at the Academy of Music
in Budapest at a time when Bartok was also there as
a teacher.
3. Lajps Hernadi, 0. cit., p. 5.
39
he was doing.1 In fact, Bartok's playing seemed to give

the impression of stiffness.2 In 1940 a .review of a
Bartok recital stated: "Mr. Bartok's playing was that
of a talented and sensitive, while unostentatious,
pianist."^ This opinion confirms Downes's statement of
1927.^
Some Bartok concerts were not played from memory.
Commenting on this unusual procedure, a Bartok pupil
states: "Any slight uneasiness of the performer who is
uncertain of his memory encroaches upon the ability of
the mind to concentrate on interpretation. Realizing
this fact, Mr. Bartok has the printed page before him
when playing in public, even though his memory is quite
capable of performance without it."5 Another pupil states
that this did not detract from the value of the per-
formance .
Indication of Bartok's technical ability has been
presented in the foregoing pages of this chapter. The
extent of that 'ability is made apparent through the
statements of those Bartok pupils who had the opportunity
to observe him at close range and over a period of years.
1. Erno Balogh, op_. cit.

2. Lili Balint, op. cit.
3. F. D. Perkins, The New York Herald Tribune, 25 April,
1940.
4. See Downes's review on page 34, above.
5. Storm Bull, "Bartok the Teacher," Musical Facts
(Chicago), 194l. (The quotation is from page one
of the author's typed copy.) Bull was a pupil of
Bartok in Budapest from 1933 to 1935-
6. Gyorgy Sandor, op. cit.
40
One source states that Bartok played well everything he

attempted,1 and another adds the opinion that Bartok had
a perfect technique; he mastered everything.2 In addi-
tion, Bartok was able to modify anything to his own hand
and arm; his motions and fingering were very different
from that of other virtuosos .5 It has also been stated
that Bartok was a genius at technique; indeed, "he was
born with it." 4
Gabor Steinberger-^ attributes to Bartok the innova-

tion of the "Anti-Romantic" concept of interpretation of
the keyboard repertory.
His piano thesis seemed simple; keep to the
written letter. Nevertheless, when this idea
was put into execution it meant nothing less
than a total break with usual practices. The
Romantic pianist was characterized by the
adding of an exuberant dose of his own per-
sonality to the playing, deliberately under-
lining and omitting as much as his personal
concept required. The pianist considered
himself entirely free with respect to move-
ment and dynamics.0

3. Loc. cit.
4. Elisabeth Lang, op. cit.
5. According to the~~b~iographical note preceding Stein-
berger's article, he is "the Hungarian composer who
was a student of Zoltan Kodaly in Budapest, through
whom he belonged to that circle of vanguard composers
who, in close and daily contact with Bartok, animated
the musical life of Hungary towards its contemporary
progress."
6. Gabor Steinberger, "Bela Bartok," Revista Musical
Chilena (1946), p. 21. For a graphic Illustration
of Steinberger' s contention,1 the attention of the
reader is directed to the playing of Chopin's Waltz
in D b , Op. 64, No. 1, by the pianist Vladimir de
Pachmann in the recording Great Masters of the Key-
board, Columbia ML 4294. "
41
Steinberger adds that excessive elaboration on details

characteristic of Romantic interpretation serves to injure
the architectonic line, and that Bartok's self-discipline
in "prohibiting above all the modification of the dynamic
prescription with arbitrary crescendos and diminuendos"
served to reveal the "structural beauties" of the music.1
Constantin Brailoiu2 concurs with this analysis of
Bartok's interpretive powers: "His playing resembled
that of no other pianist. With a unique and almost incon-
ceivable mixture of fervor and impassiveness, he dissected
the work piece by piece... Thus, brought to light in
their complexities, the too-familiar masterpieces are then
reborn new and unheard, as if by one magical action."5
Moreux recalls a performance of the Mozart Concerto
for Two Pianos played by Bela and Ditta Bartok at the
Salle Gaveau in Paris, Hermann Scherchen conducting:
"Foremost among Bartok's special qualities as a pianist
was a transcendent sense of phrasing."4 Bartok's adept-
ness in revealing the over-all structure of a piece has
been attributed to his training as a composer.5
Insofar as Bartok's repertory is concerned, he has
been rated as "the greatest contemporary composer-pianist
in terms of the range of literature he played, from
1. Loc. cit.
2. Swiss musicologist and folklorist.
3. "Bela Bartok folkloriste," Schweizerische Musikzeitung
(1948), p. 93. ,
4. Serge Moreux, Bela Bartok, sa vie, ses oeuvres, son
langage, p. 6b.
42
Scarlatti to the moderns."1 It has been further stated

that, aside from Prokofieff and Stravinsky, no other sig-
nificant composer of our time was such an accomplished
pianist as Bartok and that his interpretations of
Scarlatti, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven anu his own works will
remain unforgettable.2
Concerning Bartok's piano touch, the divergence of
published opinion invites a scrutiny of the available
data. On the one hand, he is described as a pianist whose
special quality was the possession of a rich, precise tone
with a range of shades of color comparable to that of
Walter Gieseking^ or Alexander Borowsky.4 On the other,
a review of a Bartok recital In Town Hall in 1940 praised
the technical mastery but criticized the tonal result as
being "at times percussive."^ A little more than a year
before his death Bartok was described as being "in mechani-
cal fact... a percussive player on the pianoforte."0
Asked for comment concerning the foregoing criticisms,
1. Gyorgy Sandor, op. cit. Hernadi recalls (loc. cit.) a

Bartok concerl; given in 1927 which featured sixteenth
century composers.
2. Andor Fflldes, "Bela Bartok's Piano Works," Listen
(1946), p. 6.
Serge Moreux, Bela Bartok (1955), P. 191.
5. F. D. Perkins, The New York Herald Tribune, 25 November
1940. The program was a duo-piano recital, played
by Bela and Ditta Bartok, of works by Brahms, Bach,
Mozart, Debussy and excerpts from the Mikrokosmos.
See Chapter VTI below for a discussion of the various
percussive and non-percussive touch-forms.
6. Hubert Foss, "An Approach to Bartok," Musical Opinion
(1944), p. 219.
43
a Bartok pupil 1 replied: "Tone [Bartok1s] was 'dry and

crisp' when the music called for such tone, !.e_., in
certain staccato passages. But Bartok could - and did -
produce a warm, luscious tone when he wished to... Bartok
could produce more varieties of tone at the piano than
any physicist would consider possible."2
Another pupil adds that "Bartok played Debussy
richly and variedly. His playing was plastic and he did
not use the pedal to cover up. This would appear to
refute statements to the effect that his sound was dry and
percussive."-5
The following explanation seems to be valid:
The frequent accusations against the modern
pianist that he plays "without emotion,"
"drily, coldly, mechanically," reflect the
nostalgia of the speaker (educated in Roman-
ticism) towards effects that are familiar to
him. These effects are excluded from, the
new method, since the modern school is try-
ing to avoid precisely that arbitrary quali-
ty of "impassioned temperament."4
The tendency to classify Bart6k's piano playing as

percussive, in toto, may have been engendered by the
composer's utilization of the touch as an innovation in
his piano works, resulting in widespread published opinion
by musicians concerned with the analysis of his style.5
1. Wilhelmine Creel Driver. She studied with Bartok from

1936 to 1937.
2. Wilhelmine Creel Driver, letter to 'the investigator,
6 May 1954.
4. Gabor Steinberger, o_p. cit., p. 22.
5. In his book Masters of the Keyboard (p. 292) Willi
Apel states that tEe earliest example of the new
percussive style in piano literature is Bartok's
Allegro Barbaro (1910).
44
Copland cites Bartok as a composer who found a valuable

outlet in the new use of the piano as a non-vibrating
instrument, turning it into "a kind of large xylophone."1
Murdoch concedes that Bartok "is one composer who is
striking a new sound," but argues that it is not the
result of a new piano technique: "Bartok's percussive
style is just a higher development of another instrument
p
the cimbalom. To realize his self-expression he uses
the cimbalom as the background of his writings - and
naturally the piano is only thought of as an instrument
to be hit."^ Foss takes'the opposite view: "Bartok goes
to the very heart and soul of the instrument he is using.
The piano in his violin sonatas is treated as what it is
- a percussive instrument."4 Asked for his comment, Tibor
Serly^ stated:
Bartok wanted to be known as a good pianist.
People misunderstood what he was doing
pianistically. He detested the fact that
the piano became an arpeggio instrument. He
evolved a new technique for the piano as he
did for strings, which served as a basis for
his piano compositions: he saw in the piano
1. Aaron Copland, What to Listen for in Music, p. 86.

According to Copland, the non-vib~Fating piano is
one where little or no use of the pedal is made.
This results in a hard, dry piano tone which has
"its own particular virtue."
2. In an article written for the Dictionary of Modern
Music and Musicians (p. 243), Bartok describes the
cimbalom as "Steel wires spread out like strings of
a piano, on a wood board; but they are not placed
in order of pitch. Compass is fifty notes...wires
are struck with cloth covered wooden sticks. Pedal
damper is attached to instrument."
3. Ibid., pp. 385-387.
4. Hubert J. Foss, Music in My Time, p. 149.
5. Serly's friendship witTTBartok began in 1927.
45
a new art of playing the instrument as a

percussion instrument as well as a musical
one.l
Summary
Born into a musical household, Bela Bartok revealed
at an early age the extraordinary talent that was to
serve him in his career as a pianist. Musically, he
possessed absolute pitch and a highly developed sense of
rhythm and tonal memory. Technically, he was equipped
with what piano teachers term "piano hands," hands capable
of mastering the difficulties of a Beethoven sonata for
a public performance at the age of eleven, or of perform-
ing the required pieces for the entrance examination at
the Budapest Academy of Music despite a six-month absence
from the keyboard.
After graduation from the Academy, Bartok's success

as a concert pianist was immediate. His technical powers,
diversified repertory, and interpretive ability were of
a caliber high enough to result in his appointment at the
age of twenty-six as Professor of Piano at the Academy,
to succeed his own teacher.
Beginning in 1920, Bartok's recitals were considered
outstanding events, both in Hungary and abroad. He has
been ranked as one of Hungary's greatest pianists and has
been referred to as a virtuoso who could have become one
of the world's foremost pianists had he not chosen to

December 1954.
46
devote himself to composition and musicology.

As a performer, Bartok's philosophy was simple:
neither add to nor subtract from the composer's intention
as expressed in the written score. Reflecting this
philosophy, his concert deportment was noted for the
absence of unnecessary flourishes and other mannerisms
that might distract the listener and for the use of the
score during concerts.
His use of the various touch-forms was in keeping
with his philosophy of truth in interpretation, to which
he adhered throughout his career. The evidence clearly
points to the fallacy in categorizing Bartok solely as a
percussive pianist.'
Bartok's pianistic principles, virtuosity, and
familiarity with the musical literature from the sixteenth
century to the twentieth provided him with much of the
background requisite for the second of his roles in the
music profession: teacher of the piano.
CHAPTER IV
BARTOK-AS TEACHER
It appears that Bartok was already giving piano

lessons at the age of seventeen and that he used the
money earned to buy scores for study. A year later, in
September, 1899 he entered the Academy of Music in Buda-
pest as a student of piano and composition, and he gave
private piano lessons in order to augment the funds he
received from his mother for food and lodging. He soon
discovered the financial problems that seem to be the
lot of the private piano teacher:
The young lady has stopped her lessons for the
present because her piano needs tuning. After
that she wants to go on - if it really comes to
anything. In that case, I shall ask one and
a half florins and give only two lessons. If
that does riot suit, then she can do what she
likes. The bore is that she has not paid what
is owing. Friday last I found I'was without
funds, and decided I would not wait, but demand,
so on Saturday I tried to get the money, so far
no success. Here in my lodgings I drum my
fingers; how monstrous of her not to send the
money when I am without it. If two florins come
today, perhaps the rest will follow in three
days.2
In 1907 Bartok joined the faculty of the Academy of

Music in Budapest as teacher of the advanced piano class

pp. 9-10.
2. Serge Moreux, Bartok, pp. 21-22.
48
where he gave individual as well as group instruction.

There is evidence' that, in addition, he gave private
lessons at his home or, if it was more to his convenience,
at the homes of his pupils,1 and that some pupils studied
with Bartok privately in addition to the instruction they
received from him at the Academy.2 An opinion has been
offered that other than the training of his son Peter,
Bartok's teaching experiences were concerned with advanced
piano students.-5
Bartok edited a considerable amount of, piano music

in the years following his Academy appointment: Bach
(We11-Tempered Clavier, Thirteen Pieces from the Little
Clavierbook of Anna Magdalena Bach); Beethoven (Sonatas,
Bagatelles, Op. 34, Op. 89, Fifteen Variations and Fugue
in E13, Ecossaises); Chopin (Waltzes); Couperin (miscel-
laneous pieces); Haydn (Sonatas); Mendelssohn (Scherzo
in B Minor, Prelude and Fugue in E Minor); Mozart (Sonatas,
Fantasie in C Minor, Marcia alia turca); Purcell (Pre-
ludes); D. Scarlatti (Sonatas); Schubert (Two Scherzi,
Op. 78, Op. 143); Schumann (Album for the Young); and
transcriptions of Italian cembalo and organ works of the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.4 Most of these
1. Elisabeth Lang, interview with the investigator, 21

December 1954.
2. Gyorgy Sandor, interview with the investigator, 8
January 1955.
3. Wilhelmine Creel Driver, letter to the investigator,
12 April 1954.
4. This listing is a collation of the materials on file
at the Bartok Archive and Halsey Stevens's list
(op. cit., pp. 333-334).
49
became the standard pedagogical editions in Hungary, and

the basis for piano study within the Academy of Music. 1
Although Bartok's private and Academy teaching was,
according to direct report, limited to the instruction of
advanced pianists who were preparing for concert or teach-
ing careers, he was apparently much concerned with the
musical and technical training of beginning pianists. In-
deed, evidence of this concern is manifest in the number
of works he composed with pedagogical purposes in mind.
In 1908 Bartok composed the first of his teaching
works for the piano, the Ten Easy Pieces.
The 10 easy pieces - with a "Dedication" as an
eleventh - are a complement of the Bagatelles.
They were written with a pedagogical purpose,
that is, to supply piano students with con-
temporary easy pieces. This accounts for the
still more simplified means used in them.2
From 1908 to 1909 he worked on a collection of 85
piano pieces, titled For Children, which were based on
Hungarian and Slovakian folkmusic. In his unpublished
lecture notes Bartok explains his purpose in.composing
this work:
Already at the very beginning of my career
as a composer I had the idea to write some

Lili Balint, interview with the investigator, 22
December 1954. According to Balint, Bartok told
her that he was not satisfied with his piano edi-
tions, and that if he had to do them over again, he
^would make certain changes.
2. Bela Bartok,^ First Draft (unpublished) of_ Preface to
Bela Bart6k"~Masterp'ieces for the Piano (1945),
Bartok Archive-. The quotation was' deleted from the
final copy of the preface at the request of E. B.
Marks Co., the publishers.
50
easy works for piano students. This idea

originated in my experience as a piano
teacher; I had always the feeling, that the
available material for beginners has not
real musical value.1- Excepting very few
works, for instance Bach's easiest pieces
and Schumann's Jugendalbum. I thought this
not sufficient, therefore, more than 30
years ago I myself tried to write some easy
piano pieces; at that time I thought the
best thing to do would be to use folktunes.
Folk-melodies, in general, have great
musical value; so, at least the thematical
value would be secured. The following 16
pieces are some of those piano-pieces based
on folk-tunes.
I will begin with a groupe [sic] of 8
pieces; all these are very easy, pupils can
easily play them in the first or second
year of their studies. The folk-tunes used
in them are of simpler structure, some of
them having an almost international charac-
ter. So they don't present to the beginners
any special difficulty and can easily be
grasped by them.
(demonstration)
The following 8 pieces are taken from the
same collection but are somewhat more
difficult; may be played in the 3. or 4.
year.
(demonstration)
These 16 pieces are taken from my work
entitled "For children," which contains
about 80 pieces. I wrote them in order
to acquaint the piano-studying children
1. This statement and what follows it constitutes evi-

dence that Bartok probably did have experience
teaching beginners the piano, prior to his appoint-
ment to the Academy; in fact, this might account for
Sandor Reschofsky's statement to the investigator,
in a letter dated 9 May 1954, that "Bartok probably
taught children at the beginning of his career,
for he showed a highly developed sense in that
direction."
51
with the simple and non-romantic beauties

of folkmusic.
Excepting this purpose, there is no
special plan in this work.1
Bartok collaborated with Sandor Reschofsky in the
writing of Zongora Iskola (piano School) in 1913. The
work, a manual for teachers of beginning piano students,
was written at the request of the publishing firm of
Rozsavftlgyi in Budapest. The publishers wanted Bartok
to write a series of methods from the beginning of piano
study to the highest or virtuoso degree. Bartok agreed
to do so only on the condition that Reschofsky would be
contracted to work with him on the entire scheme.
The idea was to write first a School, then
divide the material between us two and
work separately under mutual supervision.
So for the second year Bartok selected
easy'pieces by Bach,2 whereas I wrote
technical exercises and selected easy
pieces by different composers.3
During the first World War Reschofsky was in England
and' Bartok in Hungary, a circumstance which caused an
interruption in the work. Aften the war ended,-the pub-
lishers were not interested in continuing the series nor
were the collaborators inclined to complete it. 4
Reschofsky states that he and Bartok planned the
outline of Zongora Iskola which did not reach its final
1. Bela Bartok, Unpublished Lecture Notes, Bartok Archive.

2. Published under the title of Thirteen Easy Little
Piano Pieces.
3. Sandor Reschofsky, letter to the investigator, 6 June
1954.
4. Loc. cit.
52
form until they had had many preliminary talks about the
method.1 Then, as a result of these conferences,
Reschofsky wrote most of the exercises and Bartok the
pieces illustrating the technical problems in Zongora
Iskola.2 In 1929 Bartok selected eighteen of the pieces
from the method and published them under the title of
The First Term at the Piano.5
Bartok's third and last pedagogical work for the
piano was the Mikrokosmos, composed from 1926 to 1939,
the work about which the present investigation is centered.
Bartok resigned from the Academy in 1934 and became
a working member of the Hungarian Academy of Science
where he devoted full time to musicological studies.4 He
continued to give private lessons to a few students from
1934 to 1939 in Budapest and from 1940 to 1945 in the
United States.5
Beginning in December, 1940, Bartok gave lecture-
recitals on the teaching of contemporary piano music at
certain American colleges and universities, and he played
as illustrations pieces from For Children, Mikrokosmos,
and other Bartok (and Kodaly) works.0
Bartok gave what may have been his last piano lesson
in 1945, the year of his death. It seems that Agnes
1. Loc. cit.
2. LeTter dated 12 December 1954.
3 Loc. cit.
5. Ibid., p. 38.
6. The programs are listed in Chapter V, below.
53
Butcher1 visited Bartok during Easter of that year,

traveling from Canada to New York City with the intention
of resuming her studies with him. She found him sick in
bed and sad that he could not give her a lesson that day.
Bartok happily accepted her suggestion that she would
play some Bach and Mozart music on the piano in the next
room and that if he wanted to make any corrections he
should signal for her to return to the sickroom by strik-
ing his water glass with a spoon.
I had the idea that I played like an angel,
but it was a good joke for him to hit the
glass so that I. ran back and forth. Finally,
I became quite upset and unhappy, for it
is not easy to stop, especially in the
Mozart, and start it again, and in the mean-
time jump between the piano and the sickroom.
Of course, Bartok knew it too. I took it
very seriously, which is what he wanted, for
he enjoyed the practical joke.2
The Principles of Piano Teaching

It has been stated that Bartok was most effective
in directing the musical aims and ideals of his pupils
due to the absolutely musical foundation he gave them
in that he taught music first and the instrument second.^
Bartok believed that musicianship preceded and formed
the foundation for performance at the piano. For example,
Peter Bartok, when he began the study of the piano under
1. A Canadian pianist who studied with Bartok for several

years in Budapest.
2. Agnes Butcher, Unpublished Radio Script (broadcast for
Radio Free Europe, Munich, on 21 January 1954),
Bartok Archive.
3. Erno Balogh, "Personal Glimpses of Bela Bartok," Pro-
Musica (1928), p. 18.
54
his father's tutelage, was not permitted to touch the

piano for about six months.1 He sang intervals and folk
songs, practiced the writing of notes and transpositions
and studied the musical signs and their meanings. When
he asked his father why it had been necessary to under-
take that preliminary musical instruction, the elder
Bartok replied, "One cannot be a pianist without being a
musician."2
An early example of Bartok emphasis on musicianship
can be found in his first piano method, Zongora Iskola
(1913), in which the teaching of pitch discrimination,
rhythm and other aspects of notation through singing
exercises precedes technical instruction.3 it is perhaps
worthy of mention that Bartok's concept of "music first
and the instrument second" is also one of Jaques-Dalcroze's
theories which the latter advanced in an essay written
about the time Bartok was working on Zongora Iskola.
Jaques-Dalcroze, attaching the system of instruction
which emphasizes finger exercises as the basis for piano
study, states: "... [this] makes a pianist not a musician
- nothing is developed except the fingers;"4 and he recom-
mends that ear training and rhythmic movement should
1. Peter Bartok, interview with the investigator,

28 July 1954.
2. Loc. cit. The son was twelve years old when he began
the study of the piano, and he took lessons from 1936
to 1939.
3. Bela Bartok and Sandor Reschofsky, Zongora Iskola
(Piano School), pp. 4-8.
4. mile Jaques-Dalcroze, Rhythm, Music and Education,
pp. 62-63.
55
precede piano lessons.

As additional evidence of Bartok's concern with
musicianship as a foundation for piano study, we have
the statement of Andor Fflldes to that effect that Bartok
insisted that his students should thoroughly analyze all
works which they studied from every point of view,2 and
that of Dorothy ParriBh who avers that her major achieve-
ment as a Bartok pupil was the acquisition of a concept
of form and architecture in music.3
Bartok apparently adhered to the precept of musi-
cianship throughout his career as a teacher; in fact, a
little more than a year before his death he restated his
belief that a background in harmony and musicianship
was essential to piano playing.
A Bartok pupil states that "the one fundamental prin-
ciple of Bartok's teaching was absolute faithfulness to
the intention of the composer in performance of all
music,"^ and illustrates her statement by describing
Bartok's conduct at piano lessons: "No detail escaped
notice from mechanical matters of fingering to the most
exquisite particulars of phrasing and tone color and,
above all, rhythm."0
1. I b i d . , p . 103.
2 . Andor Fflldes, "My F i r s t Meeting with B a r t o k , " Etude
(1955), P. 12.
3. Dorothy Parrish, interview with the investigator,
14 April 1955.
1954.
5. Wil he l m l n e Creel D r i v e r , l e t t e r to t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r ,
dated 2 A p r i l 1954.
6. As quoted i n Halsey S t e v e n s ' s Bartok biography ( o p .
c i t . , p . 39) ; .
56
Another pupil recalls that Bartok was "fanatically

meticulous" about details:
One accent ignored or misplaced called forth
from him an explanation justifying its exist- .
ence. Chords were to be rolled "just so." He
explained that the use of the'pedal at a cer-
tain point would give an entirely different
meaning and that tempo changes were to follow
exactly the metronome markings1 in the score
since he had tested each one.
Peter Bartok, concurring, refers to his father's
demonstration of pieces from For Children as "a very
simple performance without any excessive rubatos, pedal-
ling only as marked, with strict observance of rhythm and
accentuation."
Bartok required pupils to justify any kind of devi-
ation from the score, according to Erno Balogh,3 to which
Storm Bull adds that whatever interpretation he used was
acceptable to Bartok only if the former gave a complete
line of reasoning to explain each step.4
A noted authority on piano pedagogy has said that
every piano teacher must be trained to play his instrument
in such a finished and artistic manner that he can bring
out every feature in the interpretation of any composition
he is teaching his pupil. Only by hearing the music
played as a pattern for him to follow can the pupil have
1. Marya Sielska, Bartok's Mlkrokosmos: An Analysis of

its Technical Difficulties, p. 10.
2. As stated on the back of the jacket to the recording
of For Children, BRS 919-
3. Erno Balogh, interviews with the investigator, August-
September, 1954.
4. Storm Bull, "Bartok the Teacher," Musical Facts
(Chicago), 194l (from the author's typescript copy,
P. 2).
57
a clear idea of what is expected from him.1 It appears

that demonstrational teaching was also a fundamental part
of Bartok's piano lessons.
It has been reported that Bartok for the most part
played every piece before assigning it at the lesson.
"He was a perfectionist - if he couldn't play something
he wouldn't try it, although he could and would teach
any piece."2 It seems that Lili Balint studied pieces of
her own choice which Bartok also prepared so that he
would be able to demonstrate the way they were to be
played,-^ and that Peter Bartok was assigned new materials
after his father had performed them.4 Another pupil states
that Bartok always demonstrated at the piano"after he
corrected her performance.^
It appears that Bartok was quite patient: if a point
was not understood he would replay again and again at
the piano in demonstration. Another source states that
Bartok was untiring in that respect; in fact, he played
one phrase eight or ten times if it was necessary, or
spent ten minutes over one or two beats of music J
The Pedagogical Works

Bartok's explanatory notes to his piano editions of
1. C. W. Pearce, The Art of the Piano Teacher, p. 2.

4. Peter Bartok, _op. cit.
5. Elisabeth Lang, op. cit.
6. Marya Sielska, op. cit., p. 10.
7. Lajos Hernadi, TSartok Bela,. a zongoramtivesz, a
pedagogus, az ember,"tfjZenei Szemle (1953), p. 5.
58
Bach1 and Beethoven,2 and the information contained in

Zongora Iskola provide much of the "technical and theo-
retical description and instruction" which Bartok
excluded from the Mlkrokosmos on the assumption that
"Every teacher knows what is required in this respect
and is able to give the earliest instruction without
reference to a book or method."3
I. Zongora Iskola (Bartok-Reschofsky)

The authors recommend that the pupil should be in-
structed to use a slightly inflected wrist with the
elbows positioned above the keyboard. The key is struck
from a raised position of the flexed finger. All exer-
cises and pieces should be practiced slowly at first until
the difficulties are mastered; then, they should be played
at the recommended metronomic speed.
Touch-Forms
When playing hand-to-hand legato, the change
should take place imperceptibly.
1. We11-Tempered Clavier, Thirteen Easy Little Piano

Pieces. The former was published by Rozsnyai
(Budapest) and the latter by Rozsavtilgyi (Budapest).
2. Sonatas (Rozsnyai). The Bach and Beethoven editions
were published between 1908 and 1913.
3. Bela Bartok, Preface to Mikrokosmos, Vol. I, p. 3. It
is perhaps interesting to note that a piano method
published in Hungary in 1953 (Zongora Iskola by
Mathe, Kapi-Kralik, and Geza Papp) contains the
pieces and exercises from the first volume of the
Mikrokosmos and the Bartok-Reschofsky Zongora
Iskola.
4. The so-called "percussive touch." (See Ortmann, The
Physiological Mechanics of Piano Technique, pp.
231-234)'. ~
59
Non-legato is that touch in which one finger

strikes a key only after a previously-employed
finger has left its key. The gap between the
two tones should be hardly perceptible. Non-
legato should be played from the wrist whenever
the tempo permits; however, if the succession
of notes is fast, separation occurs from the
fingers. A small vertical line I is used to
indicate non-legato between two notes.
The break of the curved legato line /^""v^ \.
also indicates a gap between two tones and is
used mostly for this purpose, but with the
exception where the curved lines indicate
the intellectual affinity or separation of
notes and/or phrases. Synonymously inter-
dependent groups marked with phrase arcs
are not separated at their divisions and must
be played sempre legato.
Staccato can be played from the fingers or the
wrist and is to be executed so that the tone
sounds only at the moment of touch. In the
finger staccato the finger leaves the key
immediately after the touch and darts into a
raised position. Eliminate stiff and forced
holding of the fingers and wrist and heed the
suddenness of this action. In the wrist staccato
the hand is somehow kicked back. The whole
action should give the impression of a ball
bouncing back from the ground. Employ it often
because it lightens the hand and the playing.
It is the task of the teacher to decide what
to play with finger staccato and what with
wrist staccato. Generally, the latter is to be
used when the succession of notes is slow and
the former if fast.l
Repeated note staccato is to be played from
the wrist with the forearm and finger-joints
motionless. In this touch the hand rebounds
effortlessly after each stroke. Staccato
sixths are played exclusively from the wrist
without moving the forearm.
Staccatissimo '''' is an increased staccato

in which the tone becomes the shortest pos-
sible - almost "sharp."
1. The authors recommend the'use of finger staccato for

quarter-note figures at M.M.= 96 and above. Like
the non-legato touch,.the wrist should be employed
in the staccato touch whenever the tempo permits.
60
The portamento is marked ,\r. or -

for individual notes. It is neither
staccato nor legato; in other words, it
takes place between them.
The tenuto sign - - - - means literally
"detained." It is a kind of warning that
the note is more important and colorful
and therefore should be maintained in its
full value. To such notes a certain
color shading must be added by pressing
the key instead of striking it. 1
Wrist motion should be employed, if the
tempo permits, when playing the first
beat of a measure or the first note after
a rest. The pianist has need of an
equally developed wrist and fingers. One
without the other is not worth much.
The playing of marcato > and sforzato sf
should be carried out by the fingers and
should not be perceivable in the hand. In
this touch the position of the fingers does
not change.
Part-Playing
When two independent line systems are played
in one hand it should sound as if they are
played with both hands. The parts can be
played first with two hands and then with one.
Dynamics
A dynamic sign is effective until replaced
by another.
When two notes not on the same line or
space are connected with a curved line,
a decrescendo takes place -towards the
second note. Marcato within the frame of
piano is weaker than that within the frame
of forte.
1. The so-called "non-percussive touch." (See Ortmann,

loc. cit.)
61
Rhythm
The first part of each measure receives
the chief emphasis.
Every syncopated note should be played
with some weight and emphasis.
The fermata /7\ about doubles the note
beneath it.
Expression
Espressivo (with expression) and doIce
(with softness) cannot be learned by
description. The student can acquire
them only if the teacher demonstrates at
the piano.1
II. Bach: Thirteen Easy Little Piano Pieces (Bela

Bartok, editor)
Touch-Forms
The bow-endings marking the ending of a
phrase does not mean that the last note
must be played staccato, or that the
sound should be shorter in any way. This
should be done only if there is a staccato
sign on top of the last note, or if there
is this separating sign. J
In addition to the separating sign \ ,
we use another interrupting sign, the
comma , . The latter does not mean
interruption only, but a slight, almost
unnoticeable stop. The time of the
separation sign J is taken from the
notes preceding that sign and that of the
sign , is taken equally from the notes
preceding and following the comma (some-
times you can take more time from the
preceding note as long as it balances
1. The investigator has selected only those technical and

musical instructions in Zongora Iskola which are
perhaps less-commonly known or least understood by
the piano teacher. Some of the instructions not
listed are those concerned with legato touch, the mean-
ing of such terms as cantabile and andante, and so
forth.
62
the time for the following one). If the

sign I is between staccato notes it
indicates the end of a phrase.
There are many different versions in
connection with staccatlsslmo and legato.
These are the signs:
' ' ' = sharp staccato (staccatlsslmo - a
more piercing and accented tone).
... = regular staccato (the sounding of
the note ranges from the shortest
in value to one-half the value of
the note.
. O = portamento (the notes have to be
played almost always one-half their
value and with which there is some
special coloring. The notes can
be played shorter).
-TT = the half-short sign (the notes are
never less than one-half their value)
= the tenuto sign (if it is above a
note, hold it for its full value; if
it is ahove a group of' ncte-a", do not
connect them but give each note its
full value, if possible. If the sign
is above a note in legato groups, it
must be emphasized lightly and with a
different coloring at the same time.
/^~~\ = the legato sign which is also used to
indicate a series of phrase groups.
Dynami c s
sf = the strongest emphasis.
A = still a sufficiently strong emphasis.
> = weak emphasis.
III. Bach: Well-Tempered Clavier (Bela Bartok,

editor)
Touch-Forms
The same sign is used to indicate legato or
phrasing. When a large bow is placed over a
smaller one, the former indicates legato and
the latter is the phrase-bow. When two bows
meet at one note, the phrase ends and begins
on that note. Rarely do we have to use a
definite staccato to separate the last note
63
of a phrase from the beginning note of the

next. Usually we have to emphasize the
beginning of the next phrase with a very
slight dynamic shading. If a strong separa-
tion between phrases is necessary, we use
the sign \
To mark a non-legato we use the simple non-
legato sign for the heavier, or stronger,
touch and the poco legato sign for the weaker,
or lighter, touch.
We use the sign - (tenuto) for non-legato in
slow tempo which means we have tcThold the
note for almost its full value. The dotted
tenuto sign 7 means.a certain half-length
in connection with the tenuto touch.
The portamento sign *C7\ is in close connec-
tion with the dotted tenuto. They can be
explained as being similar, but with one dif-
ference: it is necessary that we play portamento
lightly. There is more lightness in portamento
than in dotted tenuto.
The staccato rarely should be played suddenly
short. Usually we have to play staccato with
a rounder-sounding tone. The sign '' indi-
cates a sharp staccato.
Sometimes we place a tenuto sign above certain
notes which means a slight emphasis in connec-
tion with a tenuto touch.
Dynamics
If a melodic line ascends use a crescendo and
if it descends use a diminuendo. Do the same
in sequential progressions; crescendo as
ascending groups follow one another and diminu-
endo as they descend. If the lines of a crescendo
mark ^ ' - are narrow and small it refers only
to the melodic line in that measure. If the
mark is larger and thicker it refers to all the
melodic lines in that measure.
We must emphasize those notes which (a) have
longer values, (b) are syncopated, and (c) are
suspensions inserted between notes of shorter
value. We mark them with different marcato
signs: the strongest is sf, quite strong is A ,
and the sign > is the wealcest of the three.
64
IV. Beethoven: Sonatas (Bela Bartok, editor)
Touch-Forms
Legatisslmo is an exaggerated legato. When
every tone is held over a little into the
beginning od the next one. It can be per-
fected by using the half-pedal.
The so-called espressivo touch is played
with handbewegung.1
Dynamics
sf = the strongest accent.

A less strong than sf.
the least strong accent.
the wider the angle the more the
crescendo.
Rhythm
Sostenuto: a sudden ritardando. Ritard.
and Riten. mean a gradual
slackening of speed.
Other Terms
Pochettino or Pochissimo: we use this in terms
of "A Very Little."
Other Specifics of Piano Teaching

In a letter to the investigator, Sandor Reschofsky
comments on a touch-form not described in Zongora Iskola:
"Concerning martellato - the fingers rather pierce the
keys; you hit the keys, they are hammering. Here the
wrist gets stiffer than usual."2
A Bartok friend recalls that Bartok advised the use
1. I_.e., hand-motion. (See Ortmann, op. cit., pp. 178-182).

2. LeTTter dated 24 September 1954. ' '
65
of forward and backward movements of the arm when playing

chromatic passages,1 and another source states that
Bartok played high on the white keys with the finger
tips near the black.2
It seems that Bartok criticized sharply excessive
wrist playing which he described as "loose, wobbly
wrists that lead to loss of arm control," and he was
also quite concerned about rests.3
Balogh asserts that Bartok required the accentuation
of syncopated notes to emphasize the off-beat and to
sustain the tone. Bartok, careful in his use of the damper
pedal, cautioned against its excessive use. He employed
the soft pedal to a considerable extent and advised the
use of the half-pedal for misty effects.4
Bartok knew exactly what he wanted in terms
of the pedalling of his own piano music.
He wrote pedal signs wherever there might
be a doubt in the performer's mind concern-
ing its application or whenever he required
the use of pedal color. Much of Bartok's
music does not contain pedal indications
since he assumed the performer would under-
stand the intention of the score.5
Two Bartok pupils concur in the statement that syn-

copated pedalling of the normal variety seemed to satisfy
1. Julius G. Baron, interview with the investigator, 12

March 1955. Baron and Victor Bator were appointed
co-trustees of the Bartok Estate by the composer in
1945; Physician, amateur pianist, and friend of
Bartok beginning in 1923, Baron often discussed prob-
lems of piano technique and interpretation with the
composer.
2. Ann Chenee, op_. cit.
66
their teacher. In addition, it appears that Bartok

expected the rearrangement of any phrase or section,
through division of the hands, and so forth, where such
technical revision permitted greater freedom of expression.
In a letter to the investigator, Storm Bull describes
the technical and musical instruction he received during
his piano Btudy with Bartok:
Phrasing in general was taught entirely as
a matter of controlled dynamics. Every
note should be held for its full value un-
less marked otherwise. This included the
last note of phrases which was never less
legato in going into the next phrase than
in its connection with the past phrase. In
general he deemphasized (played softer) the
first note of a new phrase unless he wanted
to break the continuity.
Notes whether accented or not were held for

their full value. Staccato was half the
value of the note, jl.e_., quarter-note
staccato was played as an eighth plus an
eighth rest. Staccatisslmo was slightly
accented and played as short as possible
regardless of the note value. Any combina-
tion of phrasing or legato marking and/or
staccato was played with a slight detach-
ment before the succeeding note or rest.
He was very careful with regard to the

degree of dynamic force allotted to
accents.3
Summary
For almost a half-century, from 1897 to 1945, Bela
Bartok was a piano teacher, with more than twenty-five
1. Elisabeth Lang, op. cit. .

Storm Bull, letter to the investigator, 28 July 1954.
2. Storm Bull. "Bartok the Teacher," Musical Facts
(Chicago), 194l (author's typescript copy, p. 2 ) .
67
of those years as Professor of Piano at the Academy of

Music in Budapest. His teaching experiences were many
and varied; in fact, they included the teaching of
private and Academy piano students of different degrees
of skill and advancement (including beginners), the
editing of a considerable amount of piano music which
became standard pedagogical editions in Hungary, the
composition of pedagogical works for the piano and the
writing of a piano school for beginners, and the presen-
tation of lecture recitals on the teaching of "contempo-
rary music."
Bartok in his teaching assigned greater value to

musicianship than technique, for he conceived of the
latter as the means rather than the end in piano playing.
A second fundamental principle was the extension of his
philosophy of performance to his teaching: to follow
the intention of the composer as expressed in the written
score. A third precept was demonstrational teaching
which Bartok employed with patience and seeming tire-
lessness throughout his career as a piano teacher.
The Bartok-Reschofsky Zongora Iskola (Piano School),

the Bartok editions of piano music by Bach and Beethoven,
and the statements of Bartok piano pupils provide most of
the technical and theoretical description and instruction
not incorporated in the Mikrokosmos. Indeed, Zongora
Iskola and the Bach and Beethoven editions, by their agree-
ment in terms of the touch-forms of piano technique,
68
provide the key to the problem of the basic way the piano
is to be played in the Mlkrokosmos: by key-striking
(finger lift) - the so-called "percussive touch." This
fact, more thoroughly explored in Chapter VII below, has
proven to be one of the most essential guiding principles
in the preparation of a guide to the Mlkrokosmos.
i
CHAPTER V
HISTORY OF THE MIKROKOSMOS
Bartok's resumption of his concert career in the

1920's, expanded to an international scale, was perhaps
the cause of his increased activity in the composition
of piano music. Nineteen twenty-six was the year in
which he wrote the Sonata for Piano, Out of Doors, and
Nine Little Piano Pieces, and began the collection of
piano pieces eventually called Mikrokosmos. *
Verification of 1926 as the year in which the
Mikrokosmos originated can be found in two documents con-
taining Bartok's handwriting. One, a tires-a-part from
Denjis Dille's biography of the composer,2 contains
Bartok's autographic additions and corrections to what
is apparently the first published chronological catalogue
of his works in which the Mikrokosmos is listed.3 The
other, titled "List of all noticed errors in piano score
of Violin Concerto," is in part a request from Bartok to
his publisher (Boosey and Hawkes, London) to change the
entry concerning the Mikrokosmos (printed on the back

pp. 61,68.
2. Denjis Dille, Bela Bartok (1939), pp. 89-91.
3. A photostatic copy of the pamphlet is on file at the
Bartok Archive. The date listed for the Mikrokosmos
is 1926-1937.
70
cover page of the Concerto) as follows:

...piano solo...last item: omit (1940), or sub-
stitute (1926-1939) for it.l
Which one of the 153 pieces comprising the Mikrokosmos
was composed first is a matter of conjecture; the evidence,
however, seems to indicate Unison (.no. 137) - and this
pan be quite conclusively attributed to having been com-
posed in 1926.
Bartok catalogued most of his manuscripts numerically,
assigning the number 32 (printed with green crayon on the
title page) to a thirty-one page manuscript containing
sketches and second (intermediary) drafts of the Nine
Little Piano Pieces, incomplete sketches of unidentified
piano music, and one sketch each from Out of Doors, First
Piano Concerto, and Mikrokosmos.2 The original title on
the cover page was written in pencil: kis zongoradarabok
(little piano pieces) and above it, in bright blue ink,
the following:
9 Kleine Klavierstucke (Skizzen)
(einige Skizzen zu "Mikrokosmos"
"im Freien" I. Klavierkonzert)
The entire manuscript was neatly written first in
blue-black ink with a narrow pen and later corrected in
pencil.--5 The twenty-fifth page contains a continuation
of the second Dialogue (no. 2 of Nine Little Piano Pieces)
1. MS File, Bartok Archive.

2. Loc. cit.
3. Sixteen ruled staves per page, each page 10-1/2x13-1/4"
in size.
71
on the first four staves. The remainder of the page

consists of a sketch of Unison (Mikrokosmos: no. 137)
completed in two operations: first, an outline of the
piece was written in the same color ink and the identical
penmanship as that of the other pieces comprising the com-
plete manuscript; then corrections, additions, and exten-
sions were made in blue ink with a broad pen and with a
calligraphy considerably less neat in appearance. In
fact, the revisions of Unison are identical in terms of
ink, pen, and handwriting to those sketches contained in
manuscript no. 49 (Mikrokosmos Klaviersttlcke, Brouillon)
which are the first drafts of Mikrokosmos.-1-
Logically, it is not unlikely that Bartok composed
the preliminary (then unfinished) sketch to Unison as
part of a collection of piano pieces intended for publi-
cation in 1926.2 (There is no apparent relationship
between the other incomplete sketches in manuscript no.
32 and the Mikrokosmos as finally constituted). For one
reason or another, perhaps because of his preoccupation
with the composition of Out of Doors or the First Piano
Concerto that same year, he decided to submit for publi-
cation under the title of Nine Little Piano Pieces those
sketches he had completed, and he returned to the manu-
script at a later date to finish the sketch to Unison.
1. The file number of this manuscript in the Bartok Archive

is 59S1.
2. He completed Nine Little Piano Pieces on October 31,
1926, in Budapest, and they were published by
Universal-Edition A.G. (Vienna) in 1927.
72
Incidentally, this piece is not included in manuscript

no. 49.
It has been suggested that Bartok's conception of
Mikrokosmos as a title1 or as a collection of pieces with
a pedagogical purpose did not occur prior to 1933.2
I possess no letter from Bartok myself on
the subject of "Mikrokosmos," but I feel
myself connected with this work in a small
way of which I am rather proud.
In 1933 I wrote a series of short piano
pieces which were published by Schott, '
Mainz, under the title "Rhythmic Studies."
The pieces dealt with various rhythmical
problems like "Syncopation," "Shifting of
Accents," "Cross-rhythms," etc., and were
mainly devised for teaching purposes. As
usual, after publication I sent a copy of it
to Bartok, together with my "Easy Dances,"
published shortly before. Years later
when I met Bartok again (I think it must
have been in London in 1938) I asked him
what he thought of my Rhythmic Studies.
' He congratulated me warmly, saying what
excellent teaching material they were,3
then continued: "In fact, I took up your
idea and expanded it further: I am now
working on a series of piano pieces which
deal not only with the rhythmic, but also
. with melodic, harmonic and pianistic prob-
lems." .This series was to become the Mlkro-
kosmos .
1. Apparently borrowed from the Greek: mikroskosmos -

little world. C. Bartok's broadcast statement of
objectives of the work in Chapter VI.
2. Matyas Seiber, Letter to the investigator, 9 October
.1954. A pupil of Kodaly and friend of Bartok, Seiber
now lives in England' where he composes, teaches com-
position, lectures, writes for various publications,
and conducts.
3. Peter Bartok, in his interview with the investigator
on 28 Juiy 1954, reported that his father taught
him popular pieces composed by Seiber. "We played
foxtrots, rhumbas, and so forth, as duets in which
my father improvised a bass part."
4. Matyas Seiber, op. cit.
73
Bartok's unpublished lecture notes contain informa-

tion in support of Seiber's contention. After referring
to For Children (composed 1908-i'909) as easy pieces
written for piano students, Bartok said: "More than
twenty years later I again turned to this problem. But
now I approached the work with a very definite plan.
My idea...is entitled Mikrokosmos."1
Accordlng to a statement made by Peter Bartok, his
father's first reference to the title Mikrokosmos and his
first assertion that the collection of pieces under that
name constituted a piano method was made in 1936.
I served as a "guinea pig" in my father's
experiments with the Mikrokosmos, in 1936,
the first year I began piano study; in
fact, he wrote the pieces faster than I
could learn them. Then he composed the
Mikrokosmos independent of any considera-
tion of its suitability for me. 2
A Bartok pupil showed the investigator tissue proofs-?
in Bartok's autograph of several pieces from the Mikro-
kosmos which the composer presented to her during the
1936-1937 school year in Budapest. She said that Bartok
referred to the pieces at that time as teaching materials
from a collection called Mikrokosmos.4
1. Documentary File, Bartok Archive.

