Blog # 6: Don't Worry, Beethoven isn't watching ;-)

Reactions to “Urtext” (Slonimsky)

           

            What is right and what is wrong; this is a very troubling distinction to make for anyone. In music, we find ourselves at a consent debate of who’s interoperation is valid. I very much enjoyed the comparisons between different composer’s (i.e. Ives and Rimsky-Horsakov) conversations their editors. In today’s music, when encountering a weird note you have a variety of options to deal with it. I would email the composer if he were alive. If he were of the recently departed, then I would check with different recording. But I feel like this question of correct or wrong notes is the job of an editor to ask. While some composers might have a witty remark to accompany their answer it shouldn’t be a guide to any consensus to dismiss a constructive artistic conversation.

            Reactions to “Early Music” from the Grovemusic Online

             Early Music grows as we move through time. But understanding the context of a piece during its original practice is still very important to any performance. Historical performance rose in important as scholars made “quest” towards authenticity. I’m glad that so many groups emerged from this refocus to early music. It’s a very important distinction to make that early music is equal to new interpretations. Allowing artists to feel open to changing, editing and recreating from source material is needed for today’s music world. Which only harks back to the importance to understanding its historical practice.

Reactions to “Spin Doctors of Early Music”

            I really enjoy how Taruskin framed his point about Early Music within the context of what it is really trying to accomplish. With Taruskin’s ending remark of what Early Music is doing with the recreation of the past, I wonder when that process will encompass music being written today. This idea should allow composers to be from flexible when it comes to the performance of their work. I myself would be happy if anyone was inspired to work to any degree in relation to something I made. Overall this was an enjoyable read from Taruskin. Seeing him have this stance on Early Music when he is such a notable musicologist, with an almost Zen ideology approach giving the notion that everything has its purpose and place. 

Reactions to Composer’s Intent? Get Over It: [Arts and Leisure Desk]

            This was my favorite article from this weeks reading. While I’ve only had a few occasions in which I was blessed with another performance one of my piece. Every time has been a wealth of tweaks and or different way I planned to rehearse a piece. Types of descriptive language will be altered in hopes to better convey a type of texture and balance the piece needs. This all possible by a chance to try something new, I feel like composers need this. If I truly wanted to relive it, I would listen to the recording. But as it is now, I rather have a different spin, for it makes every recording a new treasure. Hopefully this allows players to be a bit more expressive with their interoperation of the music at hand. Even if the idea they have isn’t what the composer had in mind, that collaboration could spark new ideas that will make the performance even more memorable. Needless to say, this article was a very satisfying read.