Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

An Essay on “The Role of 21st Century Editor”:

James Grier comments during his discussion on the task of the critical editor; “Editing,

(therefore,) consists of a series of choices, educated, critically informed choices; in

short, the act of interpretation.” 1 But to what extent are we, the 21st century audience,

invited to rely on those choices to reflect the text of the composer aptly? An

investigation into the preparation and functionality of the Friedrich Chrysander 1885

Deutsche Händelgesellschaft facsimile edition and 1886 Deutsche Händelgesellschaft

interpretational edition, and Kenneth Nott’s 2009 Bärenreiter-Verlag Halle Handel

Edition, of Handel’s “Jephtha”, with particular reference to the Accompagnato and Air

“Ye, Presists, whose hands ne’er yet were stain’d….Farewell ye limpid springs and

floods” from Act III, will offer a fitting platform for the discussion on the role of editor

in the 21st century.

An evaluation of the sources available to, and used by the editors in question, proves to

be an integral starting point for this discussion; the editor is expected, to varying

degree’s of thoroughness and possibility, to collect and select valuable sources to

support the production of a coherent edition suited to the audience it be intended for.

Where Chrysander’s Facsimile edition exhibits the photographic artefact of the source

used, with a brief introductory comment on Handel’s compositional style, Chrysander’s

1886 edition begins to reveal a more critical approach to source treatment. The preface

refers to his facsimile edition published the year prior and also reveals Chrysander’s

reasons for the selection of Handel’s assistant’s, John Christopher Smith, conductor

1 Grier Pg 2
Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

copy; “the state of the autograph, which contains many small gaps, errors and

omissions(…) But here the conducting score written by Smith is the more valuable

because Handel enriched it with numerous corrections and improvements.”2 We can

assume, from this statement, that the facsimile and copied conductor score acted as the

only sources for this edition. Their adequacy to render a valid edition is reinforced

through Chrysander’s preface, which includes the citation and explanation of the

“corrections and improvements” within the text of the edition. Nott also reveals that

“the main score of the present edition gives the text as it stands in the autograph” and

where this fails, Smith’s performing score is implemented; much the same as

Chrysander’s method. But perhaps it is the detailed description and sheer volume of

sources listed, evaluated and utilised in support of the Bärenreiter edition, which

reflects the elevated task of the 21st century editor most accurately. Nott consults

Handel’s autograph and Smith’s conductor copy, also referred to as the performance

score, as the primary sources. This initial approach resembles that of Chrysander,

however Nott’s investigation is further enriched with his collection of early prints,

sketches and secondary copies. Nott comments: “the performance score is the most

important of the secondary sources, as it bares the pre-performance changes and

changes for revivals.” 3, here Nott continues to confirm the function of the secondary

sources during the preparation of the edition; these secondary source aid the

clarification of autographical ambiguity. It is here that the role of editor is seen to be

more complete.

Chrysander comments: “the autograph of the later sections of the oratorio reflects, in its

unstable orthography, the sheer physical effort that lay behind the simple task, hitherto

2 Deutsche Händelgesellschaft, Preface.

3 Halle Handel pXX
Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

taken for granted, of putting the notes onto paper” 4. It is important to note that where

all editors comment on the autographs area’s of visual and notational disturbance, with

particular reference to the latter part of composition due Handel’s debilitating illness,

the role of 21st century editor can be distinguished from its predecessors through Nott’s

exhaustion of secondary sources investigated to counteract this. For example his

investigation of the full score transcriptions of passages copied by Handel from the part

books of the published edition of Franz Johann Habermann’s six masses, op.1 (1747)

for use in Jephtha 5 reveals performance direction and missing insertions. Nott

comments: “Although the secondary source offer little to the text they do help to date

insertions and reveal new performance instruction.” The detailed account of the

sources collected, and the readings they offer, within Nott’s preface allow the 21st

century audience to assume the edition has grown from an environment of valid and

enriching sources.

The treatment of error and notational ambiguity occurring within the sources is an

important critical undertaking for the music editor; through the accumulation of

editorial accidents over decades, the 21st century editor must “peal back the layers of

accident and reveal the text”6. As Handel’s autograph is known and accepted to have an

abundance of error’s and gaps, as mentioned above, it is the role of the editor to collate

and select good readings in order to produce an efficient edition. Nott reveals his

thorough treatment of the variations that occur in the sources within his “Detailed

Notes”; for example, Smith’s performance score reveals a tie within the first violin part

in measure 2-3 which is not included within Handel’s autograph (see Fig.1). Nott

4 Baren pag XIX (Burrows Handels last musical autogprah p158

5 ibib
6 Grier, p67
Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

chooses to mark this with a dashed tie; he has evaluated both the autograph and the

conductor score, as well as considered the tied notes surrounding the bar in question

which should imply the tie is valid, however his choice to indicate this uncertainty is

useful for the readers study. In contrast Chrysander includes a full tie (see Fig.2) with

no mention of the ambiguity surrounding the direction; here Chrysander has removed

the performers task of deciphering between the two, or gaining further understanding

into the preparation of the edition. The photographic facsimile edition visually displays

this ambiguity, (see Fig.3), however the reader is invited to develop their own

conclusion from the text; it is clear to see that where all voices but violin 1 move the tie

ceases, but perhaps this is simply an element overlooked by an inflicted Handel?

