Introduction and Overview 

Leonie Rosenstiel, Project Editor 

The articles in this section of Current Musicology form the second and con-
cluding part of our project, "The Spheres of Music: Harmony and Discord," 
which was begun in Issue Number 14/1972. In Issue Number 15 our con-
tributors have also concerned themselves to a great extent with past, present, 
and possible future problems of communication among the various branches 
of music and related fields and with the positive and negative effects that 
these disciplines may have on each other. Again, the articles are written 
from widely differing points of view and treat their subjects in diverse man-
ners, but this variety is, itself, inherent in the nature of the project.l 

Malcolm Frager uses his own experience with the manuscript of Robert 
Schumann's Piano Concerto as a case study, demonstrating how musicologi-
cal methods and information may help a performer "to better realize the 
original intent of a composer," as well as to correct errors in published 
editions. The differing reactions of composers to musicologists and the 
potential uses of musicology as an aid both in unearthing music for perfor-
mance and in understanding contemporary scores are emphasized by 
Edmund Haines. Citing early exposure to musicology as a factor in his 
positive reaction to the field, Mr. Haines describes his own methods for re-
searching contemporary Spanish music. The ubiquitous quality of musi-
cological research is stressed by Qtto Luening, who shows how his own 
background in that field influenced his development as composer, teacher, 
and "practitioner in the arts." Going a step farther, he discusses the signifi-
cance of environmental factors in the continued survival of the art of music 
and the need for an understanding of related disciplines. 

In describing the relatively recent recognition of musical performance as 
an integral part of teaching music within the liberal arts curriculum at 
Wesleyan University, David McAllester argues for the universal acceptance 
of this procedure as the equivalent of laboratory or field experiences in other 
liberal arts and sciences. Susan Thiemann Sommer believes that problems of 
communication lead many musicians to the false conclusion that there is 
little or no relationship between musicology and performance. Performance 
decisions should remain with the performer, but he should also be aware of 
his options, and the musicologist can provide this information. As a record 
reviewer, Mrs. Sommer notes with approval the growing trend toward more 
historically valid performances of early music. 

The writers, be they performer, composer, scholar, or critic, show a 
common interest in the ways in which musicological research and resources 
may be of particular help to both composers and performers. They all stress 
the need for better communication and greater understanding, so that each 
specialist may benefit from the insights of others. 

81 



Using their own experiences and those of their friends and colleagues, the 
contributors to this issue argue strongly-both implicitly and explicitly-for 
the exposure of the developing musician, no matter what his ultimate field 
of specialization, to the information and techniques of both the practical and 
the theoretical aspects of his art. In so doing, they scrutinize past and present 
practices and attitudes in the various areas of music and offer suggestions for 
the modification of those aspects which they feel have been and will continue 
to be detrimental to the best interests of music and musicians in general. 
The authors of the present articles, as well as of those in Issue Number 14 not 
only pinpoint areas of discord but also set forth concrete, constructive sug-
gestions for achieving greater harmony and more effective communication 
among members of the musical community. 

NOTE 

1 See Leonie Rosenstiel, "Introduction and Overview," Current Musicology 14 (Fall 1972): 
81-83. 

82