what has mozart to do with coltrane? the dynamism and built-in flexibility of music

8/8/2019 What Has Mozart to Do With Coltrane? The Dynamism and Built-In Flexibility of Music

1/16

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2009, Unit 6, Te Village, 101 Amies Street, London SW11 2JW

[Expo. 3.1 (2009) 5771] Expositions(print) ISSN 1747-5368doi:10.1558/expo.v3i1.57 Expositions(online) ISSN 1747-5376

What Has Mozart to Do with Coltrane?: Te Dynamismand Built-in Flexibility of Music

CYNHIA R. NIELSEN

University o [email protected]

Abstract

Although contemporary Western culture and criticism has usually valuedcomposition over improvisation and placed the authority o a musical workwith the written text rather than the perormer, this essay posits these di-visions as too acile to articulate the complex dynamics o making musicin any genre or orm. Rather it insists that music should be understoodas pieces that are created with specifc intentions by composers but which

possess possibilities o interpretation that can only be brought out throughperormance.

Keywod: Improvisation, Hermeneutics, Music

As Bruce Ellis Benson explains in chapter two o his book, Te Improv-isation o Musical Dialogue, we tend to think that a musical composi-tion is nished once it is written down in its nal version. However,there are a number o assumptions that we should question in connec-tion with such a conclusion. First, why assume that a process o revi-

sion always leads to a better version, much less to the perect version?Beethoven, or example, was known or ceaselessly revising and oeringa number o variants or musical passages and even entire sections ohis symphonies. Even i we grant that his revisions generally improvedhis work, why should we necessarily conclude that they alwaysdid?Second, is it not the case that pressing deadlines, amilial responsibili-ties, and creative inertia likewise co-determine when a work is, so tospeak, completed? Tat is, the artist may not in act be satised withhis or her nal version, and yet the work must be brought to a close. Ithis is the case, then we might say that in some instances the composer
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/16

58 What Has Mozart to Do with Coltrane?

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2009

is aware o the incomplete aspects in his or her workthe places thatat some later time, he or she, i given the time, would want to changeor develop. Tird, is there a sense in which a composition becomes

xed and rigidly denite when written down, or is it the case thata certain indeniteness and indeterminacy remains even ater thecomposition is nished? Arguing or the latter, Benson states thatalthough composers have reasonably denite intentions, it wouldbe impossible or their intentions to encompass all o the details o anygiven piece (2003, 69). In other words, oten or perhaps even most othe time, the composer is unsure exactly how every aspect and detail othe work should sound until the piece is actually played by a specicgroup o musicians and with very particular instrumentation. In act,it is not uncommon or a composer to present his or her music to agroup o musicians, asking or critical input on various aspects o thepiece. Having perormed in several jazz orchestras and dabbled in jazzcomposition mysel, I nd this claim rather convincing. It was otenthe case that our director, an accomplished composer and arranger,presented us with his scores, only to make numerous changes during

the rehearsal timechanges he could not oresee until the actual musicappeared. Clearly, he had a denite intention o how he wanted thepiece to sound, yet the specic intricacies o tempo, dynamics, and soorth were realized only when the music was perormed.

In this essay, I hope to make maniest a number o interconnectedthemes, all o which challenge us to rethink the nature o music andthe roles o composers and perormers. As we shall see, what Bensoncalls musical places o indeterminacy, and what I call, built-in ex-

ibility, are present not only in jazz, where one might expect it, butin all musical genres, including classical music. I this is the case, andI argue that it is, then the lines between composition and improvi-sation are uid rather than xed. Recognition o this uidity allowsa new paradigm or understanding what music is. Instead o a staticproduct completed byonecomposer, a musical piece is dynamic, beingcontinually composed bymanyperormers. Consequently, the sharpboundaries between composer and perormer likewise collapse, and we

come to acknowledge that music possesses a pre-, present-, and uture-history. Music is communal; it emerges rom and continues an ever-


3/16

Cynthia R. Nielsen 59


developing tradition; it is energeia rather than ergon; yet, its dynamismdoes not destroy its identity.