2. Peter Bartok, interview with the investigator, 28 July
1954. Oh the back cover of the jacket to the BRS
recording of For Children (no. 919) he further states:
"...(the ink hardly dried on some when I started
practicing, them)..."
3. A term used in the Bartok Archive to designate repro-
ductions made from transparent masters by a photo-
graphic process.
4. Dorothy Parrish, interview with the investigator, 14
April 1955.
74
One of Bartok1s former colleagues at the Budapest

Academy of Music discloses that the composer asked for
her assistance in the preparation of certain volumes of
the Mikrokosmos:
Since he [Bartok] had never taught beginners
himself, the composer honored me repeatedly
by asking for my suggestions concerning the
musical and technical problems to be solved
in the early grades. While we discussed
sundry details of the pieces included in the
first three volumes, what struck me most was
not the systematic way in which he reached
the solution of each problem, but his keen
sense of responsibility towards the pupil
whose progress he wanted to serve.1
On February 9, 1937 Bartok played the first per-
formance of pieces from the Mikrokosmos at Cowdray Hall,
London, and accompanied the violinist Zoltan Szekely in
the Bartok Sonata for Violin and Piano and the Second
Rhapsody for Violin and Piano.2 He wrote to Szekely less
than a month before the concert: "A program loquacious
enough! But at least these many pieces are all 'manu-
script'.'^ A few days after the occupation of Vienna in
1938, Ralph Hawkes flew to Budapest and met with Bartok:
1. Margit Varro, unpublished paper read at the Wisconsin

Conservatory of Music, 29 September 1950. Another
unpublished paper (Contributions to Bela Bartok's
Biography) was presented to the Midwest Chapter of
the American Musicological Society in March, 1949
which contains a similar statement. The investigator
has been unable to maintain his correspondence with
Varro concerning the time, extent and specific nature
of her help to Bartok. It seems reasonable to assume,
however, that Bartok consulted her during the time
he was teaching his son Peter (a beginner), from
1936 to 1939.
75
There was certainly no reticence on Bartok's

part in agreeing to publish all his future
works with us [Boosey and Hawkes]. He had
several manuscripts, in preparation, such as
the Sonata for Two PianoB and Percussion and
Mikrokosmos, which were partly done,...1
The Bartok file of the London office of Boosey and
Hawkes, consisting of more than 200 letters and other
documents, contains the correspondence between Bartok
and Ralph Hawkes (and other members of the company) con-
cerning the preparation of the Mikrokosmos for publica-
tion. The composer's letters were written for the most
part from his home in Budapest and are dated from May,
1938.2
The interchange of letters begins with an invitation
from Hawkes to Bartok for the latter to appear at one
of "the intimate little Concerts we give in our Organ
Studio here in London."3 Bartok's reply states: "of
course I am with pleasure at your disposal and would play
at your concert some of my piano pieces from 'Mikrokos-
i4 /
mos'. Less than a week later, Bartok sent the follow-

ing program to Hawkes:
From "Mikrokosmos" (piano pieces):
Tale; I Wrestling; 1 Major seconds broken and
together; | Minor and Major; I Theme and in-
version; | Boating; 1 Burlesque rustique;j
Chords of the Fifth; | From the Isle Bali; |
Merry Andrew; i Five dances in "Bulgarian"
1. Ralph Hawkes, "Bela Bartok: A Recollection by His

Publisher," A Memorial"Review (1950), p. 17.
2. Correspondence"T?ile, Bartok Archive.
3. Letter dated 29 April 1938.
4. Letter dated 8 May 1938.
76
rhythm.
This takes approximately 20 minutes.
The publisher's answer to the foregoing letter
informs Bartok that the concert would be given at five
o'clock in the afternoon on June 20, 1938.2
In what seems to be an office memorandum, the fol-
lowing statement appears: "Among his [Bartok's] new
works, the Studies for Piano 'Mikrocosmos' would be the
most important for us..."-5
No further reference to the Mikrokosmos appears in
the correspondence until early in 1939, the year in which
Universal-Edition released Bartok from his publishing
agreement with them. On March 6 Hawkes wrote to Bartok
that he was ready to publish all the new works the com-
poser had ready.
Mrs. Hertzke, who called to see me the other
day, tells me that you have a School for Piano
in preparation. This work will, of course, be
very interesting indeed but I do not recall
that you told me anything about it when I had
lunch with you.
Bartok's reply, sent from Basel on the ninth of
March, states:
That piano-school is nothing else than first
part of the "Mikrokosmos"!4 In fact, it will

2. Later changed to 3 P.M.
3. The document is undated and unsigned. The wording
of the memorandum suggests that it was perhaps
written by Ralph Hawkes. The reader will note that
the Mikrokosmos is here referred to as "studies."
4. The italics are the investigator's insertion to indi-
cate that the three words were not part of the ori-
ginal sentence but later added above it. Thus, it
77
be something like a school, with exercises,

progressive order of the (very easy and easy)
pieces. If you prefer to have it more similar
to a School, I could add to It some change-
ments.
The publisher then informed Bartok that a "strict
Piano School In such a form" was not actually wanted, that
the former wished to go ahead with the publication and
not wait for the "absolute completion" of the composer's
idea, and that individual pieces from the Mikrokosmos
could be incorporated into a School at a later date.1
It seems likely that at this time Bartok discarded

any ideas he might have had concerning the publication
of the Mikrokosmos as piano pieces, per se, according to
the following letter mailed from Budapest:
Mikrokosmos. It is absolutely important to
add still 20 or 30 very small and very easy
pieces, to write them will not take much
time. Besides, I want to transcribe some of
the easier pieces for 4 hands, and to insert
before some of the (easier) pieces presenting
a new technical problem, a respective study
(Fingertibung) - all that for pedagogical
reasons...2
The letter continues with a suggestion that certain
pieces could be published with pictures "only if the
pictures are very good and original" (such as a web in
no. 142, From the Diary of a Fly) .3
Hawkes agreed with Bartok's proposals, particularly
seems reasonable to conclude that the Mikrokosmos

in its present published form as a piano method
was not Bartok's original conception when he com-
posed certain of its pieces.
,2. Letter dated 17 April 1939.
3." Loc. cit.
78
with reference to the use of sketches in illustration

of the Mikrokosmos, voiced the opinion that publication
might be possible in the early part of 1940, and suggested
that if Bartok could not secure the services of an artist
in Budapest he should come to London and confer with one
there.1 Bartok replied that he had no "occasion or
possibility to come to England" before his next concert
tour in November or December, 1939,. "so I can't see the
gentleman you will choose for the sketches."
In another letter, Bartok states that "I will send
you a copy of the incomplete Mikrokosmos in a few days.
I am very busy now in filling all the gaps still existant
[sic] in it and have written ca 30 new pieces, but these
are not yet copied. Now the whole work is almost com-
plete..."5
On June 17, 1939, Bartok wrote that he was sending
the Mikrokosmos pieces whose order was "more or less
Ple-mle (given by haphazard)."
The definitive order will be according to
difficulty. My idea is to have them pub-
lished in three volumes (you must not
forget, there will be some 30 or 40 more
of.them!): I. the easiest pieces (in-
tended for the 1. and 2. year) II. the
less easier pieces III the more difficult
ones. The I. volume should be printed
in bigger characters (this is better for
beginners) than the II. and III.4

3. Letter dated 13 June 1939-
4. Bartok also suggested that not all the pieces should
have sketches and that they should be in Volume I
for the most part.
79
After he received the manuscript of the Mikrokosmos,

Hawkes engaged the services of an artist and sent several
sketches to Bartok for approval.1 The composer found them
to be "too confusing for children" and suggested that
they should be redrawn in terms of "the children's eyes."
In the same letter he adds: "As for a new work, you
know, I want to score some of the Mikrokosmos pieces...
I hope this will be ready perhaps end of Oct.,..."2
Hawkes assured Bartok that the sketches would be im-
proved, and suggested that there should be a preface of
some kind in each of the four volumes planned for publi-
cation which would explain the various pieces and give
an indication of the whole series. He enclosed an
article about the Mikrokosmos written by his assistant,
Dr. Ernst Roth (intended as advance publicity), for
Bartok's criticism.-' Bartok returned the article with
his remarks inserted therein, and he wanted to know
whether it was intended for publication in the Boosey
and Hawkes publication Tempo. Hawkes replied that "The
article on 'MIKROKOSMOS' is intended not only for general
publicity purposes but also as a pamphlet to be issued
with the works when they are published and I take it you
approve of it."-3
1. Letter dated 29 June 1939.

2. Letter dated 8 July 1939.
3. Letter dated 14 July 1939-
80
On November 2, 1939, Bartok informed Hawkes that

the Mikrokosmos, consisting of 153 pieces, was ready
except for the Preface and the "footnotes"' to some of
the pieces.1
On November 23, 1939, Hawkes reported that he received
the complete Mikrokosmos manuscript and that he would
write again within a few days concerning the progress
made towards its publication. It was not until December
9, however, that a rather lengthy letter was mailed to
Bartok which suggested that the sketches planned as il-
lustrations for certain pieces should be eliminated, and
that sales factors might necessitate the division of
the first volume (containing 66 pieces) into two parts
with a resulting publication of six volumes in all. The
letter also noted errors in nos. 8,38,66,102,120,142, and
143 for Bartok's correction, and stated that the com-
poser's preface to the Mikrokosmos did not give suffi-
cient information or detail: "and will be what we call
'sales resisting', unless it is done in a much more
simple and easy manner...I am proposing to send you a
revised preface at an early date which I think will
meet this purpose." Hawkes further stated that a sub-
title which would give an indication on the cover page
as to the general contents of the series was required.
1. The manuscript was separated into two parts by the

composer and mailed the 11th (nos. 1-121) and l4th
(nos.122-153, the Exercises, and the Preface and
Remarks) of November, according to his letter
dated 13 November 1939.
81
Bartok accepted Hawkes's proposals, requested the

publisher to send subtitles in English which he, Bartok,
would translate into Hungarian, and he corrected the
noted errors. Bartok's comments concerning no. 142
(From the Diary of a Fly) are perhaps worthy of inclusion
here:
No. 142: "jaj, pokhalo!" means "Woe, a cobweb"!
I wanted to depict the desperate sound of a fly's
buzz, when getting into a cobweb. Now, I don't
know, if we use three languages for this expla-
nation, the joke will be spoilt. Will you kindly
decide, what to do here. We may leave out these
words.2
i
The publisher then notified Bartok that future pro-

duction problems concerning the publication of the
Mikrokosmos would be handled by Dr. Roth and Mr. Stein
of the London office, since he, Hawkes, was leaving for
a three or four months stay in America.3
The problem of selecting a suitable subtitle for
the cover page was discussed by Roth in his first letter
to Bartok: "...f.e. [sic] 'Progressive Pieces for Piano'
or, what sounds very good in English 'Progressive Piano
Pieces in Modern Idiom' or something of this kind."
Roth further stated that "As far as the preface is con-
cerned, we added a paragraph emphasising the particular
aim of your work," and he suggested that Bartok might
"alter or re-write it on similar lines."4
1. Letter dated 18 December 1939.

2. Loc. cit. The words do not appear in the published
version of no. 142.
3. Letter dated 20 December 1939.
4. Letter dated 2 January 1940.
82
Bartok accepted the subtitle "Progressive Pieces for

Piano" but voiced his disapproval in no uncertain terms
concerning the use of the word "modernity" in the para-
graph that had been written by the company and inserted
in his original preface to the Mikrokosmos.
2. In the English and French Preface, I have
some slight remarks. But, as for those parts
about the "modernity" inserted by you, that
is quite impossible to publish it in a Preface,
signed by my name, where I am speaking, and
giving hints and winks in my own name. I
would never do that: to make excuses for the
"modernity" etc.; besides I don't like the
word "modern" at all! Think of it: in 20, or
let us say in 40 years this work will cease
to be "modern." And what does it mean "modern"?
This word has no definite sens [sic], can be
misinterpreted, misunderstoodjl
On January 17, 1940, Bartok wrote to Roth that the
subtitle should be "Progressive Piano Pieces."
Bartok's plan to leave Budapest for the United States
in March prompted Hawkes's urgent request to his London
office to complete the engraving of the Mikrokosmos so
that Bartok might correct the first proofs prior to his
journey. Then, Hawkes suggested, if second proofs were
not required by the composer, the final proofs could be
sent to New York for printing and copies of the work
placed on sale during Bartok's visit.2
In an effort to comply with Hawkes's wishes, Roth
mailed proofs to Bartok as soon as they were completed -
two volumes at a time - and requested that the composer

83
"refrain from having second proofs sent to Budapest."1

Unaware of Roth's request (the mail service between
London-and Budapest was considerably delayed at this time),
Bartok wrote to Leslie Boosey demanding second proofs of
the fifth and sixth volumes of the Mikrokosmos since the
first proofs had been sent without Hungarian titles and
words. He enclosed explanatory remarks to certain pieces,
in German, which were to be translated into English and
French "but no Hungarian publication of them is neces-
sary, every musician or even amateur of serious music has
a thorough knowledge of these subjects."2
Roth answered the above with another request that
the composer should not ask for second proofs. Bartok
yielded, "although reluctantly," and he insisted that
the Hungarian titles and words missing from the first
proofs would have to b.e shown to "Hungarian-knowing
people, the best would be the composer Matyas Seiber."5
Bartok also wanted the explanatory notes to be on
the same pages as their respective pieces (after each
piece, or at the end of the page) in the first and fourth
volumes of the Mikrokosmos.4 In a postscript, however,
he states that the notes could be printed as "Remarks"

3. Letter dated 2 February 1940.
4. Loc. cit. He was correcting the proofs to these
-volumes at the time. In the published copies of
the Mikrokosmos, the explanatory notes appear on
the last page of Vols. I, II, and IV, and after the
respective pieces in Vols. Ill, V, and VI.
84
providing that an asterisk would be inserted after the

number of the respective piece. In another section of
the same letter, he comments that the ten days it took
him to correct the fifth and sixth volumes were not too
much "for such complicated proofs," and he adds:
I hope, you are not too much shocked by
the additions I put into the proofs and
by the few alterations (in some cases it
appeared that in the Mss there are faults).
In any case, take anything I have written
into the proofs as my "last will," and
disregard whatever contradictory you see
in the Mss .-1-
Bartok's original plan to publish the first 66
pieces in one volume was discarded by the company who
thought it would be more practical in terms of a lower
selling price per volume if the pieces were assembled
into two books. The composer could not understand why
the division had to be made since the proofs of the sixth
volume contained almost as many pages (55) as those com-
prising Vols. I and II (66, including the exercises and
explanatory notes).
It is a pity, that this division has been
made: now, the first book gives a very poor
impression; besides, the contents of those
60 pages are a real unity; they are meant
for the first year of piano-studying. Now,
every student will have to buy - after a few
month's studying, the second book!* Could
not be changed this disposition?
Yours, very sincerely
Bela Bartok
înstead of having his whole material of
1. Loc. cit.
85
first year's study in a single book.x

Roth replied that the first three volumes were to be
priced lower than the last three, and he asked Bartok to
p
accept the division.
In the meantime, additional proofs were sent to
Bartok as soon as they were engraved. The haphazard
order in which they were mailed and the demands made upon
him to speed the proofreading were not to his liking, as
evidenced by the following statements made in his letter
to Roth dated February 18, 1940:
This is awful, this hurrying with the proofs;
I am afraid there will be still many incon-
sequences; I have no (opportunity to have
(occasion
here everything (6 books, exercises, notes,
preface) at the same time and make the com-
parison.
This is a very complicated business, much
more complicated than an ordinary score...
I wonder why it is so important, to bring
out these volumes until April. But if we
do that, then the number of copies'should
be rather limited, in order to be able to
correct every inconsequency and fault (re-
sulting from this hurried work) in a very
1. Letter dated 5 February 1940 and addressed to Roth.

In the investigator's opinion, based on his experi-
ence in teaching the Mikrokosmos from volume to
volume to various students for more than ten years,
Bartok's use of the designation "every student" was
ill-advised.. In fact, none of the investigator's
beginning piano students has completed Vol. I in less
than three months time. In addition, it should be
noted that Bartok did not intend the use of the
Mikrokosmos as the only material of piano instruction
(see the Preface to the Mikrokosmos, Vol. I, p. 3,
in which the study of Czerny is advised)', or as
material for the gifted pupil alone (Bartok constant-
ly refers to "the average pupil" in his unpublished
notes to the Mikrokosmos).
2. Letter dated 15 February 140.
86
soon second edition.

I don't see any other possible way.
On April 5, 1940 Roth reported to Hawkes that "we
shall have finished copies [of the Mikrokosmos] by 10th
or 12th of April." Within the next two weeks the work
p
was placed on sale.
The Manuscripts
The Mikrokosmos manuscripts on file at the Bartok
Archive have been assembled into three classifications:
Sketches, Intermediary Drafts, and Final Copies. Com-
parison of the manuscripts and examination of the cor-
respondence between Bartok, Ralph Hawkes. and Ernst Roth
discloses what seems to have been the composer's pro-
cedure in the revision and correction of the Mikrokosmos.
The Sketches, consisting of 80 pages, are written
in blue ink on manuscript paper of various sizes and
stave types. Deletions and insertions ranging from
single notes to whole sections appear in profusion
throughout the manuscript, and the scrawly calligraphy
seems to indicate a certain amount of feverish activity
on the part of the composer to notate his musical ideas
as rapidly as possible. Five pieces, all crossed out,
and two exercises are contained in this manuscript which
do not appear in the published volumes of the Mikrokosmos.
Also, the sketch of Unison (no. 137) appears in the MS.
1. See the heading Errata below under which errors

noticed by the investigator are listed.
2. Letter from Roth to Hawkes, 23 April 1940.
87
of Nine Little Piano Pieces.

There are 82 pages of Intermediary Drafts which are
written in black ink on tissue masters composed of
eighteen or twenty staves. There is in this manuscript,
too, a considerable number of deletions and insertions
but not to the extent that they appear in the Sketches.
On the other hand, the notation here is neat and precise.
Titles are in Hungarian and German for the most part
(some are in English), and almost all of the pieces con-
tain timings, expression marks, and metronomic indica-
tions. Twenty-two of the pieces are marked with the
final numbers assigned to them in the published copies.
However, the numbers were probably added after the Final
Copies' had been drafted since the numerical designation
of Thumb Under (no. 98) appears on a tissue master but
not on its photographic reproduction.
Although the pieces in this manuscript seem to repre-

sent second drafts of the Sketches, several can be found
in more than one version.1 For example, a preliminary
draft of no. 46 is written so that the melody begins" with
the right rather than the left hand; nos. 51 and 88 appear
also in transpositions down a minor third and up a perfect
fifth respectively; and nos. Ill and 142 exist as well
in incomplete form. Two variants of no. l45a can be found
1. Thus, the manuscript consists of first and second

Intermediary Drafts, and, it has been filed under
the code number 59PID1ID2 in the Bartok Archive since
the variants and preliminary drafts cannot be sepa-
rated without damage to the other pieces.
88
(the piece consists of "a" and "b" parts which can be

played separately as individual compositions, or together
as a piano duet) that do not appear in the published
Mikrokosmos. The first is in retrograde motion trans-
posed down a major third, and the second variant is a
melodic inversion. No. 147 appears also in a simplified
form without octaves and hand crossings. Finally, one of
the cancelled pieces of the Sketches is in the Intermedi-
ary Drafts but it, too, is crossed out.
According to his letter to Ralph Hawkes dated

November 13, 1939 Bartok mailed a complete set of final
copies of the Mikrokosmos to Boosey and Hawkes in London.
This manuscript has not been available for inspection by
the investigator but it is not unreasonable to assume
that it does not differ appreciably from the Final Copy
(No.l) on file at the Bartok Archive in terms of revision
or correction since the latter manuscript is identical
for the most part to the publication.1
It is likely that Bartok had at least two complete

sets of photographic reproductions made from the tissue
masters, correcting one set which he retained in his
personal files (now in the Bartok Archive) and then com-
p
pleting the other for use by the engraver.
Final Copy No.l consists of 49 pages of tissue proofs
and 21 pieces written in blue ink on as many sheets of
1. Exceptions are certain English and all French titles.

2. Tissue proofs of some pieces were given by Bartok to
his pupils, Dorothy Parrish and Wilhelmine Creel
Driver.
89
four-stave manuscript paper approximately 6" x 9" in size.

The principal differences between this manuscript and
the Intermediary Drafts are revised fingerings, additional
English titles, and the insertion of numerals indicating
the order of the pieces and exercises.2
Bartok proofread the third and sixth published vol-

umes of the Mlkrokosmos which are on file at the Bartok
Archive under the designation Final Copy No.2.^ His cor-
rections, made in red crayon, extend to the addition of
a dollar sign before the numerals "1.25" on the title
page of Vol. Il-I and are listed below.4
The Mikrokosmos was issued by Boosey and Hawkes in
April, 1940 in English and American editions printed from
the same plates^ which have not yet been revised.
Errata
More than twenty typographical errors appear In
the Mikrokosmos as published, as evidenced by comparison
with the manuscripts. Errors in seven of the pieces
(nos. 74,89,92,140,145,148 and 153) 6 were discovered by
1. Nos. 1-10-, 13-16, 26-29, 38 and 39-

2. It will be noted that 33 pages of tissue proofs are
missing from this manuscript. At the present time,
their whereabouts are unknown.
3. In the preparation of the final copy of Seven Pieces
from "Mikrokosmos" (for piano duet), Bartok found
errors in no.145b which he had overlooked when proof-
reading Final Copy No.2 (he cut and pasted together
the published versions of l45a and l45b as piece no.6).
4. The investigator has been unable to determine whether
Bartok corrected the other published volumes .
5. According to information contained In correspondence
between Ernst Roth and Ralph Hawkes in February,
March, and April, 1940.
6. Nos. 148 and 153 contain errors of omission (Bartok
added certain fingerings).
90
the composer when he proofread the third and sixth pub-

lished volumes, and the remainder (in nos. 4l, 49, 65,
81, 113, 119, 123, 134, 141, 143, 152, and Exercise 2b)
were brought to light as a result of the investigator's
checking of the manuscripts against the published edi-
tion.
Certain particulars in nos. 49, 134, l4l and 143
have been determined by the investigator as mistakes,
although the consistency of appearance of these particu-
lars in the Intermediary Drafts, Final Copies and published
versions of the Mikrokosmos would seem to present evidence
to the contrary. Therefore, an explanation of each deter-
mination is presented as footnotes to pieces listed in
the errata section below.
No. 4l: In measures 13 and 14 the notes in
the bass clef are not arranged in
two parts as desired by the com-
poser. The tenor voice should con-
sist of dotted half-notes tied over
the bar-line with stems upward and
the bass voice should remain un-
changed .
No. 49: In measures 3 and 4 staccato dots
should be placed above the barred
eighth notes in the bass clef at
the same place they appear in the
treble. A staccato dot should be
placed also below the flagged eighth
note on the fourth beat in measures
6 and 7.1
According to the title (Crescendo-Diminuendo) of this

piece, its primary objective is one of dynamics and
not of touch-form combinations. The fact that Bartok
intended this piece to be played in the first year
of piano study, the style, and the comparatively
rapid tempo for a beginning student indicate to the
91
No. 65: In measure 24 the interval in the bass

clef lacks a staccato dot.
No. 74: In part "a" a footnote number 1 en-
closed in parentheses should be
inserted after the numerical desig-
nation of the piece as well as before
the statements at the bottom of the
page (p. 16).
In part "b," measure 31, a comma should
follow the text of each of the three
languages.
No. 81: The meter sign should be 2/4, not 2/2.
No. 89: In measure 10, the half note stems in
the treble clef that Indicate the alto
voice should be deleted and a whole rest
suspended from the first staff line to
complete the measure. In measure l4
the crescendo mark should be extended to
Include the first beat of the next
measure.
No. 92: In measure 5 the g natural on the second
beat in the bass clef should be played
with the third finger.
No. 113: In measure 27 the dotted quarter note
in the treble clef should be changed to
a staccato quarter note (c#).
No. 116: In measure 4, beat 2, a tenuto sign
should be placed between the staccato
dot and the fingering numbers of the
chord in the treble clef.
No. 119: In measure 23 the aJfc in the bass clef
should be a half note, not a dotted
half note.
No. 123; In measure 9 the barred eighth notes
in the treble clef lack staccato dots.
No. 134: In measure 2 a natural sign should
be inserted before the g of the
investigator that the staccato dots should be in-

serted as described. Otherwise, dissociated movements
of the hands involving non-legato against staccato
would be required, difficult even for the advanced
pianist.
92
interval appearing on the fourth beat

in each staff.1
No. 138: In measure 3 the staccato dot under
the eighth note In the treble clef
should be deleted.
No. l4l: In measure 15 the finger number 3 in
the treble clef should be positioned
above the soprano voice. In measure
21 a staccato dot should be placed
below the third of the three barred
eighth notes in the left hand. In
measure 74 the finger numbers i in
the treble2 clef should be
inverted.
No. 143; In measure 38 the meter signature
should be changed from 1/2 to 1/4.3
No.l45b: In measure 2 a" natural sign should
be Inserted before the d In the bass
clef, beat four. In measure 7 the
eighth rest appearing in the treble
clef, beat one, should be replaced
with a quarter rest.
No. 148: In measure 13 the fingering numbers
1-2-1 should be placed above the
first three notes of the group of six
barred sixteenth notes in the treble
clef.
No. 150: In measure 4 the staccatissimo sign
should be placed below the leger-line
e_ In the left hand, and another wedge
should be placed above the interval
in the right hand of the same measure,
1. The Interval as printed is a diminished fourth and, as

such, defeats the technical objective of the piece
to provide practice in fingering the intervallic pro-
gression of an augmented second to a perfect fourth.
2. The passages cannot be played as fingered In the pub-
lication.
3. The measure is comprised of four sixteenth notes. In
the Sketch this measure is combined with the preced-
ing one to form one 3/4 measure (but without a meter
sign). However, the notes are enclosed in bar lines
in the Intermediary Drafts and Final Copies as they
appear in the published version.
93
No. 152: In measure 11 the chord on the third

beat in the treble clef should read
c_-fj-g_, not -g.-a.
No. 153: In measures 43, 44, and 45 fingering
numbers should be placed below note
heads In the bass clef as follows:
measure 43 - 3 on beat four, 2 on beat
seven; measure 44 - 2 on beat seven;
measure 45 - 3 on beats four and seven.
Ex. 2b: In measure 1 the half note b_ in the
bass clef should be moved to the right
so that it is positioned directly under
the half note g in the treble clef. -
Ex. 31: The meter signature should be 7/4, not
7/8. In the first measure a marcato
sign > should be placed above the
half note chord In the bass clef .1
Transcriptions
Bartok transcribed seven pieces from the Mikrokosmos
(nos. 113, 69, 135, 123, 127, 145 and 146) for two pianos
(four hands) which was published by Boosey and Hawkes in
1947 under the title, Seven Pieces From "Mikrokosmos."
1. The publication also contains errors with reference

to the format. For example, nos. 68, 86, and l45a
contain asterisks which appear after the numerical
designations. According to the Preface to the
Mikrokosmos, asterisks indicate that pertinent notes
will be found in the appendix of each volume. The
notes to nos. 68, 86, and l45a, however, appear at
the bottom of the title page of the pieces. There-
fore, the asterisks should be deleted and a "l)" in
superscript should be placed after each numerical
designation and before each footnote at the bottom
of the page. -
Referring now to no. 142, the unpublished drafts of
the Mikrokosmos contain the direction: (jaj!
pokhalol!)
1l
following the Agitato sign. This means
Woel A cobweb!!" Bartok, in a letter to his pub-
lisher, was undecided whether or not to include the
direction in the publication (see p. 8l above).
94
Notations made on the cover page of the manuscript used

as the engraver's final copy indicate that Bartok probably
submitted the transcriptions for publication in 1944.1
Tibor Serly transcribed nos. 139, 102, 108 and 142
for string quartet,2 nos. 128, 140, 117, 146, 151 and.153
for piano and string orchestra,3 and nos. 139, 137, 117,
142, 102, 151 and 153 for full orchestra.4 The transcrip-
tions for piano and string orchestra were performed first
in March, 1942 by Mrs. Bartok and musician friends on
the occasion of Bartok's 6lst birthday.
I set the Mikrokosmos for strings as a birthday
present for Bartok at a party in my apartment.
It was after hearing them that he paid me one
of his rare compliments: "if I were a king I
would make you my court composer." Perhaps that
is what Bartok might have had in mind - to later
expand the Mlkrokosmos for orchestra.5
Recitals and Recordings

Bartok's first performance of the Mikrokosmos in a
a concert hall consisted of twenty-seven pieces played in
1. The notes are not in Bartok's handwriting. Description

of the manuscripts and determination of their dates
of commencement and conclusion have not been made
here since the collection of the various documents
concerning the transcriptions has not been completed
by the Bartok Archive at the present time.
2. In 1941. Published by Boosey and Hawkes under the
title, Five Pieces from Mikrokosmos, and recorded
on BRS 901.
3. In 1942. Unpublished.
4. In 1943. Published by Boosey and Hawkes under the
title, Mikrokosmos Suite, and recorded on BRS 303.
December 1954. Unknown to Serly, Bartok had planned
to score some of the Mikrokosmos pieces, such as
the Six Bulgarian Dances (nos. 148-153) . See
Bartok's letter to Ralph Hawkes above (p. 79).
95
two groups.1 The first group was made up of nos. 70, 8l,
90, 78, 100, 62, 87, 84, 110, 91, 92, 73, 129, 131, 116,
124 and 122 in the order listed for a total of nine minutes
and thirty-nine seconds of playing time. The second
group, played after the Intermission, consisted of nos.
133, 126, 140, 142, 143, 147, 144, 145, 137 and 146 which
totaled ten and a half minutes of playing time.2
Bartok played excerpts from the work on May 7, 1937
according to a letter he wrote to Mrs. Mtiller-Widmann,3
and on January 20, 1938 played three groups of pieces for
a B.BC. broadcast, in London. In the order listed, the
first group included nos. 125, 88, 130, 138, 120, 109 and
139 (eight minutes and thirty seconds); the second group
consisted of nos. 53, 106, 94, 108, 132, 103, 114 and 123
(eight minutes and fifteen seconds); and nos. 148, 149,
150, 151, 152 and 153 comprised the third group.4
On February 17, 1938 Bartok played five pieces from
the Mikrokosmos (nos. 140, 142, 144, 137 and 146) at a
concert in Zurich, and a similar concert was played in
Brussels and Antwerp.5 Nos. 94, 108, 132, 103, 114, 125,
130, 120, 109, 139, and 148-153 were played at the Boosey
and Hawkes Organ Studio in London, in June, 1938.6
1. Program File, Bartok Archive. See page 74 for details.

2. The pieces are listed by title, on the program, and the
.^timings were noted by Bartok in pencil on the program.
3. Bela Bartok, levelel (edited'by Janos Demeny), p. 123.
5. Loc. cit. (From a pencilled notation in Bartok's
Handwriting. The dates are not listed).
6. See Bartok-Hawkes correspondence, pp. 75-76.
96
The first American performance of pieces from the

Mlkrokosmos was given by Bartok on April 16, 1940, at
Juniata College (Huntington, Pennsylvania). Played in two
groups, the first comprised nos. 116, 129, 131, 68, 126,
102, 113 and 115; and the second, nos. 140, 142, 144, 137,
133, 138, 109, and 148-153.1 Three days later Bartok
played from the work at the Musical Arts Club In Chicago
and a week later at the Curtis Institute of Music in
Philadelphia.2
Bartok sailed for Hungary on May 18, 1940, to settle
his affairs before establishing residence in the United
States. His farewell concert in Budapest on October 8,
1940 included five pieces from the Mikrokosmos: nos. l4l,
128, 126, 102, and 148-153.5
After his return to New York on October 30, 1940, he
prepared for the concert season of 1940-1941 several pro-
grams which included excerpts from the Mikrokosmos. Cer-
tain of his programs combined a lecture on "Contemporary
Music and Piano Teaching" with a recital In which he
played eighteen pieces from the work: nos. 40-42, 52-53,
55, 62, 68-69, 73, 78, 82, 84, 87, 94, and 90-92.4 Some
programs contained nos. 122, 128, 126, 102, and 148-1535

2
L o c ' cit. (from a notation made by Bartok on scratch
paper. The titles of the pieces are not listed).
3. Loc. cit.
4. Given at Oberlin Conservatory, Mills College, University
of Washington and the University of Kansas City. The
Mills College program also included nos. l40, 142,
144, 137 and 146.
5. At the New Jersey College for Women, Swarthmore College,
and Vassar College.
97
or nos. 140, 142, 144, 137 and 146,1 and other recitals
combined those groups.2 Bartok also played duo-piano
recitals with his wife which included transcriptions from
the Mikrokosmos.3
In 1938 he recorded nos. 124 and 126 for English
Columbia and in 194l nos. 94, 97, 100, 108-109, 113-114,
116, 118, 120, 125-126, 128-131, 133, 136, 138-144, and
147-153 for Columbia (American) Records.4 Transcriptions
of nos. 69, 127 and 145 for two pianos were recorded by
the Bartoks for Continental Records in 1943.5
Summary
The Mikrokosmos was composed from 1926 to 1939,
probably In Budapest for the most part, with Unison (no.
137) perhaps the first conceived of the 153 pieces that
comprise the work published in 1940 by Boosey and Hawkes.
The Mikrokosmos manuscripts consist of sketches,
tissue masters, and corrected tissue proofs and published
copies. The errors in the publication, comparatively
few in number for a work of this size, are listed -together
1. At the Detroit Institute of Arts, Stanford University,

Wells College and the University of Oregon. Nos.
148-153 were also played at Stanford, Wells and Oregon.
2. At Oberlin Conservatory of Music; Princeton, Brigham
Young Universities; University of Washington, Reed
College, and the Wilshire Theater in Los Angeles.
3. Nos. 69, 135, 127 and 145 were given their first
American performance at Town Hall (New York City) on
24 November 1940. Nos. 123 and 146 were played at
Amherst College on 23 February 1942.
4. Titles and numbers appear on the American Columbia (ML
4419) recording. The jacket lists thirty-five titles,
but nos. 122, 72 and 146 are not performed on the
record.
5. Continental 4008 or Remington R19994.
98
with Bartok's corrections and additions in the body of

this chapter.
The first performance of pieces from the Mikrokosmos
in a concert hall took place on February 9, 1937 and was
played by Bartok at Cowdray Hall In London. Juniata
College, Huntington, Pennsylvania, was the location of
the first American recital of pieces from the work
played by Bartok on April 16, 1940.
Bartok's first lecture-recital on piano pedagogy in
America was given at the Oberlin Conservatory of Music
on December 3, 1940, in which eighteen pieces from the
Mikrokosmos were used to illustrate his talk on "Contem-
porary Music and Piano Teaching."
The composer transcribed seven pieces from the
Mikrokosmos for two pianos (four hands) which were pub-
lished by Boosey and Hawkes posthumously. Bartok and
his wife played the first American performance of four
of the transcriptions at Town Hall in New York City on
November 24, 1940.
The programs listed in this chapter indicate Bar-
tok's preference in terms of programming pieces from the
Mikrokosmos for concert use.
He recorded thirty-two pieces from the work on
Columbia ML 4419 and three of the duo-piano transcrip-
tions with his wife on Remington R19994. These record-
ings are of particular value to the teacher and student
of the Mikrokosmos.
99
Bartok's intention to score pieces from the Mikrokosmos

for-orchestra and his pleasured response to Tibor Serly's
orchestral transcriptions of the work indicate his approval
of such arrangements.
The evidence indicates that the Mikrokosmos was not
conceived of as a piano method in 1926, the year of its
origin, but as recital pieces to fill the need Bartok had
of such material due to the increase In his concert book-
ings .
The conception of the Mikrokosmos as a collection
of piano pieces with a didactic purpose, and possibly
even of the title 'Itself, may have occurred to Bartok
between 1933 (the year Matyas Seiber's "Rhythmic Studies"
was published) and 1936 (the year the composer began
teaching his son, Peter, the piano). Then, in 1939,
Bartok completed the work by adding a certain number of
pieces to the first two volumes.
100 CHAPTER VI
OBJECTIVES OF THE MIKROKOSMOS
Bartok's conception of the Mikrokosmos as a collec-

tion of piano pieces and his playing of the work at
recitals, on radio broadcasts and recordings point to
the first of his objectives in its composition:- to
provide the pianist with music for concert use.
The Preface to the Mikrokosmos is concerned, for
the most part, with instructions about the pieces in the
first four volumes. After stating that the metronome
marks in those volumes are approximations only, and that
they may be altered, Bartok makes his sole reference to
the last two volumes: "...in the fifth and sixth books
the time indications must be adhered to." 1 Bartok's
silence concerning the last two volumes serves to rein-
force the assumption, in terms of pedagogics, that their
pieces belong primarily in the category of concert music.
It is worthy of note that Bartok crossed out the
last paragraph of his unpublished lecture notes on piano
pedagogy in which he referred to the last two volumes
of the Mikrokosmos.
And finally, I will play you 5 of the more
difficult pieces from the Mikrokosmos. This
1. Bela Bartok, Preface to the Mikrokosmos, Vol. I, p. 3.

101
work is divided in 6 volumes the first of

them containing piano music for the very
beginners, as I previously told you. The
degree of difficulty is progressing in the
following volumes; so the 6th volume Is
suited only for advanced players. The 5
pieces I am going to play are taken from
the 6th and 5th volumes.l
The five pieces, nos. 140, 142, l44, 137, and 146,
were originally scheduled to be played as the concluding
portion of the first part of Bartok's lecture-recitals
on piano pedagogy; however, he decided to play them after
the intermission as recital pieces, without description
or instruction, in addition to other compositions.2
A third instance of his failure to discuss fully
certain pieces from the Mikrokosmos is mentioned by
another source:
Bartok wrote the last volume as concert pieces.
He said little to me about them because the
piano pupil is now advanced enough to under-
stand the pieces and has had background through
study of the previous volumes.3
A letter to the investigator from Mrs. Bartok states:
"A part of the pieces [of the Mikrokosmos] were composed
as essays, belonging to great compositions; another part
of the pieces were composed for Piano-education purposes."4
Other sources concur in her twofold conception of the work.5

2. From the programs on file at the Bartok Archive.
1954. In 1944 Bartok and Chenee made a musical
analysis of the Mikrokosmos pieces.
4. Ditta Bartok's letter was mailed from Budapest where
she now resides. The letter is dated July 24, 1954.
J. Friskin and I. Freundlich, Music for the Piano, p. 189,
Norman Demuth, Musical Trends In the'^wenTTeth Century,
P. 273.
102 ' '
jtirgen Uhde terms the Mlkrokosmos a collection of

"so-called recital pieces,"1 an appellation limited to the
last two volumes of the work by several authors2"Or^tEe
sixth volume by another source.3 Stevens considers "the
more difficult pieces" to be suitable for-"corFcert per-
formance, but does not specify which pieces are in that
category.4
-Bartok's second objective in the composition of the
Mikrokosmos was to compile in logical order original
materials designed for the training of pianiss Sielska
reports that when she asked Bartok what purpose he had .in.
writing the Mikrokosmos, "He picked up the.^fJLe-st--volume
of the work and turning to the preface, pointed to it
solemnly and said, 'But I have .stated it all_here'."5
The first four books of these piano pieces have
been written for-the purpose of giving material
to beginners - young or old - which should em'-"
brace, as far as possible, allproblems met with
during the first steps.6"
Bartok also refers to the Mikrokosmos as "a work
with a very definite plan. My idea was to write piano
1. "Leben und Ordnung-Bela Bartoks 'Mikrokosmos'," Zeit-

schrift fur Musik (,1954), P. 85.-
2. Lajos Hernadi, "Bartok Bela a zongoramuvesz, a peda-
gogus, az ember," tfj Zenel Szemle (1953), p. 6.
Ivan Engel, "A-Mikrokosmos-rol," Zenei Szemle (1948),
pp. 430-4351.
.Margit Varro, Paper given at the Wisconsin Conservatory
of Music, September 2;, 1950.
3. Colin Mason, "Bela Bartok's JiMikrokosmos'." The Music
Teacher and Piano Student_jU>o-ndon, 19 4 6), p. 577^
4. Halsey Stevens, The Life and7Music of Bela Bartok,
P. 139. ,
5. Marya Sielska, Bartok's Mikrokosmos: An Analysis of
its Technical Difficulties, p. 10.
6. Bela BartOk, Preface to the Mikrokosmos, Vol. I, p. 3.
103
pieces, intended to lead the students from the very

beginning and through the most important technical and
musical problems of the first years to a certain higher
degree."1 He then discusses the procedure he followed
in its composition:
This determined program involves a very strict
proceeding: no gaps must be in the succession
of the technical problems, which have to follow
each-other in a very logical order. Of course,
the realisation [sic] of such a plan could hard-
ly be based on folkmusic: it would have been
impossible to find folkmelodies for every
technical or musical problem.2 So, I decided
to write pieces on entirely original themes;
the whole collection, about 150 pieces, is
entitled "Mikrokosmos."3
The first volume Is intended for the very
beginners. I will play you some pieces of
2. and 3. volumes; these may be studied in the
second half of the first year and in the second
year. 4
A'later statement made by Bartok refers to the
Mikrokosmos pieces as an exemplification of his new trend
in piano writing, with emphasis on the percussive char-
acter of the piano, as well as a synthesis of all musical
and technical problems.
A new piano style (in the Bagatelles, Op. 14)
appears as a reaction against the exuberance
of the romantic piano music of the XlXth cen-
tury; a style stripped of all unessential
decorative elements, deliberately using only
1. Bela Bartok, Unpublished Lecture Notes, Bartok Archive,

2. Bartok alludes here to a statement made earlier in
this lecture in which he stated that his earliest
pedagogical work, For Children, was based entirely
on folkmusic. Cf_. p. 50~I
3. Or, in other words, the Mikrokosmos consists of folk-
~ melodies and original themes.
4. Bela Bartok, op. cit.
104
the most restricted technical means. As the

later developments show the Bagatelles inaugu-
rate a new trend of piano writing in my career
which is consistently followed in almost all
of my successive piano works with more or less
modifications, as for instance in the Suite
P* A 4 (accentuating in some ofTts movements
ITFTe percussive charac'Ee'r of the piano), in the
Sonata for piano (enlargement of the*~newly won
means) and especially.in the "Mlicrokosmos" pieces.
The latter appear as a synthesis of all musical
and technical problems which were^TreaTed and
in some cases only partially solvecPin the pre-
vious piano Works.1
Many sources agree that the Mikrokosmos is a method
for teaching the piano; however, opinion varies concern-
ing the emphasis the work places on the technical and
musical aspects of performance.
Several piano teachers find the. Mikrokosmos to be
a musical as well as technical method for the piano and
do not stress one above the other.2 In fact, Lang states
that Bartok told her that the Mikrokosmos represented,
his attempt to write a piece for each musical and tech-
nical problem.3
Other sources consider the method to be more a
1. Bela Bartok,^ First Draft (Unpublished) o Preface to .

Bela Bart6k~Masterpleces for the Piano (1945), Bartok
Archive. The italicized words do not appear in
the second, typewritten,draft which was submitted
to the publisher, E.B. Marks (New York), as the
final copy. The deletion was made at the request
of the'publisher, according to a letter sent to
Bartok by E. B.^Marks in 1945.
2. Storm Bull, "Bartok's Teaching Pieces," Repertoire
(Lansing, 1951), PP. 1-2.
Storm Bullj letter to the investigator, June 21, 1954.
Silvia Amerlnger, "Teaching with Bartok's 'Mikrokosmos',
Tempo ^London, 1951), p. 31.
Ann Chenee, Illustrated Lecture on the Mlkrokosmos
(as recorded for Boosey and Hawkes j "New York).
3. Elisabeth Lang,' interview with the investigator, 21
December 1954.
105
musical than a technical one. 1 Another Bartok pupil,

recalling a conversation she had with the composer con-
cerning the Mikrokosmos, made the following comment
during an interview with the investigator:
Bartok told me that teaching material is
generally written by piano teachers, not
composers, and that it represents a great
poverty in music. That is why it is
called teaching material, not music. He
mentioned Bach's Notebook for Anna Magdalena
Bach and Schumann' s Album 'for the Young as
examples of music used in teaching. ' He had
the same conception of the Mikrokosmos.2
Opinions concerning the nature and extent of the
technical instruction in the Mikrokosmos range from the
general statement that the compilation is a technical
instructor for the piano,3 to the specific assertion that
its purpose is to provide advanced pianists with the
opportunity to learn about "the new style of piano play-
ing in a form simple enough for sight-reading."4 Some
authors seem to be convinced that the technical function
of the Mikrokosmos is to teach young pianists how to
play in Bartok's particular idiom of piano composition.5
1. Colin Mason, op. cit., p. 57.

