Pail MUS 3585/95 Fall 2015 Writing Assignment No. Assignment Checklist, em Illinois University 2: Annotated Bibliography and Cover Essa a A Score: /150 (GIN Ca. 5 Article Annotat tions YiNGited | Score YINI Recording YIN Relevant Chaplers irom Period Specifie books TWIN 3-4 page Essay YN Material covered is about 1 topic (Dido) Superior ] Excellent Very Good Good Needs More Work ‘Not Acceptable for 3000 level Course Every annotation correctly and accurately describes claim in the students ‘own words Every annotation correctly and accurately describes the supporting reasons in the student’s own words Every annotation accurately and thoroughly lists the types of supporting evidence Every annotation begins with a bibliographic citation correctly formatted in cMs- Humanites/Turabian ‘Annotations stick to the word limit ca, 250 words Essay Introduction Thesis Essay Paragraph | Development Sentence Structure Grammar & Syntax Mechanics (spelling, formatting, layout, ete.)A Hopeless Pursuit Name: Tyler Harr Class: Music History IT Profi: Dr. K. Fenton Assignment/Stage: Essay No. 2 Final Draft Date: October 18, 2015For many years musicologists have tried to uncover the mysteries that revolve around the origins of Purcell’s Dido and Aeneas. It has been known that an early performance, possibly the first, was * t Josias Priest’s boarding school for girls in Chelsea sometime before the end of 1689”'. This performance was thought to have been the first performance, and therefore the year it was written, but according to more recent research this idea has been challenged. Many scholars have brought in other English operas, plays, and poems as well as musical and textual support to reveal the origins of this Opera. The musical and political ambiguities of this opera have flummoxed scholars for almost fifly years. Purcell scholars are in a hopeless pursuit at finding an exact date when Dido and Aeneas was written. This debate is hopeless because scholars continue to use the same research methodologies, such as using the epilogue. Most of their debates circulate around circumstantial evidence and a lack of legitimate affirmatioi of any of these ideas. ‘The first reason why this debate has come to a halt is the lack of new and creative research methodologies, specifically the overuse of the Opera’s epilogue. Many different scholars use the same libretto by Thomas D’Urfey, to follow the performance of the Opera at the school in Chelsea, Burce Wood and Andrew Pinnock use the epilogue to show that the first performance of Dido would have been earlier than the 1689 school performance. They claim that the epilogue would have been performed with an earlier production of the opera because of the “political sting in its tail”, Using specific details within the libretto, they explain how these could be conceived of as allegories to political issues. Due to political unrest in England, if the " Bryan White, “Letter from Aleppo: Dating the Chelsea School Performance of Dido and Aeneas®)”Early Music 37, No.3 (2009): 417. ? Bruce Wood and Andrew Pinnock,““Unscarr'd by Turning Times’? The Dating of Pucell’s Dido and Aeneas,” Early Music 20, No. 3 (1992): 375performance were later it would not have been allowed due to the unrest’. Bryan White uses the epilogue as well, but to prove a completely different point. White's overall claim is in complete contrary to that of Wood and Pinnock, elaiming that the first performance would have had to be the Chelsea school in 1689. He supports his claim with history of performances at school balls, and other events. These events would typically happen in late spring, which corresponds with Barclay Squires original thought date in 1689. The epilogue is also mentioned in John Buttrey’s article, agreeing with White in that 1689 would be the original performance". The overuse of the same research but with different results for the past fifty years shows that the scholars are not getting further in their research using the same research methodologies. / This scholarly debate is also full of differing opinions on the prologue and how to use it, V 10 discover the date of Dido. Many of these scholars discuss allegorical evidence found within the text of the prologue. Curtis Price states that “the prologue is, however, another matter, Its clearly rich in metaphor and mythological symbolism”. Many of the other authors, including Pinncok and Wood, use the prolouge to prove that the date should be moved from 1689, Price claims that there is not enough evidence in either way to move it from the agreed upon year of 1689. They have the same research methodologies and means to find an answer, but although they use the same research they come up with completely different results. Scholars could debate the librettos of the epilogue and prologue, and still never get to a definite conclusion. / Another reason why this debate is seemingly endless and hopeless stems fromthe j/ circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence relies on inferences made about a topic to * Wood and Pinnock 374. + John Buttrey.“*Dating Purcell’s Dido Aeneas,”Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association No.94 (1967-1968): $3 5 Curtis Price, “Dido and Aeneas: Questions of Style and Evidence,” Early Music 22, No. 1 (1994): 122.achieve a conclusion. Itis not definitive and does not prove anything legitimate in this debate. The epilogue and prologues are examples of this type of evidence, but there is even more uncertainty when trying to prove the dating of this opera. Andrew Pinnock uses information about the paintings of artist Antonio Verrio to point out relations between his ceiling paintings and Dido and Aeneas®. Although this explanation follows a logical consistency within it, itis not strong enough evidence to prove this point. Wood and Pinnock include an in depth look at musical style of the time period and how Dido is similar in musical style to works before 1689. These examples of musical style cite small sections of music and common patterns that were seen over the entire Baroque Era such as dotted rhythms, ground bass, and use of declamatory writing. Although these maybe pieces of the puzzle, they cannot ultimately prove the origins of this opera. This scholarly debate also uses pieces of support that lack legitimate evidence by J multiple scholars. The first example of this would be Wood and Pinnock’s inclusion of weather as an argument”. Although it is a unique piece of evidence, it cannot prove that the opera was. performed on a certain day. The weather changes on a