Klarinet Archive - Posting 000370.txt from 2002/06

From: w7wright@-----.net (William Wright)
Subj: Re: [kl] Schumann's 'Romances'
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 12:36:21 -0400

<><><> I wrote:
I hope the above...

<><> Tony Pay wrote:
...don't you mean, 'below'?

Yes, I do. <obligatory jest about knowing which way is up>

==========

<><> But to produce an edition that differs from the composition
*destroys information* if the differences between the edition and what
the composer wrote aren't made explicit.

Agreed. I *did* misunderstand you.

==========

<><> The case of the Schumann Romances is a sort of half-way-house,
because providing the clarinet part encourages clarinettists to buy them
and play them; whereas telling you that Schumann didn't want them played
on the clarinet (presumably) discourages clarinettists from buying and
playing them. So in a way, the publisher is offending and explaining the
offence at the same time.

This is where the pair of us begin --- emphasis on "begin" because we
can see a fork in the road ahead, but we aren't quite there yet --- this
is where we begin to have a difference of opinion. It's obvious that
an instructor should encourage a student to go in the proper direction,
if there is a clear 'proper direction'; but to what extent does a
publisher or composer play the role or have the obligation of being an
instructor, or of being the defender of a certain point of view?

Cheers,
Bill

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