Halsey Stevens, op. cit., p. 139.
Margit Varro, paper presented to the Midwest Chapter
of the American Musicologlcal Society, March, 1949.
Massimo Mila, "Bela Bartok ed il suo 'Mikrokosmos',"
II Diapason (Milan, 1950), p. 4.
2. Dorothy Parrish, interview with the investigator,
14 April 1955.
3. Jtirgen Uhde, op. cit., p.^85.
Henri Geraedts, Bela Bartok, p. 109.
H.C. Wolff, "Der 'Mikrokosmos' von Bela Bartok,"
Musica (Cassel), 1951, p. 137.
4. Istvan Szelenyl, "Bartok 'Mlkrokoszmosz-a'," ijjnekszo
(Budapest, 1941), p. 846. f
5. Hubert Foss, "An Approach to Bartok," Musical Opinion
106
Others are of the opinion that the method is "a dictionary

of modern piano style."1 Moreux states that the Mikro-
kosmos not only lays the foundation of a piano technique,
but accustoms the pianist to the "discontinuous style
of modern keyboard fingering."2
Bartok's third objective in the composition of
the Mikrokosmos was to acquaint the piano student with
music written in different styles. This objective was
disclosed during Bartok's last public appearance, in an
interview emanating from the Brooklyn (New York) Museum
and broadcast over Radio Station WNYC. Tibor Serly's
Mikrokosmos transcriptions for piano and string orchestra
were played and David LeVita, museum musicologist, asked
Bartok and Serly to discuss the work.
LeVita: The Mikrokosmos cycle which Mr. Serly

has transcribed for piano and string
orchestra is such a vast work I wonder
if you could tell us briefly what it
comprises.
Bartok: The Mikrokosmos is a cycle of hundred
fifty and three pieces for piano
written with a didactical purpose,
(London, 1944), p. 219. ,

Peter Yates, "Music Chronicle: Bela Bartok," Partisan
Review (1949), p. 647.
1. David Ewen, Music for the Millions, p. 4l.
Hugo Liechentritt, as quoted by David Ewen in The
Book of Modern Composers, p. 222.
2. Serge Moreux, op. cit., p. l8l. According to Moreux
(cf. pp. lll^Tl2), the fingering style in classic
piano literature is one of continuity in which
series of thirds, octaves, arpeggios and similar
figurations are linked in a chain of development.
The discontinuity of modern piano writing is a re-
sult of the absence of such series, viz., a seventh
might be followed by several thirds which in turn
might be followed by an octave or other types of
intervals.
107
that Is, to give pieces, piano pieces,

which can be used from the very be-
ginning and then going on. It is
graded according to difficulty and
the word Cosmos may be interpreted,
Mikrokosmos may be interpreted as a
series of pieces in all of different
styles to represent a small world. Or,
it may be interpreted as a world, a.
musical world for the little ones, for
the children.
LeVita: Do you know whether Mr. Serly found it
necessary to alter the material much
in transcription?
Bartok: Perhaps Mr. Serly
LeVita: Yes, perhaps Mr. Serly would be the
best one to answer that.
Serly: No treatise or textbook has ever been
written that so tellingly reveals the
story of the development of musical
style as these brief, minute Mikrokos-
mos sketches. These miniature gems
illustrate scale structures, chords,
modes, forms, rhythms, harmonies,
imitations, and canons with dazzling
ingenuity...They are more than mere
piano pieces.1
According to Bartok, the different styles represented
In the Mikrokosmos are the pre-classical (no. 89), the
abstract (nos. 45, 8l), the Impressionistic (no. 109),
and those reminiscent of or similar to certain composers
such as Bach (no. 79), Schumann (no. 80), Stravinsky (nos.
83, 105), Wagner (no. 100), Chopin or Scriabin (no. 97),
Schoenberg (no. 102), Debussy (no. 107), Couperin (no.
117), Prokoviev (no. 133), and Gershwin (no. 151). 2
1. "Ask the Composer," WNYC (New York), Sunday, May 7,

^1944, 3:30-4:30 P.M.
2; Bela Bartok, Unpublished Notes (given to Ann Chenee),
1944.
108
One source considers no. 142 to be the modern

counterpart of Couperin's Le Moucheron,1 another likens
no. 107 to Debussy's Brouillards, and a third compares
the form of no. 146 as being similar to that employed
by Michelangelo Rossi or Frescobaldi.3 Hans Engelmann,
listing nos. 91, 100, 132, and 147 as "compromise solutions
from the perspective of the twelve-tone composition prin-
ciple," points to those Mikrokosmos pieces in terms of
their relationship to the atonal style developed by
Schoenberg.4 Liechentritt states that some of the Mikro-
kosmos pieces are like Bach Inventions, Czerny Etudes,
Scarlatti Sonatas, or Chopin Mazurkas.^ Another source
notes that the work covers sixteenth-century, Bach, classic,
romantic, and tonal and atonal music of our time.0 Less
specific is Rothe's statement that the Mikrokosmos utilizes
the harmonic resources of several centuries,7 or Szelen-
yi's opinion that the method was designed to "show chil-
o
dren the" adult world of music by easier tools." Accord-
ing to Serly's broad interpretation, the work is a
condensed history of musical style as seen through Bartok's
1. J. Friskin and I. Freundlich, op. cit., p. 190.

2. Henri Geraedts, op_. cit., p. 19D".
3. Lula Ffildessy, "Bartok Bela Mikrokosmos-arol," Magyar
Zenei Szemle (Budapest, 194l), p. 55.
4. "Chromatische Ausstufung in Bela Bartoks 'Mikrokosmos',"
Melos (1951), p. 138.
5. Hugo Liechentritt, op. cit., p. 4l.
6. Jurgen Uhde, Bartok Mikrokosmos - Spielanweisungen
und Erlauterungen, p. 91.
7. Friede F. Rothe, "The Language of the Composer,"
Etude (1941), p. 130.
8. Istvan Szelenyi, op. cit., p. 845.
109
eyes. Another source adds that the Mlkrokosmos is of

the twentieth-century, but that folkmusic elements and
formal devices borrowed from old masters form a link
p
with the past.
Many sources seem to stress the stylistic objective
of the Mikrokosmos in terms of music of the twentieth-
century;^ Indeed, Salazar4 and Liechentritt^ describe
the work as a "Gradus ad Parnassum" of modern music. An-
other source adds that "it touches on every problem In
1. Tibor Serly, interview with the investigator, 21 Decem-

ber 1954.
2. From an article titled "Bela Bartok's 'Mikrokosmos',"
Tempo (American edition, 1940), pp. 5-6. The article
also appears on page 11 of Bartok's corrected copy
of Rumanian Folk Dances (published by Boosey and
- Hawkes). The investigator has been unable to de-
termine the author or authors of the article which
also appeared In pamphlet form, according to a letter
written to Bartok by Ralph Hawkes in July, 1939 5
"...the article on MIKROKOSMOS is intended not only
for general publicity purposes but also as a pamphlet
to be issued with the works when they are published
and I take it you approve of it." (Bartok Archive).
M. Cross and D. Ewen, Encyclopedia of the Great Com-
posers and Their Music, p. 43.
F.D. Perkins, "Music," The New York Herald Tribune,
25 February 1940.
Robert Sabin, "Revolution and Tradition in the Music
of Bela Bartok," Musical America (1949), p. 140.
Zolette Rehberg, "Une education muslcale nouvelle,"
Connaitre (Geneva, 1952), pp. 3-4.
H.C. Wolff, op_. cit., p. 134.
Percy M. Young, A Critical Dictionary of Composers and
Their Music, p. 4TT]
Ernest Hutchinson, The Literature of the Piano, p. 314.
Olin Downes, The New York Times, 25 AprTi 1940.
Henri Geraedts, op. cit., p. 10.
John Weissmann, ""Bela Bartok, An Estimate," The Music
Review (1^46), p. 230.
Margit Varro, op. cit.
4. Adolfo Salazar, Music in our Time, p. 302.
5. Hugo Liechentritt, op. cit., p. 41.
110
every style of contemporary music."1 Sabin further states

that the Mikrokosmos is "a kind of journal of Bartok's
whole development."2 Steinberger concurs, terming the
compilation a reconciliation of all of Bartok's past ex-
periments designed to help the pianist understand modern
and Bartok idioms.-^
The majority of sources attributes to the Mikrokosmos
the prime function of serving as an introduction to Bar-
tok's works in particular. In fact, Foss states that the
easiest road to Bartok's mind is through the Mlkrokosmos.4
Others agree that it is perhaps the best approach to the
composer's music.5 Miller's opinion is that the Mikro-
kosmos reveals most aspects of Bartok's modern, Hungarian
style;0 however, Kiss? and Engel assert that it shows
the whole of Bartok's art, and other sources consider
It a summary of Bartok's lifework.9 Theodor Weisengrund-
Adorno states specifically that the first five volumes
1.. Silvia Ameringer, op. cit., p. 31.

2. Robert Sabin, op. cit., p. 140.
3. Gabor Steinberger, "Bela Bartok," rRevista Musical
Chilena (Santiago, 1946), pp. 25 2"6~^
4. Hubert Foss, op. cit., p. 119.
5. David Ewen,, The Book of Modern Composers, p. 222.
Ivan Engel, op. cit., pp. 430-43TT
Hugo LiechenEritt, op. cit., p. 41.
Lajos Hernadi, op. cit., p. 6.
6. Hugh Miller, An Outline History of Music, p. 198.
7. Bela Kiss, Bart6k~Bela Mtiveszete, p. 46.
8 . Ivan Engel, op_. c i t . , pp. 430-431.
9. Lula / F6 l ldes3y, op. c i t . , p . 5 5 .
Istvan Barna, "Bartok 'Valtazatok'," neksz6 (Buda-
pest, 1950), p. 201.
Peter Yates, op_. cit., p. 647.
Tibor Serly, op. cit.
John Weissmann, "Bartok's Piano Music," A Memorial
Review (1950), p. 68.
Ill
of the work are a preparation for the sixth.

Bartok's fourth purpose in the composition of the
Mikrokosmos was to provide an opportunity for pianists
to become acquainted with "the simple and non-romantic
beauties" of folkmusic.
Some of the piano pieces I am going to play this
evening have been written with certain pedagogi-
cal purposes in mind. Before playing them, I
should like to give you some explanations.
The following groupe [sic] of piano pieces are

not intended for beginners, being somewhat more
difficult. Nevertheless, in composing them, I
had certain pedagogical purposes in mind too.
I wanted to give at the disposal of more pro-
gressed pupils transcriptions of folkmusic:
transcriptions of simple structure, not too
difficult to grasp and to play.2
Among the folk music transcriptions in the Mikro-
kosmos are those whose melodic origin is Hungarian (nos.
74, 83, 112 and 127), Bulgarian (nos. 113 and 115), and
Balkan (no. 100) .3
Yates considers the work a summary of Bartok's
knowledge of folk music.4 Szabolcsi concurs, stating
that it is a review of Bartok's world in terms of the
inspiration that the latter received from Hungarian,
Romanian, Slovakian, Ukranian, Bulgarian, Russian, Cro-
atian, Arabian, Turkish, Javanese, Chinese and American-
Negro folkmusic.5 other sources term the Mikrokosmos an
1. "Bela Bartok: 'Mikrokosmos'," Schweizerische Musik-

.zeitung (Zurich, 1940), pp. 129-130.
3. Bela Bartok, Unpublished Notes (given to Ann Chenee),
1944.
4. Peter Yates, op_. cit., p. 647.
5. Bence Szabolcsi, "Bartok Is a nepzene," Uj Zenei Szemle
(1950), p. 42.
112
amalgamation of East European folksong with West European

musical culture.1 According to Karacsony, the purpose
of the method is to help Hungarians regain their "for-
gotten musical language" by educating youth, from the
beginning, through monumental serious music built on
primitive peasant song.^ Less chauvinistic is Bela Kiss's
statement that the purpose of the Mikrokosmos is to "edu-
cate the new generation in the sounds of the new folk
art Bartok and Kodaly had discovered."-^
Some Investigators point to a fifth objective of the
Mikrokosmos as source material for students of composition;
in fact, Driver states that one of the objectives of the
work is to explore the possibilities of composition "both
specifically for the piano and in general."4 Szelenyi
calls It "A contrapuntal and harmonic textbook of modern
music in which Bartok almost gives us the science of the
composition of music...It teaches pianists and composers."5
Others term the Mikrokosmos "a laboratory for the com-
poser," "studies in expression and elementary composition,"7
"not only a piano school but a manual for composers," and
1. Endre Szervanszky, "Hogyan tanulmanyozzuk Bartok

muvelt?" Enekszo (1946), p. 12.
Lula Fflldessy, op. cit., p. 55.
Jurgen Uhde, op. cit., p. 70.
2. Sandor Karacsony, "Bartok," Uj Szantas (Budapest,'1948),
,P. 523.
3. Bela Kiss, op. cit., p. 45.
4. Wilhelmine Creel Driver, letter to the investigator,
April 2, 1954.
5. Istvan Szelenyi, op_. cit., p. 845.
6. Massimo Mila, op. cit., p. 4.
7. Colin Mason, op. cit., p. 57.
8. Friede F. Rothe, op_. cit., p. 130.
113
"a source of compositional and ideational material for

years to come."1 Indeed, Szervanszky asserts that it
can be considered a textbook of modern composition,
since every chordal and contrapuntal structure, with
the exception of the sonata and the fugue, can be found
therein.2
Summary
The evidence discloses five objectives of the Mikro-
kosmos: first, to provide pianists with pieces suitable
for concert use; second, to teach pianists, young or
old, the technique and musicianship of the instrument
from the beginning to a certain higher degree; third,
to acquaint pianists with music written in different styles;
fourth, to introduce piano students to folk music by
means of graded transcriptions; and fifth, to serve as
a manual for students of composition.
Bartok's original conception of the Mikrokosmos as

recital pieces and his playing of them at concerts, on
radio broadcasts, and on recordings points to its first
purpose: concert music for pianists. This contention is
supported by the statements made by Bartok's wife and
nine other sources.
The composer's pedagogical aim - to provide students,
young or old, with pieces containing the most important
technical and musical problems of the first years of piano
1. Tibor Serly^ op. cit.

2. Endre Szervanszky, op. cit., p. 12.
114
playing and on to a certain higher degree - represents

also the opinion of nineteen investigators, but with
varying emphasis on what constitutes the major educational
function of the Mikrokosmos. Nine sources stress the
technical purpose of the work, five others consider that
it treats technical and musical problems with equal em-
phasis, and five state that it has greater educational
value for Its musical content rather than its technical
features. .
Bartok's third purpose, to compose a series of pieces

"in all of different styles," is accepted as a valid ob-
jective by eleven investigators. However, thirty-four
sources delimit the work to the style of the twentieth
century. Of these, nine state that the Mikrokosmos is
concerned with contemporary music, eleven refer to it
as an approach to the contemporary idiom in general
and the Bartokian idiom in particular, and fourteen con-
sider it a compilation designed specifically to promote
understanding of Bartok's music.
Seven analysts agree with Bartok's statement that

the Mikrokosmos serves piano students as an introduction
to folk music; indeed, more than one source refers to it
as a synthesis of East European folk music with West
European musical culture.
Finally, seven investigators believe that an aim of
the Mikrokosmos is to teach students the elements of
music composition. However, this was never given
115
recognition as an objective by the composer himself.

Excluding the composer's statements from considera-
tion, of the fifty sources quoted in this chapter, 62
per cent make no mention of the technical objective of
the Mlkrokosmos, 10 per cent consider it to be more a
musical than a technical method, 10 per cent are of the
opinion that its objective Is musical and technical to
an equal degree of emphasis, and 18 per cent state that
the Mikrokosmos is essentially a method for the teaching
of piano technique.
CHAPTER VII
TECHNICAL PROBLEMS IN THE MIKROKOSMOS
The analysis of the Mlkrokosmos In terms of Its

technical aspects and the study of investigations con-
cerned with that phase of piano playing1 suggest that
technical problems in the Mikrokosmos can be grouped
into six categories: touch-forms; hand position, motion
and fingering problems; Interval and chord playing; hand
independence and part-playing; passage work and embel-
lishments; and a miscellaneous group of unrelated prob-
lems consisting of pedalling, ensemble playing and
velocity.
In the preceding chapters, Bartok's concept of the

piano as a percussion instrument is emphasized; in fact,
the summary to Chapter IV states that it is only in
terms of percussive finger-stroke as the basic approach
1. Marya Sielska, Bartok's Mikrokosmos: An Analysis of

its Technical Difficulties.
Jurgen Uhde, Bartok Mikrokosmos - Spielanweisungen
und Erla'uterungen.
Thomas Fielden, The Science of Pianoforte Technique.
Otto Ortmann, The Physical Basis of Piano Touch and"
Tone.
Otto Ortmann, The Physiological Mechanics of Piano
Technique.
C.W. Pearce, The Art of the Piano Teacher.
E. Schelling, C.J. Haalce, G.M. Haake, and 0. McConathy,
Oxford Piano Course (Teaeher's First Manual).
Sidney Vantyn, Modern Pianoforte Technique.
117
to key depression that the symbols Bartok employs In

his piano editions and pedagogical works take on their
full meaning. It is this concept, therefore, that under-
lies the discussion of the technical problems that
follow1..
Touch-Forms
It has been said that "color in the piano tone-
complex results from the presence of the tonal elements
and is obscured by the predominance of the noise ele-
ments: finger-key impact, key-bed Impact, hammer-string
impact, hammer-check impact, and friction among the
action parts." When noise elements are predominant in
the piano tone, the sound and the touch producing it can
be termed percussive.
Staccatlsslmo
Staccatissimo is the most percussive touch employed
by Bartok in his pedagogical works for the piano; in
fact, he specifies that the sound is to be "sharp."3
1. Otto Ortmann, The Physiological Mechanics of Piano

Technique, p. 342"! Hammer-string and friction
noises arise from the speed of key depression which
in turn depend on the dynamic level called for in
a composition and is therefore generally not con-
trollable by the performer. The same holds true to
some extent in the playing of staccatissimo with
its resulting hammer-check impact noise. On the
other hand, finger-key impact and key-bed impact
noises are controllable to a certain extent.
2. Ibid., p. 343.
3. References to Bartok's comments, statements, or de-
sires concerning specifics of piano technique have
been collated from the listings in Chapter V and,
to avoid repetition, are not footnoted in this
chapter.
118
Designated with the sign t , the staccatissimo touch

is achieved by using a percussive finger-strokel and by
releasing ,the depressed key as quickly as possible which
results in the cutting-off of the tone almost at the
Instant of cessation of Its accompanying noises.2
Legato-Non-Legato
Legato touches (legato and legatisslmo) and non-
legato touches (non-legato and staccato) are agogic vari-
ations of the same tone color In which finger-key impact
noise is dominantly present and key-check impact noise
conspicuously absent through the use of percussive key-
stroke and moderate to slow key-release. In fact, the
touch-forms used by Bartok in his pedagogical works can
be assembled Into four groups and scaled according to
the amount of noise present in each (Fig. 1, p.119).
Tenuto
Finger-key impact noise can be reduced by pressing
down the key after its surface has been contacted by
the finger tip, instead of striking it down from a
height.3 Bartok terms this type of finger-stroke the
1. Striking the key from a height with the finger tip.

2. Quick key release results in'the addition of hammer-
check impact noise to the tone (see Fig. l).
3. Otto Ortmann, op. cit., pp. 231-235. It Is perhaps
interesting "o note that Tobias Matthay (The Visible
and Invisible in Piano Technique, pp. 18, 30E) and
Arnold SchultzTThe Riddle of the Pianist's Finger,
p. 38) consider key pressure basic and key striking
undesirable in piano playing.
119
l&i
TovtM- Jolce 7ecfctissimo
fi>RM:
dotted -fenutb stdLtzsitissmo

AMOUNT/
NOISE:
TVPE
Of
iMALU
FRICTION
I MOQgRATE
FftlCTlOlsl
gQNStOCR^Bi-e'
FRICTION
&MAT
FRICTION
4
NJOfSE; HAMMEfrSTRMG- HAMMEK-STK\HG- HAMrtER-ST|UN& HAflrtER-STRtWfr
KEY-6ED KEY-BED KEY-BED
RNGEMEV FlNGER-KEY
KEY-CHECK
Pig. 1- Scale of Touch-Form Percussion in the Pedagogical Works
of Bela Bart6k.l
tenuto touch, designates it with the sign 7 , and

specifies that it is to be played with weight.2
Handbewegung
Key-bed impact noise can be lessened by using what
For the porposes of this study, the touch-forms scaled

between 0 and 2 will be termed non-percussive and
those between 2 and 4 will be classified as percus-
sive In character. Percussive sounds arising from
impact and friction noises in the pedal mechanism
are not taken into consideration here since they
are negligible compared to those produced by the
key action, particularly when the pedal is well-
lubricated, or when it is not shifted up and down
in rapid succession. The few pieces in the Mlkro-
kosmos that contain pedalled measures do not require
a rapidly-shifting damper pedal.
According to Uhde (op. cit., p. 96), tenuto foci are
played with a low wrist, an assertion supported
by Ortmann's. statement (The Physical Basis of Piano'
Touch and Tone, p. 152) ÊHat a low wrist posTtTon
tends to"lessen finger-key impact noise.
120
Bartok calls handbewegung: hand-motion, or flexible wrist

action. In this touch, the recoil action of the wrist
absorbs part of the shock when the key meets its bed,
and the slow key release resulting from hand movement
reduces hammer-check impact noise to a minimum. The use
of handbewegung in connection with tenuto touchiproduces
a tone relatively free from noise elements. Bartok speci-
fies the use of this tonal color in certain pieces re-
quiring the cantilena style of playing, marked dolce,
cantablle, or espressivo, and those pieces non-legato In
style marked with the portamento sign f f f ^ I n
addition, the portamento and cantilena touches are to be
played lelchtigkeit; without weight.2
Agogic Variations
The following discussion of the various touches in
terms of their varying agogic interpretations is sum-
marized in Fig. 2 (p. 121).
Legatlssimo can be played with the damper pedal
half-depressed (l/2 Ped.), fully depressed (Ped.)P or
without using the pedal by allowing one finger to hold
its key pressed down while another tone Is sounded.
1. Portamento is also known as portato and Is played

with an uplifting wrist so that the fingers are
still In contact with the keys as the wrist pushes
off from the keyboard in a swinging fashion (cf.
Uhde, loc. cit.).
2. See also Vantyn (op. cit.) for a detailed presentation
of portamento (Chap. XXII) and cantilena (Chap.
XXIII) touches.
3. The pedal sign \ | , which appears to a consider-
able extent in Bartok's other piano music, is not
used in the Mikrokosmos.
121
(fOtTAMMMTD)
CrMttfro)
imm
Im
WRITTEN:
& n i n i r g=i
5IGMS: life. ilSBffiP-'i l-** i
PLAYED;
j f-ii r 'r ii r^l iwlE'Etori
TYPE^ hptiv'tno ftffttto > - ?egatb ft>n- staccato skaa-to akccaftsu^ !
Fig* 2- Agogic Variations of Touoh-Forms Used in the Pedagogioal

Works of1 Bela Bart6k
Bart<Sk desires this effect without pedal color, he marks

the music legatissimo.!
Legato playing is indicated by the curved line /"~~N ,
the signs legato, dolce, cantabile and espresslvo, or by
the pedal mark.
Non-legato is a touch In which the gap between two
tones is "imperceptibly small." It is used when other
touch-form signs do not appear in the music, or when the
signs non-legato and poco legato are written. The
1. When the pedal is depressed fully, or half-way, the

effect is automatically legatissimo.
122
difference between non-legato and poco legato is that the

former is played with weight. Another non-legato sign
is the tenuto f .
Non-staccato is another detached touch which is
represented by the dotted tenuto sign f . According to
Bartok, dotted tenuto is never less than half the value
of the note; thus, Its duration is somewhat optional
with the performer: It may be played non-staccato or
staccato in terms of time value, but always In connection
with pressure touch and weight.
Staccato is a detached touch in which the tone Is
sounded for one-half the value of the note, or less,
and is marked f . Dotted tenuto and portamento are
also staccato touches, but in connection with non-percus-
sion.
Staccatissimo is the shortest of the detached touches
and, in addition to the usual sign, may be marked secco
quasi pizzicato; In fact, Bartok specifies that it is to
be played "as short as possible." Like the dotted tenuto,
the portamento is also variable in terms of time since
it can be played shorter than one-half the value of the
note.
Dynamic Variations
The Mikrokosmos contains certain signs, such as
1. Optional with the performer.

2. But only at slower tempi, since quick key release
would add hammer-check impact noise to the tone and
thus change the tone color from portamento to dotted
tenuto.
123
marcato, marcatlsslmo, martellato, leggero, and mezza

voce which replace or reinforce symbols of intensity.
In fact, they represent dynamic variations of the basic
legato and non-legato touch-forms listed in the foregoing
pages.1
Marcato, used interchangeably with > , is a term
which indicates that a certain passage of notes is to
be played with accents of medium intensity, and marcatis-
simo, or A. , calls for heavy accentuation. Martellato
is a percussive, staccato touch, forte or fortissimo in
intensity which requires the use of arm playing to pro-
duce the desired dynamic level.2
Leggero, on the other hand, should be played without
accentuation and is used in connection with intensities
up to mezzo-forte.3 Mezza voce ("half-voice") refers to
a sound, or series of sounds, at half-intensity.^
Touch-Form Frequency
The listings in Table I disclose that in terms of
1. Thus, they do not represent basic touch-forms in

themselves as reported by Sielska (op. cit., pp.
22-29) and Apel (Harvard Dictionary of Music,
p. 396). The latter source states tfiat leggerlo
is played with a touch of non-legato. This is
refuted by Bartok's directions In Exercise 33 of
the Mikrokosmos (legato e_ leggero) and no. 113
(mf, legato, leggero) . In other words, Bartok's
conception of a basic touch-form apparently was
in terms of tone color In connection with agogic
variations.
2. According to Ortmann, op. cit., p. 197.
3. Usually piano.
4. According to Theo. Baker (Dictionary of Musical Terms,
p. 121), a passage marked mezza voce is to be
played nearly the equivalent to mezzo-forte.
124
TABLE i
PERCUSSIVE TOUCH-POHMS IN THE MIKROKOSMOS
Vol. Vol. Vol. I u

Vol. Vol. Tot ^
Vol.
Type I II III IV V VI Ho. %
/) . i-X,
fy.1-4
11-%, ii-w, 97- 99, 1ZI, 1ZS, w-fH 1 i
legd& 7o-n, for-for, ftl-fft
7H% 109-110, 130- f39
S9-9o,92-ML-11%
Bf.'9-to,
/r 2S-21,3o\> <Wj
Qts) (3f) . m <&> Of) (13) 160 *k
staccato &-3f, (of-t9, 91,10*1, 1Z3-1*f, Wo-149,
10% HZ- 1Z1-131, 14C -14% \
H5", HI-SO, 1S3
S4M, 11% i**, 136
e?.s.n-1ify.2o-at,t+,Zt-33 1
jr }%z^, '
(
$ (W | (14) {10) | (If)(?) Si u!
noh-iefato *,, S7>4% \70,7*> i03-1*S, 122,1Z-W,wo-m
30-31 s-%to, \n,ut 107-111, 131,133,1391HS% 14t-
GÊ-t. \f$, M- 11L,1Z0~\ 1H9,1&-
10-11 \f9t1*,1f 111 | 153 .
(#| (ti\ (3i (iv! m (?) 11u

5tatcaf/;Wio
(audi f ixiicaty
i 7*, f* 1O& ! 1ZH- m
ffO
m
10
' -, ' /-^ i 1
t*\\ f#' [1)\ (1) (3) l\
hfatissiHno I I
i
-6 : , ; 137 i
(0) r
i <>) (o)' f0) (1)
(0)
\ *
*Itallcized numbers In parentheses represent the total

number of pieces in a given volume that contain
examples of a particular type of technical problem.
**The italicized numbers in this column indicate percent-
ages of all pieces in the total work containing the
particular touch-forms.
125
the act of touch in the Mikrokosmos the percussive legato

exceeds any of the other touch-forms.
It has been suggested that, since Bartok's piano
music is known for its non-legato type of execution, his
emphasis on legato is a concession based on a pedagogue's
realization that an accomplished pianist needs a smooth
legato. The major portion of each volume of the work
Is devoted to the playing of percussive legato, and the
other percussive touch-forms are found in progressively
increasing amounts in terms of the percentage of each in
the various volumes that comprise the work as illustrated
in Fig. 3 (p. 126).
Tenuto, the non-legato variant of non-percussive

touch, is the touch-form to be found in the Mikrokosmos
to a greater extent than the other non-percussive touches
(Table II, p. 127). A comparison of Tables I and II re-
veals, however, that the Mikrokosmos can be considered
as a method whose emphasis is placed on the playing of
percussive touch-forms.
It is not until the third volume of the work that
all the various non-percussive touches are used by Bartok.
Figure 4 (p. 128) shows that, with the exception of the
legato touch-forms, the non-percussive touches also show
a progressive increase in quantity from volume to volume.
It will be noted that many of the pieces contain

126
fete
Volume I Volume I VolumeUE Volu^TI v/olu**X N/olome5E
Fig* 3- Percussive Touch-Forms in the Mikrokosmos, by Volume.
more than one touch-form; indeed, nos. 102, 109, 129,

139 and 148 can be considered as studies in the act of
touch since each piece contains more than five different
touch-forms. Some of the pieces require a certain
amount of proficiency in terms of hand independence due
to the simultaneous playing of two different touch-forms
(see Hand Independence and Part Playing below).
127
TABLE I I
NON-PERCUSSIVE TOUCH-FORMS IN THE MIKROKOSMOS
3=
T6TT -7517 7oT. Vbi7 Vol. Vol. lot.
*yp I II III IV V VI Ho.
91, I**., i2Z,127- W-14K
7wt-(e<ra1o 10% fof, 113,131, 1f3-1Sfl
Ctehoto) 110-m, 134,13?-1ft
111,116,
111-120
M a) (9 (11) (V 01) 37 ZO
s-1,6-^6 69-70,0, 97,102, 1ZS, 132,

\t7-tr,11, 109,111 136, 137
iw
116, 100
qgjce., zspitss- d) &L 1Z
IXP) (0) (?) (*) CO
staccato 02,109, 12.1,11% in u,

95- 116-117 131
Co) M CD V) (3) 1& c$ 1t> f
Position, Motion and Fingering Problems

The first nine pieces of the Mikrokosmos are unisonal
melodies in which the hands are positioned two octaves
apart (nos. 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6) or at the interval of the
octave (nos. 3, 7, 8 and 9). There are certain advantages
in beginning piano instruction with the two-octave posi-
tion: the student can see the keyboard with less diffi-
culty, the elbows tend to remain in at the side of the
body, and the resultant sound has resonance or "bigness."1
August, 1954.
128
ferCdC
VoUe X VahmiE Molutn^M- Vo'vmiM Vo(*"**& Vx^c
"Q2ttegM&& M tqfdto D sttecjtt*
Fig, If.- Non-Percussive Touch-Forms in the Kikrokosmoe, by Volume.
The adjustive actions used in piano playing have

been grouped into three general types: lateral movements
of the arms along the keyboard, extension and contraction
of the hands, and passing the thumbs under the fingers
and the fingers over the thumbs.1 Lateral arm movements,
1. C.W. Pearce, op. cit., p. 136.

129
also known as change of position, begin with no. 13, ex-

tension with no. 18, contraction with no. 10, and the
passing of the thumb with no. 98 (volume III). 1 The
major portion of the pieces comprising volumes I and II
are played without changing hand position (Table III).
TABLE III
HAHD POSITION IN THE MIKROKOSUDS
T6T7 'voir "voir Vol. Vol. Vol. Tot
Typa I HI IV V
11 VI No.
TM7/3T Kf,lf,n, Lt-69,14, 17- 1o*ft 12ft-13 f
ss,a-szx m-163
OF 11- If, ?o- 106-121,
POSITION : 6t-6H,66,
+.13-11, tl-90,12- E%.3Z-33
%fr-1f-
U, 30-31
(9 01) C30)|
csw (II) Cn) 109 S9
ONE 1-11,11- 37-39,4/- 17,70-73t
POSITION; 11, 6-szt If-76,79, 10?
E+. 1-4 ri,r6,s9'
60, 63.&SI
fy-r-9,12,
if-tf,
(13) (!) (Q) (o) 11 W
CROSSED 51 %1, 12 19,101-10$126,133,13*-
fMMDS:
107,113, 136,139
111-m,
117,119-Ko 19*-117,
(1) (0 (?)
151-152
13 11
lNTE/U0C&i> (7)
HANDS: SeM-fy 13Z-133
110,111,1%) 111-144
(0) (0) 143,1*3
(0) CO (& (!) %
1. The investigator Is at a loss to understand Bartok's

delay in introducing problems concerned with the
130
The first hand crossings are made in nos. 57 (left

hand sopra) and 87 (right hand sopra), and nos. 70 (right
hand sopra) and 85 (left hand sopra) contain the first
examples of' interlocked hand positions.
ftrter
voi..I VOL I V0I.3L VOL.at V/01OI wtrffi

CHMJGEOF Position I ONE POSITION LZ3 - CWSJO HMDS ESI IKTEALOCKCD HANK
Fig . t- Hand Position in the Mlkrokosmos, by Volume.

Figure 5 is a bar graph depicting the percentage of
adjustive actions in each volume. It will be noted that
of the thumb, particularly in view of ..the fact that

those problems are emphasized in Zongora Iskola which
was designed for the first year of piano playing.
131
hand crossings and (the more difficult) interlocked

hand positions are not encountered to a fairly consider-
able extent until the last three volumes, and that the
first volume is almost wholly devoted to playing the
piano without changing the position of the hands.
TABLE IV
MOTION IN THE MIKROKOSMOS
Typt
ToTT ^voir TOT T Vol. Vol. Vol. rot
I ii XIX IV V VI No.
SlMiLM- 1-3,13-1*, %3, 92, 51104, 126,127,130
UNISON: 12-21 *4,6f ) fr. %, fy.n, 107-110, 134-13*, m-i*o.
Km
112,116, 137 m
11*
an &!-()
11,10-17, 3init,
(6) 61 33
13k,W,lT 10,13,15, 112,115,117,UL* 1tr-1ZlLHI,w-m
CONTftAKY 7/, 75/72; 104-1os, 12Z-123,
H-Z-4
irt*i,6it 12,96,H. 116-121 131
t MM
***, 66,9k Zo-H, ZZb, 1*0,1*3
10,11b ZU,Z9e
SIMILAR-
(k)
11,16
(.13) ()
11-H4 6Z, 13,77,76- 103-10*, 423,126,1*3,

(C)
t
m 53 R5T
fr-6,%,10- 112,117, 134-13*,136 iff

11,13-14, W,fy.3Z.
151,16,171
& O eg 39 11
ALTERNATE:1! 10,11-22. K.,45-50, 73,7*,79, 102,101,
m,124,1U, m-m,
^61, \tow 110,112,11* 129,133-134,
66, Sh l ' 111-117,120136
(7) (0 31 2o
i (3)
(!)\ & (0
Referring, now, to the question of types of motion,

as summarized in Table IV, there are more than sixty pieces
132
and exercises in the Mikrokosmos in which unisonal play-

ing is stressed} beginning with no. land ending with
no. 153. Parallel motion (considered by Bartok to be
similar motion at any interval but the octave) can be
found in Volume I with no. 11, alternate motion of the
hands with no. 10, and contrary motion with no. 12 as
the first examples. Other problems of motion can be
found in no. 21 (tied notes against a moving voice) and
no. 26 (repeated notes against a moving voice).
hOA
VOL.X VOL.U: VOLEL VOL a t vot. voi.1L

UNISON CONTRARY PARALLEL 1 ! ALTERNATE
F i g . 6- Motion i n the Mlkrokosmos, by Volume.
133
Beginning with no. 22, the pieces in the method con-

tain various combinations of motion with the exception of
nos. 52 (all in alternate motion), 98, 104a and 137 (in
unison), and 104b (in parallel motion). The emphasis in
Volume I Is on unisonal playing and Volume VI on contrary
motion; in fact, the latter together with alternate
motion seems to be emphasized increasingly from volume
to volume (Fig. 6).
TABLE V
FINOKRIHG PROBLEM IH THE ggROKPaMOS
Typt
FIRST a FIFTH
T5T7
I
FVoTT
II
37,431,
"VbTT
XII
Vol
IV
70,71,10-11,97-97,
Vol.
V
m-133,
Vol.
VI
110- i*3
i
o.
on
fy.3 73-74,17-12100-103, 13*-13$
SLACK Kefs: 57,62,06, 106-1*1
+.33
6*,Bf..11H ZZ,Z3c,d,
17-17 ZU
(f) (13) (If) (If) it 47

CHROMATIC *4,6Ah, 79, tf-tt, 117 13k-13* 110,112,
FIBRES; 6*,Mtt f.22cfd 144-115,
17 152 r .
(0) (?) (!) m (V zo 11
OTHER: 10,32 1*,17,*1, 7o-ii,7l} 91*1,102 12Z-1Z+, m 142,
\S4,S7,fy. Si, $7,1*- 10*, 107, 126,130-13*,141,116-
\S,9-1o,1S % CM* 110,112, 137-133 1*3
111-121
&)
(?) cm (if) (W (11) & 35*
The figures in Table V show that Bartok makes

abundant use of the first and fifth fingers on black keys
134
in the Mikrokosmos, and that such problems appear early

in the method (no. lOff.) . In fact, chromatic figurations
can be found in the second volume (no. 54ff.). Other
fingering problems include repeating the same two-note
-figure with a different fingering formula for each repe-
tition (no. 45) a left-hand ostinato in quick alia breve
whose discontinuous fingering pattern (1-4-2-5-4-1-5-2,
etc.) is not easy to master (no. 47), sliding the thumb
from a black to a white key (no. 127)> playing two con-
secutive tones of a rapid scalar figuration with the
fifth finger (no. 138), substitutional fingerings (no.
147), and repeated notes played in quick tempo with
alternate fingers (no. 153).
Figure 7 (p. 135) is a graphic illustration of the
progressive nature' of the Mikrokosmos in terms of the
type, percentage of each volume, and over-all quantity
of fingering problems.
Interval and Chord Playing

More than twenty percent of the pieces comprising
the Mikrokosmos are concerned primarily with the playing
of harmonic intervals, including: minor seconds (no. 144),
major seconds (no. 132), minor and major thirds (no. 71),
perfect fourths (no. 131), diminished fifths (no. 101),
perfect fifths (no. 65), minor and major sixths (no. 73),
1. It is perhaps worthy of. note that chromaticism as a

pianistic technique is not a particular feature of
the Mikrokosmos in toto.
135
Rrfofc
V/OUUH6 X VOWHtH VOUOMtUt VouUHlir VOWJHt-X \yoi-wE3ZL
-*V$*F(WJiw6uWtKm CHUOWTJC *6"*S Q OTHfft P*oftrt5

F i g . 7- Fingering Problems i n the Mikroko smos, by Volume.
minor sevenths (no. 148), major sevenths (no. 144),

octaves (no. 147), and diminished tenths (no. lkj),^
It can be seen in Table VI that approximately thirty
percent of the work is devoted to chord playing, contained
1. Enharmonic duplications of certain intervals are not

listed here, since they do not require additional
extension or contraction of the hands, but are in-
cluded in Table VI.
136
for the most part in the last three volumes. With the
exception of no. 143, Bartok has restricted arpeggio
playing to broken-chord figures (within the range of an
octave) beginning with no. 32. Exercises 21, 22 and 23
are the first examples of triad playing in root positions,
first inversions, and second inversions respectively, and
the playing of a non-triadic three-toned chord can be
found in no. 87. Exercise 30 contains primary and
secondary seventh chords in root positions on white keys,
TABLE VI
I1TTKHVAL A1ID CHORD PLAYING III THE MIKROKOSMOS
1
mm
Vol. Vol. ! Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Tot. ^
Type I II i III IV V VI No. >
*s,61,64,\ 67-67,70-110,M, 129,131- 140,144,

INTERVALS: 65-66, \71.fct3, 11* 132,131- 146-1*3
+.13,17, 76-77, 13*, 133
17 79-30,73,
* 11-20
IS) (*) (1J) (I) (0 (1J) fo 2Z
' MoKfrl SSL 41-12,45, 11-73 74-91,103} 1l*-12C, 142-141
47&1-1 K,1l, 1o7,11* 131,n^f 1W
(ar/Y^,pi) 9 %.Z*3o6
I
(p (7) (7) (?) (fl 4-] i 7 11
TRiAJ)i: 69,13,1+ 102,116, 127,133, 143,14,
faui. tUsu' 21-23 12o, e%. 136 1+t-ffl,
MVtftHOtJS} 31-33
0) r /\\ 1*1-1*3
(0) & d) (3) (P ? 11
OTHCR 91, IS, 101,-M, 122,126-121, 112-143,
Cttom: |f> 301,31 Ht,e%-33 130,132-133, 116,147-
136 141,1*1-
1si 1
(0)
' 1 "
(0) (?) (?) (P (p % A
157
and no. 107 requires the playing of four-toned chords

consisting of juxtaposed fourths in the left hand (on
white keys) and a cluster of tones in the right hand (on
black keys).
Vou.i voL.ir s/oijrc vou.ar VOU.Y; VOJ-.IZL
INTERVALS BMEH CHORDS I I TMADS d 3 OTHER CHORDS f H

Pig. 8- Interval and Chord Playing in the Mikrokosmos, by Volume.
The playing of harmonic intervals in Volume II is

preceded by preparatory experiences in the playing of
melodic intervals in Volume I, and the broken chords and
harmonic intervals played in Volume II in turn lead to
138
the playing of triads and other chord structures in the

other volumes of the Mikrokosmos. All types of interval
and chord playing are encountered with increasing fre-
quency from volume to volume In the method, particularly
in terms of the proportion of each volume devoted to
such technical problems.
Hand Independence and Part-Playing

Among the technical problems In the Mikrokosmos
are those concerned with the dissociation of movements
between the hands (two-part polyphonic playing, touch-
form combinations, and dynamic contrasts), independence
of finger action in one hand (part-playing), and com-
bined activities involving the simultaneous use of hand
and finger independence (two and three-part polyphony).
Polyphony Between the Hands

Two-part polyphony between the hands makes its first
appearance in no. 12 of the Mikrokosmos in which the
devices of inversion and imitation are employed. Imi-
tative counterpoint consisting of thirds and chords in
each hand can be found in nos. 71 and 73 respectively.
The listings in Table VII disclose that more than half
the work is devoted to this problem.
It is perhaps worthy of mention that Bartok employs

two-part polyphony In the Mlkrokosmos as the first ex-
ample of dissociated hand movements, and that fifty per-
cent of the first volume is devoted to it. With the
139
TABU VII
POLYPHONY BETWEEN THE HANDS IN THE MIKROKOSMOS
Vol. -Toi; vol. Vol. Vol. T Jot,
I ii Ill IV V vi- No. %
1*,17, 37-39, QHK71, S5-H 122-124,

43-414- 73,71-10, 1o3M-
S1, *i-**r,
in, m,
H- 2-4? S-7-5-9,62-d, 91- f6,106,109, 131-132,
114-116, 13$
63,^-5-0, Bf.Zo-Zl, 121
%'10,12; M6,26htt
m tit.
03) 103 ST
(**) f0 (Vfl (i)
' is"
a
V*k. Vou. VOL. Vbt-
vw.. X 3L
X 31
Fig. 9- Polyohony Bot-ween the Hands in the Mlkrokosmos,,
by Volume.
140
exception of Volume V, the other volumes exceed the first

In terms of the quantity of pieces in each that are con-
cerned with this phase of hand independence.
Touch-Form Combinations
The simultaneous performance of two different touch-
forms can be divided into three categories: percussive,
non-percussive,- and percusslve-non-percussive combinations.
, TABLE VIII
PERCUSSIVE TOUCH-FORT' COMBINATIONS III TH^ MIKROKOSMOS
Vol. Tol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. (lot.
yp I II Ill IV V VI (No. %
37-39, H- 67-63 113)116, 123,12*121- 142,146-

50, **,H. 127, 130-131, 141,14%
?tacck1o: 12 114,13?-131 152
lL-3\>
() (Z) (!) (3) &
Legate **/ 92 111,1X1 1*rt133,1S9
145-146jltf
()
150,1*2
ft) (?) I &
(i)
(!)
125,133 vn. m
(o)
(p\ (0)
ft) f 3
i
i
i (&\
1
Sti'cxhssmo ft)
[ IS) . (6) %,to \
lU biff* (2) (l\ 14C .
' fi)

TOTAL (tt<lu<l,nf (fu>- 37
& \
Percussive touch-form combinations make their first

appearance in Volume II in the form of legato against
staccato (no.
f
38). It is not until the third volume that
the other percussive touch-forms are combined one against
141
the other. Excluding duplications in which one piece

might Include more than one oombination, twenty percent
of the Mikrokosmos is concerned with this technique
(Table VIII).
It will be noted in Figure 10 that percussive touch-
form combinations are met in increasing quantities as
the piano student progresses from one volume to the next,
feGrit
Pig. 10- Percussive Touoh-Fonn-Combinations

in the Mikrokosmos, by Volume.
142
Non-percussive combinations are limited to the sixth

volume in which tenuto is played against dotted tenuto
and portamento (no. 144).
TABLE IX
PERCUSSIVE-NON-PERCUSSIVE TOUCH-FORl' COMBINATIONS t J/IKROKOSÔS
: 1
| Vol. ' Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Tot.
Type I I in IV V VI Mo.
%
; 77 mm,,
14*441,146-
111,119-m
13? ,
if) Co) i (i) , (3) m
(7) (0 I
1 17 M-DT m. m i-M5

W (0)
( * ($ () I 4
Leah, porta- 11& Pit
- W L r
-' (V (i) 3
M* -?f4*1o. Mi M-MT-M
"t<H*1vi (0 h) (i) i 4 i I
($
!
i
fti
a\ (i)\ (ff (<) G I i
Hi
, Otjtk*'*lQ:
0 00 (i)
fzofy.u
(0 (& . 1
133 iio, l4i,
1fl-W
(P (o) (8 (P 7
âecATp -
dotfed-'&tdi (>j (Oj (!)
"e (0 1 1
$-h.cc*Jp -
) m (?) Co) (?) (S) 0 0
TOTQL (tfcf'dnfra'fp/itdt*} f3 ,
1. The investigator wishes to call attention to this

further evidence of the percussive nature of the
Mikrokosmos.
143
Percusslve-non-percussive touch-form combinations

begin with no. 87 (Vol. Ill) in which legato is played
against tenuto and dotted tenuto. Table IX contains a
listing of several pieces (nos. 116, 146) In which more
than three examples of combined touches occur.
fcrfafc
1
to
Lo
Ho
2o
Sou- v/ou. \I0L. Vt- ôt" Vflt..