One may ask, and legitimately so, when a composer nally works out

the particular instrumentation, dynamic markings, tempo variations,and submits the nal score, can we then say that work nished? Incontrast to a culture or tradition o music in which a musical work is bothperceived and passed on via aural memory, our modern understandingo music, particularly classical music, emphasizes the written musicalscore as authoritative.1 Te contemporary music theorist Edward Cone,however, raises a number o interesting questions about the degree andrange o this supposedly all-encompassing authority o the writtenscore. According to Cone, it is not the case that the composition isidenticalwith the score (2005, 244). In other words, Cone suggeststhat it is impossible or the written score to capture everything that thecomposition is.Although Cone is quick to acknowledge the importance o the written

score in classical music or the purposes o the musical perormance,as well as the obligation that the perormer has to the score, he is also

cognizant o 1) the difculties o establishing an accurate score, and 2)the act that perormance always involves interpretation. Commentingon the difculties o establishing a canonic text o the music oChopin, Cone writes,

Te perormers rst obligation, then, is to the scorebut to whatscore? Te autograph or the rst printed edition? Te composers hastymanuscript or the presumably more careul copy by a trusted amanu-ensis? Te composers initial version or his later emendation? Te rst

German edition or the rst French edition? An original edition or onesupposedly incorporating the composers instructions to his pupils?Tose involved in the attempt to establish a canonic text o Chopins

works ace all those decisions. (Cone 2005, 244)

Even ater these sorts o interpretive decisions have been made, we stillhave to deal with the issue o the conductors, as well as the perormers,interpretation o the score. Here we see that accurate and excessive nota-tion does not in itsel remove the difculties in view. Te written notation

is only an approximation o what actually occurs in a musical perorm-ance. In act, it is exactly the space cleared by that approximation, an area


4/16



o indeterminacy, that is the locus o the perormers prime interpretativeactivity. Te realization o any score thus requires decisions at everypoint (Cone 2005, 245). Cones observations press us to grapple with the

various roles manuscript editors, conductors, and perormers play in theactualization o the music as it appears to us. Stated slightly dierently,i it is the case that perormers, conductors and arrangers in some genu-ine sense continue to compose a work through their various additions,deletions, and interpretations, then can we really say that a work is evernished?2 As stated earlier, the original composers certainly have somedenite intentions with regard to their compositions, but how extensivethose intentions are is another issue. Also, though some composers maybe cognizant o places o indeterminacy in their works, others becomeaware o these indeterminacies only ater the music is actually perormed.Furthermore, in light o the co-creating involved in every perormance,there are uture possibilities that will orever remain unknown to the orig-inal composer. All o this suggests that a determinate intention, thoughhaving some deniteness to it, also exhibits what we might call built-inexibility that allows or dierent maniestations and resh articulations

o a piece, while nonetheless preserving its identity.Having at least touched upon some o the ways in which this ex-ibility or indeterminacy suraces in classical music, I now turn to anexample in the genre o jazz in order to urther explore this built-inexibility that maintains identity. Large jazz ensembles and orchestrasperorm scores that are very similar to those ound in classical musicin which all the parts are extensively notated: bass line, the chords orharmonic structure, and more or lessevery note is written in ull musi-

cal notation. In contrast, jazz small groups (trios and quartets) typicallybase their perormances on what is called, in jazz parlance, a leadsheet where only the melody line is written out in standard musicalnotation, allowing or signicantly more exibility. Above the melodyline, one nds chord symbols. So while a ully notated orchestral scoreinstructs a musician exactly with specic chordal voicings, a lead sheetsimply tells the musician what chord to play, leaving the voicings openor interpretation. For example, on a jazz lead sheet, one might nd the

label C major 7 written above the melody line, instead o the actualmusical notation or a C major seventh chord (the notes C, E, G, B) or


