Round Table: Score Revisions Post-Première

Abstract

What happens to the status and identity of a musical work once it has been performed for the first time? Although compositional revisions are an innate part of the creative process (and are often themselves the basis of critical, musicological archaeology), the practice of further revision once the work has been realized via live performance, printed publication or recorded artefact enters potentially challenging territory. Indeed,Western music history tells of many composers who have been subjected to intense scrutiny for having dared to alter a composition that had entered the canon of musical works. This round table is intended to begin a critical dialogue that invites interrogation of amurky, divisive issue which relates, on the one hand, to the private relationship between composer and musical work, and on the other, to the ecological web of collaborators (performers, producers, administrators, artistic directors, publishers, agents, philanthropists) who are intertwined in bringing a new musical composition to life. Perusing music history, we encounter divergent accounts from the composers themselves regarding the ethics of post-première revision: Judith Bingham believes that there is an element of dishonesty connected with the revision of a score, akin to ‘revising a diary’.1 For many composers, the right to alter works of music is retained in perpetuity. For others, the composition is a ‘gift’ to the performer which, once handed over, should not be revoked. We can add further layers of complexity to the discussion when drawing a distinction between large-scale works, such as those written for the stage or orchestral platform, and chamber works written for specific performers (the orchestra might be less agreeable to change than, say, a duo ensemble). The nature of the score –whether a printed publication prior to the first performance or a handwritten autograph –may also factor in resistance to change.Moreover, we may consider the impact of twentieth-century copyright law on published materials; one need only consider the reworking (and borrowing) of pre-existing material by Handel to highlight how much attitudes towards revision have changed over time.2