The notation is not the music

Barthold Kuijken
Promotors: Henri Vanhulst, Raffaël D'haene

Reflections on more than 40 years’ intensive practice of Early Music.

Throughout history, music notation has become increasingly precise and complete and its symbols have acquired an ever more absolute meaning. Looking at the period from ca. 1660 to ca. 1830, the author shows that many details were written down only approximately. Further, old prints are often error-strewn and manuscripts were mostly prepared for immediate use only, not for eternity. Frequently, important performing matters were entirely left to the performer’s discretion. Reading Early Music according to modern usage can thus easily lead to wrong or incomplete interpretations. Performing according to modern usage is another problem: today’s mainstream performing style gradually came into use since the end of the 19th century. We all grew up in this tradition; consequently its elements are fully recognised by both listeners and performers and feel natural to us. Many performers, also among the “specialists”, quite indiscriminately apply these principles to Early Music as well, thereby robbing it of many particular qualities.

In Early Music, the performer actively participates in the compositional process. Indeed, besides correctly decoding the notation, he must also supplement the missing elements where necessary and in the appropriate style. “Good taste” is the criterion, but this varies with time, place, function, genre, style and person. The different attitudes a performer can adopt regarding this complicated but fascinating situation are discussed, together with their consequences. It is the author’s conviction that, when so much detailed historical documentation exists, there is hardly an excuse not to study and apply it. It should at least awake the curiosity to understand as well as possible what the composer might have heard in his mind while writing a piece of music. However, since music is not an exact science, no definitive answers can be found; at the best, a field of probabilities can be established. Artistically spoken, it is to be welcomed that this uncertainty generates only temporary answers and always new questions. Also in music pedagogy, this creative and critical reading is very important. In Early Music, it helps keeping contact with the sources themselves instead of following all too easily some charismatic performers, schools or fashions.

Complete historical authenticity is obviously impossible to attain, but that is no reason for not trying to move into that direction. In the author’s opinion, striving for historical authenticity is useless if it is not nourished by the performer’s personal authenticity. The accumulated information must be integrated into his artistic concept, feelings and mother tongue, otherwise he will seem to recite or sing a text in a language which is unknown to him. The performer will need to embody the affects of the composition as if they were his own for the time being: he borrows them from the composer and afterwards can return them with thanks. The author’s motivations and choices are explained – they are personal choices, for sure, but based on artistic integrity and feeling, historical knowledge and hands-on experience.

This essay is not intended to be a history of the Early Music movement, it is neither a scientific study of the Early Music notation nor a quick-and-easy “How to perform Early Music correctly”. It focuses on the philosophy behind the notation and on the attitude of the performer, rather than on the results. Its basic quest has been beautifully formulated by the 17th-century Japanese Haiku-master Matsuo Basho: “do not try to find the footprints of the ancestors, search for what they were searching for”.