5/16



the various specic voicings in which these harmonic structures maybe expressed (or example, E, G, C, B or C, G, B, E, and other possiblevariations or a C major seventh chord). Writing the chord symbols in

this manner aords the pianist or guitarist, as well as the bassist, a sig-nicant amount o creative reedom in perorming the piece. However,this reedom does notdestroy the identity o the piece, since a musi-cian must choose harmonies and bass lines that all within a certainrange o the specied chord symbol, and these harmonic arrangementsand variations must support the melody and make maniest the largerharmonic structure o the piece. Tus, with a jazz lead sheet, playersare in a genuine sense tied to the scorethat is, they must agree tosubmit to the givens o the piece and respond accordingly. Here thecommunal aspect o jazz perormance must be considered. For exam-ple, i the pianist simply decides to play chords that have no relation

whatsoever to the prescribed chord symbols, the rest o the group orensemble will be aected (not to mention thoroughly rustrated), astheir parts will not correspond to the pianists random harmonic super-impositions. In such a situation, the identity o the piece is destroyed

because it is no longer recognizable by either the musicians themselvesor the audience listening. Although a certain xity exists (a given melody, harmonic rame-

work, and a mutual submission to these givens by the communityo musicians), nonetheless, the personalities, skill levels, and creativesensibilities o each individual perormer also come through, makingeach perormance something unique. One might even say that the ex-ibility that lead sheets aord, coupled with the harmonic and melodic

interpretations o these givens, brings about new intelligibilities o thepiece that up to this point had not existed. Tis built-in-exibility,

when held in check by submission to the aorementioned givens, actu-ally helps rather than hinders the preservation o the piece through thepassage o time because it not only allows but expects various re-artic-ulations and new insights to be brought orth by new generations. Incontrast to a rigid, staticized view o a nished work, in which properpreservation is equated with an attempt to reproduce that work in all

o its historical, cultural, and individual particularities, understand-ing musical pieces (and texts) as possessing a built-in exibility that is


6/16



not destructive o identity allows or expansions that inevitably comewith temporal progression and the development o tradition, musicalor otherwise. Tus, this dynamic conception o works is able to over-

come a potentially devastating eature o the staticized view, namely,the possibility o the work becoming completely closed o to uturegenerations who cannot nd a way to bring a past ossication to bearon their present cultural and historical situation.

Here I imagine a possible objection: Am I not overstating my case?Ater all, isnt improvisation an essential eature ojazz; and i so, eveni there are inescapable places o indeterminacy connected with clas-sical compositions and perormances, isnt the exibility described inmy lead sheet example so signicantly dierent that the comparisonbecomes overly strained? Beore attempting to address this objection,perhaps we should take a closer look at some o the assumptions upon

which such an objection is based. First, there is the idea that jazz is akinto a ree-or-all in which musicians play random melodic lines, where-as classical music, in contrast, eliminates all improvisatory elements.Second, we have the notion that a strict division exists between the

work, conceived as a suprahistorical, untouchable essence, and its his-torical, in-time perormance, which allows or variations and supple-mentations. I turn rst to address the issues and questions surroundinga proper understanding o improvisation.

Regarding the history o the term improvisation and the negativeattachments that have come to be associated with it, Jeremy Begbie

writes:

At rst it [improvisation] carried the relatively neutral sense o extem-

porization. By the 1850s it appears to have acquired pejorative con-notations o-hand, lacking sufcient preparation (as in improvisedshelter, improvised solution). Many musicians and musicologistscontinue to view it with considerable suspicion, i not disdain. Forsome it is synonymous with the absence o intellectual rigour. Tereare educationalists who see it as a distraction rom authentic music-making. (2005, 180)

Contra this pessimistic construal, jazz improvisation requires just

as much skill, creativity, and rigor as the art o composing a classi-cal symphony. Moreover, strictly speaking, composing is not with-


