Showing posts with label music. Show all posts
Showing posts with label music. Show all posts

28 January 2025

More Odds & Ends

 

[I enjoyed putting together “Theater Odds & Ends,” posted on Rick On Theater on 23 January, so much that I decided to do another compilation of short pieces from various sources.  This time, I’ve avoided theater articles and gone with a gallimaufry of “vintage” articles of curiosity value.] 

THE RECYCLERS: FROM TRASH COMES TRIUMPH
Reported by Bob Simon 

[The transcript below is from “The Recyclers” which aired on CBS’s 60 Minutes on 17 November 2013 (and re-broadcast on 18 May 2014). The producer was Michael Gavshon.]

Ever heard of a town built on a garbage dump? We hadn’t until earlier this year when we visited a community on the outskirts of Asuncion, the capital of the tiny, impoverished South American country of Paraguay. It’s called Cateura and there is trash everywhere – in its streets, its rivers, in people’s backyards – but we decided to take you to Cateura tonight, not because of the poverty or the filth, but because of the incredible imagination and ingenuity of the people who live there. Our story is also a reminder that, ultimately, music will triumph everywhere and anywhere.

Garbage is the only crop in Cateura and the harvest lasts 12 months a year. It is Cateura’s curse, its livelihood and the only reason people live here, providing hundreds of jobs to peasant farmers who were kicked off their plots by large land owners. They are the Trash Pickers. It is their profession. They sift through the stench 24 hours a day, scrounging for anything they can sell – 10 cents for a pound of plastic, five cents for a pound of cardboard [equivalent to 14¢ and 7¢ in 2025].

You’ll be amazed at what else people here are doing with this trash . . . just look and listen.

This is the Recycled Orchestra of Cateura [Orquesta de Instrumentos Reciclados de Cateura]. The violins are fashioned from oven trays, the cellos from oil barrels. Even the strings are recycled.

The saxophones and trumpets are made from old drain pipes, the keys were once coins and bottle caps. This drum skin used to be an X-ray plate, the guitar from dessert tins.

The idea came from environmental technician Favio Chavez. When he came to Cateura and saw the kids working and playing on this miserable hill, he came up with the idea of starting a music school to lift the kids’ lives out of the trash.

From the start, Favio realized that even if he could raise the money, new instruments were out of the question. A factory-made violin would cost more than a house here and would almost certainly get stolen. But these fiddles aren’t worth a dime.

They are the handiwork of trash worker and carpenter Don Colá Gomez – three days a week he goes to the dump to find the raw materials.

Then, in his tiny workshop at the edge of the dump, he goes to work. Favio first asked him to make a violin. But this Stradivarius of South America had never seen one or heard one. [Italian craftsman of string instruments Antonio Stradivari (c. 1644-1737) made superb and highly prized instruments that now sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars to several million.]

BOB SIMON: But do you realize how unusual it is?

DON COLÁ GOMEZ: Yes, that’s the way it is. When you need something, you need to do whatever it takes to survive.

He was soon making three violins a week, then cellos and finally guitars, drums and double basses . . . out of trash.

Take a look and listen to what Colá has created. Fifteen-year-old Ada Rios has been playing for three years now. Today, she is the orchestra’s first violinist.

BOB SIMON: The first time you went and saw the orchestra you saw all these instruments with all these different colors. Were you surprised when you learned that they were made from trash?

ADA RIOS: Yes. I was very surprised because I had thought that trash was useless. But thanks to the orchestra I now realize that there are so many different things that can be done with the stuff.

Cateura didn’t exist before Paraguay’s capital Asuncion started dumping its trash here [1984]. The town grew up around the garbage and became one of the poorest places in South America.

Twenty-five hundred families live here now. There is hardly any electricity or plumbing. The drinking water is contaminated. Many of the children move from broken homes to crime and drugs.

But Ada and her younger sister Noelia, who plays the cello, say that music has become their salvation, the centerpiece of their lives. And who do they have to thank for that? Their grandmother, Mirian.

