Musical Authorship from Schütz to Bach by Stephen Rose (review)
Daniel R. Melamed
{"title":"Musical Authorship from Schütz to Bach by Stephen Rose (review)","authors":"Daniel R. Melamed","doi":"10.1353/bach.2020.0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Stephen Rose has contributed a fine new volume to Cambridge University Press’s series Musical Performance and Reception. Rose presents the book as treating the term and concept “musical author” and “attitudes towards authorship” in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. Each of its six chapters engages with “authorship,” examining it from various points of view (models of creativity, dialogues between individuality and authority, signs of the author’s presence in printed music, ownership of music, the regulation of Lutheran church music, and the experience of music in performance). From my perspective, though, the book’s most valuable contribution is to use authorship to frame many central questions in the study of seventeenth-century German music: What changed so strikingly around 1650? Why did the publication of printed music decline so steeply? How did musicians conceptualize the creation of music? What is communicated by portraits of famous musicians? Rose provides both an investigation of authorship in the period and—even more usefully—an innovative and fruitful starting point for understanding the musical culture of the time. The book’s approach is nicely encapsulated in the introduction: “The present study complements previous work by probing the discourses and economic practices surrounding musical authorship in the seventeenth century” (7). First, the book does complement other scholarship explicitly; Rose frequently positions his work alongside or sometimes as a corrective to older research. This is helpful in understanding the work’s context, but also occasionally risks burying the study’s own truly original insights and its rethinking of old problems. Second, “discourses” are central—the principal materials of the book are writings from the period, and here Rose is in impressive control. His use and command of primary sources shows his deep immersion in contemporary writings; every reference one might anticipate is there, alongside a trove that even experts might not know. This puts the book’s arguments on a convincing footing. Third, this is very much a book about “economic practices.” Rose puts a high value on musical creation as commerce, and on the functioning of the market BACH: Journal of the Riemenschneider Bach Institute, Vol. 51, No. 2, 2020 Copyright © 2020 Baldwin Wallace University, Berea, OH","PeriodicalId":42367,"journal":{"name":"BACH","volume":"51 1","pages":"295 - 305"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BACH","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/bach.2020.0013","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MUSIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Stephen Rose has contributed a fine new volume to Cambridge University Press’s series Musical Performance and Reception. Rose presents the book as treating the term and concept “musical author” and “attitudes towards authorship” in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. Each of its six chapters engages with “authorship,” examining it from various points of view (models of creativity, dialogues between individuality and authority, signs of the author’s presence in printed music, ownership of music, the regulation of Lutheran church music, and the experience of music in performance). From my perspective, though, the book’s most valuable contribution is to use authorship to frame many central questions in the study of seventeenth-century German music: What changed so strikingly around 1650? Why did the publication of printed music decline so steeply? How did musicians conceptualize the creation of music? What is communicated by portraits of famous musicians? Rose provides both an investigation of authorship in the period and—even more usefully—an innovative and fruitful starting point for understanding the musical culture of the time. The book’s approach is nicely encapsulated in the introduction: “The present study complements previous work by probing the discourses and economic practices surrounding musical authorship in the seventeenth century” (7). First, the book does complement other scholarship explicitly; Rose frequently positions his work alongside or sometimes as a corrective to older research. This is helpful in understanding the work’s context, but also occasionally risks burying the study’s own truly original insights and its rethinking of old problems. Second, “discourses” are central—the principal materials of the book are writings from the period, and here Rose is in impressive control. His use and command of primary sources shows his deep immersion in contemporary writings; every reference one might anticipate is there, alongside a trove that even experts might not know. This puts the book’s arguments on a convincing footing. Third, this is very much a book about “economic practices.” Rose puts a high value on musical creation as commerce, and on the functioning of the market BACH: Journal of the Riemenschneider Bach Institute, Vol. 51, No. 2, 2020 Copyright © 2020 Baldwin Wallace University, Berea, OH
音乐作者:斯蒂芬·罗斯(Stephen Rose)
斯蒂芬·罗斯为剑桥大学出版社的《音乐表演与接待》系列贡献了一本精美的新书。罗斯提出这本书作为处理术语和概念“音乐作者”和“对作者的态度”在十七世纪和十八世纪初。它的六个章节中的每一个都涉及“作者”,从不同的角度(创造力的模型,个性与权威之间的对话,作者在印刷音乐中的存在的迹象,音乐的所有权,路德教会音乐的规定,以及音乐在表演中的体验)来检查它。从我的角度来看,这本书最有价值的贡献是用作者的身份来构建17世纪德国音乐研究中的许多核心问题:1650年左右是什么发生了如此惊人的变化?为什么印刷音乐的出版会急剧下降?音乐家是如何将音乐创作概念化的?著名音乐家的肖像传达了什么信息?罗斯不仅提供了对那个时期作者身份的调查,而且更有用的是,为理解那个时代的音乐文化提供了一个创新和富有成效的起点。本书的方法很好地概括在引言中:“目前的研究通过探索17世纪围绕音乐作者的话语和经济实践来补充以前的工作”(7)。首先,这本书确实明确地补充了其他学术研究;罗斯经常将他的研究与旧的研究并列,有时甚至是对旧研究的修正。这有助于理解工作的背景,但有时也有可能掩盖研究本身真正的原创见解和对老问题的重新思考。其次,“论述”是中心——本书的主要材料是那个时期的作品,在这一点上,罗斯的控制力令人印象深刻。他对原始资料的使用和掌握显示了他对当代作品的深刻沉浸;你能想到的每一个参考资料都在那里,还有一个甚至连专家都不知道的宝藏。这使本书的论点有了令人信服的基础。第三,这是一本关于“经济实践”的书。罗斯高度重视音乐创作作为商业,以及市场的运作巴赫:Riemenschneider巴赫研究所杂志,Vol. 51, No. 2, 2020版权©2020鲍德温华莱士大学,伯里亚,OH
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。