Another example of variations between sources can be seen in measure 42 (Iphis)

where the autograph shows an ambiguously placed second note, see Fig.4, Nott, along

with Chrysander, make the editorial decision to maintain the pitch of the preceding

note. Although Chrysander reveals his critical engagement through his indication of

where the autograph differs from Smith’s copy, and where Handel’s additions and

corrections to Smith’s copy enriches and supports the text during the preface, Nott’s

thoroughness implies that the 21st audience of his edition may expect to be invited to

make their own interpretational decisions, and Nott’s offers a comprehensive

opportunity for this.

Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

Fig.1

Fig.2
Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

Fig.3

Fig.4

It can be argued that “there is only one source for good readings, the authorial original,

and all witnesses that transmit good readings are simply faithful reproductions of that

original, through any number of generations”7. Contamination is an obstacle all editors,

to varying degrees of acknowledgment, must manage. Nott write’s of the “significant

variants” presented within the sources, and explains that this is due to copies being

taken for the libraries of Handel’s friends and contemporaries; equally some of these

copies would have been copied from secondary sources, further increasing the

likelihood of contamination and error. To counteract this Nott has also used Walsh

and Randal prints to further support and identify variants; an editorial endeavor

unmentioned in the Chrysander editions. It is through this and Nott’s inclusion of

extensive alterations and errors in the critical report,that the role of editor has

significantly increased in meticulousness.

7 Grier, p64
Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

Where the majority of 19th century editions would call for more prescriptive

performance directions, in order to realise the “performance practice” of a work, due

to current performance “fashion” the 21st century editor must aim to reflect the text as

close to its authorial state as possible. The “style” of the Barenreiter editions has been

long scrutinised between musical scholars as “many music editors exhibit a reluctance

to address the issue of their own authority”8. To dampen this statement, the evaluation

of Nott’s account of this work is informative and unclouded by editorial illusion. The

editor’s perception of the works style and historical context ultimately governs the

overall style and content of the edition. Grier writes, “the notational symbols and their

semiotic meaning generate the stylistic attributes of a piece”9 and where “the style of a

piece consists of the predominant choices of elements ad procedure a composer makes

in developing movement and shape” ultimately the decisions, of which readings to use,

lie with the intellect and preference of the editor. Nott reveals his want to preserve or

extract the authorial text through his reluctance to incorporate every “correction” into

the text; instead he references the variations within his critical report. See Fig.5.

Ultimately the work, and indeed the edition, is realised through the performers

engagement and execution of the text; “the nexus of the composer’s instruction, as

inscribed in the text of the work, and the performers interpretation of the instruction

creates the works’ style “10. It is therefore the role of 21st century editor to guide the

performer by the edition, convention and context of the work11 to realise a text most

reflective of the composer’s ideals. This undertaking has been aptly managed by Nott

through his detailed explanation towards the treatment of the dynamics used (see Fig.6),

8 3
9 Grier, p28
1010 ibid p29
11 ibid
Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

and there contemporary equivalents, clefs, key signatures, accidentals, trills and ties. His

explanation of each aspect allows the performer to accept the information to the degree

they see fit. Chrysander, in contrast, has relieved the performer of this process by

implementing his stylistic choices into the score with little explanation of its origin.

“Style exists and operates within a historical context, and so its study is also, in the first

instance, a historical undertaking”12 and must be understood by the reader to be in a

constant state of perpetual change; “style is influenced by function, genre, existing

practice and feasibility of performance, as well as social, political and economic

factors”13, and in this the editor must allow flexibility and support of this within the

editing process. We can witness Nott’s management of this through his investigation of

the works historical context as we are lead through his critical application of his

findings; for example his notes on performance practice reveal that “The Continuo

group usually involves violincellos, bassoons, double basses (…) its seems that in

Handel’s later years (…) the simple combination of organ and harpsichord” were used.14

This accessible and comprehensive account allows the reader to acquire the necessary

information efficiently. It is useful to note here that where Chrysander insinuates the

application of such findings within his process, he appears to be far less informative,

revealing a less sensitive approach to the perpetual changes within his critical judgment.