She is a garbage worker, collects bottles in the streets of Asuncion, carries them back to Cateura to sell. Ten cents a pound. Three years ago, Mirian saw a notice advertising free music lessons for children. That’s how it all began.

BOB SIMON: Why did you want them to learn music?

MIRIAN RIOS: Because I always wanted to be a musician-- or play an instrument. Actually I wanted to be a singer. Sometimes our dreams do come true. Maybe not in our lives, but through people that we love very much.

ADA RIOS: When I play the violin I feel like I am somewhere else. I imagine that I’m alone in my own world and forget about everything else around me and I feel transported to a beautiful place.

BOB SIMON: Can you describe that beautiful place?

ADA RIOS: Yes. I’m transported to a place that is completely different to where I am now. It has clear skies, open fields and I see lots of green. It’s clean with no trash. There is no contamination where we live. It’s just me alone playing my violin.

Every Saturday, this drab school yard is transformed into a multi-colored oasis of music. The kids flock here to learn and to play.

Cateura is a long way from Juilliard, but these music students are just as dedicated as those prodigies in New York . . .  and they don’t get rained on like the kids here. Paraguay is in the tropics and you are reminded of that all the time. But the band plays on.

The veterans –15-year-olds – are teaching the novices. Many are barely big enough to hold a violin. The music can’t compete with the downpour but there is refuge in a classroom.

Favio Chavez says that music teaches the kids respect and responsibility, not common commodities in the gang-ridden streets of Cateura.

FAVIO CHAVEZ: These values are completely different to those of gangs. If these kids love being part of the orchestra – they are absolutely going to hate being part of a gang.

For the first time, the children are getting out of Cateura, performing around the country and to Chavez, the Pied Piper of Paraguay, that’s the most important thing. They are being seen. They are being heard.

FAVIO CHAVEZ: These are children that were hidden, nobody even knew they existed. We have put them on a stage and now everybody looks at them and everybody knows they exist.

That’s mainly because of a documentary that’s being made about the orchestra called “Landfill Harmonic.” Last November, the producers put their trailer up on YouTube [Landfill Harmonic - the "Recycled Orchestra"]. It went viral . . .  the orchestra began getting bookings world-wide. It is such stuff as dreams are made on.

The film which follows their remarkable journey through concert halls in Europe and America will only be released next year but already instruments are being donated and that’s not all – the kids are getting help.

Paraguay’s most famous musician, Berta Rojas [classical guitarist; b. 1966 in Asuncion; with over a dozen albums, she has performed all over the world alone and with renowned international musicians and had received many awards and honors from many countries], flies down regularly from her home in Maryland to offer master classes.

Remember Noelia, Ada’s sister, the cellist? Berta is teaching her how to play the guitar.

BERTA ROJAS: This is – an – a story that is filling my heart and my soul with so much inspiration.

BOB SIMON: When you first heard them play, what went through your mind?

BERTA ROJAS: I couldn’t believe that you could make music with trash. I couldn’t believe it. And I thought, “Oh my God, this is the best thing that had happened in Paraguay in so many years.”

And when you talk to the parents, you hear what you hear from poor people everywhere. They want their kids to have a better life than they’ve had.

Jorge Rios is Ada and Noelia’s father . . .

BOB SIMON: If Ada becomes a professional musician, she’d probably be leaving town. How would you react to that?

JORGE RIOS: Yes, the truth is if you asked that question to every parent here they would say they would leave this place if they could. I, of course, would like her to have a better life than the one I’ve had. And if she leaves I hope she takes me with her!

What’s hard to believe is that most of the parents and the people of Cateura had never heard the children play. That was about to change. A concert was finally scheduled. There were banners in the streets, the local radio station was ready to broadcast. The church was transformed into a concert hall.

The children wore their finest. This was, after all, opening night. It could have been New York.

All the students were on stage for the finale. Some of the musicians were performing after just one rehearsal.

The parents were proud, of course. But just listen to the girls’ grandma Mirian.

