WET Scores Invite a Reconsideration of Traditional Pedagogical Approaches

"Craters" A WET Score for Solo Soprano Voice

In the discourse of musical notation, traditionally demarcated by the unequivocal employment of conventional symbols—notes, rests, and the like—the introduction of what I term 'WET' scores (an acronym standing for Words, Events, Text) heralds a deviation towards a more linguistically oriented method of musical transcription and interpretation.

This deviation, it seems, aligns closely with Wittgenstein's linguistic philosophy, particularly his exploration of language games, by suggesting a foundational shift in how music might be notated and understood. The proposition at hand posits a thought experiment: Suppose music notation, from its inception, had been rooted in language—both written and spoken—rather than in the established symbols of musical tradition. The implications of such a conjecture are indeed vast, prompting a reevaluation of the role of language in music culture and education.

The essence of WET scores lies in their capacity to reframe musical composition and performance within the context of linguistic communication. By doing so, they challenge performers to engage with music on a level that transcends traditional notational boundaries, encouraging a dialogue with the score that is as much about interpretation as it is about execution. This reorientation towards a linguistic-based system of notation compels us to reconsider the nature of musical meaning, suggesting that it may be more fluid and context-dependent than previously acknowledged.

Wittgenstein's philosophical inquiry into the nature and function of language offers a pertinent framework for understanding the radical potential of WET scores. Just as he proposed that the meaning of words is inherently tied to their use within specific language games, so too might we consider that the meaning of musical phrases—and indeed, the notation by which they are represented—can only be fully understood within the context of their performance and interpretation.

This perspective challenges the notion of music as a language of absolute meanings, suggesting instead that its significance may be as variable and nuanced as that of spoken and written language.

By proposing the adoption of language as the primary means of conveying musical ideas, WET scores invite a reconsideration of traditional pedagogical approaches. This shift implies a more integrative view of music education, one that recognizes the inherent interconnectivity between linguistic and musical expression. The question then arises: Could the teaching of music benefit from a closer alignment with the teaching of language, in which sound, emotion, and performance are conveyed through the nuances of linguistic expression?

The implications of this thought experiment extend beyond the realm of music notation and education, touching upon broader philosophical debates about the nature of meaning, interpretation, and communication. WET scores, by blurring the distinctions between the linguistic and the musical, challenge us to consider the ways in which these domains might enrich and inform one another. In doing so, they not only offer a novel approach to musical composition and performance but also contribute to a deeper understanding of the complexities of human expression.