7/16



out improvisatory elements; and depending upon ones denition oimprovisation, one could reasonably argue that improvisation pervadesmusic in general. However, beore going urther, I should pause to

acknowledge the well-known difculty among music specialists inarriving at a satisactory denition o improvisation. Given this dif-culty, we shall move through a number o possibilities, noting variousaspects o improvisation broadly construed with the hope o nallyobtaining a working denition o the term as related to our presentpurposes. I improvisation is understood as a simultaneous occurrenceo composing and perormance, then improvisation cannotbe limitedto jazz. In act, what we nd is that improvisation characterized inthis manner has been prevalent in a wide variety o cultures and musi-cal genresrom Gregorian chant to Baroque music, as well as mostnon-Western expressions o music which are by and large notnotated.However, even subsequent to the development o music notation, wend composers such as J.S. Bach, Handel, and Mozart highly skilled inthe art o improvisation and who also expected those perorming theirpieces to possess this skill (Begbie 2005, 180181). Nonetheless, as

concerts in the 18th and 19th centuries gained in popularity, the grow-ing sophistication o musical notation did play a role in contributingto a more diminished view o improvisation (Begbie 2005, 181182).

Although the increase in notation severely limited opportunities orimprovising in classical music, the improvisatory elements even inmeticulously notated music cannot be totally removed so long as humanbeingsare the perormers. Avid music listeners can attest that whetherspeaking o an individual soloist or an orchestral unit, the personali-

ties, stylistic particularities, and interpretative nuances maniested inthe actual perormance o a musical work all contribute a degree ocreative liberty that alls within the sphere o improvisation broadlyconstrued. For example, how do we explain why we preer one well-known cellist playing Bachs solo concertos over another renowned andequally procient cellist? Te notes on the page are exactly the same,yet we are aware o dierences in the ways in which one perormerinterprets the piece or articulates a musical passage. In addition, it is

common or a soloist to engage in what is called ornamentation.Tat is, rather than simply play the melodic line as written, the per-


8/16



ormer adds neighboring tones and trills3 that dress up or ornamentthe melody line. (Tese ornamental notes o course are notwritten onthe page, and no two musicians ornament in exactly the same way).

A second consideration contributing to a negative view o improvisa-tion as somehow intellectually substandard is perhaps due to an overlyrigid distinction that we in the Western musical tradition tend to makebetween improvisation and composition. As I have indicated, improvi-sation is oten understood as non-calculated, ree-owing, and lackingin intellectual and musical rigor. Composition, by contrast, is thoughtto be more or less inexible, rule-governed, andgiven its highdegree o musical notationby nature purposely without spontaneity.However, as we shall see, both views are misleading and set up sharpdistinctions that do not correspond to what takes place in actualmusicmaking and perormance.

Contrary to the negative characterization thus ar discussed, improvi-sation as expressed in jazz involves a high degree o prepared and cal-culated musical ideas. All too requently we hear the rather pejorativecomment that in jazz it matters not what note one plays given the dis-

sonance prevalent in jazz and its penchant or non-resolution. Toughperhaps in someexpressions o jazz such a remark might ring true, onthe whole it tends to paint a rather misleading picture. A more accurateaccount is that proessional jazz improvisers are intensely aware o whatnotes they play, when to play them, and or what reason this note orthat scale should be played as opposed to others. For example, considerthe common harmonic structures in which one nds purposely alteredharmoniesthat is, dissonances that are deliberately applied to certain

chord structures. One o the rst skills that a beginning improviser learnsis that most traditional jazz pieces consist o what is called the ii-V-Iharmonic progression. For example, in the key o C major, the ii-V-I pro-gression is: D minor 7 G7 C major 7. Te V7 or dominant 7th chordhas multiple unctions. For example, it is the chord that typically leadsus directly to a resolution back to the tonic key, or it acts as a transitionchord to take us to a new key which will then serve as a temporary resolu-tion o sorts. In light o these unctions, as opposed to being a place o

rest (such as the tonic chord) or even a temporary rest stop, alteringor extending its choral components heightens the tension by adding new


