The Mutilation of a Masterpiece

Abstract

The responsibilities of one who undertakes the editorship of the work of a deceased musician are many and serious: he is bound to present the text in its integrity, correcting of course any obvious clerical error, and where any point of ambiguity or doubt arises to call attention to it, and, if he please, suggest such an emendation as would appear in his judgment to carry out the intentions and exact meaning of the author. It is absolutely indispensable that an editor of music should be an expert musician, thoroughly conversant not only with the works of the composer he edits but also the methods and traditions of the period in which that composer lived. The editor will frequently have to decide on the authenticity of conflicting manuscripts and copies and to accept or reject this or that reading; but if he mutilate or add to the original draft of the author, he is like a fraudulent trustee and deserves the reprobation of all earnest workers. The annals of music, if carefully searched, would present numerous instances of unfair or unwise editorship. In passing one may mention Dean Aldrich, who edited and appropriated, I think without due acknowledgment, the music of Palestrina, Carissimi, and other Italian composers. The music of Purcell has notably suffered at the hands of unscrupulous or unskilful editors. Doubtless you are familiar with Dr. Boyce's treatment of Purcell's great Te Deum in D. He tried to Handelize it, probably with the best intention, but by expansion and additions he made it about a third longer than the composer's original draft. This same Te Deum was treated in a far more shameful manner by Stafford Smith. He published the work with the following title, “Mr. Purcell's grand Te Deum Alter'd and Digested for the Use of His Majesty's Chapel Royal, also adapted for the Organ or Harpsichord only, by John Stafford Smith, Being Proper for all Chorus and places where they sing in parts.” This is one of the most impertinent pieces of vandalism I am acquainted with. The work is transposed a note lower throughout, and is rightly described as having been “altered and digested.” Smith's digestion must have been of a remarkable character; he reduced the length of the composition by about one-third, and introduced much of his own composition or decomposition into the remaining two-thirds. I have brought a copy of this Smith concoction for your inspection, and also the first printed edition of the Te Deum published by Purcell's widow.