最新提问
我的动态
登录后查看动态
题目内容双击单词支持查询和收藏哦～
题目材料：
Few topics engender more controversy among musicologists than the "authentic" performance of music of earlier periods. At issue are claims made by partisans of the early music movement that their performances represent a re-creation of history and that the historical information on which such performances are based provide a sure foundation for performances that accurately reflect the composer's original intentions. Taruskin has been the most powerful critic of this view, arguing that so-called authentic performances do not reveal any concrete truth of how the music of earlier times "should" sound. Instead, these performances reflect our contemporary taste for this repertoire's sound and offer a twentieth-century interpretation that, while based on certain historical facts, is encumbered with the unconscious biases inherent in any interpretive endeavor.
Yet, despite their flaws, historical investigations and interpretations remain an indispensable part of music scholarship. Indeed, Taruskin is not engaged in a wholesale crusade against the early music movement or against performance-practice research; rather, he is calling for intellectual honesty. His arguments are important because they help clarify the thin line between historical facts, on the one hand, and, on the other, musical interpretations based not only on those facts but also on imaginative, well-founded speculation.
Yet, despite their flaws, historical investigations and interpretations remain an indispensable part of music scholarship. Indeed, Taruskin is not engaged in a wholesale crusade against the early music movement or against performance-practice research; rather, he is calling for intellectual honesty. His arguments are important because they help clarify the thin line between historical facts, on the one hand, and, on the other, musical interpretations based not only on those facts but also on imaginative, well-founded speculation.
以上解析由 考满分老师提供。
