Klarinet Archive - Posting 000078.txt from 2001/09

From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: Re: [kl] Mozart K.622
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 10:47:34 -0400

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:40:55 -0700, leeson0@-----.net said:

> If the purpose of an edition is to state what the composer wrote,
> then, by definition, there are no good editions of K. 622. The
> manuscript has been lost since 1801 and, in the final analysis, we
> don't know what Mozart wrote except for a few measures of the opening
> tune. And the only reason we know that is because it is duplicated in
> his catalog of his own music into which he would invariably write an
> incipit of 3 or 4 measures. We also have a pretty good idea of what
> the clarinet part looks like for a piece of the first movement because
> of the manuscript in his hand that rests in Wintherthur, Switzerland,
> but one can just as well argue that that manuscript is not for
> clarinet but for basset horn, so it doesn't count.

No, one can't just as well argue that. I've said this twice before, but
I'm now saying it again more strongly. The first edition, arranged from
Mozart's original, differs very little from the Winterthur manuscript.
That places constraints on what Mozart's original could have been.

> The bottom line is that ALL editions (including Barenreiter's)
> represent an editor's view of how the piece should go. All phrasings,
> articulations, lead ins, dynamics, and even range of the instrument
> are someone's guess.
>
> That does not mean you can't do any of them, but only that none of
> them have any real authority.

But some of them have more authority than others.

You often say, 'well, that's only a matter of opinion'. But some
opinions are more defensible than other opinions. And those opinions
are our best bet at any given time.

Even *science* is merely the best defended opinion. We don't *know*
*anything*.

> So I repeat: there is no good edition of K. 622. Look for something
> that has good page turns and readable print. Nothing else is
> authoritative.

I have to say that I couldn't disagree more. The only good edition is
the Barenreiter. Not authoritative, but the only good one.

Why? Because it's the only one that doesn't *add anything* to the best
evidence we have.

It makes some dubious decisions about octave transpositions within that
minimalist framework, sure. But those decisions are easily reversed, if
you want.

There is a fundamental misunderstanding that underlies all discussion
about these matters, which is the idea that editions of 18th century
music should tell you *how to play it*.

But they shouldn't. No other 'authoritative' Mozart score tries.

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE GMN artist: http://www.gmn.com
tel/fax 01865 553339

.... (C)ontrol (A)lt (B)ye

---------------------------------------------------------------------