"Term Definitions"*

Autograph: a manuscript written in the hand of a particular person

Holograph: a document written in the hand of the author or composer

Sketch: a record made by the composer of a composition in an unfinished state 

Sources: the handwritten documents that lie behind the printed form in which the music circulates

Editions historical: any music publication that is devoted to a past repertory

Urtext: 

1. signifies the earliest version of the text of any composition

2. a magic word conjuring up an idea of absolute authenticity in literary or musical works

Facsimile: name given to a gene of book publishing based on photo-mechanical printing techniques that attempts to recreate the appearance of an original handwritten manuscript or printed edition

*All of these term definitions were taken from the readings. I simply defined them here so I could keep referring back to them without having to go back to the readings.

First of all, I admit that I kept having to read the terms repeatedly to really get a sense of their definitions. I read the article and definitions a few days ago and then decided to wait to write my post so I could have time to think about them. I am coming to the conclusion that holographs can be very valuable about giving the best kind of insight into music and the world at the time that composers lived. This has been evidenced through our discussion in class today and through lectures given by Dr. Radice during history.

"A Period is Questioned in the Declaration of Independence"

After finishing both readings initial thoughts are:

-I never considered how important punctuation could be. 

-I haven't done much score study of autographs and holographs--I've seen these pictures in books, but I have not dealt much with researching them first hand. 

-Much can be gained from studying all of these term definitions.

To be honest, I don't think that before this course or my bib and history classes I placed much emphasis on primary sources and in general the significance of being able to see a score (or other document) written in the hand of the composer. What makes this even more special is that many holographs from the past have been destroyed. There is much to learn about the times through these documents. 

Questions to Consider:

Is it truly important to follow the composer's intent so closely?
I think that studying about what the composer intended through all of the ways listed above can tell us a lot about the history of the times. Not just the musical history, but what else was going on and why the composer made certain choices. Composers did not know of the many advances that would come in the future. I feel that respecting the composer is important, but at the same time, certain things are different today. I feel that some composers would want their works strictly followed regardless of advances, but others would be more open to incorporating the innovations of today into the pieces.

Are the ideas of performance practice and period instruments valid or are they just fostering music as "re-enactment" performances?
I feel that these ideas are valid but that there can be two views--composers took time and care to write for instruments they had and techniques that they saw fit to use. At the same time (as I previously mentioned), many instruments from back then may not necessarily be around today.