9/16



tonal colors into the mix. Jazz musicians are deeply aware o these pos-sibilities, and maximize the tension-release moti in their solos. In act,it is a common practice among jazz musicians to have numerous altered

patterns prepared in advancepatterns which they have practiced orhours upon end in all twelve keys so that when perormance time comes,the music has become such a part o them that it ows eortlessly romthem. Tus, it is in no way the case that jazz musicians simply umblearound, pulling notes out o thin air, rebelliously disregarding the har-monic structure o the piece because they have some kind o perverseattraction to dissonance or its own sake. While this might de-mystiy jazz improvisation to a certain extent, it does noteradicate that side ojazz that involves a strong degree o spontaneity and communal interplay.In other words, an aspect o mystery is still alive and well in the art o jazzimprovisation because no matter how many patterns one has preparedin advance, the dynamism and community o jazz makes it such that,in Heraclitean ashion, no pattern is ever played exactlysame way twice;nonetheless, the patterns are quite identiable, as is the piece itsel.

I, in act, jazz is not a ree-or-all and involves a number o previously

prepared musical ideas, one might be led to believe that notation is thecrucial dierence between composition and improvisation. However,as Begbie astutely observes, it seems odd to claim that compositiononly happens when musicians write music down (2005, 183). I this

were the case, the act o transcribing an improvised solo would be whatmakes the solo a composition, which seems intuitively wrong. In lighto this apparent impasse, Begbie oers the ollowing as a possible wayto dierentiate composition and improvisation:

A more promising way orward is to take composition to reer to allthe activity which precedes the sounding o the entire piece o music,everything which is involved in conceiving and organising the parts orelements which make up the pattern or design or the musical whole;and improvisation to mean the concurrent conception and perorm-anceo a piece o music, which is complete when the sound nishes.

(2005, 183)

According to the above conception, composition entails all the musi-

cal activity that takes placesprior to the perormance o the piece as awhole, whereas improvisation consists in a musical idea conceived and


10/16



perormed simultaneously. In other words, the act o improvisationemphasizes the present activity o music making; that is, rather thanhighlighting product or result, the accent is on process and perorm-

ance, as conception and perormance are interwoven to a very highdegree (Begbie 2005, 184). Although Begbies stress on dynamismand present activity is no doubt on the mark, his view still presupposesan overly rigid separation between composition and improvisation.

With what Begbie has just said in mind, perhaps we could say the typeo improvisation that emerges in the musical genre o jazz is present,semi-spontaneous, music-making activity that purposely and re-crea-tively utilizes prepared and hence thoroughly amiliar musical ideas.However, i we accept my working denition and Begbies description,

we have problem. According to Begbies denition o composition, theprepared patterns employed in jazz improvisation become mini-com-positions. I we opt or a more uid relationship between compositionand improvisation (as Benson suggests below), our problem takes careo itsel. Ater all, the prepared jazz patterns consist largely o musi-cal ideas taken rom actual live, improvised perormances. So i they

count as compositions, then they are also improvised compositionsbased past improvisations. Here we should turn to Benson, whoseaccount highlights the improvisational activity oclassicalcomposers.Despite the act that a kind o mythology, which portrays composi-tion as principally a ash o instantaneous inspiration, coupled withthe Kantian idea o a creative genius tends to dominate our concep-tion o the way in which a musical composition comes into existence,Benson contends that composers across the musical spectrum actually

engage in a great deal o improvisation. Composers are more accu-rately described as improvisers, or composition essentially involves akind o improvisation on the already existing rules and limits in sucha way that what emerges is the result o both respecting those rulesand altering them (Benson 2003, 133). In the end, given the mutualinterplay between composition and improvisation, perhaps it is betterto think o both as maniesting themselves in allmusic to greater orlesser degrees along a continuum, wherein the degree o maniesta-

tion depends a host o contingencies (or example, the expertise levelo the musicians present, the perormance setting, the purpose o the


11/16



particular perormance, whether or not the conductor has an aversionto improvisation etc.).