MIRIAN RIOS: I would say it’s a blessing from God. People used to humiliate us and call us “trash pickers.” Today they are more civilized, they call us the “recyclers.” So I feel that this is a reward from God. That our children who come from this place . . . can play beautiful music in this way.

And here’s a final note from the Recycled Orchestra of Cateura. Go on, send us your garbage, we’ll send it back to you . . . as music.

[Since this segment was aired, the orchestra has toured South Africa with the heavy metal band Metallica.  They’ve since performed internationally with Stevie Wonder and the American heavy-metal bands Metallica and Megadeth.

[They were hoping to raise enough money to build a music school for their community on the edge of the dump.  In 2015, construction of the building was begun and the school opened in 2016, just before Landfill Harmonic was released.

[The documentary Landfill Harmonic (2013) was produced by Juliana Penaranda-Loftus and directed by Graham Townsley; executive producers were Alejandra Amarilla and Rodolfo Madero

[Bob Simon (1941-2015) covered most major overseas conflicts and news stories from the late ’60s to his death in a car accident.  He contributed to 60 Minutes since 1996.]

*  *  *  *
AN EXPLANATION FOR HICCUPS? DON’T HOLD YOUR BREATH
by Meeri Kim 

[This article was originally published in the “Health & Science” section of the Washington Post on 3 June 2014.]

It happens in the blink of an eye: Your breathing muscles contract, your vocal cords clamp shut, and out comes that unmistakable sound.

“Hic.”

We all get hiccups from time to time. So do cats, rats and human fetuses. Perhaps you ate too quickly, got too excited or drank something carbonated. Or you are coming out of anesthesia after an operation. But often there’s no clear trigger. Doctors don’t know what purpose they serve, nor do they know how to make them go away.

In other words, the humble hiccup remains largely a mystery. And just as theories abound on causes and cures, so do home remedies.

“People have very interesting interventions: Scare me, hurt me, tickle me, drink for 90 seconds, drink upside down for 90 seconds,” said internist Tyler Cymet. “But these aren’t based in science.”

Cymet, head of medical education at the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine, performed a five-year study involving 54 hospital patients with hiccups. Beginning in 1995, he tried a wide range of treatments, including breath holding and strong medications, but he ended up with a null result: None of the techniques proved effective in ridding patients of their hiccup spells.

[Osteopathic medicine in the United States is a form of scientific medicine which today scientifically and legally overlaps with non-osteopathic (allopathic) medical science and practice. Before the 20th century, osteopathic medicine emphasized the patient’s health and treatment by manipulation of the musculoskeletal system and on the diagnostic significance of patient lifestyle and environment.  Some osteopathic physicians (OD’s) still include such treatments alongside allopathic medical treatment for a few of their patients, but their training and practices today are indistinguishable from those of allopathic physicians (MD’s).]

“I think the jury is in that nothing works: It starts and stops on its own, and that’s about it,” he said.

But why do we do it in the first place? Some researchers propose it is a fetal digestive reflex that guards against breathing in amniotic fluid while in the womb. Or an early way to train respiratory muscles for breathing after birth.

Another theory posits that hiccups date all the way back to our amphibian ancestors. The classic pattern of breathing in followed by an abrupt closing of the glottis is seen particularly in tadpoles when they use their gills rather than their lungs to breathe. The tadpole’s brainstem tells a flap to close the glottis upon inspiration to prevent water from entering the lungs. This allows the water to pass through the gills. The hiccup reflex may have persisted up the tree of life even though it no longer serves any purpose.

What is agreed upon and well known, however, is the mechanism of a hiccup. Referred to in medicine as singultus, it is defined by a sudden contraction of the diaphragm and intercostal muscles — located within the spacing between the ribs — followed by snapping shut of the glottis, the space between the vocal folds within the larynx. The quick spasm of inhalation colliding with the closed larynx causes the characteristic sound and bodily jerk.

The peanut butter fix

Most experts also agree that hiccups involve a neuronal circuit starting with the phrenic and vagus nerves. The vagus nerve extends from the brainstem to the abdomen, while the phrenic nerves send signals from the brain to the diaphragm.