X X M I X 3
Fig. 11- Percusslve-Non-Percusslve Touch-Form!
Combinations in the Mikrokosmos, ;
by Volume.
^
Like the previous graph, Figure 11 clearly indicates
the increasing proportion of touch-form combinations .In
144
the last four volumes of the Mlkrokosmos. It will be noted

that more than seventy percent of the pieces in Volume VI
are concerned with the playing of percussive against non-
percussive touches.
Dynamic Contrasts
More than fifteen percent of the pieces in the method
are devoted to the playing of accompanying figurations
which usually require a certain amount of dynamic balance
between the hands in order to bring out the various
melodic lines. Table X indicates that the first experience
in playing accompaniments Is with the left hand (no. 40),
and that of the twenty-nine pieces containing accompany-
ing figurations, more than half require the use of both
hands.
TABLE X
ACCOMPANYING FIGURATIONS IN THE MIKROKOSMOS j
Vol. Vol. ! Vol. j Vol.
Type I
Vol. Vol. rot
II j III IV V
vrc %
\iH,ir If. 33 No.

) (sh a)
i
(4) Co) foj l>
LEFT fP.'Hfffl i* 113 13* H6,rtt-ia 3
H-Af/D:
(*> CD! (& (I) (I) is s;
BOTH 97 12*tno \in,i*m
1C 3

TbTftL Z9 (C.
145
It will be further noted that accompanying figurations

do not occur until the second volume, and that the last
volume contains the greatest proportion of this type of
hand independence (Fig. 12).
feftt
$0
to
40
2o
VOi. v*. VOL- Mil.- Voi..

X IE TE X
Fig* 12- Acoorapanying Figurations in the
Mikrokosmos, by Volume.
Dynamic variations between the hands occur when one

of two or more lines contains special accentuation marks.
For example, In a two-part canon (no. 31) the upper voice
146
Is marked with marcato (> ) accents. The lower voice,

entering in imitation a measure after -the upper has begun,
is written with similar accents: The result is that one
hand places greater stress on a particular tone while
the other is maintaining a constant dynamic level. In
similar fashion (but in a free contrapuntal style), no. 34
introduces the sforzato (sf_), or heavy accent and no. 47
the marcatissimo (A ), or medium accent. What may be
perhaps an unusual type of dynamic variation between the
.hands in terms of accentuation is contained in no. 148
in which the right hand plays a marcato accent at the
same time the left is playing marcatissimo. Twenty-five
percent of the Mikrokosmos is concerned with dynamic vari-
ations between the hands (Table XI).
TABLE XI
DYNAMIC VARIATIONS BETWEEN THE HANDS IN THE MIKROKOSMOS
t vol. Vol. ; voi. Vol. Vol. Vol. Tot.
Type II III IV V VI No,
AlAfiCATO ; 31 44,S7,53.-7*,17-73, 93,165,1111 125,127, 140,115-117,

'62' H-2*L 116-117f ! 12 f-13b, 137 119-1*0
(1) W\ CD CO zs 16
H1,*I,*4\ 12,16,1(2, 117, fy\33
122,130,135 11o, 142,
(A)
$7,92 14*-/%
143-170,
(Q)\ (3)\ (*) (I) (i)\1S3 C*J Z111
117 124- \ 112,111-
s A141,1*3
( 4) H) CD (*) >(t) (D \ (4) 12
(0) ($) | (i) 1
HQ2CftTiSiM (2) csi\/4rr<) 1
\TomL CtftlutjH^ dofhrftoiii)<tf Z*
147
Dynamic accentuation in terms of dissociation of hand

action begins in Volume I and increases proportionately
In quantity from volume to volume (Fig. 13).
Per Cuifc
io
CO
4o
V/OL. Vol.. VOL.. VM-- \AL. vat.

X TL Iff TT- TC 3
Fig* 13- Dynamic Variations Between the Hands
in the Mlkrokosmos, by Volume.
Part-Playing
There are fifty-nine pieces in the Mikrokosmos that
contain examples of three and four-part writing; however,
it is only in no. 148 that each of the separate parts
takes on the melodic distinctness that might be characteristic,
148
perhaps, of a Bach fugue. Bartok's procedure in the

other pieces Is the use of held or repeated tomes as one
of the two simultaneously-sounding line systems to be
played with one hand.1
Table XII reveals that part-playing in the left
exceeds that in the right hand, and that the bulk of
part-playing problems in the Mlkrokosmos is concerned
with the simultaneous use of both hands.
TABLB XII
PART-PLAYING IN THE MIKROKOSMOS
Vol. " Tol. fol. Vol. Vol. Vol. rot
Typo I II Ill IV V' VI %
No.
11 ,W 12*, 42^
JllfrHT
'HAND: ' (0) (?) 2 (&
(0) f I
LEFT 71,71,9$ M,11* 1*3t 139 no, HI
HMD : (!) (f) (?) ( # 11 I
S6-S7, 11,11'%, io*,iH' 431-132,
BOTH 60, W 112,111, 136,137 U,1^
/JAND5: e+ 11 1f,fy-fl, 1Z0 1&
& (if) IP il A3
TOTAL S9 3
The first example of part-playing for the left hand

alone can be found in the aecond volume (no. 41), for the
1. But nonetheless challenging to piano students.

149
right hand alone In the third volume (no. 78), and for both
hands playing together in no. 56 (Vol. II). Volume VI
contains examples of part-playing in more than ninety per-
cent of its pieces.
fa*
Ao
to
VOL- VOL. l/ot.

X i a S0* ^ 3T
p i g . II4J- Part-Playing in the Mikrokoaraos. by
Volume*
Passage-Work and Embellishments

The third volume of the Mikrokosmos contains the
first examples of scalar-type passages. For example, no.
69 is a chord study, no. 73 employes double-note sequences
150
(sixths), and no. 77 is composed of rapid sixteenth-note

figures. Rapid octave passages do not occur until the
sixth volume (no. l47)j however, there are other examples
of octave playing in the same volume (nos. 145, 148, 151
and 153) and in Vol. V (no. 113h 1 The first example
of a piece' devoted to arpeggio playing (but not involving
passing of the thumbX. is no. 143.
An indication of a slow trill can be found in no. 14,
double-note trills begin with no. 66, and the first trill
in rapid tempo (sixteenth-note quintuplets at M.M.=132)
appears in no. 138. The use of fore-arm tremolo is re-
quired in nos. 40 and 153-
Turns and grace notes can be found in the last two
volumes of the Mikrokosmos; the former beginning with no.
127 and the latter beginning with no. 128.
Table XIII is a compilation of the various types of
scalar and arpeggiated passages and' of embellishments that
Bartok uses in the method. The sparsity of such problems
in the work has been mentioned by several sources;5 how-
ever, it should be observed that Bartok recommends the
study of "the easy pieces from J.S. Bach's 'Note Book
1. See Notes to Volume IV> Mikrokosmos (p. 52), concern-

ing the use of octaves as an ossia in the repetition
of no. 113.
2. According to Ortmann (The Physiological Mechanics of
Piano Technique, pp. 185-189), the tremolo is a ^ p e
of trill in which the production of the desired in-
tensities mandates the use of fore-arm rotation.
3. Marya Sielska, op_. cit., p. 36.
jiirgen Uhde, op. cit., p. 87.
151
TABLE XIII
PASSAGE-WORK AND EMBELLISHMENTS IN THE MIKROKOSMOS
Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Tot

*yp I II Ill IV V VI Mo. %
$mes **& 71,7$ 1t,1*,127,130, 144,117-

I
fitH?e(r()\oS:
i
( I
VA**r 137-133 111, m i
M,1*t, i 143
(S) (0)
.%.32
(S at) u 11
Oowflj.A/ffigf; 13
112.
(S) (Q) (D (D CD IS) 3
\
OCTAVES : 113CMSL*)
! ft*, nr-Mt
151 1*3
(ftl ($) ; (2) (<) " (l> C> 6 3,
T/?(AD5; 69,13, Ho, 151,1*3
Sf'21&
(i) (o)
(4) __Jl)_
,() Ci) 7 J _ *m m - -T

T2\LUS : 14 \nM '67,17-79, " 110 ' 134-13*137MM
EX.11 71, t3,77, 1H1,141,

KfrfW 1*1-1*2
(i) (3) (S) (D (3) Ci) 23 1Z
1
"ftehoko;, :
(0 Ho ft) 0 0 1S3 (1) 4_
tuftMs:
t
121,130, 142, nr 1
I 136, I3f
(2) (2) (D (?) (i) (i) i f,
fc*e Hmes:
127, 734- 11*, 1*1
() m (o) (Si & Ci) 4 2
TOTAL[vy&lmg cljfkttmt) \ S2 2%
152
for Anna Magdalena Bach,' the appropriate studies by

Czerny, etc."1
ftrCl*
VtoL.TE VOk.lt V01.HE voiÊ vx.X vot.U

pAt*tt*ra*K | CM|ftU4HngttT Q
Fig* 15- Passage-Work and Embellishments In the

Mikrokosmos, by Volume.
See
Preface to Mikrokosmos, Vol. I (p. 3 ) . Bartok ad-
vises further that the study of Bach and Czerny
should be combined with the study of the fourth
volume of the Mikrokosmos. The investigator agrees
with Bull's contention, however, that Bartok under-
estimated the degree of technical difficulty of this
volume (see Storm Bull, "Bartok's Teaching Pieces,"
Repertoire [Lansing, Mich.], Vol. I, No. 1, October,
1951, P'. 4 ) .
153
Passage-work and embellishments are concentrated for

the most part in the last three volumes; in fact, more
than fifty percent of the pieces in Volume VI are con-
cerned with such problems.

Miscellaneous Problems
The remaining technical problems to be considered
In this chapter are those concerned with pedalling, en-
semble playing, and velocity as indicated by the metro-
nomic markings appearing In the Mikrokosmos.
Pedalling
The Mikrokosmos contains six types of pedal direc-
tions, all concerned with, pressure or release of the
damper pedal; Ped. *; 1/2 Ped.; Senza Ped.; (Ped.);
(Prol. Ped.); and Js~7 SF^*. ^ j . The pedal sign
j i does not appear in the method, and those signs
in parentheses indicate that the use of the damper is
optional with the performer. In fact, one source states
that Bartok only added pedal markings to his piano music
where he particularly desired its use to add a certain
amount of color, and that he often employed the damper
pedal In unmarked sections of his compositions.2 The
sign (Prol. Ped.) indicates that the performer may use
1. Bartok uses the tie sign over the bar line from a note,
interval, or chord into an empty, succeeding measure
to indicate that the damper (or sostenuto) pedal is
to be held down (see nos. 110, 14b, 140 and 153).
August, 1954.
154
the sostenuto pedal if the piano is so equipped; otherwise,

the damper pedal is to be used.1 No directions are given
for the use of the sordino pedal.
TABLE XIV
USE OF THE DAMPER PEDAL IN THE MIKROKOSMOS
1
Type I II Ill IV V VI tiq. %
97,102,161, 122,126,131 113 M

FULLY-!>&MettlD
169,111,11b,136 1,1S3
(?) (3) 119 (1)
(?) @ 11
21
HALF.pI>A k :
110 1K>
(0) (0) (i) ft) z
i
%,33 137' 117-14$
PsML.'. (9) (?) (Q) (l) (i) (& 4 2
PrU. U :
(or t<t*mi%
(S) ft) (!)
1i0
(i) (A) ** a) 2 4
OTHER. : 110 146,147,159,

(implitd or rttikej i
bittrtotjn/u'&J) W (0 m (i) (0 i r 3
(*> 3
TOTAL (tfcWi*/ duplidi'$hi)2t
The first pedal sign appears In Exercise 11, the

half-pedal sign in no. 110, and the sostenuto pedal sign
in no. 109. Use of the damper ranges from a syncopated,
one-beat pedal in no. 83 to twenty-two consecutive
measures of pedal depression in no. 146. No. 150 con-
tains a moving bass line against a sustained tenor part
1. Bela Bartok, Unpublished Notes (given to Ann Chenee),

1944.
155
that cannot be played with the left hand alone without

use of the damper pedal.1
It is quite apparent from Table XIV that pedal usage
is not stressed in the Mikrokosmos. It has been suggested
that it may be advisable in nos. 68, 70/ 85, 89, 100,
103, 108, and 111 (all without pedal markings) to use the
damper as a means of insuring a smooth legato, or roundlng-
off individual tones.2 Like the problems dealing with
passage work and embellishments, pedalling is relegated
for the most part to the last three volumes of the Mikro-
kosmos . (Figure 16, p. 156).
Ensemble Playing
There are opportunities in the Mikrokosmos for vocal
or instrumental accompanying and the performance of two-
piano pieces and transcriptions.-^ Bartok recommends that
the pieces for voice and piano should also be sung and
self-accompanied by the student and certain pieces tran-
scribed for two pianos by having the parts executed on
the higher octave.^"
Table XV reveals that the various types of ensemble
playing are introduced early In the Mikrokosmos, in accord-
ance with Bartok's statement that such experiences should
1. Harriet Cohen, Music's Handmaid, p. 157.

2. Jdrgen Uhde, op. cit., pp. IO0-IO7. Uhde refers to
those measures in no. Ill which do not have pedal
markings.
3. See also the separate publication Seven Pieces from
"Mikrokosmos" (Boosey and Hawkes, pub.) containing
^two-piano transcriptions by Bartok.
156
j fcrCufc
ft
U>
40
20
i
i
VOk. VOL. VOL. Vftu. MM.- Wb- <

X JT JT M X ^
Fig. l6- Use of the Damper Pedal in the
1
Mlkrokosmos, by Volume.
be available to the piano student as soon as possible.-1-

Bartok's philosophy that "instrumental tuition should be
developed from suitable singing exercises" is exemplified
in the pieces for voice and piano (nos. 14, 65^ 74b, 95b,
and 127) which should be practiced first without voice.2
1. Loc. cit.
2. Loc. cit.
157
tuuxr
ENSEMBLE PLAYING IN THE MIKROKOSMDS
fol. Tel. Tol. Tol. Vol. Vol. Tot
*ypt I II Ill IV V VI No. %
VOCAL or 14 6r 1*7
EttmeuMEwr/M
(U 0) (0) IV IS) 3
TWO- ?!4t/0 43-41 14*"
Pieces;
w Ci> (i) & (2) -f 3
Two- hf\o 1*,sr1, Mil. t13. /*3
TfiAHicttHioHil 5% 17,12 irr-ffs-
m () a) ( * )
if
~ \
TOTAL 24 11
Ensemble playing reaches its peak in the third

volume of the work In which approximately twenty percent
of the pieces are devoted to such techniques (Fig. 17).
Velocity
With the exception of no. 134 and Exercises 1-31,
each of the compositions in the Mikrokosmos has one or
more metronomic markings which range from a setting of
39 (no. 148) to one of 200 (no. 144) . In terms of actual
velocity, metronomic Indications begin with one note to
the beat at J = 56 (no. 144) and conclude with four
thirty-second notes to the beat at J = l60 (no. 140).
Metronomic changes appear first in Vol. II (no. 71)
in which three settings are required. No. l4l requires
158
ArCtt
Pig. 17- Ensemble Playing In the Mikrokosmos,

by Volume.
eight settings, approximately one change for each ten

measures of music.
The metronomic markings vary In terms of the basic
note value receiving one unit pf time from / = 134 to
=
"sS M* Table XVI is a listing of all the metronomic
markings in the work.
159
TABLE XVI
rETRONOME MARKINGS IN THE J.IKROKOSfcOS.
I Vol/ Voir Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol.

Type ii Ill IV V VI
Wti/452 fgtm
J. '?6 jo 160 lihifl i3tj it? 60 o 1J6 94-U it* {.,$2
i.. \ 19-kH \ To-kU CA-lTte szi>sc

i: tob, 120 : Mb 1&; Whig/l 1^-hM
I 46
\<SD~to5%
J*. 90%s&
J J. 42% m
J J J. !
39
i
j 40
Summary
The i n s t r u c t i o n s given by Bartok i n h i s piano e d i -
t i o n s and pedagogical works r e v e a l t h a t he conceived of
t h e piano as an instrument capable of producing sounds
ranging from the l e a s t ( t e n u t o , dotted t e n u t o , portamento
and c a n t i l e n a touches) t o t h e most ( l e g a t i s s i m o , legato,
n o n - l e g a t o , s t a c c a t o , and s t a c c a t i s s i m o touches) p e r c u s -
s i v e i n terms of tone q u a l i t y . C e r t a i n of the touches
d i f f e r from each o t h e r a g o g i c a l l y , such as t h e t e n u t o and
160
the dotted tenuto. All of them, including their dynamic

variations (marcato, marcatissimo, martellato, leggero,
and mezza voce) appear In the Mikrokosmos to a certain
extent, but the evidence discloses that the work stresses
a percussive approach to technique, based on the funda-
mental principle that the piano key is to be struck from
a height (unless otherwise indicated) rather than pressed
down by the finger.
The adjustive actions used in piano playing are
logically introduced- in the Mikrokosmos with reference to
change of position (preceded by five-finger exercises)
and.contraction or extension of the hand. Passing of the
thumb, however, Is not a feature of the method as evidenced
by the delay in the introduction of this problem (Vol. IV)
and the relatively few pieces which are mainly concerned
with developing the technique (nos. 98, 104, 116, 117,
118, 121, 123, 128, 130, 138, and 148-153).
Pieces which stress the various types of motion
(similar-unison, similar-parallel, alternate, contrary)
and repeated-note figures can be found in each volume of
the Mikrokosmos.
The greatest emphasis with reference to fingering
problems'in the Mikrokosmos is placed on the use of the
first and fifth fingers of each hand on black keys. Other
fingering problems, given in greater detail in the Guide
(see Appendix), are listed in this chapter as compiled
from published and unpublished sources, including those
161
mentioned by Bartok.
Broken-chord playing precedes that of intervals
which in turn leads to the playing of triads followed by
other chord structures. Forty-five percent of the pieces
and exercises comprising the Mikrokosmos contain examples
of arpeggio, interval, or chord playing.'
It has been mentioned that more than half the. pieces
in the MikrokOBmos contain examples of two-part polyphony
between the hands. Other problems concerned with inde-
pendence of the hands Include the simultaneous playing
of different touch-forms and dynamic levels. The latter
can be divided Into two categories! those dynamic levels
in which -one hand is consistently louder or softer than
the other and those in which sudden accentuations occur.
The playing of individual line-systems in one hand

(finger independence or part playingj can be found in
thirty-two percent of the pieces and exercises comprising
the Mlkrokosmos.
Scale, arpeggio, double-note, octave, and triad
passages; trills, tremolos and other embellishments;
pedalling; and pieces for the attainment of velocity are
not present to any considerable extent in the work. Bartok,
without apology for this deficiency, recommends the study
of other materials of piano instruction.
Ensemble playing in the form of self-accompanied
vocal pieces which can also be used for instrumental solo
with piano accompaniment, two-piano pieces, and compositions
162
suitable for transcription can be found in each volume of

the MlkrQkosmos, reflecting the composer's assertions that
concerted experiences are Important in piano study and
that vocal should precede Instrumental study.
The Mikrokosmos is essentially a method for the de-
velopment of hand and finger independence; indeed, poly-
phony between the hands as one component of this major
technical category alone exceeds interval and chord play-
ing by ten percent and unisonal playing by thirty-eight
percent.
With few exceptions, the data presented in the tables
and figures in this chapter indicate the progressive order
of the pieces and exercises comprising the Mikrokosmos
in terms of technical difficulty.
CHAPTER VIII
MUSICAL PROBLEMS IN THE MIKROKOSMOS
Analysis of the two major studies concerned with

the pedagogy of the Mikrokosmos reveals that In terms of
extra-technical considerations the work can be conceived
of as a method for the teaching of the fundamentals of
musicianship and as a collection of pieces illustrating
in a simple way certain aspects of Bartok's style of
composition.2 The scope of this investigation precludes
an intensive analysis of the Mikrokosmos with reference
to elements of style (rhythm, melody, harmony and form).5
On the other hand, it is worth pointing out that Bartok's
instruction on the pedagogy of the Mlkrokosmos was con-
cerned to some extent with certain stylistic components,
particularly with tonality, cadence formulae, and phrase
structure. Thus, a section under the heading Aspects of
Style, in which pieces of the Mikrokosmos are listed in
illustration of Bartok's principles of composition, Is
included below.
1. Marya Sielska, Bartok'B Mikrokosmos; An Analysis of

its Technical Difficulties, passim.
2. Jurgen Uhde, Bartok Mikrokosmos - Spielanweisungen
und Erlfluterungen, Chaps. II and III I PP. 10-24).
3. For example, analysis of no. 87 (Variations) is the
subject of Istvan Barna's article", '^Valtozatok"
(gnekszo, Budapest, 195O: pp. 197-201).
164
Fundamentals, of MuBlcianship
According to three sources concerned In whole or in
part with piano teaching, basic musical problems are
those involved with notation (rhythm and pitch) and ex-
pression (tempo, dynamics, tone color, and phrasing).
It has been stated that beauty in the rendition of a
composer's design is for the most part a deviation from
regularity in terms of expressive components,2 Such
deviation, however, should not be read into the Mikrokosmos
for two reasons: first, a majority of the pieces are
written in a redundant style insofar as expression marks
are concerned and second, Bartok's philosophy as per-
former and teacher was truth in interpretation.3
Notation
Durational values of notes used in the Mikrokosmos
range from dotted whole notes in no. 32 to thirty-second-
notes in no. 140, and include diamond-shaped note heads
(to indicate harmonics in no. 102), dotted notes, double-
dotted notes, and grace notes. Note and rest values
appear in somewhat of a progressive order in terms of
lessening durations from volume to volume, double-dotted
1. Ernest Schelling, et al., Oxford Piano Course (Teacher's

First Manual), pp. 2-4, 40-44, 62-67.
C.W. Pearce, The Art of the Piano Teacher (22nd ed.),
passim.
James Mursell and Mabelle Glenn, The Psychology of
School Music Teaching, pp. 255-270*", 307-30b.
2. Carl Seashore, In Search of Beauty in Music, pp. 71-72.
3. Concerning this philosophy refer back" to the discussion
on pp. 55-56 in Chapter IV.
165
notes do not occur until the fourth volume, and dotted

rests are not employed In the work.
Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol.

I II Ill IV V VI
N0TE5 _r _ . t'. f.. f'jp:f2*.

aesTS r
Fig. l8-0rder of Appearance of Note and Rest Values
In the Mikrokosmos, by Volume.
The tie is introduced in no. 9 in connection with

the teaching of syncopation.
According to the data listed in Table XVII, none of
the twenty-three different meter signatures appearing in
the Mikrokosmos contains the sixteenth or thirty-second
note as the pulse unit, or designates compound quadruple
time. Other than those exceptions, Bartok has provided
the piano student with what appears to be a wide variety
of playing experiences in terms of simple, compound,
regular, and irregular meters. In fact, no. 140 seems
to be a study in that respect, for It contains thirty-
seven changes of time or measure signature.
Approximately twenty-two percent of the Mikrokosmos

is comprised of pieces containing more than one meter
signature, beginning with no. 12 in the first volume
(2/2:3/2:2/2). Other than a 6/4 signature in no. 33,
the volume contains simple duple, triple, and quadruple
meters. Vols. II-VI seem to introduce the more intricate
signatures In somewhat of a progressive order (Fig. 19).
166
It should be noted that Bartok employs 9/8 meter in

its compound form (divisive rhythm) and in its irregular
form (additive rhythm: 5+4) i n the same piece, no. 103.
TABLE XVII
T*V.TER" SIGNATURES ITT THE ITKROKOSI.'OS
Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Tot'

Type I n Ill IV V VI No.
Si 60 1
u, 14 47,53^7.60, 11-12,%*% 1*3 17
% 64, er-16,13
i
1Z,?>2 71 in,uo-iJLi ?44J7 i
143 i
H-1t 11-15 7?7< fyloi-loz,
122-123125- 140-141M
fy.f-9,12,15 1oH-1o(,,110,1111*1,
1%-f3f
i,ihn,*.1> it,&*(.,&, 10,15,71,1%
91192,101- H5,1iui2t, 191-142
n-17 ios;m-iDt, m,13i-fS7
93-n,ii,fy. 1U-f1H,11H,1ff,
Hk.zUîob
'W,W1, 111,116-111, W}irf1ih1i5 lHi-^114
ir K,if-n,96; IZo-111
24,3t,fy.3 4? 1iitm,no*i 733
i
121
JiU JiU _4
? Ion
Jul
33
I
i
\
1
167
Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol.

I II Ill IV V VI
% > * *
%
*
H.H f'f'T * %
3+1+1
' 7 T
3% 2 **?,
* * *
3+H2
V
jU3
JU2.+ 2+3
r
Fig. 190rder of Appearance of Meter Signatures
In the Mlkrokosmos, by Volume.
Table XVIII is a listing of the various types of

pulse subdivisions, ranging from two to eight to the beat,
in the Mikrokosmos-. What is perhaps not readily apparent
upon inspection of the figures in the table, Is Bartok's
procedure in introducing the piano student to duple,
triple and quadruple subdivisions.
Nos. 12, 32 and 34 (Vol. I) are written.in 2/2 or
3/2 meter, so that the quarter notes therein contained
must be counted two to the beat. Then, in the first
piece of the second volume (no. 37)* the conception of
subdivision of the beat into two parts is expressed as
168
eighth notes in 2/4 meter.
TA3LE XVIII
SUBDIVISION 0? THE BEAT IN THE MIKROKOSMOS
*T* Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Tot,

z II 1J
? IV V VI Ifo.
rrr tt,M,3f
0)
*7 Jtf 11 .
ft,13 (S)
11-72,76,()
(4)
1i.o
3-WOAt-K 6r,70V-lfV- 17-106 1*- 112-131,133-

CD
/**, 147 al
ti
1*o- 1*7
ft; SX,S3 61-63,U</gt*ji-rs,*T-
t 110,111-111, 133
H <4.H,1H-%1111-161/21, i16-Tf74'H2'
ii 26-273ob .
(19) (12) 30 ,
fy (o) (0) * " iV
91,100^
sr
n
tl)
X
0 , 0$O 11$
* Si.
101 1
"fff
1 l r 12<b i_
111
l
* ,Ml5lJ*p 61,t$- moi,ioi 1Z6,132 12
i Hi i
f'LL' 55 7s,f

fcl
4*7
r
I4f i
I
i l^f-itf 53, *7 121 3
77 If, fo/t 1*2,11H 121-12T 130, 1H3-1W1H,

Ev If 135 1Hf, 1*2
1J
f - MM 1*0,1 Sf{ 2
1 ^BJ
141
0: null
137 I
f'ffififf 1W 1
#. mttt 14*, 144 1

1
169
Subdivision of the beat into three parts occurs

first as a function of compound meter (6/8), in which
the dotted quarter note Is comprised of three eighth
notes (no. 4l). After a certain amount of playing ex-
perience in the same rhythm (in nos. 49, 51 and 54), the
student is introduced to eighth note triplets in 2/4
(no. 55). Other types of triplets encountered thereafter
are listed in Table XVIII.
The playing of four notes to the beat is introduced
in the same manner described above for the subdivision
of the beat into two parts. Nos. 53 and 57 (Vol. II)
are written in 2/2, so that the eighth notes therein
contained must be counted four to the beat. In no. 77
(and Ex. 28) of the third volume, the conception of sub-
division of the beat into four parts is expressed as
sixteenth notes in 4/4 meter.
Quintuplets, sextuplets and septuplets appear in
the fifth volume (in no. 138) and the subdivision of the
beat into eight parts in no. 140, in the last volume.
The piano student is introduced to polyrhythmic
playing1 in the Mikrokosmos through the ear rather than
the fingers. For example, in a .piece for two pianos in
the second volume (no. 55) "the primo contains eighth note
triplets and the secondo contains eighth note duplets in
measures 21 to 22. Then, in no. 97, the first playing of
1. The conflicting coincidence of different rhythms. For

a detailed discussion of polyrhythm, see Curt Sachs,
Rhythm and Tempo, pp. 334-338.
170
a polyrhythm occurs in measure 35. No. 130, a piece in

2/4, contains a. quintuplet in the right hand at the same
time the left is playing two eighth notes.
A more intricate polyrhythm In which non-coinciding
meters are employed can be found In no. 138. Although
the measure signature is 2/4, the left hand plays synco-
pated melodic intervals (perfect fifths) which give the
effect of a drone bass in triple meter arid, at the same
time, the right hand plays a melody whose rhythmic emphasis
is strongly duple. Other examples of non-coinciding or
overlapping meters occur in nos. 103, 110, 124, 125, 129,
131, 133, 145, and 146.
It has been noted that 636 different syncopation
patterns appear in the Mlkrokosmos, some of them recurring
in several pieces. Table XIX is a listing of those
pieces in which syncopation patterns can be found. It
will be noted that more than forty percent of the Mikro-
kosmos is devoted to such rhythmic problems, and that
they appear already in the first volume of the work.
It will be further noted that an increasingly greater
proportion of syncopation patterns is encountered from
volume to volume in the work (Fig. 20).
Pitch notation In terms of leger-line notes includes
*J \ /'< and / / ] " 1 . Almost the entire compass of

T
1 i

171
TABLE XIX
SYIJCOPATIOIT PATTERNS IN W I'lKROKOSMOS
Vol* Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. tot\

I II V YI Wo.
> 11.11}1 40-4141- 61,10-%% 11- 103 122- f33, 140- &3
4r,si-fit53, ir-fc,ft4, 13*-135
51-% 63
11-fi
(i) (13) (13) w (17) (tt) u 44
ftr(2s(fc
ff*
(oO
to '- 1
*0
v/oi.. Vol.. VM..

X X
F i g * 20 - Syncopation P a t t e r n s i n th Mikro-
kosmos, by V o l u n e .
172
the piano keyboard is used in the Mikrokosmos:
m
: .*i
m J
The piano scores in nos. 1-21 of the work contain
/
the clef signs \ 1. , no. 22 is written j \ , and the
secondo part of no. 43 . . No. 53 seems to be a

_ *
study in clef changes; indeed, they occur within its

thirty-two measure length as follows:
(?) $ o- -$
The first sign of chromatic alteration of pitch is
the f# In the key signature of no. 8. Bartok deviates
from usual practice by placing the sign in the first space
of the upper staff; in fact, the key signature in no. 10
is comprised of one flat, a13.1
The first accidental (cJF) appears in no. 15, and the

natural sign is introduced in Ex. Id (Vol. I ) . No. 88
contains the first double-flat sign and no. 102 the double
sharp.
Bitonal key signatures can be found in nos. 99 and
105 (Vol. IV), the former containing e_D In the treble and
fjft-gfr in the bass, the latter without signs in the treble
and four sharps (f#-, c#, g^ and drfr) -In the bass.
1. It is not unlikely that the artificial signatures de-

vised by Bartok for the Mikrokosmos are patterned
after those in his book, Hungarian Folk Music (cf.
pp. 30 and 6l).
173
Table XX lists those pieces and exercises which con-

tain key signatures and accidentals. It will be noted
that twenty-six percent are written with key signatures
and that the last volume contains only accidentals.
TABLE XX
KEY SIGNATURES AND ACCIDENTALS IN THE T.ÎKROKOSI.TOS

Typo I II Ill IV V VI No. I
3?-l, Hl^ 6% 10-71) t1-9f 104- 1*2,126-127,
*,1W 5,ir,ti-?i, n-nngo, 105 m, frf, 131,137
5 IM/Wi/RE**': 24-2C ?% (,0,63,66, MM, is, 117,119,011
93-f6
(6) cm (1J) (11) (S) C*) +3
ACCIDENTAL; 1*,1W 42-ms, 6U9,11- 9i-n,iM- 122-133 140-1*3
S0tS2SA-5S, 111,14-11,
U.U-l,2-4 56-53.61-61, It-93, f*
4*1-66, x,
*, 16,11-12,
fy..22}Z3,
14-17 25-21, X%104^06-121
11
(W &) OJ) cm Its 2
(24)
The use of accidentals shows a continuous increase
from volume to volume in terms of the number of pieces
and exercises containing them (Fig. 21).
The number of accidentals in a composition is per-
haps one of the factors contributing to ease or difficulty
in score reading. It should be noted that the maximum
number of accidentals to be found in any piece of a spe-
cific volume of the Mikrokosmos increases as the student
proceeds through the work (Fig. 22).
174
kM
Vot
vatr v*k.3T VOLJB: U * 3 T ^TK ^
Fig. 21- Key Signatures and Aocidontals in the

I'lkrotosmos, by VoluMe.
Expression
A comparison of the Mikrokosmos with urtext editions
of Bach or Beethoven piano works will reveal with perhaps
greater emphasis the extent to which Bartok indicates the
desired interpretation of his work. In fact, Sielska's
frequency tables, concerned with character and tempo
marks and other qualifying terminology in the Mikrokosmos,
175
2o
a
12
III
Mil
ow Vbu.
Mil
vbc. 46L. VOW. >- VOU>
Flgf 22- Maximum Number of Aooldentals Con-

tained In Any of the Pieces Com-
prising the Mikrokosmos, by
Volume.
may have been compiled to give an impression that the

method is a veritable compendium of musical symbols and
terms.^
Bartok indicates desired tempos in the Mikrokosmos
with metronome numerals, tempo signs, and timing marks
which indicate the duration of pieces in seconds and
minutes. Excepting nos. 1-29, 134, 148-151, 153, and
Ex. 1-31, each of the pieces and exercises in the work
contains all three types of tempo Indications.5
1. Marya Sielska, op. cit., pp. 50, 58, 6l, 77 and 80.
2. See Table XVI in^the preceding chapter.
3. It is as if Bartok, in this manner, attempts to in-
sure perhaps the correct playing of his music in
terms of tempo.
176
It has been noted that the pieces range in duration

from fifteen seconds (no. 38) to three minutes and twenty-
five seconds (no. 144), and that the timings serve as a
check on transition passages such as rallentando, "where
the student is prone to exaggerate."
The first tempo mark (moderato) occurs in no. 30,
the slowest (largo) in no. 89, and the most rapid (presto)
in no. 103. Other marks Include; grave, lento, adagio,
andante, andantino, allegretto, allegro, vivace, and
vivacissimo. Some of them are modified by such terms as
non troppo, poco, plu, mosso, molto, and assai.
More than twelve terms are used to indicate tempo
changes in the Mikrokosmos. Those that appear in several
forms are: rallentando (rallent., rail.), ritenuto (riten.,
rit.), and ritard. (rit.) . To indicate a sudden decrease
in speed, Bartok uses the term sostenuto (sost.) which
occurs in nos. 110 and 150. Pochiss. and pochett. (further
abbreviated poch.) are qualifying terms meaning "a very
little" (see nos. 119, 125). The fermata, used to "about
double the value of the note beneath it," is extended in
duration by the addition of the term lunga above it (no.
137) It is perhaps worthy of mention that although the
ritardando is encountered more than sixteen times in the
second volume (beginning with no. 51), it Is not until
no. 103 (Vol. Ill) that the first accelerando takes place.
Sixty-three different dynamic markings are used in
1. Marya Sielska, op. cit., pp. 44-45.

177
the Mikrokosmo3, according to one source, of which forte

appears with the greatest frequency (ninety-two times).
The dynamic range is from p_ (no. 46) to, fff (no. 145).
Bartok uses five levels of intensity with reference
to accent marks in the work: the tenuto (-), marcato (>),
marcatissimo. (A ), and sforzato accents (sf, sff). The
tenuto sign, in addition to designating a light accent,
calls for the use of the tenuto touch. All the accents
listed call for intensities relative 'to the dynamic level
of a composition. That is, marcato within the frame of
piano is weaker than it would be in forte. It should be
noted that Bartok was careful in his teaching with regard
to the degree of dynamic force allotted to accents.2
Various terms are used to indicate gradual and sudden
changes of intensity (cresc, dim., f subito, etc.) and
simultaneous dynamic-tempo changes (calando, smorzando and
stringendo). I
The various symbols used to indicate tone color com-
ponents (pedalling and the various touch-forms) are listed
and described in the preceding chapter. It is perhaps
worthy of mention that Bartok reinforces tone color nota-
tion In the Mikrokosmos with certain expression marks such
as
strepitoso (no. 47) and scorrevole (no. 85).
The composer also uses two rather unusual phrasing
marks, the short vertical line bisecting the fourth and
1. Ibid., pp. 50. 77. Closely following are piano (eighty-

eight times) and mezzo-forte (seventy-one times).
2. Storm Bull, letter to the Investigator, 21 June 1954.
178
fifth lines of a staff, and the comma. The former indi-

cates a definite separation between phrases, so that the
last note of the preceding phrase is played staccato.
The latter, although It also Indicates detachment, dif-
fers in that the time of separation is taken equally
from the last note of the preceding phrase and the first
note of the one following. At other times, sempre legato
is to be maintained between phrases marked with slurs.
In addition, a decrescendo should be played towards the
second of two slurred notes.
There are more than thirty types of symbols in the

Mikrokosmos, including vertical and horizontal brackets,
octave signs, hand indications, and so forth. Finally,
there is a considerable number of direction marks, such
as
if* seconda volta (no. 40), come sopra (no. 110), repet.
ad infinitum (no. 135), and sin al fine (no. 145).
Aspects of Style
It has been suggested that the Mikrokosmos can be
classified according to categories derived from the titles
of the pieces, such as preparatory exercises; "half-
compositions," folkmusic, and national styles; pieces
for the .development of technique; pieces based on musical
phenomena; and character pieces.2 A sixth category can be
added to the others: pieces written in the style of certain
1. See pp. 61-63.in Chapter IV.

2. Jiirgen Uhde, op. cit., pp. 20-21.
179
composers.
The thirty-three exercises are distributed among the
first four volumes as appendices and are intended as
preparatory drills to certain pieces indicated by the
composer, opinion to the contrary notwithstanding.2 In
addition, nos. 134 (Studies in Double Notes) and 135
(Perpetuum Mobile) sound more like exercises, perhaps, ,
than pieces.
An article by Bartok lists four ways in which "peasant
music becomes transmuted into art music."^ Examples can
be found in the Mikrokosmos of the type in which accompani^
ment, iritroductory and concluding phrases are of secondary
importance to the'peasant melody, such as nos. 83 and 113.
Those pieces in which the melody only serves as a "motto"
while that which is built round it is of real importance
include nos. 100, 112, and 115. A third method, in which
Bartok does not make use of a real peasant melody but
invents his own imitation, is illustrated in nos. 90 and
1. See Chap. VI for a "complete listing of pieces in this

category.
2. According to Jurgen Uhde (op. cit., p. 21), Professor
of Piano at the Stuttgart State School of Music,
Germany, the relationship of Ex. 18-20, 23-24 to
their respective pieces (in order: nos. 66-67,' 73,
76) is unclear. In fact, Uhde considers the exercises
listed above,.with the exception of Ex. 24, to be
more difficult technically than the pieces they are
supposed to precede. The investigator, on the basis
of his experience in teaching the work to beginning
piano students, disagrees with both contentions.
3. Bela Bartok, "The Influence of Peasant Music on Modern
Music," A Memorial Review (1950), pp. 72-74.
4. These and Ifhe following listed examples were derived
from Bartok's Unpublished Notes to Mikrokosmos
(given to Ann Chenee, July, 1944J7
180
128. A fourth type of transmutation does not contain

peasant melodies or their imitation but is pervaded by
the atmosphere of peasant music, such as nos. 40 and 61.
The pieces whose titles are based on technical prob-
lems (.i.e.., no. 98, Thumb Under) have been discussed in
the preceding chapter. It is perhaps worthy of mention
that they"are considered'to be in no way inferior in
rank to pieces with "musical" titles and that they com-
pare favorably in terms of construction with such promi-
nent examples as certain of Chopin's etudes.
Pieces named for musical phenomena can be further
subdivided into categories concerned with rhythm (nos.
9, 27, and 133 are titled, Syncopation), melody (no. 14,
Question and Answer), tonality (no. 32, In Dorian Mode),
harmony (nos. 89 and 93 are titled, In Four Parts), form
(no. 28, Canon at the Octave), and the fundamentals of
musicianship (no. 7, Dotted Notes; no. 49, Crescendo-
Diminuendo; no. 102, Harmonics; no. 83, Melody with
Interruptions).
Character pieces are those whose titles suggest a
program, such as From the Diary of a Fly (no. 142), or
Pastorale (no. 24).
Pieces in the style of certain composers are listed
in Chap. VI. 2 Nos. 79 (Hommage a J.S.B.) and 80 (Hommage
k. R.Sch.) are the only pieces in the Mikrokosmos whose
1. Jttrgen Uhde, op. cit., p. 23.

2. See page 108.
181
titles provide a clue to the identity ,of the composer con-

cerned.
Tonality
According to one source, the Mikrokosmos is based
for the most part upon pentatonic scales (..6.., no. 6l)
and ecclesiastic modes (no. 32).! It should be noted that
scales in the major-minor system (no. 38), chromatic
scales (no. 54), scales of the type with a minor third
and an augmented fourth (no. 58), whole-tone scales (no.
136), and artificial scales such as the one appearing .in
no. 10 (d-^-f^-g^-a13) are not Infrequently encountered.
Bartok employs three types of melodic patterns in
terms of modal construction. The first type of melody .
is in a "pure" mode, such as the Phrygian in no. 34. In
the second case, the melody may swing to and fro between
different modes as in no. 53 (Ionian, Or major, and Dorian).
The third type represents a mode which consists of a cer-
tain tonality with one or more altered notes,2 and this
can be seen in no. 92 (Phrygian mode with an augmented
fourth).5
Uhde's analysis of harmonic procedure in the Mikro-
kosmos can serve as a basis for understanding the manner
in which Bartok applies the concept of polytonality.^ A
1. Jttrgen Uhde, op. cit., p. 15.