Having examined the calculated aspects o jazz improvisation, as well

as highlighting some o the ways in which improvisation and placeso indeterminacy emerge and exist in classical music, I now turn todiscuss the idea that a sharp dichotomy exists between the work and itsperormance. In chapter our o his book, Te Improvisation o MusicalDialogue, Benson discusses the ways in which a musical ergon or prod-uct emerges rom musical energeia or activity, and yet this ergon stillremains within the play o musical energeia and cannot be separatedrom it (2003, 125). In other words, i it is the case that the boundariesbetween composition and improvisation are uid, then every perorm-ance isan interpretation, and musical traditions themselves adapt andevolve over time. From this perspective, musical works are more prop-erly understood as dynamic rather than static, nished products. Ben-son, stressing the interdependence between musical works and musicalenergeia, outlines three implications o such a view.

First, the teloso music making cannot be dened simply in terms o

the creation o musical works, or even primarily so. Instead the workbecomes a meansto the end o making music, not an end in itsel. Sec-ond, i the work exists within the play o musical energeia, then it cannotbe seen as autonomous or detached. Like a living organism, it is ever inmotion and constantly in need o care and inusions o new lie tokeep it alive. Tird, i perormers are essentially improvisers, then au-thorship becomes more complex. (Benson 2003, 126)

Here we have an inversion o the common view o a musical work as

the goal or teloso music- making. Rather, musical activity itsel is thetelos, and a musical work unctions as a vehicle to that end. Tus, thetelos in view is not static and even requires on-going, creative inu-sions o musical lie to keep it alive. Such a view is exceedingly tradi-tion-riendly, as it recognizes not only a post-history, but a pre-historyembedded in every musical work. Beethoven, or example, did not existin a historical vacuum but drew upon the musical ideas o Haydn andMozart, who in turn were themselves inuenced by Bach and other

earlier composers. o use Hans-Georg Gadamers term, what we have isa multi-level, continual usion o horizons (2004, 306). Beethovens


12/16



piano sonatas are in part the result o his engagement with earliercomposers and traditions; hence, we have, so to speak, a pastusion ohorizons with respect to the composition itsel. o speak o a past

usion, however, detracts rom the dynamic nature o musical activ-ity. Here we should emphasize that an ongoing, polyphonic usion ohorizons occurs with every musical perormance. For example, when atwenty-rst century Russian pianist perorms Beethovens Piano SonataNo. 14 in C-sharp Minor, she enters into the ever-unolding lieworld othe piecea lieworld that both precedes and goes beyond Beethoven.

A dierent but related re-shaping takes place with respect to the per-ormer, who, like the musical piece, also belongs to a tradition. Perhapsour Russian pianist has been inuenced by French impressionism andother twentieth century compositional styles. I so, these componentsare part o her musical lieworld and at some level inuence her in-terpretation o Beethovens sonata. Even so, her perormance o thisparticular piece must be recognizable as Beethovens Piano Sonata No.14 in C-sharp Minor. In addition to a past usion, we have apresentus-ing o horizons which aects not only the composition but again the

perormer as well. So long as the alterity o the composition is respectedand its identity (notwithstanding the difculty o stating exactlywhatthat identity is) is made maniest rather than marred or destroyed, theperormer hersel is changed by allowing the piece to become, as it were,a part o who she is. Authorship indeed becomes more complex sincethe perormer not only participates as co-author o the piece, but thepiece itsel and the traditions rom which it came re-author and hencechange the perormer.4 Here, it is not difcult to see parallels between

musical pieces and written texts and musical perormers and textualinterpreters. Te intelligibility and coherence o this aorementionedidentity, which somehow allows or change and yet remains intact, isa legitimate concern that has provoked a great deal o discussion. Inorder to secure the identity o a musical work, some musicologists andphilosophers o music have posited an essential division between thesuprahistorical work itsel and its written and aural historical embodi-ments. Benson identies Roman Ingarden as one who holds such a

position.5 Regardless o whether Ingardens position might be parseddierently, the view presented articulates a plausible alternative and