While hiccups are little more than a temporary annoyance for most of us, they can become all-consuming. Coleen O’Lear, a home page editor at The Washington Post, hiccups nearly every day — sometimes just occasionally, other times in fits.

“When I get them rapid-fire, they are pretty high-pitched and sound ridiculous,” O’Lear said. “It is physically uncomfortable.”

The 29-year-old has had hiccup spells for as long as she can remember; doctors say they may be linked to acid reflux disease, which she has had since she was a baby. She has tried every home remedy she has heard of: spoonfuls of sugar, holding her breath, deep breaths, drinking upside down, sucking on lemons. Some may work temporarily; most fail completely.

But one thing does work: eating a spoonful of creamy peanut butter very slowly. O’Lear thinks it has something to do with coating her esophagus, but Cymet believes it has more of a mental calming effect.

“The peanut butter is a type of cognitive behavioral therapy, where you’re controlling your breathing and thinking about what you’re doing instead of getting anxious,” he said.

Although her newsroom colleagues are entirely accustomed to them, O’Lear still finds the hiccups frustrating.

“People don’t know how to react to it,” she said. “Most of the time, they bless me.”

The chronic hiccuper who stepped into psychologist Duane Hurst’s office two years ago got so fed up with her five-year-run of daily hiccup spells that she initially requested an invasive procedure to crush the phrenic nerve, effectively paralyzing her diaphragm. Hurst, of the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Ariz., thought such a procedure was far too extreme and instead offered to try a technique called heart rate variability biofeedback.

Flipping back and forth

Our nervous system controls involuntary bodily functions, such as heartbeat and blood vessel contraction, via two complementary branches. One branch stimulates responses related to our fight-or-flight instinct — increased heart rate, dilated pupils, sweat secretion — while the other initiates the rest-and-restore mode.

Some people are oversensitive to stress stimuli and flip too easily back and forth between the two — perhaps a beneficial trait when man was a target of predators, but not as helpful in today’s world, where it can lead to unwanted anxiety. A quick fight-or-flight response that once saved man from cave bears and saber-toothed cats can kick in at inopportune moments, such as at a meeting with the boss or while merging on the highway.

By measuring the interval between heartbeats, doctors can track the interplay between the two branches and the extent to which they are battling each other: One ups the heart rate, while the other slows it down.

For the woman who had considered having her phrenic nerve crushed, Hurst used an electrocardiogram to detect variability in her heart rate and instructed her to take carefully measured breaths. The idea was to help her find a respiration rate that would activate her rest-and-restore mode, rebalance the nervous system and ease stress.

“Not many people are aware that they can use their breathing in a systematic way,” Hurst said. “Each one of us individuals has a breathing sweet spot.”

Once she started paced respiration, she began to calm down — and then, suddenly, no more hiccups. One biofeedback session was all she needed.

“Her hiccups literally stopped when she was in the chair,” Hurst said. “She is going on two years of being symptom-free.”

This was the first hiccups case for Hurst, who typically uses heart rate variability biofeedback to treat migraines, tension headaches, fibromyalgia [a condition characterized by chronic pain, stiffness, and tenderness of the muscles, tendons, and joints], anxiety disorders and irritable bowel syndrome. Similarly, Cymet has used breathing exercises, cognitive behavioral therapy and even yoga or Pilates for the hundreds of hiccupers he has seen over the years. Overall, he estimates a 20 to 25 percent success rate.

But he says most people don’t need to worry unless the hiccups interfere with respiration or eating.

“Everybody gets them, but we don’t know why — we don’t know if [in terms of evolution] it’s adaptive or maladaptive,” Cymet said. “We’re still in the dark ages of understanding hiccups.”

[In evolution, an adaptation is a trait that is (or has become) more helpful than harmful, in contrast with a maladaptation, which is more harmful than helpful.]

