This major essay collection takes a fresh look at how differences among people matter for music and musical thought.

When we view Chopin's later works in the context of his biography, we find a conjunction of real-life machines (trains, the telegraph), mimetic mechanical music (music boxes), and prolific textual variants. Particularly fascinating are several late pieces that feature canons, a form of strict counterpoint that at once evokes the notion of “machine music”—the leading line seems automatically to generate the following line—and produces relatively few textual variants that concern pitch. Variants in the realm of performing indications, though, occur frequently. (...) Chopin worked hard to ensure fidelity of pitch, but—this article shows—in giving the performer leeway to choose among various modes of performance, he ensured a role for individual expression in musical textures otherwise evocative of notions of science and logic. (shrink)

This essay introduces a Common Knowledge symposium on the relationship between texts (for instance, musical scores or dramatic scripts) and performance in the arts by drawing out its implications for the interpretation of publicly consequential texts (such as constitutions, legal statutes, and canon law). Arguing that judges and clerics could learn much from studying the work of Philip Gossett and other practitioners of textual criticism in the arts, the essay suggests that a wider array of choices exists for legal interpretation (...) than the usual alternative between originalism or literalism, on the one hand, and intuitionism, on the other hand. Contributions to the symposium (titled “Between Text and Performance”) emphasize what Roger Moseley calls “improvisatory fluency in historical idioms,” and this introduction recommends that jurists develop for the law the kind of “ear” that musicians must have when a score invites or demands improvisation. (shrink)