2. Also referred"to as "color" or "foreign" tones in the
composer's unpublished notes.
3. Jtirgen Uhde, op. cit., p. 15. ' The .4 is characteristic
of the Lydian mode.
4. Ibid., pp. 16-18.
182
first stage of Bartok's harmony is concerned with the use

of an unaltered mode (no. 40: Lydian). Second, one mode
may be alternated with others, as in no. 57 (in which
nine alternations occur, changing between major, Lydian,
Mixolydian, Dorian, and Phrygian). Third, there may be
an interaction of two modes which have identical prin-
cipal tones (no. 59s upper voice in f_ minor, lower voice
in f_ Lydian; interchanging at M. 7-12, and again at
M. 13-18). Fourth, two modes may interact, each with
different principal tones, so that one principal tone is
stronger than the other (no. ,122: upper voice in g_ major,
lower voice in c_ Lydian), or both principal tones may be
of equal intensity, so that a kind of "neutral tonality"
results (no. 101: upper voice Aeolian, lower voice ej3
Dorian). Fifth, two tonal systems with the same principal
tone may interact, one or both of them a compound of two
modes (no. 117: M. 1-4 is essentially d Mixolydian, with
Phrygian color in the upper voice and Lydian in the. lower.
M. 17-21 Is in & Mixolydian in the upper voice and d_
Lydian with Aeolian color in the lower). What may be the
highest level in terms of complexity is the Interaction
of two compounded tonal systems, each with a different
principal tone (no. 121: M. 1-3 is in e_ Mixolydian with
Lydian color in the upper voice and ci Lydian with Phrygian
color in the lower).
1. Loc. cit. In Folk Songs of Hungary (p. 31), Bartok

states that the music of~~Eastern Europe contains the
most incredible variety of available tonal modes and
leading of melodic lines.
183
Harmonic Principles
Bartok writes that his use of the chord of the seventh
as a concord was prompted by his researches into peasant
music in which the seventh appears as an interval of equal
importance with the third and fifth.1 Examples of such
usage can be found in the closing chords of nos. 78 and
105 of the Mikrokosmos.
Bartok further states that "the frequent use of
quart intervals suggested to us the use of quart chords."
Quartal harmony can be found in the Mikrokosmos in no. 125
in arpeggiated form and as chords in the ossia of no. 131.
Bartok's meeting with Henry Cowell in December, 1923
may have resulted in the former's use of tone clusters
in his piano music.^ They occur in the work in arpeggiated
form (nos. 132 and 144) and as chords (nos. 107, 130, 132
and 142) .
The discovery of "a highly interesting treatment of
the Tritone" in Roumanian and Slovakian folk songs led
Bartok to the free use of the augmented fourth and diminished
fifth in his music.^ In fact, the bitonal piece titled
Diminished-Fifth (Mikrokosmos: no. 101) is cited on the
preceding page of this chapter as being comprised of a
kind of "neutral tonality." Further evidence can be seen

Music," A Memorial Review (1950), p. 73.
2. Loc. cit.
,P. 67. ,
4. Bela Bartok, "The Folk Songs of Hungary," Pro-Musica
(1928), pp. 33-34.
184
In Bartok's use of the Lydian mode (nos. 37, etc.) and

other modes with Lydian color (rios. 4l, etc.).
Structure
Certain of the pieces comprising the first volume
of the method contain what Bartok terms irregular or
asymetrical phrases. For example, no. 3 is arranged
into four groups of three-measure phrases, no. 5 consists
of five phrases which are two or three measures in length,
and no. 6 contains three phrases of four, three, and two
measure lengths.
In his instruction on the pedagogy of the Mikrokosmos,
Bartok discussed to some extent his use of certain cadences.
No. 32, a piece in the Dorian mode, ends with a major
chord, and a cadence frequently used In Yugoslav music can
be found in no. 26 which ends with a half-cadence on the
dominant chord, so that the fifth degree of the scale is
in the bass and the second degree in the soprano voice.
No. 87 ends on a tonic six-four chord, no. 101 with the
interval of a diminished fifth, and no. 121 with the un-
usual procedure of the simultaneous sounding of the lead-
ing tone against the tonic, the latter then tied over into
the last measure as its only tone. A plagal ending can
be found in no. 73 and a Phrygian cadence in no. 128.
Bartok uses a considerable number of contrapuntal
1. Bela Bartok, Unpublished Notes to Mlkrokosmos (as

given to Ann Chenee, July, 19^PT) .
2. Loc. cit.
185
devices in the work, such as imitation (no. 22), inversion

(nos. 23 and 29), strict canon (no. 31), free canon (no.
36), augmentation and diminution (no. 46), retrograde
(no. 96), pedal point (no. 139), and stretto (no. 91)- 1
In a brief analysis of form in Stravinsky's music
during his "Russian" period (from Le Sacre du Printemps
onward), Bartok notes that the former seldom uses melodies
of a closed form comprised of three or four lines, but short
motives of two or three bars that are repeated "a la
ostinato."2 These short recurring motives, Bart6*k adds,
are very characteristic of Russian music of a certain
category, and occur in some of the old Hungarian music for
wind instruments as well as In Arab peasant dances.^
Bartok-, however, uses both types of melodic construction
in the Mikrokosmos. For example, a melody eight measures
long, containing half and authentic cadences, can be found
in no. 68 (Hungarian Dance), and a recurring motive (con-
taining four tones) three and a half measures long in the
next piece (no. 69).
According to Bartok, an ostinato is "a ground bass
which recurs obstinately throughout a composition."^ He
further states that the traditional ostinato was a re-
peated theme, unlike the iterated chords in no. 146
1. Lack of space precludes the listing of all the pieces

in illustration of these devices.
Music," A Memorial Review (1950), p. 74.
5 Loc. cit.
4. Bela Bartok, Unpublished Notes to Mikrokosmos (as
given to Ann Chenee, July, 19^P+) .
186
(Ostinato) of the MikrOKosmos, or the perfect fifths used

as a drone bass in no. 138 (Bagpipe) .1 Examples of the
traditional ostinato can be found in nos. 47 (a two-
measure theme), 69 (a three-measure pattern of triads in
root position), and no. 148 (a scalar figuration one
measure in length).
The structural schemata discovered by Bartok as a '
result of his research into Hungarian peasant music are
placed in two classifications: architectonic and non-
architectonic forms. The difference between them is that
the former Is comprised of melodies symetrical in form
and the latter, those non-rounded in structure.2, A com-
parison of Bartok's findings in terms of the structure
of Hungarian peasant melodies and Sielska's formal anal-
ysis of the Mikrokosmos pieces-^ reveals certain similari-
ties . The method contains such non-architectonic forms
as ABBC (no. 106), AABB (nos. 14, 53), AABC (nos. 7, 28,
79), ABAB (nos. 42, 5 4 and ABCD (nos. 9, 86). AABA is
an architectonic form found in nos. 12 and 13.
It has been noted that twelve of the Mlkrokosmos

pieces are in free form.5 According to Taylor, free form
1. Loc. cit.
2. Bela Bartok, Hungarian Folk Music, pp. 9, 21-23,. 37,
39, and 52.
4. Other non-rounded schemata in the Mikrokosmos, but not
In peasant melodies, are AB, ABC, ABODE and ABCDC.
Symetrical structures include ABA and ABCA (cf.
Sielska, loc. cit.) .
5 Loc. cit. The investigator believes that no.. 114 is
in binary, not free form and no. 142 to be more a
free than a ternary form.
187
in the work is the result of Bartok's improvisatory treat-

ment of fragmentary musical ideas.1
Major forms include the theme and variations (nos.
87, 128, 140), and the rondo (nos. 57, 136, l4l). The
latter form, however, might be termed better a "rondo-
variation" form, since the thematic repetitions are varied
to some extent.
Summary
The tables and figures presented in this chapter
indicate the extent as well as the progressive order of
musical instruction in the Mikrokosmos in terms of such
fundamentals as score reading (problems of rhythm and
pitch) and interpretation (problems of tempo, dynamics,
tone color and phrasing).
Further, the number of musical signs and terms used

in the method seems to suggest that it is, to a certain
extent, a compendium of data that might comprise the
material for a dictionary of music.
Rhythm in the Mikrokosmos seems to be concerned for
the most part with syncopation patterns, irregularity
and change of meter, and non-coinciding or overlapping
meters to some extent. Polyrhythm does not seem to be
emphasized in the work, although several examples are in-
cluded.
1. Vernon H. Taylor, Contrapuntal Techniques in the Music

of
Bela Bartok, p. ti. Uhde (op. cit., "pp. ltf-l<J)
Therms such treatment "organ! ciTransformation."
188
Other aspects of style (melody, tonality, harmony,

and form) in Bartok's music, expressed by the composer
in the form of published statements, can be found in cer-
tain pieces of the Mikrokosmos. Stylistic specifics
include four methods for the transmutation of peasant
into art music, the -writing of.quartal harmony, use of
tone clusters, the chord of the seventh as a consonance,
the free use of the tritone, and the employment of short,
recurring motives In the fashion of an ostinato. In
addition, certain forms used In the Mikrokosmos are iden-
tical to those discovered by Bartok in his Hungarian
peasant music research, and the composer's own analysis
of the Mikrokosmos discloses perhaps his particular in-
terest in tonality, phrase construction, and cadences.
Musical characteristics of the Mikrokosmos determined

by secondary sources are for the most part those concerned
with tonality and structure. For example, melodic patterns
In the work may be based on pure, alternating, or compounded
modes; major and minor scales; pentatonlc scales, arti-
ficial formations; and on other types, such as whole-tone,
chromatic, and oriental scales. Six stages of procedure
in terms of tonality seem to occur. Beginning with pieces
written in one mode, the various levels include bitonal
compositions in which two modes with the same or different
principal tones interact and polytonal examples in which
two compounded modes, each with a different principal tone,
are simultaneously sounding. Finally, there is a certain
189
amount of variety in .the Mikrokosmos with reference to

formal designs, including theme and variations, rondo-
variation form, and free forms resulting from the trans-
formation or improvisatory treatment of motives.
CHAPTER IX
RESUME"
General Summary
Bela Bartok has been termed one of the ten most
potent musical forces in the first fifty years of the
twentieth century, and this accolade probably resulted
from his achievements as pianist, piano teacher, music-
ologist, and composer of pedagogical as well as concert
music.
Bartok, a ranking pianist in Hungary and better-
known internationally as a virtuoso rather than a com-
poser in the 1920's, deliberately limited his concert
activities In order to devote more' time to composition
and musicological research; although, it is said, he
possessed pianistic gifts which would have made it easy
for him to become a successful virtuoso. His philosophy
as a pianist was truth in interpretation: neither add
to nor subtract from a composer's intention as expressed
in the written score, and his use of the various touch-
forms belies statements made by certain critics that
Bartok was solely a percussive pianist himself.
The agreement among Bartok's pedagogical editions

and school for the piano in terms of the touch-forms of
piano technique suggests the way the piano is to be
191
played In the Mikrokosmos: by key-striking (finger lift)

- the so-called "percussive touch." And the same works
provide also most of the technical and theoretical
description and instruction not incorporated in the
Mikrokosmos. Bartok believed that technique Is the means
rather than the end in piano playing and, therefore, he
stressed musicianship in his teaching. He extended his
philosophy of performance to his teaching by insisting
that his pupils should follow the Intention of the com-
poser as expressed in the written score unless they could
justify deviations they wished to make in Its performance.
His lessons were noted for his demonstrations at the
piano, and he iterated such performances until he was
satisfied that his pupils understood the requirements
of the music.
The Mikrokosmos was composed from 1926 to 1939. The

evidence points to Unison (no. 137) as the first piece
and certain pieces from the first two volumes as the last
to be composed in the work. The first performance of
pieces from the Mikrokosmos was given by Bela Bartok in
London (Cowdray Hall) on February 9, 1937. The first
American performance was also played by the composer at
Juniata College in Huntington, Pennsylvania, on December
3, 1940. Bartok's preference in terms of programming
pieces from the Mikrokosmos for concert use as well as
his transcriptions, recitals, and recordings of the work
are noted in the chapter concerned with an historical
192
study of the Mikrokosmos.

The objectives of the Mikrokosmos are to provide
pianists with pieces suitable for concert use; to teach
pianists of various ages the technique and musicianship
of the instrument from the beginning to a certain higher
degree; to acquaint pianists with music written in dif-
ferent styles; to Introduce piano students to folk
music by means of graded transcriptions; and to serve
as a reference book for students of composition. The
last-named objective was never given recognition as such
by the composer although it is listed as an objective
by seven of fifty sources which discuss the aims of the
Mikrokosmos.
Although forty-five percent of the pieces and exer-

cises in the Mikrokosmos contain examples of Interval,
chord, and broken chord playing, the work is essentially
a method for the development of hand and finger inde-
pendence. Black key playing, motion studies, two-piano
pieces, accompanying figurations, and ensemble playing
are also a feature of the Mikrokosmos.. On the other
hand, passage-work for the attainment of velocity such
as trills, tremolos, double-note and chord passages,
scales, and arpeggios, is virtually ignored. However,
Bartok suggests the study of "Czerny, etc." which are
to be undertaken concurrently with the fourth volume of
the Mikrokosmos.
As far as musicianship is concerned, the Mikrokosmos

193
stresses fundamentals of musicianship which include

score-reading and interpretation; in fact, the number of
musical signs and terms used invites Its comparison to
a dictionary of music as a compendium of such data.
The MikrokoBrnos exemplifies certain aspects of the
composer's style or principles of composition. Rhyth-
mically, the work emphasizes syncopation, irregularity
of meter, and metrical changes. Overlapping or non-
coinciding meters are used extensively, but polyrhythmic
studies are few in number. Harmonically, the Mikrokosmos
illustrates Bartok's use of quartal harmony, tone
clusters, the tritone, and the chord of the seventh as
a consonance. Six stages of procedure are pointed out,
ranging from pieces written in one mode to polytonal
examples consisting of compounded modes with different
principal tones. Formally, the Mikrokosmos contains
theme and variations; rondo-variations; free forms; and
contrapuntal devices such as ostinato, imitation, inver-
sion, augmentation, diminution, strict and free canon,
retrograde motion, stretto and pedal or organ point. In
addition, the work contains various types of cadences
and many examples of asymetrical phrase construction.
Melodically, the Mikrokosmos is to a certain extent
representative of Bartok's methods of transmuting peasant
into art music: setting a peasant melody so that accom-
paniment, introductory and concluding phrases are of
secondary importance; use of a peasant melody as a
194
"motto" while that which is built round it is of real

importance; invention of an imitation of a real peasant
melody; and the composition of music which is pervaded
by the atmosphere of peasant music but which does not
contain actual peasant melodies or their imitation.
In the last analysis, the Mikrokosmos can be classi-

fied according to categories derived from the titles of
the pieces: "half-compositions," folk songs and dances,
and national styles; pieces for the development of piano
technique'; pieces based on musical phenomena; program
music; and pieces written in the style of certain com-
posers.
Conclusions
In general, the research verifies the hypothesis
upon which this study is based and, furthermore, it in-
dicates that the hypothesis can be re-stated in expanded
form as follows: The Mikrokosmos is an approach to piano
playing in the form of a progressive method which repre-
sents a synthesis of Bela Bartok's experiences as pianist,
piano teacher, musicologist, and composer.
Interpretation of the data resulting from an inquiry
Into Bartok's experiences as stated above leads to the
following specific conclusions which should be of par-
ticular importance to aspiring and practicing piano
teachers:
1. The Mlkrokosmos reflects Bartok's concept of the
piano as an instrument capable of producing sounds
195
ranging from the least to the most percussive in quality.

In other words, the work Is designed to develop the act
of piano touch.
2. It Is not the purpose of the Mikrokosmos to
develop virtuosity, per se, but rather, to train the
fingers and the hands for independence of action as well
as for the playing of harmonic structures.
3. The Mikrokosmos is designed to present the funda-
mentals of musicianship by means of Interesting pieces
which are graded in order of difficulty. And many of
them are suitable as recital pieces for the pupil as well
as for the concert pianist.
Recommendations
It is the practice on the part of some piano teachers
to conduct special theory classes for their piano students.
The investigator urges those teachers in particular and
piano teachers in general to include the Mlkrokosmos as
part of the piano lesson in view of the method's content
with reference to the fundamentals of musicianship and
in accordance with the generally-accepted trend in piano
teaching to present theory by means of the keyboard in-
stead of the blackboard. In fact, this is in line with
Bartok's own philosophy of piano teaching.
The investigator, in discussions and interviews with

piano teachers, was asked for his opinions concerning
the suitability of the Mikrokosmos for children. Specific
questions raised were in reference to the age at which a
196
child could begin the study of the Mikrokosmos and whether

it was advisable to use the method with youthful beginners
before a certain amount of experience had been acquired
with the major-minor tonal system, regular phrase struc-
tures and rhythmic patterns, and consonant vertical and
horizontal structures. Here is a fruitful area for
further research which may also provide answers to other
pertinent questions, for example: To what extent is the
Mikrokosmos being used in piano pedagogy at home and
abroad? What are the outcomes of its instruction other
than the acquisition of specifics of technique and musi-
cianship? How does it compare with other materials of
piano teaching? What is the reaction to the work on the
part of students, parents, and teachers?
It would be of interest and perhaps of significance

to ascertain the extent to which pieces from the Mikro-
kosmos are being used internationally in public concerts,
music school recitals, radio, television, and recordings.
Such an investigation might include published reviews of
those performances is another step towards evaluation of
the Mikrokosmos in terms of its worth as music, per se.
Reference has been made in the present study to

certain opinions which hold that the Mikrokosmos can be
considered as a textbook .for students of composition.. Can
this hypothesis be validated and, if so, can a suitable
guide be prepared? Too, the work has been classified as
representing Bartok's development as. a composer and that
197
It can be considered as his oeuvre in miniature. In-

vestigation of these concepts should be of value in the
field of musicology.
Little has been done by way of exploration of Bartok's
influence on contemporary trends .in piano playing, piano
teaching, and composition. Of equal Importance would be
a study of Bartok as folklorist. There is also a need for
translation of Bartok's published and unpublished letters
from Hungarian Into English. Finally, the vast quantity
of materials on hand at the Bartok Archive In New York
City suggests that the time is ripe for a definitive
biographical study of Bela Bartok.
CHAPTER X
SETTING UP THE GUIDE
Format of the Guide

The guide which comprises Appendix C of this inves-
tigation consists of a Foreword, an Introduction, a
section titled "How To Use the Guide,-" and the main body
of the guide itself.
The Foreword restates the hypothesis upon which the
guide is based and explains briefly the purpose of the
work.
The Introduction relates the Mikrokosmos to general
educational theory and trends in piano teaching, dis-
cusses Bartok's principles of piano teaching, and describes
in outline form the composer's ideas concerning piano
playing and musicianship as collated from the data which
are recorded in the investigation.
"How To Use the Guide" is a section which delineates

the format, definition of terms, and designations and
abbreviations. The format of the guide is patterned
generally after that used in the Teacher's First Manual
of the Oxford Piano Course (published by the Oxford
University Press, 5th edition) In which the pieces are
listed by title In numerical order and the pedagogical
instruction is given In outline form under appropriate
199
topical headings.
As far as the guide to the Mikrokosmos is concerned,
four major headings are used in reference to each piece.
Technique and Musicianship represent the findings of the
writer and other analysts of the Mlkrokosmos. Bartok's
Comments contains extracts from the Preface and Notes to
Mikrokosmos and, what is perhaps more important, Bela
Bartok's unpublished notes on the pedagogy of the Mikro-
kosmos (given to Ann Chenee in July, 1944). Suggestions
includes the experiences of the writer and other teachers
of the Mikrokosmos as well as references to Bartok's re-
cordings of the Mikrokosmos and his transcriptions for
two pianos (four hands), Seven Pieces from "Mikrokosmos"
(published by Boosey and Hawkes).
For the purposes of clarity and conciseness, the
headings concerned with technique and musicianship are-
divided further into first-order and second-order sub-
heads as derived from categories used in the investigation.
The complete format follows:
No. TITLE
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH.
2,. HAND INDEPENDENCE.
(a) Counterpoint:
(b) Combined Touch-Forms:
(c) Dynamic Contrast:
(d) Accompanying Figurations:
200
3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE.
4. INTERVAL," CHORD," AND/OR BROKEN CHORD
PLAYING.
5 . POSITION.
6 . PEDALLING.
7 . PASSAGE-WORK.
8 . EMBELLISHMENTS.
9. FINGERING PROBLEMS.
10. ENSEMBLE PLAYING.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION.
2. RHYTHM.
3. EXPRESSION.
' (a) Tempo:
(b) Dynamics:
(c) Phrasing:
(d) Terms:
C. Bartok's Comments.
D. Suggestions.
It will be noted that subheadings are not used in
those pieces which do not contain examples of the cate-
gories listed above. And it is expected that the piano
teacher will refer to the published vplumes of the Mikro-
kosmos when using the guide.
Validation of the Guide

The guide was submitted for evaluation to a jury
201
of five pianists who were also active as music educators,

and each was asked to record opinions on a direction
sheet (see Appendix B). All of the jury members chosen
stated that they have used the Mlkrokosmos In their piano
teaching.
The jury consisted of:
1. ERNO BALOGH. Professor's Diploma, Royal
Academy of Music, Budapest, Hungary.
Pupil of Bela Bartok from 1906 to 1915.
Internationally-known composer, concert
pianist, and recording artist. Faculty,
Peabody College of Music since 1947.
Visiting Professor of Piano and Pianist-
in-Residence, University of Illinois
(Summer Session, 1948), and University
of Virginia (Summer Session, 1952).
Fellow, MacDowell Colony (1950). Cited
for outstanding services to American
music by the National Association of
Composers and Conductors (1944). Member
of the American Society of Composers,
Authors, and Publishers since 1936.
Author of articles on Bela Bartok, and
a private piano teacher.
2. ROGER BOARDMAN. Ph.D., New York University.
Faculty, School of Education, New York
University. Concert pianist and record-
ing artist (Parade Records). Former
faculty member, the Juilliard School of
Muslo . Author of A History of Theories
of Teaching Piano Technic IPnTD., School
of Education of New York University, 1954).
A private piano teacher for more than
twenty years.
3. ARNOLD BR0ID0. M.A., Teachers College,
Columbia University, Editor and Produc-
tion Manager, Boosey and Hawkes Publish-
ing Company (New York Office). Chairman,
Production Committee, Music Publisher's
Association. Former secondary school
music teacher, Binghamton (New York)
Public Schools. Author (with Marilyn
Davis) of Music Dictionary for Children
(New York: Doubleday & Co., 195o~)^ AiTEhor
of articles on music and music publishing.
A private piano teacher for more' than
twenty years.
202
4. ANN CHENEE. Diploma, Combs Conservatory

of Music (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania).
Music specialist and consultant, Veteran's
Administration Hospital, Montrose, New
York since 1951. Concert pianist. Former
faculty member, Music School Settlement,
New York City (1934-1946). Past President,
Piano Teachers Congress of New York (1951-
1954). Lectures and lecture-recitals
on the Mikrokosmos, piano playing, and
piano teaching. Author of articles on
piano playing. A piano teacher for more
than 25 years, she is probably the only
person with whom Bela Bartok completely
analyzed the Mikrokosmos.
5. DOROTHY PARRISH DOMONKOS. B.A., University
of Minnesota. Phi Beta Kappa. Exchange
Fellow, Royal Academy of Music, Budapest,
Hungary from 1934-1937. Pupil of Bela
Bartok from 1936 to 1937. Concert pianist
and lecturer on the music of Bela Bartok.
Formerly Instructor of Piano, Wells College
(New York), and Juniata College (Hunting-
ton, Pennsylvania) where she arranged for
the first American performance o"f the Mikro-
kosmos which was played by the composer. A
private piano teacher for more than ten
years, she was probably the first to teach
the Mikrokosmos in America.
The results of the evaluation were as follows:
YES, YES, NO
to a to a
high mode-
de- rate
gree de-
gree
1. Is the Guide presented in a form
which makes it easily usable by
piano teachers? (5) (2) (0)
2. Is the style of writing appropri-
ate for a reference book such
as this? (5) (0) (0)
3. In the section "How to Use the
-Guide," are the definitions of
terms clear in meaning? (5) (0) (0)
4. In the main body of the Guide
Itself, are the descriptions
under Technique understandable? W (1) (0)
5. Are the descriptions under
Musicianship understandable? D) (2) (0)
203
YES, YES, NO
to a to a
high mode-
de- rate
gree de-
gree
6. Are the instructions in
Suggestions clear? (5) (0) (0)
7. Are those instructions adequate? (5) (o) (o)
8. Assuming that piano teachers
have a need for reference mate-
rial In their teaching of the
Mikrokosmos, does this Guide
meet that need? (4) (l) (0)
Erno Balogh stated that there Is too much material

In the guide and that it should be kept to a minimum for
use by the average teacher. He also made the following
suggestion:
Although mention is made in the Preface (3
and 5) about truth in the interpretation of
Bartok's music, I would place greater
emphasis right at the beginning that the
full benefit of the Mikrokosmos is only
achieved if all the signs of tempi, phrasing,
etc., are meticulously observed.
Roger Boardman found that he had to refer back con-
stantly to the fourth and fifth sections of the Introduc-
tion and the section on the use of the guide in order to
understand the descriptions under Technique and Musician-
ship in the main body of the guide. He said:
I don't see how else you can do it, but
this qualified my "checks" (on questions
4 and 5 of the check-list).
I think the sections I refer to of the
Introduction and How to sections are most
valuable of all - if one absorbs thoBe
and follows yours and Bartok's suggestions
which I was also very interested in seeing,
one should come out with a legitimate
performance idea.
204
Arnold Broido believed that "for publication purposes,

in actual use among teachers, I would imagine that it
(the guide) would have to be considerably simplified and
possibly sugar-coated to get the teachers through it."
He added that the guide Is easily usable by piano teachers
"if you limit the teachers under discussion to those
(very few) who are intellectually capable of teaching this
kind of music and who have the Interest to go to a reference
work to prepare their lessons." On the other hand, he
found the Instructions in the main body of the guide to
be excellent:
They cover the material from all angles
and are written In a much simpler style than
the preface, introduction, etc. For publica-
tion purposes, most of this would be useable.
I would say that the Guide would meet the
need of the piano teacher for a reference
work in the teaching of the MIKROKOSMOS.
Certainly there is nothing self-explanatory
about the material as It is presented in
the books and as a matter of fact, we have
long felt a need for something that would
give the teacher an inkling of how the
material was organized and what it could be
used for. As it stands I suspect that most
teachers use the material in the form of
supplementary pieces, which Is probably the
most ineffective way possible. From my
point of view this Guide could be a major
weapon in the battle of bringing the MIKRO-
KOSMOS to the greatest number of potential
users. I fear, however, that at best, this
is a small number of the overall teaching
population of the country, the bulk of whom,
it seems, have not developed their taste
beyond the most hackneyed compositions of
the romantic era.
Ann Chenee also was of the opinion that the guide
would not meet the needs of "the average piano teacher with
205
very limited knowledge or time. There is too much material,

and a more simple presentation would be necessary." Other
than this criticism, she commented further that:
This is a thoroughly comprehensive analysis
and description of "Mikrokosmos," presented
in a direct, concise, clear style. It has
been done with fastidious attention to de-
tail, and accuracy. An excellent piece of
work which should be a boon to any piano
teacher who may want to become familiar
with the material, and to launch his pupils
into preparatory study for a musical and
intelligent performance of contemporary music.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Published Sources
Amerlnger, Silvia, "Teaching with Bartok's 'Mikrokosmos1,"
Tempo (London), Autumn, 1951, PP. 31-35.
Anonymous, (Bela Bartok Obituary), The New York Herald
Tribune, 27 September 1945.
Anonymous, "Bela Bartok's 'Mikrokosmos'," Tempo (New York),
April, 1940, pp. 5-6.
Anonymous, Etude, January, 1951, pp. 9-10, 47.
Apel, Willi, Harvard Dictionary of Music. Cambridge
(Mass.): Harvard University Press, 1945. P. x + 833.
, Masters of the Keyboard. Cambridge (Mass.):
Harvard University Press, 19^7. P. 323.
Baker, Theodore, Dictionary of Musical Terms. New York:
G. Schirmer, Inc., 1923. P. vl + 257T
Balogh, Erno, "Personal Glimpses of Bela Bartok," Pro-
Musica, June, 1928, pp. 16-18.
Barna, Istvan, "Bartok 'Valtozatok',"tfnekszo(Budapest),
March, 1950, pp. 197-201.
Bartok, Bela, "Digging for Folk Music" (as told to Joan
Foster), Musical Digest, March, 1928, p. 37.
, "The Folksongs of Hungary," Pro-Muslca,
October, 1928, pp. 28-35.
, Hungarian Folk Music. London: Oxford
University Press, 1931. P. 305.
, "Hungarian Musical Instruments," A Dictionary
of Modern Music and Musicians (London: J.M. Dent and
Sons, 1924. P. xvi + 543), PP. 243-244.
, "The Influence of Peasant Music on Modern
Music," A Memorial Review (New York: Boosey and
Hawkes), 1950, pp. 7I-7b.
, levelei (janos Demeny, editor). Budapest:
Muveit Nep Konyvkiado, 1951^ P. 236 + xvi.
207
Bartok, Bela, "The Life of Bela Bartok," A Memorial

Review (New York: Boosey and Hawkes), 1950, pp. 7-10.
, Notes to J.S. Bach's Thirteen Easy Little
Piano Pieces. ' Budapest: RozsavOlgl es Tarsa, 1916.
, Notes to J.S.. Bach's We 11-tempered Clavier.
Budapest: Karoly Rozsnyai, 1908"! Volume I.
, Notes to Beethoven Sonatas. Budapest:
Rozsavttlgyi es Tarsa, 1909.
____^ , Preface and Notes to Mikrokosmos. New
,York: Boosey and Hawkes, 19^0". Vols. I-VI.
, "Some Early Letters," A Memorial Review
(New York: Boosey and Hawkes), 1950, pp. 12-13.
Bartok, Bela, and Reschofsky^ Sandor, Zongora Iskola.
Budapest: Rozsavfllgl es Tarsa, 1917" P. 69.
Bartok, Peter, Notes to the Recording "For Children."
New York: Bartok Records (919) . Volume T~.
Bingham, W.V.D., and Moore, B.V., How to Interview. New
York: Harper and Bros., rev^ ed., 1<5T4~ P. 308.
Brailoiu, Constantin, "Bela Bartok folkloriste,"
Schweizerische Musikzeitung (Zurich),, March, 1948,
pp. 92-94. " -
Bull, Storm, "Bartok's Teaching Pieces," Repertoire
(Lansing), October, 1951, pp. 1-5.
, "Bartok the Teacher," Musical Facts (Chicago),
1941 (author's typescript copy, pp. l~2~y~.
Cohen, Harriet, Music's Handmaid. London: Faber and
Faber, new ed., 1950. P. 173.
Copland, Aaron, What to Listen for in Music. New York: '
Whittlesey HouSeT Y3T. FT xTTiT '281'.'
Cross, Milton, and Ewen, David, Encyclopedia of the Great
Composers and Their Music. New York: Doubleday and
Company,"Inc., 1953. P. vlii + 1009.
\ Darrell, R.D., editor, Schirmer's Guide to Books on
Music. New York: G. Schirmer, Inc., T ^ l . P. xxxviii
+ 402.
Demuth, Norman, Musical Trends in the Twentieth Century.
London: Rockliff Publishing Corporation, Ltd., 1952.
P. xvii + 359.
208
Dille, Denjis, "The Life of Bela Bartok," A Memorial

Review (New York: Boosey and Hawkes), 1950, pp. 10-11.
Doflein, Erich, "Bartok und die Musikpadagogik," Musik
der Zeit (Bonn: Boosey and Hawkes), 1953* Vol. Ill,
PPT 3^=38.
, "Uber Bartoks 'Mikrokosmos'," Melos (Mainz),
July-August, 1954, pp. 210-212.
Downes, Olin, in the New York Times, 23 December 1927
and 25 April 1940.
Dumesnil, Maurice, How to Play and Teach Debussy.
Schroeder and Gunther, Incr,~l532. P."~2l~ '
Engel, Ivan, "A-Mikrokosmos-rol," Zenei Szemle (Budapest),
December, 1948, pp. 430-431.
Engelmann, H.U., "Chromatische Ausstufung in Bela Bartoks
'Mikrokosmos'," Melos (Mainz), May, 1951, pp. 138-l4l.
____^ , Bartoks Mikrokosmos: Versuch einer Typologle
"Neuer Musik." Wurzburg: Konrad Triltsch Verlag,
1953. P. ix + 70.
Ewen, David, editor, The Book of Modern Composers. New
York: Alfred A. Knopf", Inc., 2nd ed., 1950. P. x +
586 + xv.
, Music for the Millions. New York: Arco
Publishing Company, 1943" PT"viii + 673.
Farkas, Ferenc, "Bartok Mikrokosmosa," A Zene (Budapest),
1940.
Fielden, Thomas, The Science of Pianoforte Technique. New
York: The Macmillan Company, 1949. P. x + 193.
Ftildes, Andor, "Bela Bartok's Piano Works," Listen,
January, 1946, pp. 6-7.
, "Bartok as Pianist," Juilliard Review, Fall,
1955, PP. 18-21.
, "My First Meeting with Bartok," Etude, March,
1955, PP. 12, 49.
Ftildessy, L.H., "Bartok Bela Mikrokosmos-arol," Magyar
Zenei Szemle (Budapest), April, 1941, pp. 52-55.
F-oss, H.J., "An Approach to Bartok," Musical Opinion
(London), April, 1944, pp. 218-219^
209
Foss, H. J., Music In My Time. London: Rich and Cowen,

Ltd., 1933. P. 2F6T"
Friskin, James, and Freundlich, Irwin, Music for the
Piano. New York: Rinehart and Company, 1954.
P. xi + 432.
Gayley, C.M., Classic Myths. New York: Ginn and Company,
rev. ed., 1911. P. xli + 597-
Geraedts, Henri, Bela Bartok. Haarlem-Antwerpen:
J. H. Gottmer, 1952" PT"206.
Good,- C.V., Barr, A.S., and Scates, D.C. The Methodology
of Educational Research. New York: D. Appleton-
Century Company, 1941. P. xxi + 890.
Gray, Cecil, Musical Chairs. London: Home and Van Thai,
1948. P. 32T:
Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians (H. C\ Colles,
editor) . New York": The Macmillan Company, 1944,
Supplementary Volume. P. xvi + 688.
Halperson, Maurice, "Bela Bartok Explains Himself,"
Musical America, January, 1928, pp. 9, 15.
Hawkes, Ralph, "Bela Bartok: A Recollection by His
Publisher," A Memorial Review (New York: Boosey and
Hawkes), 195^", pp. 14-19.
Hernadi, Lajos, "Bartok Bela, a zongoramuvesz, a peda-
gogus, az ember,"tfjZenei Szemle (Budapest),
September, 1953, pp. 1-7. -
Hutchinson, Ernest, The Literature of the Piano. New
York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 19487 P. vlii + 374.
Jaques-Dalcroze, Emile, Rhythm, Music and Education.
New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1921. P. xvii + 334.
Karacsony, Sandor, "Bartok," tfj Szantas (Budapest),
August-September, 1948, pp. 521-527.
Kiss, Bela, Bartok Bela Muveszete. Kolozsvar: Ifju
Erdely Kladas, lpoT P. 71.
Kodaly, Zoltan, "A Folklorlsta Bartok,"tfjZenei Szemle
(Budapest), 1950. English translation printed by
Legation of the Hungarian People's Republic,
Washington, D.C, 5 April 1951, pp. 1-5.
Lieberson, Goddard, The Columbia Book of Musical Master-
works . New York: Allen, Towne and Heath, Inc., 1947.
P. xiii + 546.
210
Macartney, C.A., Hungary. London: Ernest Benn Limited,

1954. P. 376.
Mason, Colin, "Bela Bartok's 'Mikrokosmos'," The Music
Teacher and Piano Student (London), February, 1946,
p. 57.
Mathe, M., Kapi-Kralik, J., and Papp, G., Zongora Iskola.
Budapest: Tankflnyvkiado, 1953. P. 96.
Matthay, Tobias, The Visible and Invisible in Piano
Technique. London; Oxford University Press, 1947.
P. xiii + 176 + 1E-59E.
Middleton, Jean B., "Teaching Pieces by Bela Bartok,"
(Mikrokosmos: Vol. VI, no. 153), Piano Quarterly
Newsletter (New York), Winter, 1954-1955, pp. 21-22.
Mila, Massimo, "Bela Bartok e II suo 'Mikrokosmos'," II
Diapason (Milan), gen., 1950, pp. 2-6.
Miller, Hugh, An Outline History of Music. New York:
Barnes and Noble, Inc., 1947. P. lx + 254.
Moore, Douglas, "Homage to Bela Bartok," Modern Music,
Winter, 1946, pp. 13-14.
Moreux, Serge, Bartok. London: Harvill Press, 1953.
P. 256.
, Bela Bartok. Paris: Richard-Masse, 1955.
P. 323.
, Bela Bartok, sa vie, ses oeuyres, son langage.
Paris: Richard-Masse, 1949. P. 128":
Murdoch, William, "Pianoforte Music," A Dictionary of
Modern Music and Musicians (London: J,M. Dent ancT~Sons,
Ltd., 1924. P. xvi + 543), pp. 385-387.
Mursell, J., and Glenn, M., The Psychology of School
Music Teaching. New York: Silver Burdette Company,
T33B7 P. v + 585.
Ortmann, Otto, The Physical Basis of Piano Touch and Tone.
New York: E.P. Dutton and Company, 1925. P. xii + l9.
, The Physiological Mechanics of piano Technique.
New York: E.P. Dutton and Company, 1925". P. xv + 395.
Parrish, Dorothy, "Teaching Pieces by Bela Bartok,"
(Mikrokosmos: Vol. Ill, nos. 70, 82), Piano Quarterly
Newsletter (New York), Winter, 1954-1955, pp. 2, 11.
211
Pearce, C.W., The Art of the Piano Teacher. London:

Boosey and Hawkes, 2~2~nd ed*: F7 xx + 352.
Perkins, F. D., in The New York Herald Tribune, 25 April
1940 and 25 November*T*<"F4*y" .
Rehberg, Zolette, "Une education musicale nouvelle,"
Connaitre (Geneva), 1952, pp. 3-4.
Rothe, F. F., "The Language of the Composer," Etude,
February, 1941, pp. 83, 130.
Sabin, Robert, ^Revolution and Tradition in the Music
of Bela Bartok," Musical America, February, 1949,
pp. 7, 140.
Sachs, Curt, Rhythm and Tempo. New York; W.W. Norton
and Company, 1953. P. 391.
Saerchinger, Cesar, in The New York Herald Tribune,
.4 December 1927.
Salazar, Adolfo, Music in Our Time. New York: W.W. Norton
and Company, 1946. P. 367.
Schelling, E., Haake, G.M., Haake, C.J.,.and McConathy, 0.,
Oxford Piano Course (Teacher's First Manual). New
York: Oxford University Press, fifth ed., 1932.
P. xviii +I87.
Schultz, Arnold, The Riddle of the Pianist's Finger.
New York: Carl Fischer, Inc., 19WI P. xiii + 317.
Seashore, Carl. In Search of Beauty in Music. New York:
The Ronald Press Company, 1947. p. xvi + 389.
Steinberger, Gabor, "Bela Bartok," Revista Musical
Chilena (Santiago),'1946, pp. 21-27. " "
Stevens, Halsey, The Life and Music of Bela Bartok. New
York: Oxford University Press, 195J. P.. xviii + 366.
Szabolcsi, Bence, "Bartok Is a nepzene," tr Zenei Szemle
(Budapest), September, 1950, pp. 39-47.
Szelenyi, Istvan,. "Bartok 'Mikrokoszmosz-a'," iljinekszo
(Budapest), September-October, 1950, pp. 845-046.
Szigeti, Joseph, "Making Music with Bartok," The Long
Player, October, 1953, pp. 10-12.
Szervanszky, Endre, "Hogyan tanulmanyozzuk Bartok muveit?"
Enekszo (Budapest), December, 1946, pp. 12-15.
212
Uhde, Jurgen, Bartok Mlkrokosmos; Spielanweisungen und

Erl&uterungen. Regensburg: Gustave Bosse Verlag,
1954. P. 120.
,."Leben und Ordnung - Bela Bartoks 'Mlkrokosmos',"
Zeitschrlft fUr Musik (Regensburg), February, 1954,
pp. 5-aa.
Vantyn, Sidney, Modern Pianoforte Te chnique. New York:
E.P. Dutton and Company, 1919. P. viii + 166.
Weisengrund-Adorno, Theodor, "Bela Bartok; 'Mikrokosmos',"
Schweizerische Muslkzeltung (Zurich), Vol. 80, 1940,
pp. 129-130.
Weissmann, John, "Bela Bartok, An Estimate," The Music
Review (Cambridge), November, 1946, pp. 221-241.
____^ , "Bartok's Piano Music," A Memorial Review
(New York: Boosey and Hawkes), 1950, pp. 60-71.
Wolff, H. C , "Der 'Mikrokosmos' von Bela Bartok,"
Musica (Cassel), March, 1951, pp. 134-140.
Yates, Peter, "Musical Chronicle - Bela Bartok," Partisan
Review, June, 1949, pp. 643-648.
Young, P. M., A Critical Dictionary of Composers and
Their Music. London: Dennis Dobson, Ltd., 1954.
P. 3tfl": ~~i
Zlmmerrelme-r, Kurt, "Der Stil Bela Bartoks," Musica
(Cassel), Vol. I, 1947, pp. 262-266.
.Unpublished Sources
Bartok, Bela, Concert Programs. Program File, Bartok
Archive.
; Final Copy of Preface to the Album "Bela
Bartok Masterpieces for the Piano," 1945. "Documentary
File, Bartok Archive.
, Final Copies of Mikrokosmos. MS. File:
59PFC1, 59 PFC2, Bartok Archive. N
, Final Copy of Seven Pieces from "Mikrokosmos."
MS. File: 59 TPPFC1, Bartdk Archive.
, First Draft of Preface to the Album "Bela
Bartok Masterpieces for the Piano," 1945. Documentary
213
, Intermediary Drafts of Mlkrokosmos. MS.

