Students on my Music criticism course are given written guidance on many aspects of technique. A question from someone writing programme notes for a diploma recital has made me think that some of this guidance might be relevant to them, so I reprint parts of it here:
1. Introduction
In all its various
guises, the objective in music criticism and in writing programme note is to clarify and explain. To do this, language has to be simple and
direct. This paper aims to give
pointers to help achieve this, without diminishing the essential individuality
of each writer’s use of language.
2. References and External material
There is a golden rule
in all writing for non-specialist musicians - the majority of consumers of music criticism and programme notes; NEVER use footnotes or citations – if to read our work,
the reader is obliged to refer elsewhere, its independence and immediacy is negated. It means we are not using our own words (and, by
implication in criticism, not expressing our own views) and, furthermore, it imposes on the
reader an obligation to expend further effort to understand what should be
immediately evident.
In music criticism, material from external sources
directly connected with the item under review (second-hand) should be used
sparingly (if at all) and without exhorting the reader to find that material
for themselves. Where, in academic
writing, we might expect full detailing of material derived from external
sources, in criticism, we must acknowledge briefly without identification. Thus, should the need arise in the critic’s
mind to quote from booklet notes, programme notes, or publicity fliers, the
words taken would be placed in inverted commas and merely acknowledged as “according
to the booklet notes"/"the booklet notes tell us”/”the publicity told us”, etc.
etc. If (and this should rarely occur)
the critic wants to use material from a source which was not directly connected
with the subject of the review (third party), a mention of the author or source
material should be made, but without excessive detail. For example, “When Mendelssohn took a boat to
the Hebrides, his fellow passengers reportedly said he looked ‘very green in
face’.” This acknowledges that the words
have come from a third party source, and there is no need to identify it. If it needs to be identified (perhaps because
it offers an unusual opinion), keep it short.
“Mendelssohn’s scherzo movements
are usually considered light and airy, but Malcolm Smyth has written that this
one ‘is more in the manner of cows dancing on concrete’.”
You are obliged to
identify words which are not your own, but you are under no obligation to acknowledge
their precise source.
3. Musical Terms
There are certain
musical terms, usually in Italian, which are universally recognised as such,
even if the majority of those who recognise such words have only a vague notion
of their correct meaning. The writer
should recognise this, and treat them as ordinary English words in passing (ie.
“the first movement was an allegro and full of joy”). Only when the word is a specific title should
it be treated differently.
However, since the precise meaning of these words is not widely known (even amongst
musicians) the writer must be careful of using them other than when reporting
what the music is called or described as.
Do not use them as English adjectives, since their shades of meaning are
too complex to be treated as such. So, “the
performance was not really allegro” is wrong, while “despite being marked
allegro, the performance seemed very slow and solemn” is acceptable.
Music criticism/programme notes are not forums to provide the level of education required to explain the implications
of these technical terms, so do not attempt ever to explain them. In addition, from your target audience, try
to identify the level of musical knowledge and how far you can use these terms
without explanation. Often a young audience
will not even know basic words like crescendo; so rather than use them, suggest
“the piece gradually grew louder”, whereas a more mature and experienced
concert audience would know the meaning and you should not write down to them
in a way which might be perceived as insulting their intelligence; use the term
in its correct context “towards the end of the movement there was an extended
crescendo”. The same applies with words
like forte and piano. But when we get
into more specialist and cumulative terminology (“Lebhaft”, “Sehr Mässig”, “doucement”,
“andante quasi adagio”), if necessary, some translation or word of explanation
will be appropriate – in which case do not relate the word to other terms, nor
give dictionary definitions which often do not illuminate adequately, but
explain them in simple English.
Great insight! Do you think you could write more of such guides? Love it!
ReplyDeleteIf you are in Singapore on 21st June I am giving a workshop on the subject as part of the 7th Singapore Performer's Festival.
Delete