This is a bit of a professional Lecture/Rant.
A person in a well-appointed (big) orchestral position recently told me he’d never have any respect for a conductor who showed up with a Dover score. (This was while browsing my library that contains quite a few of those). For those of you not familiar, these are inexpensive reprints of older editions (aka 100+ years). They are often the first printed scores we can afford as young musicians. They are not from critical sources, sometimes are admittedly problematic, but are nonetheless quite useable for the most part. This person indicated that only the most expensive critical edition on the podium was acceptable to his mind.
Now, I’m not arguing the validity of critical editions, and I have acquired and used many of those (although their superiority is not always as clear as one might think). I encourage my students to use them, and other sources, to prepare, edit, and mark changes into their personal scores—no matter the edition they choose. These “Urtext” editions are generally well researched and have good credentials and follow good processes in their editing. Plus, the feel (layout and paper) is generally better in these editions.
In preparing music, all musicians tasked with leading performance, from a solo to a Mahler symphony, should utilize as many sources as they can get their hands on, either from libraries or by purchasing them if they have the means to do so. A study of multiple sources provides much fodder for the very important “pondering side” of score study. But no single source can be considered the Rule of Law. Even composer manuscripts have multiple questions (see: Beethoven). In fact, I encourage students to also look at it from “the other direction” if they are using an Urtext edition. I contend there is much to be learned from those older performing editions as well.
All musicians have the RESPONSIBILITY to consider different, well-informed musical decisions. THIS IS WHY WE STUDY MUSIC! Plus, our old markings in those cheaper editions from past study and performances may still be quite useful. (My old solo Bach viola music, in a now-frowned upon edition, is but one example). Perhaps we even may add our own editorial markings that differ from the “biblical sources,” making a clearer expressive/dynamic/articulation/bowing choice and then marking it into those newer expensive editions! Sacrilege? I think not. Even Brahms went to Joachim for bowing suggestions.
What bothers me is not any particular edition. Rather, it’s the idea, seemingly very prevalent now, that the conductor must show up with some sort of secret club card. This means holding the “correct” edition is somehow deemed more impressive than the ACTUAL WORK that has gone into preparing a meaningful musical communication, in other words: the preparation and ability to interpret, inspire and effectively conduct a piece of music.
Judging a conductor by the score they carry onto the podium is a surface judgment, akin to not getting respect unless you pull up in an expensive car (see below). It’s the same trap as when search committees go for the hairstyle or wardrobe instead of the actual content or character of the person holding the baton. But that is an entirely different Lecture/Rant…
Copyright 2022, Robert Baldwin. Posted on Before the Downbeat. 6/9/22
Before the Downbeat 