[This article caught my eye because, when I was a schoolboy—I remember it mostly in middle school—I had a . . . well, a hiccup problem.  I didn’t get them as frequently as Coleen O’Lear, but when I got the hiccups in class, it was disturbing to the teacher and my classmates, and embarrassing to me.  Once they started, they wouldn’t stop, and I’d sit there hiccupping while doing my work. 

[The teacher would sneak up on me from behind and smack my desk with a ruler to try to scare the hiccups out of me.  It never worked.  I tried holding my breath and at home, Mom would get me to drink water slowly or upside down, but none of that worked.

[To make matters worse, if I got the hiccups once, I’d invariably get them again, sometimes twice more sometime during the day.  It was a given.

[One day, I had a doctor’s appointment in the afternoon and while I was in the doctor’s office, I started hiccupping.  When the usual folk remedies failed, as usual, the doc said he had something that would help.  He gave me a large, white pill that I was to chew up and swallow—it was slightly chalky but didn’t taste too bad—and I did as he instructed.  Seconds later, the hiccups stopped and stayed “off” the rest of the appointment—and never returned that day.

[Whenever I was in his office and the hiccups started, he gave me one of the pills, and they’d stop.  I never asked him what the pills were, and to this day, I don’t know.  I suspect now that it was a placebo and that the relief came from the placebo effect because he was the doctor and he told me the pill would help—so I believed him and it worked.

[Years later, I discovered that the pills looked and tasted almost exactly like antacid tablets.  I imagine that’s what they were—and maybe there was some actual medical application to the relief from the hiccups from a dose of antacid.

[For whatever reason, the hiccup attacks stopped a few years later.  I didn’t get them in high school or college, and certainly not in the army.  I still get hiccups occasionally, like anybody else, but not often, and they go away on their own.  And they don’t come back again a few hours later like they did when I was a ’tween.

[But what I’d like to hear is why some people spell it hiccough?  Never mind why we do it—someone explain that to me!

[Meeri Kim is a freelance science journalist based in Philadelphia.  She has a PhD in physics from the University of Pennsylvania and has contributed to the Washington Post since 2013.] 

*  *  *  *
MATTER: THIS IS YOUR BRAIN ON WRITING
by Carl Zimmer 

[This article was originally published in the “Science Times” section of the New York Times on 24 June 2014.]

A novelist scrawling away in a notebook in seclusion may not seem to have much in common with an NBA player doing a reverse layup on a basketball court before a screaming crowd. But if you could peer inside their heads, you might see some striking similarities in how their brains were churning.

That’s one of the implications of new research on the neuroscience of creative writing. For the first time, neuroscientists have used f.M.R.I. [functional magnetic resonance imaging] scanners to track the brain activity of both experienced and novice writers as they sat down—or, in this case, lay down—to turn out a piece of fiction.

The researchers, led by Martin Lotze of the University of Greifswald in Germany, observed a broad network of regions in the brain working together as people produced their stories. But there were notable differences between the two groups of subjects. The inner workings of the professionally trained writers in the bunch, the scientists argue, showed some similarities to people who are skilled at other complex actions, like music or sports.

The research is drawing strong reactions. Some experts praise it as an important advance in understanding writing and creativity, while others criticize the research as too crude to reveal anything meaningful about the mysteries of literature or inspiration.

Dr. Lotze has long been intrigued by artistic expression. In previous studies, he has observed the brains of piano players and opera singers, using f.M.R.I. scanners to pinpoint regions that become unusually active in the brain.

Needless to say, that can be challenging when a subject is singing an aria. Scanners are a lot like 19th-century cameras: They can take very sharp pictures, if their subject remains still. To get accurate data, Dr. Lotze has developed software that can take into account fluctuations caused by breathing or head movements. For creative writing, he faced a similar challenge. In previous studies, scientists had observed people doing only small tasks like thinking up a plot in their heads.

Dr. Lotze wanted to scan people while they were actually writing. But he couldn’t give his subjects a keyboard to write with, because the magnetic field generated by the scanner would have hurled it across the room.

