What to compose?

There have been composers very attentive to pedagogy such as Clementi, but Chopin and Liszt themselves were no less so. Therefore, each has their own "mission" which one hopes will be fulfilled with the pleasure of the interested party. So, as a first thing, I think that a composer must enjoy what they write... the rest, in my opinion, will come naturally

Bestellen wrote:

What to compose does not seem like an outlandishly far-fetched question, because we can also successfully dedicate ourselves to original works, both motivic and variously dissonant, but once the results are achieved and

placed in common listening, what is gained from it.

Posted like this, I would think about what the audience gains in the sense that, in the end, pieces are directed toward the audience; if we exclude the remunerative aspect, what would remain? Precisely the composer/performer/audience relationship. In the case of teaching, since you mention it, I would say the teacher/student relationship.

Teaching also has its difficulties; proposing new studies (I imagine for piano) to improve which aspects or to cover which areas that would be "uncovered"? I ask this because I am not a pianist, so the issue could even be interesting.

Bestellen wrote:

Perhaps professional authors possess compositional dams, systems as formidable in technique, ability, and experience, capable of producing prodigious lakes, waterfalls, and rapids.

Whatever the purpose of composing may be, technique is never a limit. The limit lies in writing pieces at the service of technique, whereas technique itself should be at the service of Music.

Another aspect of the matter is: who knows how to evaluate whether what we think could be useful for the study of technique, for example pianistic (but also composition), in reality is not, or at least is not necessary given the treatises in circulation? It is not very different from writing in any case despite the numerous compositions from which we can draw from the current and non-current repertoire, but in part the purpose changes, at least a little. One can write a piece for the pleasure of doing so and at the same time identify (not yet for me) a (presumed) utility for those who might study it, but ultimately is it not a "variation" of the proposal (intention perhaps is better) of one's own way of composing? If publication arrives, the didactic "purpose" (for those who can afford it) is achieved, at least on paper (double meaning), but one still gains that visibility that perhaps one would not have if the pieces were proposed as works without "that" purpose. This is one aspect, but there are others.

It also occurs to me that the purposes change over time; who has ever heard a vocal piece by Bach during the Mass? By now they are just concert pieces... and that's it.

Dante wrote:

It also occurs to me that the purposes change over time; who has ever heard a vocal piece by Bach during the Mass? By now they are simply concert pieces... and that's it.

..and indeed Bach's entire keyboard oeuvre is "didactic"

And not only for keyboards.

I have written a couple of works for educational purposes, self-published, and they are probably the most used things. Another use could derive from concert performances of suitable mature music, but in my case it happens less often, although a female colleague performed one of my pieces in Japan. Other performances by my esteemed colleagues, I would say that is enough. Translating some lovely songs for elementary piano is fine, I believe that is the case.

As for video recordings of one's own music, that is also fine, but they cost effort, fatigue, and money.

What to compose? Simple: if we have work obligations, errands, etc., compose what the client wants, trying to squeeze in as much of ourselves as possible without dissatisfying anyone (neither the client nor ourselves); if one has no obligations or commissions, compose what we like and it doesn't matter if someone does or has done things greater or better than ours, it can be a stimulus to improve.

I have friends who "are forced" to write very banal things or to sing songs they loathe, but for market reasons much larger than them, if they want to stay in a certain circle, they MUST do so. It is a choice; in my opinion, it's not important to try to please at all costs, it is more important to express oneself (it's a cliché, I know, but perhaps it is also a truth)...

Of course, it is important to express oneself. Personally, I have grown a bit tired, and now I am working on my third book (textbook). Music only occupies a part of it, especially since they will be predominantly aphorisms and short thoughts on general humanistic topics.

@Bestellen, it is nonetheless a different and no less valid path of personal expression; I agree with you on also contemplating the creative approach based on thoughts and reflections.