Blog Post 8: November 5

IMSLP is a very cool resource and it was fun to read about in the article. Two of the things that stood out to me the most are the copy-right laws they must follow and the fact that has been built and maintained entirely by its users. The copy-right laws it has to follow seems like it would be very complicated to keep up with. It would be a lot easier if it were only one set of laws but IMSLP must follow three separate countries copy-right laws. This means one composer's works may be considered public domain in one country, but not the others. I wouldn't be able to handle keeping up with that myself. I guess this is partly why Guo elected to shut down the site entirely in 2007. It is very impressive that IMSLP is maintained by users. I think this is part of what makes it so unique and has allowed for so many items to be posted on it. One user even submitted over 200 items! This seems like a great way to tap into people's private collections and get to see what exists today.

I found "The Spin Doctors of Early Music" to be very fascinating. Taruskin did a very good job of pointing out how we put on "historical" performances that are typically completely inaccurate. I did find it interesting though how he was seemingly criticizing people for putting on inaccurate historical performances, yet applauding them at the same time. While I always like the idea of a historical performance, I have come to the conclusion that I will never hear a Mozart composition exactly the way he would have heard it performed. It is just impossible to recreate. The line that stood out to me the most in the article was when Taruskin stated: "Being the true voice of ones time is ... roughly 40,000 as vital and important as being the assumed voice of history." Ultimately what I took away from this article is that we should perform these pieces to suit our own tastes. These works should be appreciated for what they are, but we should not be too wrapped up in the composer's intentions.

"Composers Intent? Get Over It" took the ideas stated in "The Spin Doctors of Early Music" and applied them to 20th serialist music. Kozinn had some interesting things to say and I was particularly struck by a comment he made about a certain interpretation of serialist music may make the tumblers tick for someone to begin to understand and enjoy that music. I had never really though of it this way. Personally I am not a huge fan of serialist music, but then maybe I am in that boat. Perhaps if I hear an interpretation of a piece that I like, then I will begin to appreciate serialist music more. (Honestly I had never really considered the fact that one could even interpret serialist music.) This is a very cool idea and I really liked what he had to say. Maybe all orchestra should start doing what the Berlin Philharmonic did when they came to Carnegie Hall and include at least one recent piece of music in their programs. This could please all audience members, with the inclusion of classic and new music, and introduce listeners to content they may have never heard before. This would be a fun experiment.