Why are pianists the only ones with specific labels - collaborative or accompanist - when the folks we make music with are not labeled other than their instrument? It would be one thing if the label gave us more respect and at least equal consideration, but it only serves to put us in a lower class. We are pianists and coaches and chamber players and soloists. Why do we need additional labels? The mind set of the public won’t change until we do. Thanks for this article!
Agreed! I think “collaborative pianist” is just a fancier-sounding label for “second class.” And I don’t want to be called a “collab,” either. I mean, if you’re a pop star who pretends to design clothes, then you can have a “collab” with Target. Or a famous athlete can have a “collab” with a wine label. Along with “accompanist, it’s another term that means nothing. I am a pianist, dammit!
I am one of the few people that usually doesn't mind the word accompanist, although I would prefer to just be called a pianist. When you think about it, the root of the word accompagnare means "to go with." When I accompany somebody, I go with them somewhere. I think that's a perfect description of what we do--to go along with someone-- although it seems nowadays it has a connotation of "to follow or be subservient and be somehow less than"--but that isn't really what the word means. Somehow the modern connotation of the word has turned into something many see as demeaning. Conversely, just a few weeks ago I played a last minute concert fundraiser for a local opera company--duets and arias. During the dinner, another pianist played cocktail piano, which everyone in the room ignored, and I noticed with bemusement that he was listed in the program as "pianist," and my picture was right under his, listed as "accompanist." ha! That one DID hurt, somehow! And, now, I'm wondering,--what is worse? To play jazz piano and get top billing but have absolutely no one listen to you--or to be labeled "accompanist" but have people actually listen because you are playing with the singers who will not be ignored!
Eileen, you are lucky not to have had that word used *against* you. To control you, to put you down, to deny you equity. When I asked for fair treatment at Brevard back in the day, Henry Janiec said, “Accompanists like you are a dime a dollar.” Or when I asked why I wasn’t in publicity for a big concert, “Because you are only the accompanist.” A businessman on an airplane told me I couldn’t be a professional pianist because I was an accompanist. A singer’s teacher started to tell me what accompanists are supposed to wear and how loudly I could play on her students’ recital—just 2 years ago!!! I could go on and on and on.
This was exactly what I needed to read today. Kathleen, you articulate so well the work we have yet to do. I look forward to your essays - they are beautifully thought provoking. Thank you!
Hence my problem with the title "accompanist." The irony is it's not really even a title, think about that for a moment.
Something else I just realized, or maybe I'm just wondering: we tend to get called "accompanist" by vocalists, yet "pianists" (or whichever instrument we're playing) by other instrumentalists, maybe because we are seen as partners in the production? Has anybody else noticed that?
Why are pianists the only ones with specific labels - collaborative or accompanist - when the folks we make music with are not labeled other than their instrument? It would be one thing if the label gave us more respect and at least equal consideration, but it only serves to put us in a lower class. We are pianists and coaches and chamber players and soloists. Why do we need additional labels? The mind set of the public won’t change until we do. Thanks for this article!
Agreed! I think “collaborative pianist” is just a fancier-sounding label for “second class.” And I don’t want to be called a “collab,” either. I mean, if you’re a pop star who pretends to design clothes, then you can have a “collab” with Target. Or a famous athlete can have a “collab” with a wine label. Along with “accompanist, it’s another term that means nothing. I am a pianist, dammit!
I am one of the few people that usually doesn't mind the word accompanist, although I would prefer to just be called a pianist. When you think about it, the root of the word accompagnare means "to go with." When I accompany somebody, I go with them somewhere. I think that's a perfect description of what we do--to go along with someone-- although it seems nowadays it has a connotation of "to follow or be subservient and be somehow less than"--but that isn't really what the word means. Somehow the modern connotation of the word has turned into something many see as demeaning. Conversely, just a few weeks ago I played a last minute concert fundraiser for a local opera company--duets and arias. During the dinner, another pianist played cocktail piano, which everyone in the room ignored, and I noticed with bemusement that he was listed in the program as "pianist," and my picture was right under his, listed as "accompanist." ha! That one DID hurt, somehow! And, now, I'm wondering,--what is worse? To play jazz piano and get top billing but have absolutely no one listen to you--or to be labeled "accompanist" but have people actually listen because you are playing with the singers who will not be ignored!
Eileen, you are lucky not to have had that word used *against* you. To control you, to put you down, to deny you equity. When I asked for fair treatment at Brevard back in the day, Henry Janiec said, “Accompanists like you are a dime a dollar.” Or when I asked why I wasn’t in publicity for a big concert, “Because you are only the accompanist.” A businessman on an airplane told me I couldn’t be a professional pianist because I was an accompanist. A singer’s teacher started to tell me what accompanists are supposed to wear and how loudly I could play on her students’ recital—just 2 years ago!!! I could go on and on and on.
This was exactly what I needed to read today. Kathleen, you articulate so well the work we have yet to do. I look forward to your essays - they are beautifully thought provoking. Thank you!
Thank you so much!
Kathy, thanks for getting me all worked up at bedtime. 😂😂 Thank you for your writing!
Hence my problem with the title "accompanist." The irony is it's not really even a title, think about that for a moment.
Something else I just realized, or maybe I'm just wondering: we tend to get called "accompanist" by vocalists, yet "pianists" (or whichever instrument we're playing) by other instrumentalists, maybe because we are seen as partners in the production? Has anybody else noticed that?
Believe me, I’ve been called “accompanist” by every kind of instrumentalist!