We must acknowledge that the sources and tools available to the 21st century editor

have improved in sophistication and abundance in comparison to earlier counterparts;

current editors find themselves equip with the most contemporary findings, and thus we

can expect their edition to be well informed. Nott’s treatment of the sketches available

at the British Library reveal his sophisticated critical thirst, and where “it is not a new

12 ibid
13 Grier, p29
14 Halle Handel pXXI
Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

attraction to seek ‘style’ within an edition; the unique interpretational judgement of the

editor is to paramount the style of the edition.”15, the role of 21st century editor here is to

also realise the ‘stylistic’ desires of the audience, and or performer. During the

exploration into the efficiency and function of varying sources, it grew increasingly

apparent that independent to the source, the editor’s interpretation infiltrates the very

fabric of the work; whether through personal preference or scholarly insight. It is

important, however, for the editor to realise a sensitive point at which the editorial

method aids the realization of the “actual” text; an aspect highly desired in the

contemporary audience. There the role of the editor is to therefore sensitively make

choices and judgments upon where the composers idea’s and compositional nuances

are not compromised or masked by want to “arrange” the text. Nott shows great

competence for this in his use of “dashed” ties and marked points of reference (See

Fig.7) for example; directing the reader to his detailed notes for explanation allows for

the text to remain uncompromised. Chrysander’s facisimile, although without

immediate stylistic features, does carry some nuance of editorial style with the inclusion

of the essay in its pre-face. This introduction offers the audience some contextual

surrounding, allowing for some performer interpretation through guidance. In contract

Chrysander’s edition one year later displays a more refined approach to style; his

acknowledgement to alterations, stylistic habits and errors are supported with some

informative notes.

15 Grier, p29
Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7
Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

Presentation is a crucial aesthetic for the function of an edition; editions are required

for specific needs and must primarily serve as taxi for the text of the work. The 21st

century edition studied is a full-score, critical edition. Although this edition may not be

entirely functional for performance, it offers the performer the background support

necessary for an informed realisation of the work treated. It is the task of editor to

produce a text that clarifies the work, allowing for the performer to readily understand

and perform the text efficiently. Nott has met this need by converting the clefs to mirror

the contemporary convention, (see Fig. 8), the page notation is vertically aligned, notes

are spaced in proportion to their note value, a clear font is used for visual ease and the

text underlay is even and matched. These decisions, in a quest for ultimate clarity, have

not come at the detriment of the text as Nott retains historically pivotal features such as:

five staves, in contrast to Chrysander’s six, to ensure the figured base is realized by the

continuo16 (See Fig. 9), the order of parts is retained from the autograph, dynamic are

markings are unobtrusive and mirroring the primary sources only (see Fig. 10) and

editorial input is discretely marked for reference.

The facsimile offers limited scope for editorial or presentational endeavor; however

here the editor may choose which source is to be treated and the edition, as a result,

has enabled all to have access to the facsimile rather than the autograph. Chrysander’s

Photographic facsimile does however reveal the source in a state before any textual

information has been lost or contaminated through verbal and printed reproduction;

this edition visually reveals Handel’s compositional nuances. While this edition can be

seen as a useful initial point for the classical performer, for reference and historical

insight, the edition is not easily read for performance, or indeed particularly beneficial

16 “Handel, Italianate in ornamentation, (…) since a great deal of his music, both vocal and instrumental, was written
in a manner that in patently unfinished and in need of ornamental completion by the performer” Neumann, p 523
16
Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

for primary interpretation. In contrast, Nott ensures the text is without interruption by

critical commentary; instead the work is displayed on a full-page, which allows the focus

to be devoted to the text. This also invites the reader to develop their interpretational

and analytical conclusions about the work, without the constant coercion of the

commentary; instead the critical report is displayed in a compact section of this edition

and offers the reader the opportunity to “refer” as and when is necessary. Here Nott

has achieved a sympathetic balance between the service to the work and the performers

needs.

Fig.8
Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

Fig.9

Fig.10

Through an investigation into the editions by Chrysander and Nott, it can, and should

be expected that the 21st century editor can be relied upon to evaluate and select good

readings from the sources collected in order to “establish and present a text that most

fully represents the editor’s conception of the work, as determined by a critical

Isabelle Peters PET11007711 Notation to Performance

examination of the work, its sources, historical context and style” 17 . Where “new

investigations of well-known source will continue to yield new insights into the works

they transmit in direct proportion to the imagination and erudition of the

investigators” 18 , the text need also continue to serve the reader’s, or indeed the

performer’s needs, well as serve as a guided platform for its audience’s study and

interpretation.

17 37
18 crit pg38