File: 59PID1ID2, Bartok Archive.
, Lecture Notes. Documentary File, Bartok
Archive.
, Letters. Correspondence File, Bartok Archive.
, 9_ Kleine Klavierstiicke (Skizzen) einige
Skizzen zu "Mikrokosmos" "Im Frel'en" I. Klavierk'onzert.
MS. File: 57PS1ID1, 1926, Bartok Archive.
, Notes to Mikrokosmos (as given to Ann Chenee
. in July, 1944).
, Sketches of Mlkrokosmos. MS. File: 59 PS1,
Bartok Archive.
i , Transcription of Radio Broadcast "Ask the

Composer."^ Station WNYC, 7 May 1944. ATFtifluTts
Butcher, Agnes, Radio Script. As broadcast for Radio
Free Europe, Munich, on 21 January 1954. Bartok
Archive.
Chenee, Ann, Illustrated Lecture on the Mikrokosmos. As
recorded for Boosey and Hawkes7~~New York.
Gombosi, Otto, First Draft of a Biographical Study of
Bela Bartok (incomplete, untitled manuscript). Bartok
Archive.
Sielska, Marya, Bartok1s Mikrokosmos: An Analysis of its
Technical Difficulties. Unpublished Master's Thesis.
Rochester: Eastman School of Music, 1947.
Taylor,^Vernon H., Contrapuntal Techniques in the Music
of Bela Bartok. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.
Evanston: Northwestern University, 1950.
Varro, Margit, Contributions to Bela Bartok's Biography.
Paper presented to the Midwest Chapter of the American
Musicological Society, March, 1949.
, Lecture Notes'. Given at the Wisconsin Con-

servatory of Music, 29 September 1950.
214
Music1
Bach-Bartok, tlzenharom kflnnyu1 kls zongoradarab a "Noten-
buchlein -ftir Anna Magdalena BachT" Budapest:
Zenemukla d"o~Vallalat, 1952.
______ , Wohltemperirtes Klavler. Budapest: Rozsnyai
Karoly, 190b, Vol. I.
Beethoven-Bartok, Szonata. Budapest: RozsavBlgyi es
Tarsa, 1909-19 r ~?
Bartok, Bela, Piano Works (published by Boosey and Hawkes,
New York):
1908 - Fourteen Bagatelles, Op. 6.
1908 - Ten Easy Pieces.
1908-1909 - For Children.'
1913 - First Term at the Piano.
1916 - Suite Tor"~Piano, Op. 14.
1926 - Sonata for Piano.
1926 - Out of Doors.
1926 - Nine Little Piano Pieces.
1926 - First"ôncert'o for Piano and Orchestra.
1926-1939
?
- Mlkrokosmos, Vols. I^vT.
~ Seven Pieces from "Mlkrokosmos," for Two Pianos
Bartok-Serly, Five Pieces from 'Mikrokosmos.' Transcribed
for String QuarteT: New York: Boosey and Hawkes, 1942.
, 'Mikrokosmos' Suite. Transcriptions for
Orchestra. New York: Boosey and Hawkes, 1943.
Recordings2
Bela Bartok, pianist:
Bela Bartok plays Bartok. (REMINGTON R19994)
BagaTtelle, Op. 6, No. ; Rondo No. 1, on Folk
Tunes; Petite Suite; Preludlo All'ungharese;
Improvisations, Op. 20, Nos .""1-2, 6-5; Hungarian
The titles listed here are those referred to in the in-

vestigation. For a complete listing of Bartok's works,
see Halsey Stevens (The Life and Music of Bela Bartok,
pp. 323-334), Otto Gombosi (A Memorial Review. New'
York: Boosey and Hawkes, 1950", pp. 92-95), and Denjis
Dille (Musik der Zeit. Bonn: Boosey and Hawkes, 1953,
Vol. 3,~PPT~70~=T57T~
The titles listed here represent those recordings avail-
able for purchase by the public according to the
Schwann Long Playing Record Catalog for December, 1955.
215
Folktunes, from "Homage to Paderewskl"; From

Mlkrokosmos; Chord and Trill Study, New Hungarian
Folk Song, Chromatic Invention I Pit ta Pa'sztory
and Bela Bartok, Pianists) .
Bela Bartok at the Piano. (BARTOK RECORDS 003)
Roumanian Dance No. 1, Op. 8/a j Bagatelle No. 2,
Op. 6; Burlesque - A BilT'Drunk; Allegro"Barbaroj
Suite, Op. 14.
Bela Bartok. (VOX PLP 6010)
Sonata for Two, Pianos and Percussion (with Ditta
Pasztory Bartok); Ten Pieces from the Collection
"For Children"; Evening In Transylvania; Bear
Dance.
Bela Bartok. (COLUMBIA ML2213)
Contrasts for Violin, Clarinet and Piano (with
Joseph Szigeti and Benny Goodman); Rhapsody
No. 1 (with Joseph Szigeti).
"Meet the Composer": Bela Bartok Playing His Own
Works". ("COLUMBIA ML44T^}
Mllcrokosmos Excerpts: Nos. 94, 97, 100, 108, 109,
113, H 4 , 116, 116, 120, 125, 126, 128, 129, 130,
131, 133, 136, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144,
147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153.
Other Mikrokosmos Recordings:
Bulgarian Dances (6). Scarpini, pianist.
Colosseum 1025.
Eight Pieces from "Mikrokosmos" (Volume VI).
KaTchen, planis"t. Nos. 140, 144, 146, 147, 148,
149', 151 and 153. London LL759.
Mikrokosmos: 6 Dances in Bulgarian Rhythm.
RappapoFE", pianist". Etude 101.
Mikrokosmos Suite. New Symphony Orchestra of
London, Tibor Serly, conductor. Nos. 102, 117,
137, 139, 142, 151 and 153. Bartok 303.
Five Pieces from Mikrokosmos. New Music String
Quartet. Nos. 102, 106, 116, 139 and 142.
Bartok 901.
APPENDIX
^
217
APPENDIX A .
INTERVIEW QUESTION LIST

A. Background of Interviewee.
1. When and where did the interviewee meet Bartok?
2. Under what circumstances?
3. How long did the association continue?
4. What changes in the interviewee's status took
place during this time?
5. What is the interviewee's present(occupation?
B. The General Story; the Interviewee to Relate his
Memoirs concerning Bartok.
C. Bartok As Pianist.
1. Did Bartok discuss his piano teachers 'or his
experiences as a piano student?
2. If not, are.there any sources you know of in
which this Information is recorded?
3. Are there any persons(you know of who might have
such information?
4. Where are they now?
5. Discuss Bartok's piano playing:
a. Posture.
b. Hand position.
c. Finger action.
d. Use of weight?
e. Mannerisms?
f. Concert deportment.
g. Other details.
6. Do you know of any sources or persons who have
information concerning Bartok's piano playing? -
7. What was Bartok's rank as a pianist in Hungary?
Internationally?
8. Do you agree with those ratings?
D. Bartok As Teacher.
*
1. Discuss Bartok's piano teaching;
a. At Academy? Bartok's studio? Your home?
Combination?
b. How long were the lessons?
c. How many times per week?
d. Lesson procedure at Academy.
e. Lesson procedure at Studio. Cost of private
lessons? How did this compare with other
teachers' fees?
f. Were lesson materials assigned by Bartok?
Chosen by you? Combination?
218
g. Did Bartok demonstrate?

h. What materials comprised the lessons?
I. Did Bartok use the metronome in his teaching?
j. Can you recall any Incidents that occurred
during the Instruction?
2. What was Bartok's rank as a piano teacher in
Hungary?
3. Did you study with other piano teachers after
working with Bartok? Why?
4. In your opinion, what were the composer's theories
about piano teaching?
5. As far as you were concerned, what were Bartok's
admirable qualities as a piano teacher? His
drawbacks?
6. Do you know of any published sources or of any
persons who could give further information con-
cerning Bartok as a piano"teacher?
E. The Mikrokosmos. -
1. Did Bartok discuss the Mikrokosmos with you?
2. If so, did he mention his objectives in writing
tho work? Before or after publication?
3. Do you know when he first used the title, or
mentioned the title in your presence?
4. Did you play any of ...the pieces from the Mikrokosmos
as part of your lessons with him?
5.. Do you know of any published sources or persons
who could give further Information concerning
this or other aspects of the Mikrokosmos?
6. Do you teach the Mlkrokosmos? If so
a. To whom?
b. As a method, or as individually-selected
pieces?
c. Your reaction to the work as a piano teacher?
d. Your pupils' reactions?
e. Your colleagues' comments?
219
.APPENDIX B
CHECK-LIST AND COMMENTARY SHEET

Reviewer: ' Date:
On the basis of your evaluation of Guide to the Mikro-
kosmos, please check ( J ) the appropriate column following
each question listed below. The attached blank sheets are
provided for any comments you care to make concerning these
questions in particular and the Guide In general.
YES," YES," NO
to a to a
high mode-
de- rate
gree de-
gree
1. Is the Guide presented in a form
which makes it easily usable by
piano teachers? ( ) ( ) ( )
2. Is the style of writing appropri-
ate for a reference book such as
this? ( ) ( ) ( )
3. In the section "How to Use the
Guide," are the definitions of
terms clear in meaning? ( ) ( ) ( )
4. In the main body of the Guide
itself, are the descriptions underA
Technique understandable? ( ) ( ) ( )
5. Are the descriptions under Musi-
cianship understandable? ( ) ( ) ( )
6. Are the Instructions in
Suggestions clear? ( ) ( ) ( )
7. Are those instructions adequate? ( ) ( ) ( )
8. Assuming that piano teachers have
a need for reference material in
their teaching of the Mikrokosmos,
does this Guide meet that need? ( ) ( ) ( )
220
APPENDIX C
GUIDE TO THE MIKROKOSMOS
(See Volume II)

Copyrighted
by
Benjamin Suchoff
1957
Sponsoring Committee: Associate Professor Walter Kob,
Chairman, Professor Emil Lengyel and
Professor William P. Sears
B E M BARTOK AND A GUIDE TO THE MIKROKOSMOS

Volume Two
BENJAMIN SUCHOFF
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Education in the Sdhool of Education of
New York University
1956
>2&
APPENDIX C
GUIDE TO THE MIKROKOSMOS

o.3 TO
ERNO BALOGH
ANN CHENEE
AND
WALTER KOB
FOREWORD
Mikrokosmos is for the most part a collection of-

pieces and exercises written with a pedagogical purpose:
to provide beginners of various ages with an approach to
piano playing. But the work is more than just a piano
method; indeed, it represents perhaps a synthesis of
Bela Bartok's experiences as concert pianist, piano
teacher, musicologist, editor of works from the standard
keyboard repertory, and composer.
The form of this synthesis can be expressed in
Bartok's own words: "Mikrokosmos may be interpreted as
a series of pieces in all of different styles to repre-
sent a small world. Or, it may be interpreted as a world,
a musical world for the little ones, for the children."
Thus, GUIDE TO THE MIKROKOSMOS attempts more than

an analysis of each piece for technical and musical prob-
lems, or the suggestion of instructional procedures for
aspiring and practicing piano teachers. It presents
Bartok's ideas concerning the way the piano should be
played and taught, records his comments on the Mikro-
kosmos, and discusses the work In terms of its relation-
ship to educational theory and trends in piano teaching.
It is perhaps worthy of mention here that this
handbook represents the combined result of the author's
experience in teaching the Mikrokosmos and the findings
225
of his doctoral dissertation, Bela Bartok and a Guide

to the Mikrokosmos (School of Education of New York
University, 1956).
Benjamin Suchoff
Woodmere, New York

December, 1955
INTRODUCTION
Bela Bartok's original conception of the Mikrokosmos

(1926-1939) as a collection of piano pieces suitable for
concert use was probably maintained until 1936, the year
he began teaching his son, Peter, the piano. It was
from this time until 1939 that the latter also served as
a "guinea pig" in his father's experiments with the Mikro-
kosmos, and that the work was expanded to its present form
as a piano method.
But the composer's position as Professor of Piano at

the Academy of Music in Budapest (since 1907) had limited
his teaching activities to the instruction of advanced
pianists. It is perhaps for this reason, therefore, that
he sought the advice of at least one expert on the tech-
nical and musical problems to be solved in the early
grades of piano playing. Although the extent to which
Bartok was influenced as a result of his discussions on
piano pedagogy has not aB yet been ascertained, the
evidence indicates that he was aware of educational theory
and trends in piano teaching. Further, he followed cer-
tain principles In his piano teaching and he had definite
ideas concerning the way the piano should be played.
(l) THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE MIKROKOSMOS TO GENERAL

EDUCATIONAL THEORY. There Is ample evidence of Bartok's
cognizance of individual differences among piano pupils.
227
For example, In the Preface to Mlkrokosmos he refers to

"gifted" and "less gifted" pupils and in his unpublished
notes he comments on "average" and "unusual" pupils. It
seems likely that Bartok's interpretation of these desig-
nations is in terms of coordination, for in the latter
source he refers also to "the pupil who has great control."
Too, Bartok recommends the following procedures to meet
individual needs; (a) the order of pieces may be altered
in accordance with the ability of the pupil, (b) many of
the pieces may be played faster or slower than indicated,
(c) teacher and pupil have.the opportunity of making a
choice, since there are frequently several pieces dealing
with the same problem, (d) the teacher should invent
exercises for the pupil, and (e) the teacher should "pre-
sent pieces in any way that seems best to the student's
needs."
An indication of the composer's desire to stimulate

pupil interest in the Mikrokosmos can be seen in the
number of pieces which contain attractive titles, such
as: Boating, Dragons' Dance, Wrestling, From the Island
of Ball, and so forth. Bartok believed that certain
pieces were interesting because of their construction in
terms of unusual rhythmic patterns, changes of meter or
tempo, hand crossings, ..colorful tonality, use of the
pedal, or irregularity of phrase structure.
It has been said that the satisfaction that comes

with ^ success is of the greatest importance in arousing
228
readiness toward piano playing. The first three volumes

of the Mikrokosmos seem to have been compiled with that
thought in mind, for they are comprised of short pieces
(many of them sixteen measures in length, or less),
written within a five-finger range, which are arranged
in graded order according to difficulty. And there are
equally brief preparatory exercises to a third of the
pieces.
(2) THE MIKROKOSMOS AND TRENDS IN PIANO TEACHING.

In the Preface to Mikrokosmos, Bartok asserts that "In-
strumental tuition should be developed from suitable
singing exercises." This, one of the fundamental concepts
of Jaques-Dalcroze and of public school music education,
is developed in the method through the inclusion of pieces
for voice and piano to be sung and self-accompanied by
the pupil.
One of the important elements in piano playing is
the ability to play as freely in one key as in another.
In accordance with this principle, Bartok recommends the
transposition of the easier pieces and exercises into
other keys. It will be noted also that the pieces in
the Mikrokosmos are written in a variety of keys, and
furthermore, they are not limited to the Western major-
minor tonal system.
Bartok also understood the value of creative expres-

sion as a means of stimulating pupil interest and of
encouraging good practice habits. He suggests that the
229
pupil should transcribe suitable pieces (from the first

three volumes of the Mlkrokosmos) for two pianos, and he
states that many opportunities are given for original
and inventive work In terms of simplification of accom-
paniments and "other developments."
Finally, the Mikrokosmos exemplifies the philosophy
of theory through practice. The fundamentals of musi-
cianship are introduced one by one in the interesting
materials at hand to such an extent that the use of tb(
Mikrokosmos as part of the lesson plan can be said to
obviate the necessity of piano teachers conducting
separate theory classes for their pupils.
(3) BARTOK'S PRINCIPLES OF PIANO TEACHING. Through-

out his teaching career Bela Bartok believed that musician-
ship preceded and formed the foundation for performance
at the piano. In fact, he said that "One cannot be a
pianist without being a musician." It should not be In-
ferred that Bartok was not concerned with technical de-
velopment; indeed, in the Preface to Mikrokosmos he sug-
gests "the appropriate studies by Czerny, etc." But he
assigned greater value to musicianship, for he conceived
of technique as the means rather than the end in piano
playing.
A second fundamental principle was the extension
of his philosophy of performance to his teaching: to
follow the intention of the composer as expressed In the
written score. His attention was directed also to the
230
smallest of details, and he did not permit deviations

unless they could be justified by the pupil.
Demonstratlonal teaching was an important part of
Bartok's piano lessons, and he would replay again and
again at the piano to illustrate a particular point.
Apparently Bartok was a patient man who was endowed with
seeming tirelessness when it came to demonstrating for
his pupils.
(4) BART6K'S IDEAS CONCERNING PIANO PLAYING. Bartok's

conception of the piano was in terms of its being an in-
strument capable of producing sounds ranging from the
most to the least percussive in quality, and he specified
key-striking, the so-called "percussive touch" as the
basic way the piano is to be played. In fact, it is only
in terms of percussive finger-stroke as the fundamental
approach to key depression that the symbols Bartok uses
in the Mikrokosmos take on their full meaning. For
example, pianists usually interpret the tenuto sign as a
dynamic adcent of weak intensity or as an indication that
a note is to be .held for its full value. Bartok, how-
ever, adds a third meaning: "To such notes a certain
color shading must be added by pressing the key Instead
of striking it."
The touch-forms used in the Mikrokosmos are listed

below together with their descriptions as set down by
Bartok in his other pedagogical works and editions for
the piano.
231
(a) PERCUSSIVE TOUCH-"FORMS.

Staccatissimo ' ' ' is an increased staccato
in which the tone becomes the shortest possible.
Staccato means that the sounding of the
note ranges from the shortest in value to
one-half the value of the note.
Non-legato is played (when no other touch-
form designations appear In the music) so
that the gap between two tones is Imper-
ceptibly small.
Legato is indicated by the use of curved lines
or the sign legato.
Legatissimo is an exaggerated legato: when
every tone Is held over a little into the
beginning of the next one. It can be per-
fected by using the half-pedal. It Is used
when the music Is marked legatissimo.
(b) NON-PERCUSSIVE TOUCH-FORMS.
Tenuto is a kind of warning that the
note Is more important and colorful and there-
fore should be maintained in its full value.
To such notes a certain color shading must be
added by pressing the key instead of striking
it. It is played with weight.
Dotted Tenuto - ~ means that the notes are
never less than one-half their value and.that
they are to be played with the tenuto touch.
Also played with weight.
Portamento * ' is in close connection with
dotted tenuto. They, have one difference; it
is necessary to play, portamento lightly (with-
out weight).
Espressiyo (with express-ion) and dolce (with
softness) cannot be learned by description.
The student can acquire them only if the
teacher demonstrates at 'the piano. The so-
called espresslvo touch is played with hand-
motion.
(The playing of marcato > and sforzato sf
should be carried out by the fingers and
should not be perceivable In the hand. In
this touch the position of the fingers does
not change.)
232
(5) BARTOK'S IDEAS CONCERNING MUSICIANSHIP. The

composer was careful to indicate in the Mikrokosmos
exactly how he wanted the work played. In fact, almost
all the pieces contain three tempo Indications (tempo
marks, metronome marks, and time of performance);
dynamic markings; explanatory terms; and other symbols
to the extent that the work can be considered, to be not
unlike a dictionary of music.
In the discussion of Bartok's teaching principles
(above), it is pointed out that he emphasized truth in
interpretation. In accordance with this philosophy,
listed below are a number of signs whose meaning may be
obscure or open to more than one interpretation, to-
gether with Bartok's specific instructions as assembled
from his other pedagogical works and editions for the
piano.
(a) DYNAMICS.
Sff, sf (sforzato), A (marcatissimo), and
> (marcato) are dynamic accents listed In
order of diminishing emphasis.
A dynamic sign is effective until replaced
by another.
A decrescendo takes place towards the second
of two slurred notes.
Accents within the frame of p are weaker
than within the frame of .
Syncopated notes should be played with some
weight andemphasis.
(b) RHYTHM AND TEMPO.
The first part of each measure receives the
chief emphasis.
233
Sostenuto Indicates a sudden ritardando.

^ e fermata 1^\ about doubles the value of
the note beneath it.
(c) PHRASING.
Curved lines are used to indicate legato,
and they also mark the phrasing. Legato
phrases are not to be separated where the
curved lines meet unless they are marked
with separating signs. Legato phrases can
be emphasized, however, by beginning them
with a slight dynamic shading.
When two slurs meet at one note, the phrase
begins and ends at that note.
The separating sign I indicates the inter-
ruption of legato between phrases. The last
note of the phrase preceding this sign
should be played staccato or otherwise
shortened.
The separating sign 3 (comma) also indicates
the interruption of legato. In this case,
it means a slight, almost unnoticeable
pause in which the time of separation is
taken equally from the notes preceding and
following the comma.
HOW TO USE THE GUIDE
I. Format and Definition of Terms.

Of the four major headings used in the description
of the pieces, A. Technique and B. Musicianship represent
the findings of the author and other analysts of the
Mlkrokosmos; C. Bartok's Comments contains extracts'from
the Preface and Notes to Mikrokosmos and, what is perhaps
more important, Bela Bartok's unpublished notes on the
pedagogy of the Mikrokosmos (given to Ann Chenee in July,
1944); and D. Suggestions includes the experiences of the
author and other teachers of the Mikrokosmos as well as
references to Bartok's recordings of the Mikrokosmos and
his transcriptions for two pianos (four hands), Seven
Pieces from "MikrokoBrnos" (published by Boosey and Hawkes).
For the purposes of clarity and conciseness, the

categories concerned with technique and musicianship are
divided further into appropriate first-order and second-
order subheads. These, together with an explanation of
their use, are as follows:
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH: the various legato touch-forms (legato,
legatissimo, espressivo, dolce, and cantabile)
and non-legato touch-forms (non-legato, tenuto,
dotted tenuto., portamento or portato, staccato,
and staccatlsslmo).
.2. HAND INDEPENDENCE: the dissociate movement or
separate function of the hands. It includes
235
(a) Counterpoint: the simultaneous playing,

between the hands, of two or more inde-
pendent parts.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms; legato in one hand
as the other hand plays staccato, etc.
(c) Dynamic Contrast: the playing of marcato
In one hand as the other hand maintains
a consistent dynamic level, etc.
(d) Accompanying Figurations: the playing of
ostinato-like patterns (motives, intervals,
chords, or broken chords) in one hand as
the other hand plays a melody which may
or may not require dynamic contrast. ;
3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE: the simultaneous playing,
in one hand, of two independent parts. In
the Mikrokosmos this consists for the most
part of sustained tones against a moving
voice.
4. INTERVAL," CHORD, AND/or BROKEN CHORD PLAYING: .
The Mikrokosmos contains harmonic Intervals up
to and including a tenth; triads and their in-
versions, various typeB of chords comprised
of three or more tones; and arpeggios, of
which none Involve passing of the thumb.
5. POSITION: five-finger range; two or more
changes of position; the hands one or more
octaves apart; interlocking of the hands; and
crossing of the hands in which the right or
the left hand' crosses over (sopra) or under
(sotto) .
6. PEDALLING: Use of the damper, or solo sostenuto
pedals as indicated in the Mikrokosmos" There
is no specific indication in the work for
use of the soft pedal.
7. PASSAGE-WORK: scalar-type passages, usually
in quick tempo, which may or may not involve
passing of the fingers.
8. EMBELLISHMENTS: grace notes, turns, the
prall-trlller (inverted mordent), fast or
slow trills, and fast or slow tremolos (trills
comprised of intervals greater than a second).
9. FINGERING PROBLEMS: black key playing (par-
ticularly with the first and fifth fingers),
"discontinuous" fingerings, replacement of
fingers, and so forth.
/
236
10. ENSEMBLE PLAYING. Vocal or Instrumental

accompanying and the performance of pieces
for two pianos (four hands).
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION; note and rest values, clef changes,
key signatures, accidentals, pitch names, and
various characters used in music notation.
2, RHYTHM: measure signatures, change of time,
non-coinciding or overlapping meters, sub-
division of the beat, cross-rhythm (poly-
rhythm), and syncopation.
- 3. EXPRESSION: the fundamentals of musicianship
concerned with
(a) Tempo: metronome marks; tempo changes;
and various signs indicating steady,
accelerating, or slackening rate of speed.
(b) Dynamics: accents; symbols (pp to fff);
and .various signs which maintain or
change levels of intensity.
(c) Phrasing: regularity or irregularity of
phrase structure, certain cadences, and
aspects of form (ternary, rondo, and
theme and,variations).
(d) Terms: other directions (i..e.., la seconda
volta), and character signs wltTTTnore
than one expressive meaning (stringendo).
All descriptions and instructions are given in out-
line form, and it is expected that the teacher will refer
to the published volumes of the Mikrokosmos when using
the GUIDE.
II. Designations and Abbreviations

Keys or tonality centers are indicated in the GUIDE
by italicized capitals, and specific pitches are identi-
fied by italicized lower-case letters. A word (or words)
In double quotation marks refers to a direction or statement
237
made by Bela Bartok In his other pedagogical works for

the piano.
In D. Suggestions, reference is made to Bartok's
recording of excerpts from the Mikrokosmos (Columbia ML
4419). In order to help the teacher locate quickly a
particular piece in this, long-playing record, the follow-
ing type of instruction Is given; "See BR 1:6:2." The
first numeral designates the side of the record, the second
indicates the number of the band, and the third refers
to the order of the piece within that band (there are as
many as four pieces recorded In one band). Bela and Ditta
Bartok's recording of certain transcriptions from the
Mikrokosmos are referred to with the Instruction: "See
REMINGTON R19994.
Other abbreviations used in the GUIDE are as follows:.

measure m.
measures M.
beat b.
beats B.
number no.
numbers .'..."..".'..* nos.
Exercise Ex.
right hand R. H.
left hand . L. H.
against (versus) vs.
VOLUME I
Nos. 1 - 36
( E x . 1-4)
239
Nos. 1-6. SIX UNISON MELODIES.

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
2. POSITION. One, the hands an octave or two
octaves apart.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Whole, half, and quarter notes.
Half and quarter rests. The phrase mark.
2. RHYTHM. 4/4.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Phrasing: regular and Irregular structure.
C* Bartok's Comments. Melodies are scalewise with
consistent note values and five-finger range. Small
staves above each piece indicate range of five-finger
position. Nos. 1 and 2 are symetrical or balanced in phrase
structure. No. 3 is written in a sort of D minor beginning
on the dominant. No. 4 contains .combinations of note
values In shorter sentences, and It begins on the seventh
tone and ends In . No. 5 is in the natural A_ minor; it
contains a stepwise sequence of asymetrical phrases.
No. 6 begins and ends on the fifth tone, and it introduces
the quarter rest.
D. Suggestions. The melodies written two octaves
apart should foster good elbow position (check this during
the playing of no. 3). In m. 6 of no. 6, the pupil may
give the half note less than its full value in anticipa-
tion of the quarter rest. Assign transpositions accord-
ing to Bartok's recommendation in the Preface to Mikro-
kosmos.
240
No. 7 . DOTTED NOTES

A. T e c h n i q u e .
1 . TOUCH. Legato.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The dotted half note.
c
* Bartok's Comments. This melody Is also used In
no. 28. Dotted notes in the Phrygian Mode. The rhythm
can be illustrated in this way: (b \ \
y f *> f
D. Suggestions. It is perhaps in order here to call
attention to the composer's instruction that no Interrup-
tion of legato should take place between legato phrases.
No. 8. REPETITION
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato.
2. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Black key playing.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Key of G.
^ Bartok's Comments. In the key signature it is
more convenient to put the sharp on the same space as the
note. It is easier to see, too. Combination of rests.
H
Theme is inverted. Short phrases because of repeated notes.

D. Suggestions. A Bartok-devised key signature which
the composer used in his folk music notation. Explain to
the pupil that the sharp sign usually appears on the fifth
line of the treble clef. The gap between the repeated
notes should be "hardly perceivable."
241
No. 9 . SYNCOPATION
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The tie.
2. RHYTHM. Syncopation.
C. Bartok's Comments. The rhythmic feeling of the
suspensions should be emphasized by some energetic move-
ment, such as tapping with the foot, nodding the head,
or using the voice in the respective places which are
marked by rhythm signatures between the staves. This
melody is also used In no. 27.
D. Suggestions. Be sure that the half note is given
its full value in m. 12, and point out that the phrase
markings in M. 8-14 indicate that the third phrase ends
and the last phrase begins on the same tone (g_) .
No. 10. WITH ALTERNATE HANDS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
2. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Black key playing,
b. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Bartok-devised key signature.
2. RHYTHM. 3/4. Syncopation.
c
Bartok's Comments. The signature is aP. Lowered
fifth for special color. Combines past experiences.
D* Suggestions. Accent slightly the half notes in
M. 18 and 21. Fingerings may need to be indicated in
certain measures.
242
No. 1 1 . PARALLEL MOTION
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Reading of two voices which proceed
in similar motion at the Interval of a
tenth.
C. Bartok's Comments. Mixolydian, beginning on the
second degree. Voices proceed at the interval of a tenth.
D. Suggestions. The pupil may overlook the contrary
motion between M. 14 and 15. Take notice of the metronome
mark.
No. 12. REFLECTION

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
2. HAND INDEPENDENCE.
(a). Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. RHYTHM. Change of time: 2/2 and 3/2. Subdi-
vision of the beat into two parts, the
half note as the pulse unit.
C* Bartok's Comments. Present the time signatures
in any way that seems best to the student's needs.
Bitonal - contrast of major (L.H.) and minor (R.H.)
modes. The left hand reflects the right hand, and the
voices move in opposite direction. The structure is more
lively due to change of meter.
D. Suggestions. The voices move in parallel motion
between M. 16 and 17. It may be advisable here to explain
243
the meaning of the signs C (4/4) and ty (2/2 or alia

breve),, for they will not be found in the Mikrokosmos.
No. 13. 'CHANGE OF POSITION

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
2. POSITION. Five-note range in two positions.
B. Musicianship.
1. EXPRESSION.
(a) Phrasing: symetrical phrases in ternary
form.
C Bartok's Comments. The same melody is used in
no. 17.
D. Suggestions. Direct the attention of the pupil
to the fact that the first and last phrases are identical,
and that the second is similar to the first phrase. Mark
the phrases A A^ B A, and explain the values of such
analysis.
No. 14. QUESTION AND ANSWER

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. * Legato.
2. POSITION. Five-note range in three positions.
3. ENSEMBLE PLAYING. Accompanying techniques.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Simultaneous reading of piano score
and song text.
c
Bartok's Comments. Sing and play the piece. Com-
pare it to speech. In order to emphasise the ability of
244
expression of music - contrary to the opinion of post-war

years - interrogatory and answering verses have been put
to the respective sections of the melody. It is recom-
mended that the.piece be sung by two pupils (or two groups
of pupils) alternatively before practising It.
D. Suggestions. The piece can be practiced In a
variety of ways: pupil and teacher can alternate the
singing of its. phrases, the teacher can accompany the
pupil's singing, and the pupil can accompany himself.
No. 15. VILLAGE SONG

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
2. POSITION. Five-note range in four positions.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Bartok-devised key signature.
Accidentals.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Phrasing: ternary form.
C. Bartok's Comments. First study with a title.
It is in a sort of G major with altered fourth. A paral-
lel can be found in the Sarabande from the First Partita
of J.S. Bach. Asymetrical phrase structure.
D* Suggestions. Note the metronome mark. Compare
the form and phrase structure of this piece with that of
no. 13.
245
No. 16. PARALLEL MOTION AND CHANGE OF POSITION

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
2. POSITION. Five-note range in two positions.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Reading of two voices which proceed
in the same direction at the Interval of
a tenth.
c
Bartok's Comments. Irregularity and variety of
structure. Key of C_.
D
* Suggestions. . The pupil may overlook the contrary
motion between M. 21 and 22. Accent slightly the half
notes in m. 20.
No. 17. CONTRARY MOTION

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
3. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Black key playing,
L.H. only.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Accidentals.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Phrasing: symetrical phrases in ternary
form.
C. Bartok's Comments. Same dissonance can be observed
in Bach. This melody used in no. 13.
246
D. Suggestions. Accent slightly the half notes in

M. 3, 7 and 15.
Nos. 18-21. FOUR UNISON MELODIES

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
2. FINGERING PROBLEMS. 'Extension of the hand
in the playing of various melodic intervals.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The whole rest. The separating
sign | which indicates the Interruption
of legato between phrases.
2. EXPRESSION
(a) Dynamics: the marcato ( > ) accent.
c
* Bartok's Comments. The melodies stress interval
playing. Use the exercises to explain them. No. 20 com-
bines intervals and change of direction. No. 21 is in A
minor, it introduces accents.
D. Suggestions. Assign nos. 18-20 as one unit, and
Ex. la-c. No. 21 then can be taught separately and dis-
cussed at some length concerning the playing of accents.
Assign Ex. ld-f with no. 21.
In no. 20, the second phrase is extended by the addi-
tion of a measure of rest, and the fourth phrase is ex-
tended by the addition of the tied whole note. Explain
that the use of these contrasting types of additions
serves to extend asymetrlcal phrases into balanced struc-
tures, and demonstrate how the piece sounds without the
measure of rest and the tied whole note.
247
The accents appearing in no. 21 call for slight

intensification of the notes they modify, and they should
be played without hand motion (that is, with the fingers
only). Explain the purpose of J in m. 8. The sign also
serves as a warning that the following measures require
alternate motion of the hands. The pupil, because of
his preoccupation with the playing of accents, may over-
look the ties and rests in M. 13-16.,
No. 22. IMITATION AND COUNTERPOINT

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
2. HAND INDEPENDENCE,
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Reading of treble clef notation
in L.H.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: f_.
C. Bartok's Comments. Similar voices in contrapuntal
style. Imitation: the second voice commences later and
is similar to the first voice. G tonality.
D. Suggestions.. This piece is more difficult to
play than no. 23. It may be advisable, therefore, to re-
verse the order of pieces and assign no. 23 together with
Ex. 2 as the first examples of polyphonic playing.
Be sure that the pupil observes all rests, and that
the re-entry of one voice does not interrupt the flow of
248
legato in the other voice. Explain that = forte = loud,

and that counterpoint is the simultaneous playing of two
or more Independent melodic lines.
No. 23. IMITATION AND INVERSION

1 . TOUCH. Legato.
2 . HAND INDEPENDENCE,
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Reading of individual melodic lines
with bass clef notation in L.H.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: f_.
C* Bartok's Comments. One voice imitates the other
and then inverts. Inversion: the position of the (two)
voices is so changed that the upper voice becomes the
lower and vice-versa (bars 1,2,3 and 7,8,9 show the ori-
ginal position, the remaining bars show the inversion).
D
Suggestions. See no. 22, above.
No. 24. PASTORALE
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Whole rest in 3/4 time. A key
. signature. -:
249
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics; p_ = piano = soft.
(b) Phrasing: the last measure is added for
structural balance. Ternary form.
c
* Bartok's Comments. Key of D with gjfr added for
practical purposes.
- D. Suggestions. In the Lydian Mode built from D as
principal tone. Do not interrupt the flow of legato at
the junction of phrases in m. 7.
No. 25. IMITATION AND INVERSION

'A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
^ (a) Counterpoint."
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Bartok-devised key signature. The
whole rest in 2/4 time. Repeat signs |: :
2. RHYTHM. 2/4.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: M.M. = 150.
(b) Dynamics: Sf = sforzato (or sforzando) =
very loud accent.
c
* Bartok's Comments. B minor feeling with lowered
fifth. Asymetrical in form. The signature is cHr. See
Notes.
D. Suggestions. Explain the various types of accent
marks used in the Mikrokosmos (see Introduction, above).
The tempo may be too rapid for certain pupils. In such
250
c a s e s , t h e composer a d v i s e s a r e d u c t i o n i n speed ( s e e
Preface t o Mlkrokosmos).
No. 26. REPETITION

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato and non-legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. non-legato.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. D key signature.
c
* Bartok's Comments. Second voice repeats first
voice in sequence in rhythmic form beginning on the domi-
nant. Has the character of D major, ending on the fifth
degree In the L.H. and the second degree in the R.H. This
is called a half-cadence, frequently used in Yugoslav
music.
D* Suggestions. There may be some difficulty in
playing this piece at the indicated tempo. The repeated
notes played in one hand must not interrupt the legato
playing in the other hand. Assign Ex. 3 as a preparation
for no. 27.
No. 27. SYNCOPATION

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
. (a) Counterpoint.
251

B. Musicianship.
C. Bartok's Comments. Asymetrlcal phrase structure.
Tied-over syncopation. Same melody was used In no. 9.
D. Suggestions. Review the meaning of counterpoint,
and illustrate the discussion by comparing nos. 9 and 27
(the pupil should demonstrate).
No. 28. CANON AT THE OCTAVE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: p_.
(b) Phrasing: in canonic form.
C. Bartok's Comments. Canon: two equal voices are
introduced so that one commences later than the other.
There can be any interval between the voices. In Nr. 28
it is an octave, hence the title "Canon, at the Octave."
E minor with altered second. Same melody used in no. 7.
D
- Suggestions. Compare this piece with no. 7 to
illustrate the explanation of canonic form. Syncopated
notes should be accented slightly. Note the dynamic level.
Assign Ex. 4 as a preparation for no. 29.
252
No. 29. IMITATION REFLECTED

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
3. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Black key playing in R.H.
B. Musicianship.
C. Bartok's Comments. Seven-bar sections. Direct
mirror-like reflection of the first voice. Imitation
reflected: the melodic line of the imitating (lower) voice
runs in contrary direction to that of the upper voice.
D
* Suggestions. The flow of legato between phrases
must not be interrupted.
No. 30. CANON AT THE LOWER FIFTH

A: Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: Legato vs. non-legato.
B. Musicianship.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: moderato = at a moderate rate of
speed.
(b) Phrasing: In canonic form.
C. Bartok's Comments. Intervals and direction of
253
the two voices are the same, but the interval between
them Is different. See note to Nr. 28. The interval of
the two voices Is here a fifth.
D. Suggestions. The repeated notes in one hand must
not interrupt the legato playing in the other hand. First
tempo indication.
No. 31. LITTLE DANCE IN CANON 'FORM

A. Technique.
(a)- Counterpoint.
(c) Dynamic Contrast; > vs. f_.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The repeat sign.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: allegro = quick, brisk. M.M. = 160.
(b) Dynamics: marcato accents in each hand.
(c) Phrasing: in canonic form.
C. Bartok's Comments. An identical canon in pitch
and interval.
D. Suggestions. First example In which the voices
are contrasted dynamically. It is more important for the
pupil to acquire control of accents than to attempt the
playing of this piece at the indicated tempo.
254
No. 32. IN DORIAN MODE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
3. INTERVAL AND BROKEN CHORD PLAYING. L.H. only.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The dotted whole note in 3/2 time.
The dotted line between staves.
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat into two
partsj the half note as the pulse unit.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Lento = slow.
(b) Terms: legato = In a smooth and connected
manner, with no break between the tones.
^ Bartok's Comments. Dorian Mode: One of the so-
called ecclesiastical modes. Beginning on D as principal
tone the degrees of this scale have no accidentals (there
are white keys only). Built from C as principal tone the
scale should read as follows: A* '
=EF&
Therefore, it is a minor (minor third) scale with a
major sixth and a minor seventh. This and the following
ecclesiastical modes were used in the middle ages until
about the 17th century but, since J.S. Bach, they have
been replaced in the art music by the major and minor
scales. However, besides many other unnamed scales, they
are still flourishing in the folk music of Eastern Europe
255
(Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, etc.) and Asia and are not

at all antiquated.
t
This piece has a major chord ending as in Bach.

D
Suggestions. In M. 7 and 12, g_ is played with
the first finger of' each hand. In m. 6, the dotted line
Indicates that f_ (played by the L.H.) is a continuation
of the melody In the R.H. Explain that a solid line would
indicate the playing of that note'with the R.H. Take
notice of the metronome mark: it indicates rate of speed
of the quarter note and does not affect conception of
the half note as the pulse unit (count one and two and
three and in each measure). See Suggestions in no. 33,
below.
No. 33. SLOW DANCE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
3. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Black key playing in L.H.
. only.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The dotted whole note in 6/4 time.
Bass clef leger-line notes above the staff.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Andante = moving, walking.
(b) Dynamics: mf = mezzo forte = softer than
forte "(half-loud). ~-~==^- = crescendo
= increasing gradually In loudness.
256
C. Bartok' s Comments. G tonality, c_ gives color in

contemporary music. Ends on a half-cadence.
D. Suggestions. 3/2 is a simple triple meter ac-
cented as follows: i)t)f0 . On the other hand, 6/4 is
a compound duple meter: )}}?*)) . Explain to the pupil
> -
the difference between these time signatures in terms of

accentuation and counting, and their similarity with
reference to notation. It is recommended that the pupil
demonstrate his understanding by playing no. 32 in 6/4
and no. 33 in 3/2.
No. 34. IN PHRYGIAN MODE
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: sf vs. .
B. Musicianship.
parts: the half note as the pulse unit.
Syncopation.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Calmo = moderate.
(b) Dynamics: cresc. = crescendo, dim. =
diminuendo = becoming gradually softer.
c#
Bartok's Comments. Phrygian Mode: One of the
ecclesiastical modes beginning on E as principal tone
with seven degrees without accidentals (a minor scale
with a minor second, sixth and seventh). Tonal and
257
rhythmic variety within a short range. 2/2 meter. This

modal style used in Hungary for the last 150 years.
D. Suggestions. In m. 15, begin the crescendo about
P_ and increase gradually to f_ (sf_ in L.H.i) in m. 19.
No. 35. CHORALE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo. > Largamente = slow (broadly,
largely).
C. Bartok's Comments. Voices resemble free canon
writing.
D. Suggestions. Chorale = a hymn tune of the German
Protestant Church. There seems to be a certain similarity
between this piece and a chorale, particularly in terms
of construction.
No. 36. FREE CANON

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Teneramente = (tenderly, delicately)
moderate In speed.
258
C. Bartok's Comments. See note for Nr. 28. The canon

is "free" If the second voice deviates inconsiderably from
the first. Natural A minor.
D
* Suggestions. The pupil may overlook the quarter
rests in M. 3-10. Petere (printed parallel to the double
bar) Indicates that Bartok has dedicated Volume I of the
Mikrokosmos to his second son, Peter.
9 VOLUME II
Nos. 37-66
(Ex. 5-18)
260
No. 37. IN LYDIAN MODE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato and tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The eighth note ond rest in 2/4.
C\ = fermata = pause, hold.
parts: the quarter note as the pulse unit.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; Allegretto = slower than allegro,
moderately fast.
C. Bartok's Comments. Lydian Mode: Another ecclesi-
astical mode beginning on F as principal tone with 7
degrees without accidentals, a major scale with augmented
fourth. This interval is so characteristic in this scale
that a melody based on the first five degrees only (as
Nr. 37) may be called "Lydian." Direct imitation in
voices. Ends on dominant.
D
* Suggestions. Tenuto touch: the key is pressed
rather than struck down. The fermata "about doubles the
value of the note beneath it." Assign Ex. 5.
No. 38. STACCATO AND LEGATO

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato and staccato.
(a) Counterpoint.
261
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. staccato.

B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. D key signature. Staccato signs.
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat into two parts:
the quarter note as the pulse unit in 3/4.
C. Bartok's Comments. The signature is not conven-
tional. Develops ability to play staccato and legato.
Voices are reflected. See exercise in appendix.
D. Suggestions. Note the hand independence required
in m. 7. Staccato tones should be sounded for "one-half
the value of the note (or less)."
A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. F key signature.
the quarter note as-the pulse unit in 4/4.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Comodo = at a convenient pace,
leisurely.
(b) Phrasing; in canonic form.
c
Bartok's Comments. Contrast of staccato and legato
in each hand in contrapuntal style. Might be good to talk
about different types of staccato - the shorter and longer
types.
262
D. Suggestions. The playing of legato vs. staccato

may prove difficult. Slow practice is recommended. If
Bartok's comment concerning the teaching of staccato types
is followed, demonstrate how the piece would sound if
played staccatissimo.
No. 40. IN YUGOSLAV MODE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Accompanying Figurations: in L.H.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. A key signature.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: A, = marcatissimo accent =
moderately strong accent.
(b) Phrasing: in ternary form.
(c) Terms: La seconda volta : the second time.
C. Bart ok's Comment s. E Mixolydian Mode. Ends on
a half-cadence. Imitation of Yugoslav bagpipes: the
piece is written for two pipes although the instrument
has three. The Scotch bagpipe has only a chanter and a
drcne. The Yugoslav has three pipes: chanter, tonic-
dominant, and drone (a tonic pipe). A bagpipe theme can
be found in the main theme of Beethoven's Sixth Symphony.
D. Suggestions. This may be an opportune time to
teach the use of forearm tremolo in the L.H. Assign
Ex. 6-8.
263
No. 41. ACCOMPANIMENT IN BROKEN TRIADS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Dynamic Contrast: mf. vs. p.
(b) Accompanying Figurations: in L.H.
3. BROKEN CHORD PLAYING. In L.H.
4. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. First example of part-
playing in L.H.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Bartok-devised key signature. The
whole rest in 6/8.
2. RHYTHM. Change of meter. Subdivision of the
beat into three parts: the dotted quarter
as the pulse unit in 6/8 and 9/8.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Adagio = slow.
(b) Terms: sempre legato = always legato. The
use of this Instruction eliminates the
necessity of inserting legato slurs
in the L.H.
^ Bartok's Comments. Changes in meter and rhythmic
patterns. Ctfr for key signature. Broken chords up and in
reverse direction. G major with an augmented fourth and
a minor seventh.
D. Suggestions. First example of Bartok's use of a -
compound mode consisting of G Mixolydian with the Lydian
$ ^ (g.-<__.-_6-__?: -___.-e.-___.-_s) Errata: in the last two measures
of the piece, in L.H., each leger-line d should have stems
up on the right side of the note head so as to indicate
a tenor voice in part-writing.
264
No. 42'. ACCOMPANIMENT IN BROKEN TRIADS

A. Technique.
(a) Dynamic Contrast: vs. mf.
(b) Accompanying Figurations: in each hand.
3. BROKEN CHORD PLAYING. In each hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Leger-line notes below staff in
treble clef.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Andante tranquillo = moving tran-
quilly, at a moderate rate-of speed.
C- Bart ok's Comment s. Sustained theme in R.H.,
broken chords in L.H., then reversed. Chords are all
practically the same but with a few altered or foreign
tones.
D
Suggestions. In m. l4, the c_ in the R.H. is
natural and in m. 34 the _c in the L.H. is also natural.
The effect is bitonal: major vs. minor with A as the
principal tone for both modes. Assign Ex. 9.
No. 43. IN HUNGARIAN STYLE

A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
3. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Black key playing in Piano
II.
4. ENSEMBLE PLAYING. For two pianos, four hands.
265
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Mixed accidentals and dotted notes.
Bass clef notation in each hand.
2. RHYTHM. The dotted quarter in 4/4.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Terms: piu = more.
C. Bartok's Comments. First example of an arrangement
for two pianos. Piano I plays broken thirds in parallel
motion. See exercise in appendix. After the solo version
"a" has been played, the second piano part of the same
grade of difficulty which is provided may be added. Ver-
sion "b" shows the melody written in conventional style.
The theme is the same but the thirds are in contrary
motion. G minor with augmented sixth.
D. Suggestions. If only one piano is available,
transpose the primo part two octaves higher. Teacher or
another pupil should alternate the playing of both parts.
No. 44. CONTRARY MOTION

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, staccato and ______________.
(a) Counterpoint.
3. ENSEMBLE PLAYING. For two pianos, four hands.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Devised two-sharp signature in Piano
I and E key signature in Piano II. Acci-
dentals .
266
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Terms: Vivace = lively.
C. Bartok's Comments. Note the signature: key of E
but additional sharps not added because they are not used,
Ends with an augmented third in doubled notes. Can be
played without the second piano part.
D. Suggestions. See Suggestions in no. 43 above.
No. 45. MEDITATION

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, staccato, and ______________.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. staccato
and tenuto..
(b) Dynamic Contrast: p_ vs. mf.
(c) Accompanying Figurations: in each hand.
,4. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Black key playing in each
hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. E13 key signature.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: mp = mezzo piano = half-soft,
louder~Than p.
(b) Terms: subito = suddenly.
c
- Bartok's Comments. Although signature of piece
is C_ minor, the composition Is in F minor with a major
sixth. Abstract in theme and rhythm. Returns to former
Dorian Mode. Can be played on two pianos, the second
267
player executing the same piece on the higher octave.

