Balancing Authenticity and Functionality: An Introspection of Re-engraved Scores in Music Theory and Analysis Textbooks

_____________

My thoughts have been preoccupied with an important question for a significant period, and I now find myself with ample time to carefully contemplate it and commit it to writing.

It has come to my attention that there is a perspective advocating for the use of an ‘original sheet music’—or more precisely, scores initially published by their respective publishers—in music theory textbooks and practice workbooks, particularly those that pose examination-style questions or contain entrance mock tests. Proponents of this approach argue that it highlights the authenticity of musical notations and showcases the artistry of music score editing, rather than depending on reproductions that have been re-edited by the textbook publisher.

This assumption and statement (purportedly allowing readers to view the original version of the score) are both somewhat perplexing.

Firstly, we will examine the musical examples employed in most classical music theory analyses throughout this article. We will also explore the manner in which scores collected in music history are presented. For illustrative purposes, I shall reference three music history textbooks that are widely recognised in Europe, the United States, and other countries (the instances of music theory textbooks will be discussed later). Grout, Stolba, and Bonds have published music history books through three esteemed publishers, namely W. W. Norton and Company, McGraw Hill, and Pearson. Upon inspection, it is apparent that these examples have invariably been re-notated, or more precisely, re-engraved. when the editorial departments of these publishing houses processed the musical score examples (or some basic music analytical examples) in their respective publications. 

This observation raises a pertinent question: under the aforementioned concept, would the use of the original publisher’s score not better exemplify authenticity? Furthermore, should music history books not adhere more closely to this principle, thus enabling readers to examine the intricate details of original score publications?

In response to the question presented above, I aim to provide a clear and concise elucidation whilst also explaining my own introspection to highlight why publications opt to re-edit all musical examples rather than incorporate the original sheet music:

• Given that our primary focus is not on ‘original research,’ ‘manuscript study’ or even ‘comparison of score versions,’ the insistence on utilising the original published score proves to be inconsequential.
• It is entirely within the realm of standard practice for the editorial department to re-engrave specific musical passages, as the accurate selection and extraction of particular segments is paramount to their purpose.
• Upon examination, it will become evident that scores have been invariably re-engraved, even when these textbooks have published their own music example collections (e.g. Grout).  The use of the original publisher’s score may only be feasible in cases pertaining to twentieth-century works or those employing specialised notations.
• With regard to emphasising the authenticity of the music score display, it should be noted that manuscripts have been published by numerous entities. All scores have been beautifully edited, albeit in different ways, which raises the question: what is the standard of choice? (Does the entire textbook use the music scores first published by the original publisher? It is doubtful that textbooks published by critics universally employ first-edition music scores.)

Does the underlying principle apply to music analysis or the scores utilised in music theory (particularly textbooks that focus on music theory and analysis, and introduce concepts such as triads, tonality, scales, non-harmonic tones, and modulation)? Indeed, it is. We can also consider some distinguished textbooks here, such as those written by Bruce Benward, Stefan Kostka, and George Thaddeus Jones. Furthermore, we can examine a number of renowned music theory examples or Theory of Music workbooks published by ABRSM and Trinity College London. The scores employed in these scholarly works do not require readers to engage in ‘first edition score studies’ or version comparisons. Rather, they require readers to examine specific musical parameters within the scores (such as metre, rhythm, intervals, chords, cadences, and terminology). In this context, a re-engraved score is more than sufficient in terms of functionality. In essence, the primary consideration is the layout and editorial presentation of the score.

Consequently, it can be seen that all entrance examinations or test papers published in countries such as Japan, Singapore, China, Canada and the USA, as well as countries in Europe, invariably feature re-engraved scores. One will never encounter cases where question setters utilise screenshots to create examination items.

A salient detail is evident here, namely the inclusion of the composer’s name and the title of the work in the musical scores of entrance examinations, test papers, or indeed scholarly works published in the aforementioned countries. This provision affords readers or students direct access to the original version. Consequently, it is not necessary to scrutinise the presented musical excerpts in order to appreciate the aesthetic qualities or verify the authenticity of the first edition or original score. This is because the scores are readily accessible through alternative means.

A germane question may arise here: is it imperative for the re-engraved musical score in entrance examinations, test papers, and workbooks to be an exact facsimile of the original publisher’s score? In my opinion, the necessity of such exactitude is contingent upon the specific information required by the editor and question setter. In cases where only particular elements of the musical score are pertinent, a ‘reproduced’ score that faithfully represents these elements should be sufficient to achieve the intended purpose.

To the end, the practice of re-engraving musical scores for textbooks, examinations, and scholarly works is not merely a matter of convenience, but a considered approach that balances authenticity with functionality. Whilst the original published scores undoubtedly possess inherent value, their wholesale reproduction in educational materials is often unnecessary and potentially counterproductive. The re-engraved scores, when faithfully reproduced, serve the pedagogical and analytical purposes admirably, allowing for clear focus on the relevant musical elements. Moreover, the inclusion of compositional details enables interested parties to seek out original editions if desired. This approach, adopted widely across reputable institutions and publications, underscores a pragmatic philosophy: that the essence of music education and analysis lies not in the precise replication of historical documents, but in the clear and accessible presentation of musical concepts. As such, the re-engraving of scores stands as a judicious compromise between preserving the integrity of the music and facilitating effective learning and examination.

TY Feng, 2024, 08, Hamburg.