The Ultimate Authority? Possibilities and Problems in Composers’ Organ Recordings

• Recordings, says the musicologist Richard Taruskin, “are the hardest evidence of performance practice available.” With this in mind, can we imagine a more authoritative statement on the performance of a musical work than the composer’s own recorded version, providing us with a rich source of direct, first-hand information on his intentions and practices? We become enlightened, not only on many aspects of performance that the composer chose not to enter into his score, but also on subtle details that could never be conveyed in written form. But the presence of a recording by the composer may also give rise to questions and doubts. Whereas a recording ideally serves to supplement and clarify the information given in the score, it may also – at least seemingly – contradict it, thereby raising the question of whether the ultimate authority resides in the score or in the recorded performance. If we are eager to know about a composer’s intentions, we must reflect on the intentions behind the recording as well as on how they are mirrored in the performance. Is it reasonable to use a composer’s recording as an authoritative model for performers, laying down in detail the “correct” way of performing a piece? And if such an authorial intention is presumed, the question still remains of the composer’s success as a performer in realizing his intentions, not to mention the possible distortions caused by the constraints of the technical medium used.

Ämnesord

HUMANIORA  -- Konst -- Musikvetenskap (hsv//swe)

HUMANITIES  -- Arts -- Musicology (hsv//eng)

HUMANIORA  -- Konst -- Musik (hsv//swe)

HUMANITIES  -- Arts -- Music (hsv//eng)

Nyckelord

organ

organ recordings

performance practice research

Publikations- och innehållstyp

vet (ämneskategori)

kap (ämneskategori)