D
* Suggestions. Check fingerings in M. 11-16. The
d is natural in M. 14 and 15.
No. 46. INCREASING - DIMINISHING

A . Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: mf vs. jo, vs. mf,
pp vs. p.
B. Musicianship.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: pp = pianissimo = softer than p.
C. Bartok's Comments. Tone control. Not for the
average pupil.
D. Suggestions. Phrygian Mode, ending on the dominant
Double bar in m. 14.indicates the midpoint of this piece
In terms of dynamic level. It is perhaps worthy of men-
tion here that key speed is the determining factor in
dynamics: fast key descent will produce a loud tone and
slow key descent will result in a soft tone. Assign
Ex. 10-11.
No. 47. BIG FAIR

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Non-legato.
268
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: sf_ and A vs. f_.
(c) Accompanying Figurations: L.H. only.
3. PEDALLING. Use of the damper pedal.
4. FINGERING PROBLEMS. 'Discontinuous' fingerings.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. G key signature.
the half note as the pulse unit in 2/2.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: con brio = with spirit. M.M. = 132.
(b) Phrasing: In ternary form.
(c) Terms: strepitoso = noisily; sempre simile =
in like manner throughout; senza =
without; Ped. = depress the damper
pedal; meno = less; * = release the
damper pedal.
C. Bartok's Comments. Voices moving in broken thirds
and fourths in contrary motion which creates an atmosphere
of excitement. Use of the pedal and shading very important.
D
* Suggestions. One of the difficult pieces In this
volume; in fact, the combination of pedalling, accentua-
tion and discontinuity of fingering may be beyond the
ability of certain pupils at the indicated tempo.
No. 48. IN MIXOLYDIAN MODE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
269
(b) Dynamic Contrast: mf vs. f.

B. Musicianship.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Allegro non troppo = not too fast.
C. Bartok's Comments. Key of G with no accidentals.
Mixolydian Mode: an ecclesiastical mode with G as prin-
cipal tone and seven degrees without accidentals. Ends
on dominant. L.H. figures in broken chords or chord of
G_ with foreign notes. Chord in E minor. R.H. melody in
contrary motion. Very good for individual finger control.
I checked all the Mikrokosmos pieces against the metronome.
D. Suggestions. Accent slightly the first beat of
each measure of accompanying figurations as well as the
syncopated notes. Observe the dynamic changes in the last
five measures.
(
No. 49. CRESCENDO-DIMINUENDO

A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Mixed accidentals.
2. EXPRESSION.
270
(a) Dynamics: as indicated by the title.

c
* Bartok's Comments. Quick change from legato to
staccato. Key of with accidentals. Crescendo and
diminuendo.
D. Suggestions. Errata; in M. 3-4, staccato dots
should be placed above the barred eighth notes in the
bass clef at the same place they appear In the treble.
A staccato dot should be placed also below the flagged
eighth note on b.4, M. 7-8, in the R.H.
No. 50. MINUETTO

A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Devised one-sharp key signature.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: tempo di Menuetto = at the speed of
a minuet. The minuet dates from
about the end of the 17th Century and
it Is a slow, stately dance in triple
meter.
(c) Dynamics: ~Z^==^m = gradually get softer.
c#
Bartok's Comments. Application of staccato and
legato playing. Key of A major with altered tones.
D. Suggestions. Compound mode: A Major with the
Lydian augmented fourth. Check the playing of legato
(R.H.) vs. staccato (L.H.) in m. 17.
271
No. 51. WAVES

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, and espresslvo.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Db key signature.
2. RHYTHM. The upbeat and syncopation in 6/8.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: poco ritard. = growing a little
slower.
(b) Dynamics: p subito = suddenly soft.
C. Bartok's Comments. Good demonstration of the tie
on different beats in one voice while the other voice
proceeds. Key of D ending on dominant. Imitation of
voices: one in the tonic and one in the dominant. Can
be played on two pianos, the second player executing the
same piece on the higher octave.
D. Suggestions: Bitonal: upper voice in A^ and
lower voice in D13. To play dolce, use pressure touch
(tenuto) combined with flexible wrist action (without
weight) so that percussiveness is reduced to a minimum.
Note the decrescendo marks above the slurred notes in
R.H. of M. 14-15.
272
No. 52. UNISON DIVIDED

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, and tenuto: from
to hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: cresc. and > .
C. Bartok's Comments. Melody Is divided between the
hands. Key of G with altered fourths.
D. Suggestions. G Lydian Mode. There may be a ten-
dency to play legatissimo when changing from hand to hand,
or to play legato in M. 2 and 8. Notes in bass and treble
clefs are to be played with L.H. and R.H. respectively.
No. 53. IN TRANSYLVANIAN STYLE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato and tenuto: from
hand to hand.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes.
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat into two and
four parts: the half note as the pulse unit
in 2/2. Syncopation.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Risoluto = energetic, with decision.
C. Bartok's Comments. Imitation of R.H. in L.H. Con-
tinuity from one hand to the other expresses one idea.
Note changes in clef signs and hand positions. Key of D.
273
D
* Suggestions. Subdivision of the beat into four
parts through use of the eighth note in 2/2 meter (the
eighth notes can be counted one-a-and-a-two-a-and-a).
Dotted lines indicate the melody is taken up by L.H.
Note the separating sign in L.H. of m. 24.
No. 54. CHROMATIC

A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
3. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Chromatics.
B. Musicianship.
2. EXPRESSION,
(a) Dynamics.
C. Bartok's Comments. Chromatic study with quick,
forceful, and sudden staccato. Definite shading and
accents. Good place to take up the chromatic scale if the
pupil hasn't had it.
D
' Suggestions. The pupil may continue playing in
unison on b. 1 of M. 3, 6, and 11. Awkward hand contrac-
tion in M. 9-10. Assign Ex. 12-13.
No. 55. TRIPLETS IN LYDIAN MODE

A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
274
(b) Dynamic Contrast: in relievo = bring out,

in relief.
(c) Accompanying Figurations: staccato inter-
vals in each hand.
3. INTERVAL PLAYING. Fifths.
4. ENSEMBLE PLAYING. ' For two pianos, four hands.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes (secondo only).
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat Into three
parts: the quarter note as the pulse unit
in 3/4, Polyrhythm: the simultaneous com-
bination of two to the beat (in one part)
vs. three to the beat (in the .other part).
Change of time.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Tempo dl marcia = in march time.
C. Bartok's Comments. Consult exercises in appendix
before playing this piece. Consecutive fifths used:
avoided yesterday, used today. See notes for Nrs. 37
and 44. The accidentals are used for color, although this
mode has none. L.H. is the metronome since it keeps the
beat steady.
D. Suggestions. Bring out the melody in L.H. of
M. 9-15 (in Piano I) as indicated. In the same part,
because of the change from 2/4 to 3/4 at m. 17, the pupil
may interpolate a quarter rest between M. 17 and 18. The
pupil should play both parts. If only one piano is
available, the teacher can play the secondo part trans-
posed an octave down (M. 10-15 transposed two octaves
down). Assign Ex. 14 as preparation for the part-playing
to be encountered in no. 56, making sure that the ties
275
are observed when repeating each two-measure section or

when proceeding from one section to another.
No. 56. MELODY IN TENTHS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. . Legato.
2. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing in each
hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Treble clef in each hand.
2. EXPRESSION,
(a) Dynamics.
C. Bartok's Comments. Two voices are sustained
while others move. Ends on a consonant chord.- In old
music a chord built of consecutive thirds, even with the
seventh degree added, was called a consonant chord. At
first the chord contained a major third, but later one
with a minor third was also considered to be consonant.
Can be played on two pianos, the second player executing
the piece on the higher octave.
D. Suggestions. As a preparation for part-playing,
Bartok recommends use of both hands in playing the indi-
vidual line systems of one staff. If this is done the
fingerings should be rearranged to avoid awkward juxta-
position of the hands. When the piece is played as
written, be sure the held tones are maintained throughout
each phrase. Note the alternation of modes: Aeolian
to Dorian to Phrygian, each with A as the principal tone.
1
276
No. 57. ACCENTS

A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: > vs. p_, mf, and .
A vs. f and ff.
3. POSITION. Hand crossings: L.H. over, R.H.
under.
hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Change of signature: key of , A,
and E. Change of clef.
four parts: the half note as the pulse
unit in 2/2. Syncopation.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Non troppo vivo = not too lively.
(b) Dynamics: molto marcato = very marked,
accented.
(c) Phrasing: Canonic writing in variation
form.
C. Bartok's Comments. Accents on upbeats. Notice
changes of keys and positions. Feeling is key of A in
which the piece begins and ends, but the tonality is in-
definite. Requires very good control for the accentuation.
D
- Suggestions. In the L.H. of M. 6 and 12, the
separating sign indicates the end of the phrase and that
the half note preceding the sign can be shortened to allow
for the quick change of position in M. 7 and 13. Another
277
of the more difficult pieces in this volume. Assign

Ex. 15.
No. 58. IN ORIENTAL STYLE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Espresslvo.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Change of clef (L.H. only).
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Assal lento = very slow, but not
as slow as the indication molto lento.
^ Bartok's Comments. G minor tonality typical of
Oriental style contains a minor third and an augmented
fourth. Ends on a half cadence. See exercise in ap-
pendix.
D
* Suggestions. To be played with espressivo touch
(see Suggestions of no. 51 above). The comma in the
treble clef of m. 7 indicates a "slight, almost unnotice-
able pause." In this case, the time for separation should
be taken from the note preceding the comma. Thus, m. 7
can be thought of as consisting of a half note and a
quarter rest.
No. 59. MAJOR AND MINOR
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
278
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: > , A , and _____ vs. f_.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The reading of accidentals involved
In the simultaneous performance of F minor
and F Lydian Modes.
C. Bartok's Comments. Contrasting minor in one part
and major with alterations in the other. Also considered
as polytonal. Ends on dominant. Could discuss here vari-
eties of minor modes.
D.- Suggestions , Demonstrate for the pupil the play-
ing of the following minor modes and point out character-
istic intervals:
F HJRH01IC fllNOfi.

HHODIC HH/OR.
' i? tt*k' ' t" l ; t *

T-*- -r
j i
tu
May, ytfe MKJ- ttb _j n*k
F Down f ABOLIAU F PHRYt/AH

um
aSc
IZt -r-+-
M*j. te
r
i ^=C
-f^x-
t1\. tttaJ Ttt

ll
Af - 2 l
-**-
No. 60. CANON WITH SUSTAINED NOTES

A. Technique.
2. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing in each hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. E key signature.
2. RHYTHM. 1/2 meter. Change of time.
279
3. EXPRESSION
(a) Tempo: Grave = slow, serious, heavy.
(b) Phrasing: in canonic form.
C. Bartok's Comments. Play carefully so that the
sustained notes are heard. Four-voice canon in 2/2 and
1/2 meter. In E.
D. Suggestions. The separating signs here also in-
dicate phrase endings.
No. 61. PENTATONIC MELODY

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
2. HAND INDEPENDENCE. '
(a) Dynamic Contrast; in relievo.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Change of clef In L.H.
C. Bart ok's C omment s. Pentatonic: The scientific
name is "anhemitone-pentatonic," that means a scale of
Sfive degrees without any semitone, or a minor scale
where the second and sixth are missing. It was used fre-
quently in the old Christian monodic ecclesiastical music
and is still living in three centres: with the American
Indians, with the African Negroes, and in Central Asia -
which is the most importan one. Each of these centres
built different melodic types upon the same basis. The
Central Asian centre spread its influence as far west as
the Hungarians, eastwards to the Chinese and southwards
/
280
to the Turks. The character of Nr. 6l resembles the

Central Asian type. There are many kinds of pentatonic
scales, some are In major. This Is in the key of A minor
although it ends on tonic and dominant fifths of C_, a
common ending in old music.
D. Suggestions. Assign Ex. 16.
No. 62. MINOR SIXTHS IN PARALLEL MOTION

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, staccato, and ______________.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: > vs. f_.
3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing in L.H.
(m. 40).
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Mixed accidentals. Clef changes
in L.H.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Vivace, ma non troppo, risoluto =
resolutely b~u~t not too lively.
.(b) Dynamics: marcato.
C. Bartok's Comments. Gives impression of duo or
bi-tonality. Oriental feelings. Can be harmonized -
see example in appendix.
D. Suggestions. Note juxtaposition of hands in m.
23. Strict observance of eighth rests also will con-
tribute to accuracy in terms of providing time needed to
make the quick leaps in M. 24, 26, and 38. Note the
281
separating signs in m. 6: the second quarter note should

be played staccato but with tenuto touch.
No. 63. BUZZING

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
(M.l-2).
4. EMBELLISHMENTS. Slow trills in each hand.
B. Musicianship.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: con moto = with-animation, ener-
getic movement.
(b) Dynamics: sempre pianissimo.
C. Bartok's Comments. Could be practiced as a trill
exercise. However, when played as intended, requires
conspicuous finger control because it must be played
softly. Not intended for the average pupil.
D. Suggestions. Begin practicing at medium intensi-
ties. Be sure that all rests are observed and that
syncopated notes are accented slightly.
No. 64. LINE AND POINT

A. Technique.
282
3. PEDALLING. Use of the damper.

B. Musicianship.
2. RHYTHM. 2/2.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics; marcato.
C. Bartok's Comments. 64a: From a sustained interval
of a second, voices proceed in opposite directions. It is
not considered difficult. Good illustration of bitonality
and 2/2 meter. 64b: Chromatic figures proceeding for the
same point an octave apart. Version "b" is a chromatic
compression of version "a". This is the first example
of compression from diatonic into chromatic.
' D. Suggestions. Note the use of leger-llne half
and whole rests in M. 12 and 16 respectively of no. 64a.
Assign Ex. 17.
No. 65. DIALOGUE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Staccato.
2. INTERVAL PLAYING. Fifths in each hand.
3. ENSEMBLE PLAYING. Vocal accompaniment.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The vocal score.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: >
c
* Bartok's Comments. Song appearing in Book I
(cf. no. 14) is here played with accompaniment. Suggestions
283
for playing are in appendix: Referring to the notes in

the preface the piece can be played without voice as
follows: a) on one piano: the left hand plays the lower
line of the accompaniment, the right hand plays the
melody. In the last four bars the right hand continues
to play the upper line of the accompaniment, b) on two
pianos: one player plays the accompaniment in its original
form, the other one plays the melody by doubling the
upper octave. Exercises in different types of fifths
would be of help. In D minor with altered sixth.
D. Suggestions. D Aeolian Mode. If the piece is
sung and self-accompanied, check for accuracy of pitch
during the singing of the melody in M. 15 and 19.
Errata: a staccato dot should be placed above the interval
in the bass clef of m. 24. Assign Ex. 18.
No. 66. MELODY DIVIDED

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato and espresslvo.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. espressivo.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: vs. piu p.
3. INTERVAL PLAYING.
4. EMBELLISHMENTS. Slow double-stop tremolos.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Change of clef in R.H. D key
signature.
284
2. EXPRESSION,
(a) Dynamics.
^* Bartok's Comments. Study in double notes in
pentatonic melody, transposed. In E or mixed keys.
D. Suggestions. Polytonal. This volume also dedi-
cated to Peter Bartok. Assign Ex. 19-20, Vol. Ill, and
note that the meter signature indicates an additive rhythm
consisting of 3 + 3 + 2 eighth notes. Each unit should
be accented as indicated by the solid and dotted bar
lines. The pupil should also play the exercise in 4/4
for the purpose of comparing the two types of rhythm.
Note: 4/4 is a divisive rhythm.
285 VOLUME I I I
Nos. 67-96
(Ex.19-31)
286
No. 67. THIRDS AGAINST A SINGLE VOICE

A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint: as Indicated in the title..
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: > in R.H.
3. INTERVAL PLAYING. Thirds in each hand..
B. Musicianship.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics; seven-bar crescendo.
C. Bartok's Comments. Nothing special to consider.
Consult exercises in appendix.
D. Suggestions. Be sure that all tied notes are
held for their full value.
No. 68.' HUNGARIAN DANCE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, staccato and tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. staccato
and tenuto, staccato vs. tenuto.
3. INTERVAL PLAYING.
4. ACCOMPANYING FIGURATIONS. In each hand.
5. ENSEMBLE PLAYING. Two pianos, four hands.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. D key signature.
287
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: con spirito = with spirit.
C. Bartok's Comments. Can be played without the
second piano part. A colorful piece for two pianos. Key
of D.
D. Suggestions. If only one piano is available, the
teacher or another pupil can play the upper staff of the
secondo part an octave higher than written. The pupil
should practice both parts. Assign Ex. 21 which is the
first example of staccato chord playing in the Mikrokosmos.
No. 69. CHORD STUDY

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Staccato, tenuto, and espresslvo.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: staccato and tenuto
vs. espresslvo.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: vs. mf.
(c) Accompanying Figurations; in each hand.
3. CHORD PLAYING. Triads in each hand.
4. PASSAGE-WORK. Chordal, R.H. only.
B. Musicianship.
1. EXPRESSION.
(a) Terms: cantablle = in a singing style
(.i.e., with espresslvo touch).
C. Bartok's Comments. . See exercise in appendix.
Simple basic triads good for hand position in grasping
chords and playing crisp staccato. The accompaniment
288
-
I . -_
could be s i m p l i f i e d as f o l l o w s : &f=l:Trlt _m I 7 etc.
In bars 10-11, 14-15, 22-23, 26-27, 30, 32-33 there are

some slight difficulties.
D. Suggestions. Bartok transcribed this piece for
two pianos under the title, "Chord and Trill Study" (no. 2
in Seven Pieces from "Mikrokosmos," published by Boosey
and Hawkes). In this transcription, no. 69 appears as the
secondo part in which the melody and some chords contain
octave doublings. The transcription is suitable for per-
formance by certain pupils and it may be used effectively
as a recital piece in which the teacher or an advanced
pupil plays the primo. Bela and Ditta Bartok can be heard
in the definitive performance of the transcription: see
REMINGTON R19994.
No. 70. MELODY AGAINST DOUBLE NOTES

A. Technique.
(a) Combined Touch-Form; legato vs. espresslvo.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: p vs. f.
3. INTERVAL PLAYING. In each hand.
4. POSITION. Crossed hand3: R.H. over, L.H. under.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. B key signature in R.H., C key sig-
nature Tn L.H. Bass clef In each hand.
2. EXPRESSION. j
289
(a) Terms; calando = decreasing in intensity

and speed.
c
* Bartok's Comments. Polytonal. R.H. is in F#
minor with raised sixth. The signature is actually B
major but the piece is written in the dominant minor.
L.H. is in D minor.
D. Suggestions. Practice first for mastery of touch
and then work for control of dynamic contrast.
No. 71. THIRDS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato and tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint in thirds.
only.
B. Musicianship.
1. RHYTHM. Change of time: 2/2, 3/2.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: un poco piu mosso = a little faster.
Tempo I = at the tempo indicated by
the first tempo mark (M.M. = 66).
c
* Bartok's Comments. Note changes of meter and tempo,
also F major R.H. vs. D minor L.H. Key of D minor ending
on a major triad. Dignified, quiet atmosphere. Note how
theme comes to rest on a major chord.
D
* Suggestions. Ex. 23a,b can be assigned here in
advance preparation for no. 73.
290
No. 72. DRAGON'S DANCE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, tenuto, and staccato.
(a) Combined Touch-Form: legato vs. tenuto and
non-legato.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: marcatissimo vs. tenuto.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Change of clef in L.H. Mixed acci-
dentals .
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Molto pesante = very ponderously,
heavily.
G
Bartok's Comments. Tonality and intervals lend
a bizarre effect. Pay attention to phrasing of second
voice. Key may be G_ or it may be called a hovering or
uncertain tonality.
D. Suggestions. Assign Ex. 22, 23c,d.
* No. 73. SIXTHS AND TRIADS

A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
3. INTERVAL AND CHORD PLAYING. As indicated by
title.
B. Musicianship.
1. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: f_ subito.
291
C. Bartok's Comments. Again the major against minor

in triads and their inversions. Key of ending on dominant
chord. Could be practiced in various ways and speeds.
Plagal ending.
D. Suggestions. Can be played in the style of Ex.
23a: play all eighth notes staccato and all quarter and
half notes tenuto.
No. 74. HUNGARIAN SONG

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, and ______________.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. non-legato
and tenuto.
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: mf and _sf vs. f_.
4. ENSEMBLE PLAYING. Accompanied song.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Reading of vocal score.
* 2. RHYTHM. Syncopation.
C. Bartok's Comments. Written first as a piano solo,
then as song with accompaniment. Valuable for learning
how to accompany. Pupil and/or teacher should sing the
melody. See the relative notes in the preface.
D. Suggestions. Observe the interruption of legato
as indicated by the separating sign in L.H., m. 32 of
parts "a" and "b."
292
No. 75. TRIPLETS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato-.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
three parts: the quarter note as the pulse
unit in 2/4 and 3/4.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: poco allarg. = growing a little slower.
c
* Bartok's Comments. Interesting rhythmic patterns.
Key of D. Notice change of meter and accents.
D. Suggestions. It is recommended that Ex. 24
should be assigned here in preparation for no. 76 (the
exercise seems to have little pertinency to no. 77).
No. 76. IN THREE PARTS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato and staccatissimo
2."HAND INDEPENDENCE.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. staccatissimo,
(b) Dynamic Contrast: A vs. .
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Devised G key signature.
2. RHYTHM.. 2/2.
293
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; Allegro molto = very fast.
(b) Dynamics: marcato = marked, accented.
^ Bartok's ___________________ Note placement of the sharp
in the key signature. Tied notes over moving voice re-
quire good finger control. Key of G ending on dominant
chord.
D. Suggestions. Staccatissimo is the most percussive
touch-ofrm employed by the composer who specifies that
the sound is to be "almost sharp." The key should be re-
leased as quickly as possible after depression. Assign
Ex. 25.
No. 77. LITTLE STUDY

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, staccato, and tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
3. BROKEN CHORD PLAYING. In each hand. Some
intervals in L.H.
4. PASSAGE-WORK. Scalar passages in each hand.
B. Musicianship.
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat into four and
six parts: the quarter note as the unit of
pulse in 2/4 and 3/4.
C. Bartok's Comments. Good for finger facility and
parallel direction. G minor ending on G major chord.
294
Good example in appendix.

D. Suggestions. In the last measure, the R.H. can
be counted as follows: one-a-and-ta-ta two and.
No. 78. FIVE-TONE SCALE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
!
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: > vs. .
(c) Accompanying Figurations: in R.H. only.
4. EMBELLISHMENTS. Slow trill in R.H.
B. Musicianship.
1. RHYTHM. Syncopation, ben ritmato = rhyth-
mically.
2. EXPRESSION,
(a) Dynamics.
C. Bartok's Comments. Voices are in five-note ranges
in changing position. In E minor. Consonant chords.
D. Suggestions. Note the tied notes in the last two
bars. Assign Ex. 26-28 and be sure the accents are ob-
served in Ex. 27 and 28.
No. 79. HOMMAGE A J.S.B.
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
295
(b) Dynamic Contrast: > vs. , mp, and mf.

4. EMBELLISHMENTS. Slow tremolo in each hand (m.
17)
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. G key signature. Mixed accidentals.
The sixteenth rest.
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat into four
in 3/4. The dotted eighth-sixteenth note
rhythm. Syncopat1on.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; Calmo = tranquilly, calmly.
poco rlt. = gradually a little slower.
ritard. = growing slower.
a tempo = return to the original tempo.
C. Bartok's Comments. Signature looks like E minor
but the piece is written in E major. In no fixed key.
Left hand imitates right hand figures in inversion. Minor
intervals are superimposed over major ones . Requires
well-balanced playing. See exercises: variety of inter-
vals from a set note. Also Irregular accents.
D. Suggestions. An opportune time for the explanation
of dotted eighth-sixteenth note rhythm. Check carefully
the playing of m. 17.
No. 80. HOMMAGE A R. SCH.

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato and staccatissimo.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: in relievo.
296
(c) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. stacca-

tissimo.
(d) Accompanying Figurations: in each hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. E13 key signature. Mixed accidentals.
2. RHYTHM. The dotted eighth-sixteenth note rhythm,
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Andantino, placevole = slower than
andante, played in a smooth, non-
accented manner.
C. Bartok's Comments. Employs the more complex and
richer harmonies of the early Romantic Period. Atmosphere
like Schumann's music.
D. Suggestions. There may be a tendency to play M.
17-20 (particularly M. 17 and 18) .as dotted- rhythms
throughout.
No. 81. WANDERING

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: mp vs. p.-
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Change of clef In L.H.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Non troppo lento = not too slow.
(b)- Dynamics.
297
C. Bartok's Comments. Melodic figures repeated a

tone higher or lower. Contrasting major and minor thirds
No fixed key. Abstract music.
D. Suggestions. Errata: the meter sign should be
2/4, not 2/2. Assign Ex. 29 (see Bartok's Comments in
no. 82 below).
No. 82. SCHERZO

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, staccato, and
tenuto"
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: tenuto vs. staccato.
(c) Dynamic Contrast: A vs. mf.
B. Musicianship.
2. RHYTHM. Change of time: 7/8, 3/8, 3/4, 2/4.
Syncopation.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; Allegretto scherzando = slower
than allegro and in a playful, joking
manner.
(b) Dynamics: accents.
C. Bartok's Comments. Should be played crisply with
strong accents, especially left hand. Appendix exercise
demonstrates accented beats in 7/8 time.
D. Suggestions. Accent B. 1 and 5 in the first four
bars. Scherzo = joke, jest. This title can be given to
298
an instrumental piece of a humorous character whose lead-

ing features are animated movement, accentuation, and
contrast.
No. 83. MELODY WITH INTERRUPTIONS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato and tenuto.
2. INTERVAL AND CHORD PLAYING. In each hand.
3. EMBELLISHMENTS. Slow double-stop tremolos In
each hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: marcato.
^ Bartok's Comments. Hungarian folk tune: genuine,
not made up. Double notes in trill form with repeated,
strongly-accented notes which interrupt. Similar to
theme in [Stravinsky's] Petrouchka.
D
Suggestions. Observe the syncopated pedalling.
Every g in the R.H. is natural.
No. 84. MERRIMENT
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, tenuto and espres-
slvo (dolce).
2.- HAND INDEPENDENCE.
(a) Counterpoint.
hand.
299
4. CHORD PLAYING. In R.H. only.

B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. A key signature. Treble clef in
each hand.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; tranquillo = slower.
(b) Dynamics: accents.
C. Bartok's Comments. Good study in syncopated
rhythm. In Mixolydian Mode in E with minor seventh.
D. Suggestions. Take notice of the part-writing in
M. 7 (R.H.) and 11 (L.H.). Assign Ex. 30-31. Errata:
in Ex. 31 the meter sign should be 7/4, not 7/8, and an
accent (> ) should be placed above the half note chord
in the first bar, L.H.
No. 85. BROKEN CHORDS

A. Technique.
2. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing in R.H.
4. POSITION. Hand crossings: R.H.-under (sotto),
L.H. over (sopra).
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Change of clef in L.H.
2. RHYTHM. The eighth note duplet in' 6/8.
' 3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: change of tempo.
(b) Dynamics: accents, 8-bar crescendo.
300
C. Bartok's Comments. Broken chord pattern in con-

tinuation from right hand to left hand and vice-versa.
Note the changes In rhythmic patterns. Scorrevole means
fluently. Key is not very certain but it seems to be in
G. Appendix exercises are based on all chords of the
scale, with the seventh added, and their resolution. Very
good to introduce here.
D. Suggestions. M. 3, 27, and 59-60 can be counted
one-two-and-three, four-five-and-six. The second note of
each duplet should be played on 'and.'
No. 86. TWO MAJOR PENTACHORDS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: sf_ vs. p (crescendo) .
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Reading of sharps in L.H. only.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: change of tempo,
(h) Dynamics; from p_p to f f.
C. Bartok's Comments. Pentachord means the first
five degrees of a scale of seven degrees. One voice in C,
the other in FT in juxtaposition. Often employed in
modern music and when understood would solve many of its
301
mysteries. Not for average pupils.

D. Suggestions. The phrase marks proceed from bass
to treble clef in M. 1-4 and from treble to bass clef in
M. 5-8. The fifth measure is the same as the first but
in retrograde motion and M. 6-8 represent an inversion in
F* major of the C_ major melody in M. 2-4. Observe the
tie in M. 32-33.
No. 87. VARIATIONS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, tenuto, dotted tenuto, and
espresslvo (cantabile, dolce).
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. dotted
tenuto.
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: A and sf_ vs. f_,
vs. pp.
hand.
5. POSITION. Hand crossing: R.H. over.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes in each hand.
2. RHYTHM. Change of time. Syncopation.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Lo stesso tempo = the same tempo.
(b) Dynamics: accented voice parts, M. 34
and 36!
(c) Phrasing: theme and two variations.
C. Bartok's Comments. Use of more involved chords
302
against melody In right hand and then reversed to left

hand. Note changes in tempos and rhythms. In D minor
feeling but ending on 6/4 chord of D major.
D. Suggestions. Dotted tenuto Is an agogic variation
of tenuto touch: the key is pressed rather than struck
down and the tone is sounded "usually for half the value
of the note, never less." Cantaolle and dolce are to be
played with espresslvo touch; in fact, the difference
between them is one of dynamics (as indicated in the score)
No. 88. DUET FOR PIPES

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Espresslvo (cantabile) and staccato.
(a) Counterpoint.
3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Last bar only.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The double flat. Treble clef in
each hand.
three parts: the quarter note as the pulse
unit in 2/4.
3. EXPRESSION.
(b) Phrasing: the separating sign.
C. Bartok's Comments. Two pipes or flutes play
chromatic melodies with skips and in triplets with various
combinations.
303
D. Suggestions. Take notice of the interruption

of legato between M. 22 and 23. The accented, staccato
sixteenth notes in m. 32 require almost the equivalent of
a staccatissimo touch.
No. 89. IN FOUR PARTS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, noh-legato and tenuto.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Devised two-sharp key signature.
2. EXPRESSION.
(b) Phrasing: separating signs.
C Bartok's Comments. Four voices: sometimes in
chord form, sometimes in contrapuntal style. Preclassical.
D* Suggestions. Observe the non-legato in the last
two bars. Errata: In m. 10 the half note stems in the
treble clef that Indicate the alto voice should be deleted
and a whole rest should be suspended from the first staff
line to complete the measure. In m. 14 the crescendo
mark should be extended to include the first beat of the
next measure.
No. 90. IN RUSSIAN STYLE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
hand.
304
3. INTERVAL PLAYING. As accompanying figurations

in each hand (minor seconds, major sevenths).
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Change of clef in L.H. Mixed
accidentals.
four parts: the half note as the pulse unit
in 2/2.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: marcato e_ pesante.
(b) Phrasing: separating signs.
(c) Terms: Ossia = alternative passage.
c
* Bartok's Comments. Voice in left hand against a
minor second in right hand resolved to a minor third.
Major third resolved to an augmented fourth. Not an
original Russian tune but in the style: short themes and
sentences, repetition. Good time for explanation of aug-
mented and diminished intervals in key of , etc.
D. Suggestions. Referring to M. 23,-25, L.H., compare
the intervals with their inversions in the, Ossia; major
seventh-minor second, minor sixth-major third, perfect
fifth-perfect fourth, and diminished fifth-augmented
fourth. Pupils who are interested in the rules of inter-
vallic inversion should be encouraged to play various
intervals in keys such as F and G;
. No. 91. CHROMATIC INVENTION 1

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Espresslvo.
305
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Mixed accidentals. Clef change in
L.H.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: smorzando = fading away.
C. Bartok's Comments. Patterned after the form of
Bach, written In the chromatic idiom. Two-voice inventions,
simple and clear. Voices In direct Imitation and inver-
sion. Teaching of it can be delayed if pupil Is not ready.
D. Suggestions. Introduction (or review) of the
chromatic scale can be undertaken with this piece.
No. 92. CHROMATIC INVENTION 2
A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
(c) Dynamic Contrasts: A and vs. mf, vs. ff.
3. POSITION. Hand crossings: R.H. over. Unison
playing with the hands two and five octaves
apart. One and two-octave leaps with the
R.H. within a four-octave range.
306
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes in R.H. Leger-line
notes in L.H. The' sign 8_ .
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Allegro robusto = fast, firm and
bold.
C. Bartok's Comments. Voices begin in unison. More
freely written than the first invention and has entirely
different character and spirit. Written within the limits
of a pentachord with chromatic tones.
D. Suggestions. In m. 14, b. 1, the a remains sharp.
Errata: In m. 5, L.H., change the first finger number
from 2 to 3;.
No. 93. IN FOUR PARTS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. G key signature (devised).
2. RHYTHM. Change of time: 2/4, 3/4, 5/8.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Phrasing: separating signs.
(b) Terms: sonoro = with a sonorous, ringing
tone.
c
Bartok's Comments. Well-knit, four-voice study
with an interesting and consistent rhythmic pattern.
Note changes in meter. Key of G.
307
D. Suggestions. The legato should be Interrupted

between M. 10 and 11.
No. 94. TALE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Espresslvo, tenuto, and dotted tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing in eac^h hand,
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. E b key signature. Clef changes in
each hand. Mixed accidentals.
2. RHYTHM. Change of time.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics.
(b) Phrasing: the comma (m. 10).
C. Bartok's Comments. Descriptive little piece in
contrapuntal form, alternating between 2/4 and 3/4 meters.
Some polytonality. Key of C_ minor. Form is definite and
very expressive.
D. Suggestions. The comma (m. 10) is a separating
sign which means "a slight, almost unnoticeable pause in
which the time of separation is taken equally from the
notes preceding and following the comma." See BR 1:6:1.
No. 95. SONG OF THE FOX

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, staccato, tenuto,
and portamento" (portato).
308
v (a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. non-legato
and portamento, non-legato vs. staccato
and portamento, and tenuto vs. portamento.
3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing in L.H. only.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The vocal score. D. key signature.
Change of clef (R.H., parT "b").
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Phrasing: the separating signs | and >.
(b) Terms: poco a poco piu tranquillo e
rallentando al = Tittle by litTTle
growing quieter and slower until.
Ca = about.
V- Bartok's Comments. Good study in syncopated
rhythm. Simple melody made interesting by variety in
harmony and changes in tempo. When in song form, the
accompaniment is simple but interestingly done. See the
relative notes in the preface.
D. Suggestions. Portamento (portato) is a detached
touch which combines key pressure (tenuto touch) with
hand-motion (flexible wrist action) so that "the tone re-
ceives one-half the value of the note and is played with-
out weight." Take notice of the separating signs in M.
4, 8, and 15 of part "a" and M. 10 and 17 of part "b."
This piece can be played as a self-accompanied vocal solo.
309
a two-piano transcription, and/or an instrumental or

vocal solo with piano accompaniment.
No. 96. STUMBLINGS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Espresslvo and staccato.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. G key signature. Leger-line
notes above the staff in the bass clef.
2. EXPRESSION,
(a) Dynamics.
C. Bartok's Comments. Good study for finger work
in parallel motion. Good material for stressing arm co
ordination combined with fingers. Key of G.
D* Suggestions. The arrangement of the notes in
M. 1-2 is suggestive of 6/8 time and, therefore, the
pupil should be cautioned against interpolating accents
anywhere except the first beat of a measure.
VOLUME IV
Nos. 97-121
(Ex. 32-33)
, 311
No. 97. NOTTURNO

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, staccato, and espresslvo.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. espresslvo
and staccato.
B. Musicianship.
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat into six
parts: the dotted quarter as the pulse
unit in 6/8. Polyrhythm (cross-rhythm);
two (L.H.) vs. three (R.H.), m. 35.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Phrasing: in ternary form.
C. Bartok's Comments. Nostalgic piece in E minor,
reminiscent of Chopin or Scriabin. Note left hand theme
at end of piece.
i
D. Suggestions. Assign Ex. 32, a study In passing

of the thumb, as preparation for no. 98 and take notice
of the legato vs. staccato and marcato accents in 7/8
time. As far as no. 97 is concerned, Notturno = nocturne
= a piano piece of romantic or sentimental character
usually lacking a distinct form. See BR 2:4:1.
No. 98. THUMB UNDER

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
312
2. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Passing of the thumb.

B. Musicianship.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Phrasing: separating signs.
(b) Dynamics; accents.
CL. Bartok' s Comments . Not difficult but good for
thumb crossing. Refer to exercise in appendix. In F,
ending on the second tone.
D. Suggestions. Note interruption of legato between
M. 17 and 18.
No. 99. CROSSED HANDS

1 . TOUCH. Legato and t e n u t o .
(a) Dynamic Contrasts: > , , and f_ vs. mf.
3. POSITION. Hand crossings: L.H. over.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Devised one-flat (e_D) and two-sharp
(f# and g# ) key signatures in R.H. and
LTH. respectively. Clef changes in L.H.
G* Bartok's Comments. Difficult for some pupils
because of different key signatures for each hand. Show
combination of parts to make scale or diminished seventh
chord. Key is uncertain.
D. Suggestions. According to Bartok's comment above,
the parts can be combined to form the following Bcale and
* 313
diminished c h o r d s : , ~~_ ZJuK
U J ' n i ' W i jj
^ff. ' (%\g) (his)
No. 100. IN THE STYLE OF A FOLK SONG "

A. Technique.
.1. TOUCH. Espresslvo.
(a) Counterpoint.
B. MusicianBhip.
parts: the eighth note as the pulse unit
in 5/8. The dotted eighth-sixteenth note
rhythm. Change of time: 5/8, 3/8.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Terms: tutte le due voci con molta
espressione"='~both parts or voices
with much expression.
c
* Bartok's Comments. This resembles the Wagnerian
"Magic Fire", theme from Die Walktire. Melody is long, writ-
ten in two different meters, but it is clear and definite
and repeated in different positions. A Balkan melody,
not my own invention.
D. Suggestions. Direct the pupil's attention to
the tied notes in M. 17-19 and 21-23. See BR 1:3:1.
No. 101. DIMINISHED FIFTH

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
314
B. Musicianship.
1. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; Con moto = with animation.
c
Bartok's Comments. Two voices beginning at the
interval of a diminished fifth and proceeding at various
directions and patterns. Phrases are short and concise.
Probably in the key of D minor, ending on diminished fifth,
D. Suggestions.- Juxtaposition of the hands may
cause some difficulty at first. Be sure to observe the
eighth rests in m. 5 in order to avoid collision of the
hands when proceeding to m. 6.
No. 102. HARMONICS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, staccato,
staccatissimo, tenuto, portamento, and
espresslvo (dolce).
2. CHORD PLAYING. In each hand.
4. EMBELLISHMENTS. Grace notes in R.H.
5. PASSAGE-WORK. Scalar passages in R.H.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Use of diamond-shaped quarter, half,
and dotted half notes. Use of treble
clef in L.H. and clef changes in R.H.
The double sharp.
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat into two,
three, and four parts: the quarter note
as the pulse unit. Change of time;
2/4, 3/4.
315
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; un poco rubatq. "robbed" a little
inTempo. This direction means that
the strict rhythmical flow can be
modified by prolonging prominent
melody notes or chords if there is
an equivalent acceleration of less
prominent tones. Change of tempo.
(b) Dynamics: sff = sforzato. This is the
strongest accent sign used In the
Mlkrokosmos.
C. Bartok's Comments. Interesting effects produced
from vibrations of overtones or harmonics when keys are
silently pressed down and the same notes are sounded In
a different range. Schoenberg was the first to use har-
monics in three atonal pieces, Op. 11. Henry Cowell uses
these and many other devices such as plucking the strings
in various ways at long or short distances to produce
unusual sound effects or colors.
D
' Suggestions. This piece can be considered as a
summary of technical" and musical problems encountered
heretofore in the Mikrokosmos. Concerning the playing of
harmonics, slow key descent (use tenuto touch) will permit
key depression without sounding of tones.
No. 103. MINOR AND MAJOR

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, and espresslvo.
(a) Counterpoint.
316
4. POSITION. Hand crossings; R.H. over (L.H.

under).
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Change of clef in R.H. Dotted
bar lines.
2. RHYTHM. Change of time: 5/8, 6/8, 7/8. 8/8,
9/8, 3X2 . 9/8 as an additive (4+5)
~8~ "~B~~
rhythm and as a divisive (compound time)
rhythm. The dotted bar lines in M. 5-6
indicate additive rhythms of 2+3+2 and
8
3+2+3. The sign 3X2 is another way of
"""& "B~
indicating 3/4 so that the eighth note
continues to serve as the pulse unit.
Note also that 5/8 is considered as
3+2 and 2+3.
~8~ T"
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Change of tempo. Presto = faster
than allegro and slower than prestissimo.
Accelerando = gradually growing faster.
(b) Dynamics: sff, 15-bar crescendo.
(c) Terms: rep, ad libitum = the performer is
free to repeat these measures (M. 37-
38).
C. Bartok's Comments. This is a minor pentachord
superimposed against a major in an interesting variety
of meters. 3X2 instead of 3/4 so as not to change speed
-tf-
notes.
D* S u g g e s t i o n s . The t e a c h e r can e x p l a i n 9/8 as an
a d d i t i v e and a d i v i s i v e rhythm. The following illustra-
t i o n may h e l p : ADDITIVE - 4+5 JJJJ fiJJi ,' DIVISIVE -
9/BjSJJ)m . "*"'
> -
317
No. 104. THROUGH THE KEYS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
2. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Passing of the fingers.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. D, IE13, E, A, and B13 key signatures.
Change of clef in L.H.
C. Bartok's Comments. Study in change of key without
modulation. Same theme in unison and in similar motion.
D. Suggestions. Also serves as a study in extension
and contraction of the hands. Emphasize slightly the
syncopated notes In M. 14, 16, and 21 (in both parts).
No. 105. PLAYSONG
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, and tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: > vs. f_.
.3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing in each
hand.
4. POSITION. Crossed hands: L.H. over, R.H.
under.
5. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Black key playing in
L.H. and white key playing in R.H.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. E key signature in L.H., C key
signature in R.H. Treble clef In each
hand.
318
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: .change of tempo.
(b) Dynamics: marcato.
C. Bartok's Comments. Two pentatonic scales: a five-
note scale in D minor in the right hand and Cj minor in
the left hand. Similar to a theme in [Stravinsky's]
Sacre du Printemps. Ends on dominant.
D. Suggestions. The separating signs in M. 12, 16,
and 18 indicate phrase endings.' Note the marcato (accents)
in the alto and bass voices of M. 42-44.
No. 106. CHILDREN'S SONG

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrasts; p vs. mf and p, in
rilievo.
3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE*. Part-playing in L.H.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The tie sign between staves (M.
35-36). Change of clef in L.H.
2. EXPRESSION.
(b) Dynamics.
C. Bartok's Comments. A repetition of things done
before:
D. Suggestions. Note the phrasing of M. 1-9 and the
319
separating sign in the L.H. of m. 26. Bring out the L.H.'

slightly in M. 27-34.
No. 107. MELODY IN THE MIST

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, and tenuto.
2. CHORD PLAYING. In each'hand.
3. POSITION. Interlocked hands.
4. PEDALLING. Use of the damper (or solo
sostenuto pedal).
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Mixed accidentals, m.d. = right
hand, m.s^. = left hand.
C. Bartok''"B- Comments. Dissonant chords played a
half-tone apart create a vague, misty impression. To
understand range and tonality of chords, play them in con-
tinuity broken from left hand to right- hand. The melody
emerges from the mist to complete the phrase. This is
built to a climax and disappears in the mist. Key of C_.
D. Suggestions. Depress the damper pedal exactly as
marked in the score. The pedal should be used also on
b.3 of M. 34 and 38 (release the damper on b. 1 of M. 35
and 39). Finger the chords in M. 41-44 as before. In
M. 40-45 the pedal tones (g in each hand) can be sustained
by depressing the middle or solo sostenuto (sustaining)
pedal on b. 2 of m. 40, or by depressing the damper pedal
as Indicated. If the damper is used, replace the fingers
silently on the pedal tones, b. 2 of m. 44, and (keeping
320
the keys held down) release the damper as marked In m. 45.
No. 108. WRESTLING

A. Technique.
2. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing in each hand,
3. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Passing of the fingers.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION.. Mixed accidentals.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: sempre marcatissimo. Always very
marked or accented.'
c
* Bartok's Comments. Picturesque struggle between
tones of a minor second. Both-hands in unison. One
voice is tied while the other continues within the small
range of a pentachord with chromatic tones. There are
superimposed major and minor thirds. The voices finally
resolve to the major triad of D.
D
* Suggestions. See BR 1:5:1.
No. 109. FROM THE ISLAND OF BALI

A. Technique.
espresslvo (dolce), and dotted tenuto.-"
(a) Counterpoint.
3. PEDALLING. Use of the solo sostenuto (sustain-
ing) pedal, or the damper.
.>
321
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Change of clef in L.H.
2. RHYTHM. Change of time:. 6/8, 4/4.
3. EXPRESSION. '' '
(c) Terms: (prol. Ped.) = optional use of
the solo sostenuto pedal.
C. Bartok's Comments. Impressionistic composition
possibly describing a tropical scene. Then, some action or
dance takes place in the Risoluto section, finally return-
ing to the original tempo and mood. Sostenuto pedal could
be used if you have one. Tonality uncertain but it ends
on D minor and F minor.
D. Suggestions. If the piano is not equipped with
a solo sustaining pedal, the half-depressed damper can
be tried as a substitute (M. 30-38). See BR 1:2:2.
No. 110. CLASHING SOUNDS
A. Technique.
' 1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, and tenuto.
hand.
4. POSITION. Interlocked hands.
5. PEDALLING. Use of the half-depressed damper.
6; EMBELLISHMENTS. Slow double stop tremolos in
each hand.
322
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Treble clef In each hand.
3. EXPRESSION.'
(a) Tempo: Assal allegro = very rapid, but not
as fast as molto allegro. Tempo I, II.
Un poco sostenuto = suddenly a little
slower.
(b) Dynamics; mezza voce, ma marcato = half-
voice (mezzo forte7"""buf marked or
accented.
(c) Terms: come sopra = as above (i_._3.,
marcato).
C. Bartok' s Comments. Fifths in and D13, one against
the other, beginning mezza voce with slower note values
and the pattern is worked up to a frenzy of rhythmic sounds.
This changes gradually to a sostenuto movement where the
upper and lower voices of the chords proceed in unison.
Tempo II returns, finally ending as it began with a common
resolution to f_ and e_. The pedal is held down for many
measures, only it is put halfway down.
D
" Suggestions. Bartok does not use the term sostenuto
to indicate a gradual decrease in speed and, therefore,
M. 21-29 should be played at M.M. = 140.
No. 111. INTERMEZZO
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, tenuto, and espressivo.
(a) Dynamic Contrasts: vs. mp, mf vs. mp.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: non-legato vs.
legato and tenuto.
323
3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing In each hand.

