Academic journal article Notes

Communications

Academic journal article Notes

Communications

Article excerpt

This column provides a forum for responses to the contents of this journal, and For information of interest to readers. The editor reserves the right to publish letters in excerpted form and to edit them for consiseness and clarity.

Update:

Between the editing of final proofs and the publication of David Nicholls's review of Ruth Crawford's Music for Small Orchestra and Suite no. 2 for Four Strings and Piano (Notes, December 1996, 626-27), I received from A-R Editions a copy of the collected second edition published in 1996 (priced at $43.20). Regrettably, the score arrived too late to make any emendations to the review, although we were able to note the current availability of the revised edition at the end of the review citation, While it is not possible to record here all of the changes in this edition, readers of Notes (and, in particular, owners of the 1993 version) should be aware that the revisions are considerable. Such changes come to light only upon comparing the two versions; regrettably, A-R Editions fails to mention anywhere in the revision the corrections and additions that have occurred, or even why a second edition of this groundbreaking first volume of MUSA was necessary.

In his review, Nicholls cited two errors, both of which are corrected in the new edition. The suspicious g[??] in the piano part at m. 29 of the Suite's final movement was indeed a printer's error and now reads as b'. There is no way to know how many other such errors have been tacitly corrected in the revision. The text of Judith Tick's introductory essay now correctly references footnotes 134-36. Nicholls did not mention, however, the even more garbled aspects of the footnote sequence occurring in the 1993 edition: on page xx, the footnotes repeat the numbering 81-85 from the previous page rather than continuing with 86-90; this misnumbered sequence lasts until footnote 128 on page xxv (which should read 133) and then jumps to the correct footnote number 134 on page xxvi (due to text reformatting in the revision, footnote 134 now appears on p. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.