13/16



is helpul or our present discussion; thus, I shall reer to this view asthe essential division position. With this strict separation betweenthe work itsel and its material expressions, we are brought back to the

question o the relation between the work and the score. Te essentialdivision position claims that the score preserves the work and helps tomaintain its identity. Yet, as Cones insights suggest, the score cannotexhaust the work and instead merely relates aspects o the work. Tere-ore, the score unctions as a kind o schema. I we acknowledge boththat the score in some sense maintains the identity o the work withoutcircumscribing the work, then we are pressed to ask: what then is thesomething more that the score ails to capture? o this question, Ben-son adds, Is there something that guarantees the identity o this sur-plus that goes beyond the score? Moreover, what connection is therei anybetween this more and musical energeia? (2003, 127).A person holding the essential division position might suggest that

rather than creating new additions, perormers over time are simplyrealizing the inherent potentialities possessed by the work rom thebeginning. Tus, the work itsel does not actually change over time

but merelyappearsto change. However, as Benson observes, the prob-lem with this view is thatpracticallythese possibilities seem notto come merely rom within but also rom without: or they ariseatleast partlyby way o perormance traditions, which are themselvesdeveloping (2003, 128). o claim that all the uture potentialities o amusical piece come only rom within reduces the perormer to a purelypassive re-producer. Here the other-ness o the work is retained but atthe expense o the perormers alterity. In place o this dichotomous

conception wherein the relation between the work itsel and its em-bodiments are orever estranged, Benson argues or a mediating way

which, on the one hand acknowledges that a work possesses latent po-tentialities yet, on the other hand, stresses that those potentialities aresupplemented by additional possibilities that come into being over thecourse o time via the perormances themselves and as a result o evolv-ing musical traditions. Elaborating his view, Benson explains:

a composer may indeed have a complex conception o the work (and

so potentially a relatively complex set o intentions), but thoseintentions are supplemented by actual perormances and the develop-


14/16


15/16



and Romantic periods.

2. Tis idea o on-going composition exhibits striking similarities with Gadamers

hermeneutical insight that texts always exhibit an excess o meaning upon

which tradition builds. See, or example, Gadamer 2004, 296.

3. A trill consists typically in the rapid alteration between two musical notes adja-

cent on the musical scale; however, there is no xed or single way o executing a

trill. Whether or not one has correctly executed a trill is largely dependent upon

the context in which it is ound and the musical genre in which one is perorm-

ing.

4. See, or example, Wright 2004, 237.

5. See the discussion o Ingarden in Benson 2003, 126133.

References

Begbie, Jeremy

2005 Teology, Music and ime. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Benson, Bruce Ellis

2003 Te Improvisation o Musical Dialogue: A Phenomenology o Music. Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cone, Edward .

2005 Te Pianist as Critic. In Te Practice o Perormance: Studies in Musical

Interpretation, edited by John Rink, 241254. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Gadamer, Hans-Georg

2004 ruth and Method, 2nd ed. ranslated and revised by Joel Weinsheimer and

Donald G. Marshall. New York: Continuum.

Wright, Kathleen

2004 On What We Have in Common: Te Universality o Philosophical Herme-

neutics. Renascence: Essays on Values in Literature56(4): 234255.


16/16

what has mozart to do with coltrane? the dynamism and built-in flexibility of music

Documents