4. INTERVAL PLAYING. In the L.H. only.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. A key signature. Mixed accidentals.
Clef change in L.H.
c
* Bartok's Comments. Melody in melanoholy mood in
3/4 and 5/4 in characteristic Hungarian style: it is a
common device to repeat the melody a fifth higher. In F#
minor ending on the dominant.
D
' Suggestions. The intervals in the L.H. of M.
48-49 are to be played non-legato and, in the same hand,
f is natural in M. 38-40.
No. 112. VARIATIONS ON A FOLK TUNE
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, and staccato.
(a) Counterpoint.
5. PASSAGE-WORK. Scalar double sixths in each
hand.
B. Musicianship.
2. EXPRESSION,
(a) Dynamics.
i 324
C. Bartok's Comments. This is an original Hungarian

song. Everybody knows this tune, even the Russians,
Poles, and Slovaks. Theme is announced in single tones,
repeated in double sixths, and then in four-voice form in
slower tempo. Then the theme Is repeated in sixths,
vivace. Diatonic is compressed into chromatic tonality.
D
- Suggestions.. Note fingerings in the first two
scores and in m. 45. Observe crescendo marks. Assign
Ex. 33: here the L.H. brings out the additive rhythm of
4+3 and the R.H. plays legato and without accentuation
(leggero).
No. 113. BULGARIAN RHYTHM (l)

A. Technique.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. staccato.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: mf vs. f and mp, m vs. p.
(c) Accompanying Figurations:,L.H. only.
. 3. POSITION. Interlocked hands.
B. Musicianship.
1. RHYTHM. 7/8 meter. Syncopation.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: leggero = lightly, without
ace entuation.
C. Bartok's Comments. The repetition can be played
n
In this way: + ^ \ with octaves throughout. In
Si Itc,
mWW
325
this case, the "seconda volta" shall be played louder

than the "prima volta." In order to develop the sense
of rhythm it is recommended to play the piece as follows:
two players (the exercise is useful even for more ad-
vanced players) who are able to play the piece perfectly,
shall play it as a piano duet, the second player playing
the three introductory and the six closing bars and the
accompaniment doubled in the lower octave (with both
hands), the first player playing the melody doubled in
the upper octave. Both parts should be studied by each.
The theme is Hungarian and the rhythm is Bulgarian.
Bulgarian rhythm has short units. 7/8 meter. The melody
is syncopated and not symetrical. 7/8 and 5/8 time are
very common in Bulgarian music. Metronome time means to
play 49 measures in one minute (including the repetition).
D. Suggestions. Play the L.H. without accentuation
(leggero) Errata: in m. 27:the dotted quarter note In
the treble clef should be changed to a staccato quarter
note (cf). See the two-piano transcription (no. l) in
Seven Pieces from "Mikrokosmos." See also BR 1:1:1.
No. 114. THEME AND INVERSION

A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint. .
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. tenuto.
326
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. D key signature. Clef changes in
each hand. Mixed accidentals.
3. EXPRESSION,
(a) Dynamics.
C Bartok's Comments. Theme must be clearly outlined
and presented to the pupil. Explain its arrangement. It
is a combination of B minor and E minor.
D
* Suggestions. The fir'st two bars contain an intro-
ductory phrase which is repeated in varied form in M.
9-10, 17-18. The theme itself begins in m. 3 and is re-
peated in inverted form in m. 11. See BR 2:5:3.
No. 115. BULGARIAN RHYTHM (2)

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
4. INTERVAL AND BROKEN CHORD PLAYING. Minor
sevenths in L.H. and arpeggios in each
hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef change in L.H. Mixed acci-
dentals .
2. RHYTHM. 5/8 as 3+2 and 2+3.
327
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Phrasing: in ternary form.
(b) Terms: scorrevole (fluently).
C. Bartok's Comments. This is an original Bulgarian
theme. Altered key of G.
D* Suggestions. Check the hand-to-hand legato in
M. 9-16 for steady dynamic level and clarity in articula-
tion (there may be a tendency here to play legatissimo).
No. 116. MELODY

A. Technique.
dotted tenuto, portamento and espresslvo
(cantabile).
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato and
espressivo vs. tenuto, dotted tenuto,
and portamento.
(c) Dynamic Contrast: > vs. .
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. The double-dotted half note. Clef
changes in each hand.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Tempo di marcia = march time.
Change ofTempo.
(b) Dynamics.
C. Bartok's Comments. Same framework at Introduction
328
and at end. In Hungarian structure. Key of G.

D
Suggestions. A difficult piece in terms of
variety of touch; in fact, all the non-percussive touch-
forms are to be found here in various combinations. Ex-
plain that the second dot of a double-dotted note in
turn adds half the value of the preceding dot to the note.
See BR 2:1:2.
No. 117. BOURREE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato and dotted tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. dotted
tenuto.
(o-) Dynamic Contrasts: sf vs. p, > vs. mf.
3. BROKEN CHORD PLAYING. In the L.H.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes In each hand. Mixed
accidentals.
3. EXPRESSION,
(a) Dynamics.
c
Bartok's Comments. Name of piece derived from
the rhythm, similar to Couperin.
D. Suggestions. Bourree = an old dance of French or
329 '
Spanish origin. The tempo does not change in M. 23 and

26 since the quarter note remains the unit of pulse.
No. 118. TRIPLETS IN 9/8 TIME

A. Technique. '
1. TOUCH. Legato.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: > vs. and mf.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes in R.H.
2. RHYTHM. 9/8 as a compound triple meter.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: accents.
C. Bartok's Comments. None.
D
- Suggestions. See BR 2:4:2.
No. 119. DANCE IN 3/4 TIME

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, staccato, and tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms; legato vs. staccato.
3. POSITION. Hand crossing: L.H. under.
330
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. E key signature.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Allegretto grazioso = moderately
fast and gracefully. Pochiss. allarg.
= "a very little" gradual decrease in
speed.
(b) Dynamics.
C. Bartok's Comments. Key of E - kind of a Mixolydian
tonality.
D. Suggestions. Errata: in measure 23 the af in the
bass clef should be a half note, not a dotted half note.
No. 120. FIFTH CHORDS

A. Technique.
1." TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, staccato, and
tenuto.
2. FINGER INDEPENDENCE, part-playing in each
hand.
3. CHORD PLAYING. Triads in each hand,
i 4. POSITION. Interlocked hands.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Change of clef in each hand.
2. RHYTHM. Change of time: 5/4, 3/2, 4/4, 3/4.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; accelerando from M.M. J = 160 to
j = 108.
(b) Dynamics.
C. Bartok's Comments. Device of blocked small chords.
Altered C major. Has great technical value. Must be
331
played with a very pointed touch and accentuation.

D
* Suggestions. See BR 1:2;1.
No. 121. TWO-PART STUDY

A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms; legato vs. non-legato.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. A key signature. Mixed accidentals.
2. RHYTHM. Change of time: 3/2, 4/4, 5/4, 3/4,
6/4. Syncopation.
C. Bartok's Comments. Different tonalities and scales
Mixed major and minor. Unusual procedure at end of piece.
D. Suggestions. Note separating signs which indi-
cate interruption of legato in L.H. of M. 15-16.
VOLUME V
Nos. 122-139
333
No. 122. CHORDS TOGETHER AND OPPOSED

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Non-legato and tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. tenuto.
(c) Dynamic Contrast: A vs. f_.
4.'PEDALLING. Use of the damper.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes in each hand. G key
signature.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: accents.
C. Bartok's Comments. Key of G_. Tonic and dominant
chords superimposed or against each other. Chords have
foreign tones or they could be called eleventh or thir-
teenth chords. Framework of the chord is often the sa~me
with inner voices moving up or down the scale. Ends on
chords of G and C_ with consecutive fifths added to each.
Good for strengthening fingers in inner voices and for
fast repetition. Foreign tones add color.
D. Suggestions. Note the fingerings in M. 60 and 63.
This piece, listed on the back jacket, does not appear
in Bartok's recording (Columbia ML4419) of the Mikro-
kosmos .
334

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Staccato, legato, and tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. staccato
and. tenuto.
B. Musicianship.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Phrasing: canon at the fifth (part "b")
and lower fifth (part "a").
c
* Bartok's Comments. Key of C_ with much chromati-
cism. Requires keen observation and good control of
fingers to make quick changes in touch.
- D. Suggestions. Errata: In m. 4 a staccato dot
should be placed below the second of two barred eighth
notes comprising b. 1 in the bass clef. In m. 9 the barred
eighth notes in the treble clef also lack staccato dots.
A transcription of this piece appears in Seven Pieces from
"Mikrokosmos" and it is recommended that the pupil should
play the primo and secondo parts with the teacher or
another pupil.
No. 124. STACCATO

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Staccato.
(a) Counterpoint.
335
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: sf_ and f vs. .

B. Musicianship.
in R.H.
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: Allegretto mosso = rapidly but not
as fast as allegro.
(b) Dynamics.
(c) Terms: secco quasi pizz. = dry as if
plucked.
C Bartok's Comments. Repeated note's in crisp, rapid
staccato touch. Requires light, fast movements, strong
accentuations, and variety of shading. Can be very
effective if played with vitality.
D. Suggestions. To be played with percussive finger-
stroke. The sforzato accents can be considered as desig-
nations of staccatissimo touch.
No. 125. BOATING
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, staccato, and espresslvo
(cantablle).
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. staccato
and espressivo.
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: vs. mf and piu .
(c) Accompanying Figurations: In each hand.
4. POSITION. Hand crossing: L.H. over.
336
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes in L.H.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: pochett. rit. = "a very little"
ritardando.
C. Bartok's Comments. Descriptive piece In a very
unusual tonality. Repetition gives feeling of monotonous
motion of the water.
D
* Suggestions. In m. 46 the R.H. replaces the L.H.
b_ natural on the third beat. See BR 2:5:2.
No. 126. CHANGE OF TIME
A. Technique.
B. Musicianship.
6/8.
C Bartok's Comments. Unusual changes of time and
construction. This is similar to Rumanian style. The
phrase structure is made up of one measure each of 2/4,
3/4, 3/8, and 5/8. This is consistently followed through
more than one-halfv of the composition. The signature
looks like F but the piece ends on the dominant of .
Count with the eighth note as the unit.
337
D. Suggestions. The syncopation pattern formed by

the phrase structure can be illustrated also with the
quarter note as the pulse unit: 2/4 / J 3/4 >///
4/4 / ** ) ) r . See BR 2:1:1.
> > >
No. 127. NEW HUNGARIAN FOLK SONG

A. Technique.
dotted tenuto, and portamento.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. staccato,
tenuto, and dotted~tenuto.
3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing in R.H.
4. INTERVAL PLAYING. Broken octaves, in L.H.
6. EMBELLISHMENTS. Five-note turn in L.H.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. D key signature. Clef changes in
each hand.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: pochiss. allarg. = "a very little"
gradual decrease in speed.
c
* Bartok's Comments. This piece can be performed
as follows: a) the same performer singing and accompanying
himself, b) on two pianos, the first player playing the
melody by doubling the octave, the second player by playing
the original accompaniment, c) for violin and piano. The
violinist plays the first verse in the original position,
338
the second in the higher octave. Pentatonic. Valuable

practice in accompanying. Pupil could sight read vocal
part while teacher plays, and vice-versa. Good ear train-
ing. Changes in rhythm make the pupil alert. In B minor,
ending on D major. This Hungarian "new" tune is 100
years old - "old" tunes are older!
D
Suggestions. It is recommended that the pupil
should play the primo and secondo parts of this piece in
its transcribed form (see No. 5, Seven Pieces from"Mikro-
kosmos"). See also REMINGTON R19994.
No. 128. PEASANT DANCE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH.. Legato, non-legato, staccato, and
tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. non-legato,
staccato, and tenuto.
(c) Accompanying Figurations: in L.H.
3. INTERVAL PLAYING. In each hand. Broken
octaves in L.H.
5. EMBELLISHMENTS. Grace notes in R.H.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes in L.H.
3. EXPRESSION.
339
(b) Dynamics: accents ( > , A , _sf, sff).

(c) Phrasing; in ternary form.
c
Bartok's Comments. An original (Bartok) theme
but in old Hungarian modal style. Interesting changes
in rhythm and tempo. In the second section, one voice
imitates the other. This is symetrical In form. The
ending is a Phrygian cadence. Altered key of G.
D
* Suggestions: See BR 1:1;'*.
No. 129. ALTERNATING THIRDS

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Non-legato, staccato, dotted tenuto,
and tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: > vs. p.
4. PASSAGE-WORK. Double thirds.
<
B. Musicianship.
the quarter note as the pulse unit. The
quarter note triplet in 2/4 and the half
note triplet in 2/2. Change of time.
Syncopation.
2. NOTATION. Clef change in L.H.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: quasi a tempo = nearly up tu tempo.
tornando al Tempo I_ = returning to the
first speed..
(b) Dynamics: leggero = lightly, without accent.
c
- Bartok's Comments. This is in Phrygian Mode. Most
340
of the thirds are on white keys. Crisp, but stay very

close to keys. Work very carefully on the rhythm at the
ending - it must be exact.
D. Suggestions. Observe the diminuendo in the last
seven bars. See BR 1:1:2.
No. 130. VILLAGE JOKE

A. Technique.
IT TOUCH. Legato and staccato.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. staccato.
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: A vs. f_, > vs. .
3. INTERVAL AND CHORD PLAYING. Broken octaves
and tenths in L.H. Chords in R.H.
5. EMBELLISHMENTS. Five-note turns in each hand.
6. FINGERING PROBLEMS. The playing of black key
major seconds with R.H. first finger.
Chordal and intervallic leaps.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Leger-llne notes below the staff
in the bass clef. Chord cluster notation
in the treble clef of m. 27. Mixed acci-
dentals. Change of clef in R.H.
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat into five
parts: the sixteenth note quintuplet in
2/4. Polyrhythm; five vs. two to the beat
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: pesante and leggero.
C. Bartok's Comments. Lydian Mode. In playing it,
make it droll and witty. Upward scales with augmented
341
fourths add to the colorful effect. Also the rhythmic

scheme. Note the alterations in the downward scales.
Alsc that the process Is reversed from R.H. to L.H.
Should be a good concert number or encore.
D
* Suggestions. See BR 2:1:3.
No. 131. FOURTHS

A. Technique.
tenuto.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms; legato vs. staccato.
4. INTERVAL PLAYING. In each hand. Chord playing
in the Ossia.
5. EMBELLISHMENTS. Slow tremolos in each hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. G b key signature. Mixed accidentals.
Clef changes in each hand.
2. EXPRESSION,
(a) Dynamics.
C
' Bartok's Comments. Contrasts of fourths in G13
major and E13 minor. Good example of duo-tonality. Has
pentatonic feeling. Accentuation very positive and must
be played clearly. Take your choice at the end - which-
ever preferable.
D. Suggestions. Check the part-playing in M. 35-40.
See BR 1:1:3.
342
No . 132. MAJOR SECONDS BROKEN AND TOGETHER

A. Technique.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: ______________ vs. espresslvo.
4. FINGERING PROBLEMS. First finger R.H. on two
keys.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Treble clef In each hand. Mixed
accidentals. The solid line (between
staves) which indicates that the R.H.
plays the melody note in the lower staff.
2. RHYTHM. Change of time; 9/8 and 6/8 as com-
pound meters.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: smorzando = growing slower and
softer.
^ Bartok's Comments. Study of chromaticism with
a feeling of G_ major. Hovering tonality. An exotic
effect can be produced.
D. Suggestions. The hand contractions required may
prove awkward at first, but use the composer's fingerings
to insure a smooth ______________.
No. 133. SYNCOPATION

A. Technique.
343
3. POSITION. Hand crossings: each hand over and

under.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes in each hand. Bass
clef leger-llne notes below the staff.
Mixed accidentals.
Syncopation.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: pesante, accents, pp-ff.
c
- Bartok's Comments. Difficult rhythmic patterns
require close study. Not for average pupil. Key of G.
Good preparation for Prokoviev.
D. Suggestions. Note the held tones in M. 14-17
(R.H.). See BR 1:4:1.
No. 134. STUDIES IN DOUBLE NOTES (l) (2) (3)
A. Technique.
(a) Dynamic Contrast: crescendo vs. diminuendo.
3. INTERVAL PLAYING|. In each hand.
4. EMBELLISHMENTS. Double-note tremolos and grace
notes in each hand.
B. Musicianship.
in each hand.
344
2. EXPRESSION,
(a) Dynamics.
c
* Bartok's Comments. Excellent preparation for all
fast double-note playing. Could be practiced in different
rhythms, staccato, etc. Very valuable to develop a firm
hold upon the keys.
D. Suggestions. The third study can be used for the
practice of hand Independence: legato vs. staccato and
dotted eighth-sixteenth note patterns vs. eighth note
patterns as written. Errata: in m. 2 a natural sign should
be inserted before g of the interval appearing on b. 4 in
each staff.
No. 135. PERPETUUM MOBILE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato.
2. INTERVAL PLAYING. In "each hand.
3. POSITION. Hand crossing: L.H. over.
4. EMBELLISHMENTS. Double-note tremolos in each
hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes In L.H. Mixed acci-
dentals .
2. EXPRESSION.
(a) Terms: repet. ad Infinitum = repeat in-
definitely.
C
' Bartok's Comments. Excellent technical work in
chromatic double notes in repetition. Altered key of F.
345
D. Suggestions. Perpetuum Mobile = perpetual motion

= a piece which proceeds from beginning to end in the
same rapid motion. A two-piano transcription of this
piece appears as no. 3 in Seven Pieces from "Mikrokosmos."
No. 136. WHOLE-TONE SCALE

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato and espressivo ^dolce, cantablle).
(a) Counterpoint.
hand.
5. POSITION. Hand crossings: R.H. and L.H. over
and under.
6. EMBELLISHMENTS. Five-note turn in L.H.
B. Musicianship.
in each hand.
2. RHYTHM. The eighth note quintuplet in 2/4.
Change of time.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: change o'f tempo. Marcato.
(b) Dynamics.
(c) Phrasing: separating signs. Canonic
rondo-variation form.
(d) Terms: Stringendo = growing faster and
louder. 1
C. Bartok's Comments. Whole-tone scales of C_ and A
in juxtaposition, worked out in many other keys, in
changed rhythms and tempos. These devices are used to
346
produce color.
D. Suggestions. Note the separating signs which
interrupt the legato in M. 34 and 40. Observe that the
quintuplet in m. 79 is to be played sempre piu lento.
See BR 2:5:1.
No. 137. UNISON

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, legatissimo, tenuto, and
espressivo. ..
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. espressivo.
4. POSITION. The hands two, three, and four
octaves apart. Playing in the extreme
ranges of the keyboard.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Leger-line notes in each clef.
Clef changes In each hand. D key signature.
7/8.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: lunga = long = the tone should be
- held (here) for at least double the
value of the note. Change of tempo.
(b) Dynamics: to ff.
(c) Terms: ma sonora = but with a sonorous
or ringing tone.
(d) Phrasing: in ternary form.
C. Bartok's Comments. Excellent practice for reading,
making quick changes of position, meter changes, clef
signs, and style (dynamics and touch). Key of D.
347
D
- Suggestions. Legatissimo (M. 50-64) "is an
exaggerated legato; when every tone is held over a little
into the beginning of the next one. It can be perfected
by using the half-pedal." Take notice of the alternation
and combination of espressivo and legato touch-forms in
M. 39-49.
No. 138. BAGPIPE

A. Technique.
tenuto.
2 ., HAND INDEPENDENCE.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: non-legato vs. legato,
staccato, and tenuto.
(b) Dynamic Contrast: vs. mf, > vs. and mf.
(c) Accompanying Figurations: in L.H.
hand.
4. PEDALLING. Optional use of the damper.
6. EMBELLISHMENTS. Three and five-note trills
in rapid tempo (R.H. only) .
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes In L.H.
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat into two, five,
six, and seven parts: the quarter note as
the pulse unit in 2/4 and 3/4. The six-
teenth note triplet, quintuplet, sextuplet,
and septuplet. Polyrhythm: five vs. two.
3. EXPRESSION.
(b) Dynami c s.
348
(c) Phrasing: in ternary form.

c
- Bartok's Comments. Use of all three pipes: chanter,
tonic and dominant, and the drone. Interesting division
of the pipes. Squeaky effects are typical. It never ends
normally because the air is going out of the pipes.
Accent first beat of the five-note groupings.
D. Suggestions. M. 1-27 exemplify Bartok's use of
non-coinciding meters; the L.H. is in 3/8 and the R.H. is
in 2/4 meter. ' The pipes are divided as follows: soprano
voice = chanter, alto voice = drone pipe, and the bass and
tenor voices = the tonic-dominant pipe. Be sure that a_
is held down in the last two measures (R.H.). Errata: in
m. 3 the staccato dot under the eighth note in the treble
clef should be deleted. See BR 1:2:3.
No. 139. MERRY ANDREW

A. Technique.
and dotted tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. staccato,
non-legato, tenuto, and dotted tenuto;
non-legato and tenuto vs. staccato.
(c) Dynamic Contrast: A vs. f_.
4. INTERVAL, CHORD, AND BROKEN CHORD PLAYING. In
ea'ch hand.
5. POSITION. Interlocked hands. Hand crossings:
R.H. and L.H. over.
349

B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes In R.H., treble clef
In L.H.
2. EXPRESSION,
(a) Dynamics.
C. Bartok's Comments. Changes in key and tonality
create a gay, droll effect. Major against minor in certain
places. Key of C_.
D. Suggestions. See BR 2:1:4.
350 VOLUME VI
Nos. 140-153
351
No. 140. FREE VARIATIONS

A. Technique.
tenu'tb'.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: non-legato vs. tenuto
and staccato, legato vs. ______________.
(c) Dynamic Contrasts: p vs. mf, A vs. f_.
each hand.
5. PEDALLING. Use of the half-depressed damper.
6. PASSAGE-WORK. Rapid scalar.passage in R.H.
B. Musicianship.
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat into eight
in 2/4. Change of time: 2/4, 3/8, 4/8,
5/8, 6/8, 7/8, 8/8, and 9/8. Syncopation.
9/8 as compound triple meter and as
divisive rhythm (4+3+2). 7/8 as 4+3 and
8/8 as 3+3+2. 8 ~8~
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; change of tempo. II dopplo piu
lento = twice as slow. Stretto =
quicker.
(b) Dynamics: intenso = with intensity, stress.
(c) Terms: lugubre = mournfully. Strepitoso =
noisily.
(d) Phrasing: in rondo-variation form.
352
C. Bartok's Comments. Ingenious variety of treat-

ment. Change of mood, change of tempo and style. Excel-
lent technical and rhythmic materials.
D
- Suggestions. Observe the separating sign (comma)
in m. 12. Begin m. 44 at M.M. J = 80. See BR 1:3:3.
No. l4l. SUBJECT AND REFLECTION

A. Technique.
tenuto. ]l
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. tenuto.
3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing in each hand,
4. POSITION. Crossing of the hands: R.H. under.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes in each hand. Leger-
line notes above the staff in the treble
and below the staff in the bass clef.
Mixed accidentals.
7/8. Syncopati on.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: change of tempo. Vivacissimo =
very quick.
(b) Phrasing; in rondo-variation form.
(c) Dynamics: accents.
C. Bartok's Comments. Subject clearly defined and
arranged In changing meters, keys, and styles of tonality.
Tonality is B b . I think of this as being mirrored in
water: as the water becomes disturbed the reflection be-
comes distorted.
353
D. Suggestions. Observe the slight pause indicated

by the separating sign in m. 22. Errata; in m. 21 a
staccato dot should be placed below the third of the three
barred eighth notes in the L.H. In m. 15 the finger num-
ber 3 in the treble clef should be positioned above the
soprano voice. In m. 74 the finger numbers i In the treble
clef should be inverted. See BR 2:4:3.
No. 142. FROM THE DIARY OF A FLY

A. Technique.
tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
(c) Dynamic Contrast; _sf_ vs. mf.
hand. Combined touch-forms; in M. 44-45
the soprano voice is non-legato and the
alto voice Is staccato. In M. 44-46 the
tenor voice is staccato and the bass voice
is non-legato. In M. 46-48 the soprano
voice is tenuto and the alto voice is
staccato. In M. 47-48 the tenor voice is
staccato' and the bass voice is tenuto.
Dynamic contrast: in M. 42-43 the alto
voice is marcatissimo and in M. 44-48 the
soprano voice Is similarly accented. In
m. 43 the tenor voice is marcatissimo
and in the next measure it is marcato at
the same time the bass voice is marcatis-
simo. In M. 45-48 the bass voice is
marcatissimo.
4. POSITION. Interlocked hands. Hand crossings:
R.H. and L.H. over and under.
5.' CHORD PLAYING. In each hand.
6. EMBELLISHMENTS. Trills and tremolos in each
hand.
354
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Mixed accidentals. Treble clef in
each hand.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; change of tempo. Agitato = agitated,
poco stringendo = a little acceleration.
(b) Dynamics: sff, sf, /\ , > . ________________.
(c) Terms: lamentoso = In a melancholy, sad
style; con gioia = joyfully.
(d) Phrasing: in ternary form.
C. Bartok's Comments. I wanted to depict the desperate
sound of a fly's buzz,' when getting into a cobweb. The
fly is telling the story as he writes in his diary. He
was buzzing about and didn't see the spider web. Then he
is caught in the web (Agitato: "Woe, a cobwebi") but he
manages to get himself free before he is eaten and he
escapes. A happy ending (con gioia). Play it delicately,
close to the keys. Slight use of wrist in staccato, it
must be flexible.
D. Suggestions. Take notice of the slight pause in
m. 59 and the replacement of fingers in L.H. of M. 72-73.
Note also the ties In M. 98-102 (R.H.). See BR 1:3:2.
No. 143. DIVIDED ARPEGGIOS

A. Technique.
and espressivo.
(a) Counterpoint.
355

4. CHORD AND BROKEN CHORD PLAYING. In each hand.
5. POSITION. Hand crossings: L.H. and R.H. over
and under.
7. PASSAGE-WORK. Rapid arpeggios (without passing
of the fingers) in each hand.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes In each hand. Mixed
accidentals. Treble clef leger-line notes
above and below the staff.
2. RHYTHM. Change of time: 2/4, 1/4. Syncopation.
3 . EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; change of tempo. Un poco stentato =
retarding a little.
(b) Dynamics: mezza voce = mf.
C. Bartok's Comments. This is very difficult to
play and understand'for average pupils. The themes must
be introduced clearly and with great care for rhythmic
accuracy. Only for unusual pupils.
D. Suggestions. Use espressivo touch in M. 27-28
only. The arpeggios are broken chords in five finger po-
sitions which do not require passing of the fingers.
Errata: in m. 38 the meter signature should be 1/4, not
1/2. See BR 2:2:1.
No. 144. MINOR SECONDS, MAJOR SEVENTHS

A. Technique.
and portamento (portato).
356
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms; tenuto vs. dotted
tenuto and portamento.
3. FINGER INDEPENDENCE. Part-playing In each hand.
each hand.
5. POSITION. Interlocked hands. Hand crossing:
L.H. over.
6. PASSAGE-WORK. Scalar and arpeggio passages
in each hand.
7. PEDALLING. Indicated and optional use of the
damper.
8. FINGERING PROBLEMS. '
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes in each hand. Thirty-
second notes and double-dotted eighth and
quarter notes. Mixed accidentals.
2. RHYTHM. Subdivision of the beat into eight
in 4/4. Change of time: 4/4, 2/4 and 3/2.
Syncopation.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo; change of tempo. Doppio movimento
= twice as fast.
(b) Dynamics: intenso.
(c) Terms: mesto = pensive, melancholy.
C. Bartok's Comments. This is very difficult and
t
requires a pupil who has great control. The sevenths are
bells and they emphasize the melody.
D. Suggestions. Note the decrescendo that takes place
towards each dotted eighth note (m. Iff.) . In m. 38 the
357
L.,H. crosses over to play d. an, octave higher than the

leger-line d in the R.H. In m. 4l the e natural and e_b
played by the L.H. should be released on b. 3. In M.
41-42 observe the tied notes in the R.H. See BR 2:3:1.
No. 145. CHROMATIC INVENTION

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Non-legato and tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint. 1-
(c) Dynamic Contrasts: > , A , and sf.
3. INTERVAL PLAYING. Octaves in each hand.
4. POSITION. Hand crossings: R.H. and L.H. over,
L.H. under.
5. ENSEMBLE PLAYING. Parts "a" and "b" together
as a piece for two pianos.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes in each hand. Mixed
accidentals..
3. EXPRESSION.
(â) Tempo: accelerando sin al fine = Increas-
ing in speed up to VEe end.
(b) Dynamics: fff = extremely loud.
(c) Terms: con 8 (ad lib.) = with octaves (if
the perTbrmer wishes to do so).
C. Bartok's Comments. Versions "a" and "b" can be
played separately or together on two pianos.
D. Suggestions. Errata: In m. 2, part "b," a natural
358
sign should be inserted before the d in the bass clef,

b. 4. In m. 7 the eighth rest appearing on b. 1 in the
treble clef should be replaced with a quarter rest.
The two-piano transcription of this piece in Seven
Pieces from "Mikrokosmos" (no. 6) contains part "a" as
the primo and part "b" as the secondo. See REMINGTON
R19994.
No. 146. OSTINATO

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, tenuto, dotted
tenuto, staccato, and staccatissimo.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. non-legato
and ______________. Non-legato vs. tenuto,
dotted tenuto, staccato, and sta"cc"atls-
simo.
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: > , A. , and sf_. .
(c) Accompanying Figurations: L.H. only.
hand.
Also octaves, and chords with the span
of an octave.
6. POSITION. Hand crossings: L.H. and R.H. over.
7. PASSAGE-WORK. Scalar passages In each hand.
B. Musicianship.
accidentals. Leger-line notes in each
clef.
359
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Tempo: change of tempo. Non accelerando
(non ace . ) , meno vivo.
(b) Dynamics: leggero.
0* Bartok1s Comments. 'Ostinato; a ground bass which
recurs obstinately throughout the composition. Has a
definite Oriental feeling. Dorian Mode with alterations.
This is not actually a traditional ostinato because the
traditional ostinato was a repeated theme. Also suggests
Bulgarian pipes on page twenty-seven (m. 32ff.).
( D. Suggestions. Take notice of the staccatissimo
marks in the R.H. of M. 142 and 145. In m. 154, b. 1,
the octave of d_ can be divided between the hands. In
m. 92 the chord is to be played subito piano ( sub.),
"suddenly soft." A transcription of this piece appears
as no. 7 in Seven Pieces from "Mikrokosmos." Although
the piece is listed on the back jacket of Bartok's re-
cording of the Mikrokosmos (Columbia ML4419), it does not
appear in the record itself.
No. 147. MARCH

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, tenuto, staccato,
and staccatissimo.
(a) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. non-legato,
tenuto, and staccato" T"enuto vs.
non-legato and staccato.
360
(b) Dynamic Contrasts: A and sf.

hand.
6. PASSAGE-WORK. Octaves in each hand.
7. EMBELLISHMENTS. Octave trill in R.H.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Mixed accidentals. Clef changes in
R.H.
2. RHYTHM. Change of time: 4/4, 5/4, 3/2. Sub-
division of the beat into two, three, and
four parts: the quarter note as the pulse
unit in 4/4.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: sff and other accents. ________
(b) Terms: sonoro.
C. Bartok's Comments. Repetition in L.H. (fourths
and fifths) creates a grotesque effect - like a march of
primitive peoples.
D. Suggestions. This piece requires quick hand cross-
ings and judicious use of the damper pedal. The solo
Sostenuto pedal can be used In M. 54-55. Note the finger-
ings in M. 31-32 and that f& is tied over the next three
bars. The playing of chromatic octaves can be undertaken
here. In m. 26 the separating, sign interrupts the legato
(L.H.). See BR 2:2:2.
.361
No. 148. SIX DANCES IN BULGARIAN RHYTHM (l)

A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, tenuto, dotted
tenuto, staccato, portamento, and
espressivo (dolce) .
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. non-
legato, staccato, tenuto, dotted
tenuto, and porTTamento. Dotted
tenuto vs. portamento. Staccato and
non-legato vs. tenuto. Espresslvo
vs. legato, dotted tenuto and
portamento.
(c) Dynamic Contrast: > vs. A .
hand.
* 4. INTERVAL, CHORD, AND BROKEN CHORD PLAYING.
Octaves in each hand and tenths in L.H.
Arpeggiated triads in 'L.H. Chords with
the span of an octave and a ninth.
5. POSITION. Interlocked hands: L.H. under.
6. PASSAGE-WORK. Scalar passages In each hand.
7. EMBELLISHMENTS. Grace notes, turns, and the
Pralltriller (inverted mordent) in R.H.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef changes in each hand. The in-
verted mordent. Mixed accidentals.
2. RHYTHM. Additive rhythm: 4+2+3. Syncopation.
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: rinf. = rinforzato = a sudden
increase in loudness (in this short
passage).
(b) Phrasing; in variation form.
362
C. Bartok's Comments. Hexachord in Dorian Mode, re-

peated in the left hand, which never goes to the octave
in range. Changes in accentuation typical of Bulgarian
rhythm. The phrase dictated the meter sign, because of
accentuation. Odd-numbered groups heavily accented.
D. Suggestions. The inverted mordents (M. 38, 48,
and 52) are comprised of the indicated notes and their
diatonic upper neighbors in the rhythmic form of two
thirty-second notes and a sixteenth note. Do not play
them as sixteenth note triplets or as grace notes in
anticipation of the beat. Pupils with small hands should
play the ninth (m. 55) and the tenths (M. 33 and 5?) as
broken intervals. The chord on b. 7 of m. 55 and the
octaves on B. 8 and 9 of m. 58 can be shared between the
hands. The ascending scalar passages in the L.H. of
M. 4ff. can be fingered: 1-4-3-2-1-2-1, and the soprano
voice in m. 34 can be played: 3-4-3-4-5-4-5.
Errata: in m. 13 the fingering numbers 1-2-1 should
be placed above the first three notes of the group of
six barred sixteenth notes in the treble clef. See BR
1:4:2.
No. 149. SIX DANCES IN BULGARIAN RHYTHM (2)

A. Technique.
and dotted tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
363
(b) Combined Touch-Forms; legato vs. staccato

and dotted tenuto. Non-legato vs.
tenuto.
(c) Dynamic Contrasts: > vs. and A . Sff
vs. A . N vs. mf.
hand.
5. PEDALLING. Optional use of the damper.
7. EMBELLISHMENTS. Slow trill in R.H.
B. Musicianship.
2. RHYTHM. Additive rhythm; 2+2+3.
8
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: martellato = hammering = a
percussive staccato touch played
forte or louder. Usually requires
the use of the forearm to achieve
the indicated dynamic level.
C. Bartok's Comments. The rhythmic figure in the
first measure is very important - maintained throughout.
D. Suggestions. See BR 1:4:2.
No. 150. SIX DANCES IN BULGARIAN RHYTHM (3) <
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, tenuto, staccato,
~- and staccatlsslmo.
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. tenuto and
non-legato. Tenuto vs. non-legato.
364
(c) Dynamic Contrast: A vs. f_ and > vs. .

(d) Accompanying Figurations: in L.H.
hand. Dynamic contrast: A in the bass
voice (M. 37, 4l).
4. INTERVAL PLAYING. Legato sixths in L.H.
5. POSITION. Hand crossing; R.H. under.
6. EMBELLISHMENTS. Grace note in L.H.
7. FINGERING PROBLEMS..
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. Clef change in L.H. Mixed acci-
dentals .
2. RHYTHM. Additive rhythm: 2+3 (5/8).
8'
3. EXPRESSION.
(b) Dynamics; marcato and leggero.
(c) Phrasing: canonic form M. 58-78.
C. Bartok's Comments. 5/8 time. Very much like
other things written before it.
D. Suggestions. Play the leggero sections without
emphasis, and interrupt the legato (as indicated by the
comma) between M. 92 and 93. The use of the damper pedal
will be required in M. 31-41. See BR 1:5:2.
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato, non-legato, tenuto, and dotted
tenuto.
(a) Counterpoint.
365

and dotted tenuto.
Octaves in R.H.
4'. POSITION. Interlocked hands; R.H. over.
5. PASSAGE-WORK. Chordal passages in L.H.
6. EMBELLISHMENTS. Grace notes and fast trills
in each hand.
7. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Repeated notes.
B. Musicianship.
'l. NOTATION. Clef changes in each hand. Mixed
accidentals. The trill sign.
~~~8
3. EXPRESSION.
(b) Dynamics.
(c) Phrasing; in variation form.
c
- Bartok's Comments. Very much in the style of
Gershwin. Gershwin's tonality, rhythm, and color. Amer-
ican folk song feeling. Moderate tempo but vital, crisp,
and accented.
D>
Suggestions. Bartok, in his recording of this
piece, accents each quarter note of the melody (beginning
m. l). Note the separating sign (comma) in m. 50 and
the fermata between the last two bars. See BR 1:5:3.
A. Technique.
tenuto.
366
(a) Counterpoint.
(b) Combined Touch-Forms: legato vs. non-legato,
staccato, and ______________.
hand.
5. POSITION. Hand crossings: R.H. and L.H. over.
6. EMBELLISHMENTS. Slow trills In both hands and
fast trills in R.H.
B. Musicianship.
accidentals..
2. RHYTHM. Additive rhythm: 2+2+2+3. Syncopation.
8
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: ________________.
C. Bartok's Comments. Combination of staccato and
legato. Mixed key, ending in A. Rhythm - strong accents.
D. Suggestions. L.H. sopra in M. 5-10 and R.H.
sopra in M. 11-15. Errata: in m. 11 the chord on the
third beat in the R.H. should read -.-g, not -J_-a.
See BR 1:6:2.
No-: 153- SIX DANCES IN BULGARIAN RHYTHM (6)
A. Technique.
1. TOUCH. Legato and non-legato playing.
(a) Counterpoint.
367
(c) Dynamic Contrasts: A V s . f_ and _____ vs. f.

Marc. (marcato) vs. f_.
hand.
Octave and broken octave playing in each
hand.
6. FINGERING PROBLEMS. Repeated notes.
B. Musicianship.
1. NOTATION. \ Clef changes in each hand. Mixed
accidentals.
_5
3. EXPRESSION.
(a) Dynamics: marcato, marcatissimo.
(b) Phrasing: canonic writing M. 25-29. In
ternary form. x
(c) Terms: strepltoso = noisily.
C. Bartok's Comments. Polytonal - chords against
organ point. Key of E. Especially third group of each
measure accented. Bring out accents in left hand of m.
9ff. Buzzing effect in m. 69ff.
D<
Suggestions. In m. 49 middle _c should be played
with the first finger of the R.H. The repeated notes in
M. 81-82 can be fingered: 3-2-1-3-2-1-2-1, 5-2-1-3-2-1-2-1
Avoid accentuation In the leggero section (m. 75ff.).
Errata: fingering numbers should be placed below note
heads in the bass clef of M. 43-45 as follows; m. 4*3 -
368
3 on b. 4, 2 on b. 7; m. 44 - 2 on b. 7; m. 45 - 3
B. 4 and 7. See BR 1:6:3-

Bela Bartok and A Guide To The 'Mikrokosmos' (Volumes One and Two)

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Bela Bartok and A Guide To The 'Mikrokosmos' (Volumes One and Two)

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Copyrighted

BELA BARTOK AND A GUIDE TO THE MIKROKOSMOS

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the

I hereby guarantee that no p a r t of the document which

BELA BARTOK AND A GUIDE TO THE MIKROKOSMOS

Submitted in partial fulfillment of

It was the purpose of this investigation to prepare

its being an instrument capable of producing sounds ranging

6. Although forty-five per cent of the pieces and

7. The tables and figures in the chapter on musical

Some years ago the Bela Bartok Archive was established

I take this opportunity to express my deep gratitude

In conclusion, I wish to acknowledge again the help

Woodmere, New York

Purpose of the Investigation and Statement of the Problem

It was not the purpose of this investigation to educe

understandings requisite for interpretation of the

Significance of the Problem

1. Anonymous, "Bela Bartok's 'Mikrokosmos'," Tempo (New

written in considerable detail. In addition, he and

In apparent contradiction to this statement of the

1. Zongora Iskola. Budapest: Rozsavfllgyi es Tarsa,

1. The Mikrokosmos drafts include Sketches, Intermediary

Jttrgen Uhde's handbook parallels the investigator's

As regards an interpretation of Bartok's instructions

1. Bartok Mikrokosmos Spielanweisungen und Erlauterungen

correspondence1 and interviews.

Procedure in Collecting Data

First witness reports referring to Bartok's teaching

1. Ditta Bartok (the composer's widow), Ivan Engel, Storm

The study made of Bartok's- unpublished documents

The primary sources were studied to determine Bartok's

entered in appropriate columns. Analyses of the Mikro-

The next step was the construction of tables, graphs,

Sources concerned with the playing and teaching of

the Mikrokosmos in particular and the piano in general

Projection of the Hypothesis

hypothesis and, what is perhaps of greater significance,

To commemorate the end of the first fifty years of

1. Etude, January, 1951* pp. 9-10.

The composer also has been cited as "taking first place

The youthful Bartok was, first of all, a devoted

1. Denjis Dille, "The Life of Bela Bartok," A Memorial

Emperor, Francis Joseph, called on Czarist Russia to put

In 1902, his last year at the Academy, Bartok began

1. C.A. Macartney, Hungary, pp. 88-96.

collection of Hungarian, Rumanian, and Slovakian peasant

1. Zoltan Kodaly, op. cit., p. 1.

the theater. Among his better-known compositions are

1. According to the chronological listing compiled by the

subjects, including: "Comparative Music-Folklore," "A.

Bart6k's career was characterized by a life-long

1. Halsey Stevens, The Life and Music of Bela Bartok,

United States on October 29, 1940 with the understanding

1. Erno Balogh, "Bartok in America," The- Long Player

A little more than a year before his death in

Bartok was ill and was composing at that time.

1. Then President of the Piano Teacher's Congress of New

In December, 1944 Bartok's'Concerto for Orchestra

1. Halsey Stevens, op. cit., p. 102.

Bartok assumes more and more a major position in the

1. Norman Demuth, Musical Trends in the Twentieth Century,

Bela Bartok was born on March 25, l88l, in Hungary,