|
guest54
Guest
|
 |
« on: January 17, 2014, 11:25:24 am » |
|
It may be instructive to compare any well-known musical composition with any well-known poem. The essence of the poem, in its printed form, remains unaltered, whether a small, narrow and unattractive type face is used, or a more carefully prepared and acceptable design. In the same way the essence of the musical composition remains unaltered even when the conditions of performance change: in the one the words remain the same, and in the other the notes remain the same.
When several editions of the poem are compared, small differences are often found; mainly differences of punctuation, but sometimes also "alternative versions" of the text. This situation resembles what we find in the case of various editions of a musical composition. We might think of the task of the editor and printer of the poem as similar to the task of the performer of the musical work. They each strive for accuracy, and where there are differences, they would do well to explain them. If we choose a pleasant performer for a piece of music, it is no more significant than choosing a pleasant type-face and layout for a poem.
It will be observed that there is no place for "interpretation" in that. The "interpreters" about which there has been so much hullabaloo since the time of Liszt and Wagner are really a kind of cuckoo in the nest.
Now poetry may be appreciated in a second form: it may be spoken or recited. This gives rather more scope for interpretation, in that the reciter may vary his or her speed, change his or her tone of voice, flutter his or her eyelashes, and so on. But just as the musical performer will not play a "wrong note," so will the reciter of a poem not substitute a "wrong word."
When we turn from true poetry to the theatre, we find much more liberty, especially with Shakespeare where so much of the text is corrupt. Actors do not seem to have the same concept of faithfulness to the text. And operas are treated in much the same way; vast chunks omitted and passages rewritten.
So, Liszt's desire to insert his own speeds, flourishes, loudnesses, emphases, and so on, where they expressly contradict what is written in the score, seems to have become a widespread one - part of human nature. Performers cannot help inserting themselves into the performance. The B.B.C. does it too, when, assuming some kind of ownership, they chop up compositions and transmit them one movement at a time. But it seems to me that such crude and selfish behaviour shows a less than appropriate respect to the original creators of art-works: the composers or poets.
|