daily basis, and how can the scholar prove that the recorded weather is a trustworthy document. Curtis Price also does not use new evidence to support his claims. He takes the arguments of Wood and Pinnock and negates all of their claims®, Although he is contributing to the scholar conversation, Price is not adding new evidence to this debate and not furthering the discussion further. Andrew Pinnock, “Which Genial Day? More on the court origin of Purcell’s Dido and Aeneas, with a shortlist of dates for its possible performance before King Charles Il,” Early Music 43, No. 3 (2015): 1 7 Wood and Pinnock 389. * Price 122.Although there have been many scholars that have contributed to this discussion, the debate itself seems to have come to a halt due to the overuse of the same research methods and lack of new non-circumstantial. I think that this debate has run its course and has no need to be studied anymore. The new arguments being published are not adding new research to the debate and are arguing the same concepts. English Opera had a very small role in the overall evolution of opera and was not respected throughout most of Europe. I do not think that finding the exact year that Dido and Aeneas was written would change the way we think of musie in the western ‘world nor our opinion on this opera.Bibliography Buttrey, John. “Dating Purcell’s Dido Aeneas”. Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association, 14 (1967-1968): 51-62. Purcell’s Opera, Dido and Aeneas, has perplexed its scholars for many years and has lead to this debate. Buttrey claims that the Opera was written in 1689 as originally thought. He supports this claim using many examples from British history 's well as relating the prologue and epilogue to other English plays written during that time. He does not address other scholars within his discussion. He begins with using the epilogue written by Thomas D’Urfey and relates this to the English political and religious powers that created unrest in the time period. He then goes on to show how plays such as Brutus of Alba and other English plays. He then goes to using the prologue and allegories relating Dido to Queen Elizabeth I, showing how the Opera would have been performed at the school first. Pinnock, Andrew. “Which Genial Day? More on the court origin of Purcell's Dido and Aeneas, with a shortlist of dates for its possible performance before King Charles II”. Early Music 43, No. 3 (2015): 1-15. Purcell’s Opera Dido and Aneas has never had a clearly defined date for when it was written, only records of an early performance of it in a school. Challenging the work of Price, White, and Wood, Pinnock brings in new ideas to this debate. He claims that this opera was written for a celebration for King Charles II, possibly in 1684. Pinnock examines other librettos, that were written for the royalty of the time period. He also uses other operas of the time to show how this Purcell opera compares. The Dido prologue can be thought of in this political manner as well. He uses his other paper, “deus ex machina”, for support and brings it into the scholarlyconversation saying that “Which Genial Day” is a second part his first article. After Pinnock’s in depth look at the prologue, then discusses how Antonio Verrio’s ceiling paintings point to specific details within Dido. J Price, Curtis. “Dido and Aeneas: Questions of Style and Evidence”. Early Music 22, No. 1 (1994): 115-125, Price, a Purcell opera expert, claims that there is not enough evidence to move the year of Purcell’s Opera, Dido and Aeneas from 1689. He references the work of Wood and Pinnock and counter’s their entire claim relating this Opera to Venus and Adonis and other Purcell works of the time period. Price uses other examples of Purcell’s work to show structure and music text relationships within these examples. He also gives his opinion on the prologue aspect of this debate; He states that they have very little to do with the Opera itself and other scholars make too ‘many unsupported opinions. This article does not bring any new evidence to the debate, just counters many arguments. White, Bryan. “Letter from Aleppo: Dating the Chelsea School Performance of *Dido and Aeneas™", Early Music 37, No.3 (2009): 417-428. White asserts that with new information found in letters by Rowland Sherman, he has found research that aid in determining the date of the first performance of Pureell’s Dido and Aeneas. Hie claims that due to these letters from Rowland Sherman the first performance of this ‘opera was by the Chelsea school in 1689 as originally thought by Barclay Squires. White uses letters written by Sherman from the Middle East during this time to explain how the Opera could not have been performed before or after the Chelsea schoo! performance. He uses the argumentsfrom other scholars, Pinnock, Wood, and Buttery, and explains how their arguments compare to the newly discovered letters. The letters are written to merchant music lovers of England and include passages that relate to the first performance of “Dido and Aeneas”. This essay is organized into six parts: the section deals with the background information on these letters and how they were sent back and forth. The following section is showing evidence for the Chelsea school performance in 1689. Next, White uses the epilogue and prologue and excerpts from these letters to show how the opera could not have been performed other places. Lastly, he discusses the possibility that this opera could have been written before this performance and how research can only prove that this school performance of 1689 was the first. Wood, Bruce and Andrew Pinnock. “’Unscarr’d by Turning Times”? The Dating of Pucell’s Dido and Aeneag”) Early Music 20, No. 3 (1992): 372-390. Bruce Wood and Andrew Pinnock assert that the debated dates for the English Opera Dido and Aeneas, by Purcell are incorrect due to recent evidence. They claim that Dido may have been performed before the performance of 1689 thought to be the first performance. Wood and Pinnock use the epilogue and prologue to point out cultural, social, and political context clues, They also use specific examples of musical style that relate to other works of the time period, Literary sources of the time period are also brought in to give historical examples to help date the opera. Lastly the weather is brought into the scholarly conversation showing holes many other arguments. This article is organized into five parts, the epilogue, prologue, and examples of musical style, literary context, and the weather.