David Runnion replies to me:

>>Unless, of course, the composer made a mistake or miscalculated.  But
>>apparently the composer can never be wrong.  Sweet racket.
>
>Unfortunately, all we have to go on is what the composer wrote.  With
>the exception of living composers to whom we can write or telephone, the
>written indications are the only guide we have.  So, Steve, at least from
>this performer's point of view, no, the composer is never wrong.  To change
>what is written is to tread someplace where we have no right to tread.

I'm really of two minds about this.  On the one hand, I'm extremely
sensitive to performers or conductors or publishers changing what a
composer writes, often without permission.  And, of course, the dead can't
defend themselves.  This happened for years to Gershwin, who was not
allowed to fail on his own.  People insisted on helping him do it.  For
example, until recently, most of Gershwin's concert works were performed in
arrangements silently made and passed off as pure Gershwin.  Ethical issues
aside, the problem is that, compared to the real thing, it's simply not as
interesting or as daring.

On the other hand, one can easily imagine - although in practice I admit
it's hard to think of a live, successful example - a score definitely
improved by some brilliant editing.

>To take it a little further, if you start eliminating repeats willy-nilly,
>doesn't that logically lead to changing dynamic markings that don't suit
>us? If we don't like a particular modulation in a Beethoven sonata, may we
>change the harmony? Heck, why not change the order of the movements? Surely
>Beethoven must have been mistaken putting the scherzo before the slow
>movement in the ninth symphony!

The answer to this is that you try it out and see if it works.  In other
words, you judge by specifics, not by some inflexible bromide.  You might
indeed know better than the composer.  It's a long shot, but it's still a
shot.  Furthermore, most standard performing editions of Beethoven are not
necessarily what Beethoven actually wrote, but are heavily edited, using
manuscripts when possible as well as early publications.  Now with
Beethoven, you're less open to ethical attacks since "authentic"
performances are not exactly unavailable.  Does a repeat work or doesn't
it? Does a modulation work or doesn't it? Is the order of movements
effective? These are questions to be put to a specific performance.  The
answers may very well change from one performance to another.  If the
answers work out to Beethoven's favor, based on a mnemonic repository of
successful performances of the One True Text (and if we're talking about
edited music - as I believe all of Beethoven's music is - what do we mean
exactly?), we have every right to criticize a specific performance.

I know it's not a matter of either-or - scrupulous observance of the best
possible text vs.  intellectual excitement - but I find it very hard to
condemn a performance full of fire, imagination, and energy just because it
doesn't observe every single repeat.  It strikes me as pedantry.  But then,
I love Stokowski's and Schoenberg's Bach arrangements.  Different strokes.

Steve Schwartz