So Dr. Lotze ended up making a custom-built writing desk, clipping a piece of paper to a wedge-shaped block as his subjects reclined. They could rest their writing arm on the desk and scribble on the page. A system of mirrors let them see what they were writing while their head remained cocooned inside the scanner.

To begin, Dr. Lotze asked 28 volunteers to simply copy some text, giving him a baseline reading of their brain activity during writing.

Next, he showed his volunteers a few lines from a short story and asked them to continue it in their own words. The volunteers could brainstorm for a minute, and then write creatively for a little over two minutes.

Some regions of the brain became active only during the creative process, but not while copying, the researchers found. During the brainstorming sessions, some vision-processing regions of volunteers became active. It’s possible that they were, in effect, seeing the scenes they wanted to write.

Other regions became active when the volunteers started jotting down their stories. Dr. Lotze suspects that one of them, the hippocampus, was retrieving factual information that the volunteers could use.

One region near the front of the brain, known to be crucial for holding several pieces of information in mind at once, became active as well. Juggling several characters and plot lines may put special demands on it.

But Dr. Lotze also recognized a big limit of the study: His subjects had no previous experience in creative writing. Would the brains of full-time writers respond differently?

To find out, he and his colleagues went to another German university, the University of Hildesheim, which runs a highly competitive creative writing program. The scientists recruited 20 writers there (their average age was 25). Dr. Lotze and his colleagues had them take the same tests and then compared their performance with the novices’.

As the scientists report in a new study in the journal NeuroImage, the brains of expert writers appeared to work differently, even before they set pen to paper. During brainstorming, the novice writers activated their visual centers. By contrast, the brains of expert writers showed more activity in regions involved in speech.

“I think both groups are using different strategies,” Dr. Lotze said. It’s possible that the novices are watching their stories like a film inside their heads, while the writers are narrating it with an inner voice.

When the two groups started to write, another set of differences emerged. Deep inside the brains of expert writers, a region called the caudate nucleus became active. In the novices, the caudate nucleus was quiet.

The caudate nucleus is a familiar part of the brain for scientists like Dr. Lotze who study expertise. It plays an essential role in the skill that comes with practice, including activities like board games.

When we first start learning a skill—be it playing a piano or playing basketball—we use a lot of conscious effort. With practice, those actions become more automatic. The caudate nucleus and nearby regions start to coordinate the brain’s activity as this shift happens.

“I was really happy to see this,” said Ronald T. Kellogg, a psychologist who studies writing at Saint Louis University. “You don’t want to see this as an analog to what James Joyce was doing in Dublin. But to see that they were able to get clean results with this, I think that’s a major step right there.”

But Steven Pinker, a Harvard psychologist, was skeptical that the experiments could provide a clear picture of creativity. “It’s a messy comparison,” he said.

Dr. Pinker pointed out that the activity that Dr. Lotze saw during creative writing could be common to writing in general—or perhaps to any kind of thinking that requires more focus than copying. A better comparison would have been between writing a fictional story and writing an essay about some factual information.

Even the best-designed scanning experiments might miss signs of creativity, Dr. Pinker warned. The very nature of creativity can make it different from one person to the next, and so it can be hard to see what different writers have in common. Dr. Pinker speculated that Marcel Proust might have activated the taste-perceiving regions of his brain when he recalled the flavor of a cookie. But another writer might rely more on sounds to evoke a time and place.

“Creativity is a perversely difficult thing to study,” he said.

[One paragraph here really struck me.  Dr. Martin Lotze remarked after one examination of the brain activity, specifically in the caudate nucleus, of the two groups of writers:

When we first start learning a skill—be it playing a piano or playing basketball—we use a lot of conscious effort. With practice, those actions become more automatic. The caudate nucleus and nearby regions start to coordinate the brain’s activity as this shift happens.

[When I was working on my acting MFA, I had the good fortune to have as my acting teacher an actress, Carol Rosenfeld, with whom I’d already been studying for a couple of years before I followed her to Rutgers for the MFA program.  She knew me and my work very well by this time. 

[Carol, of course, came to see all of her students’ performances in the many university productions---and we grad students were is great demand, so we acted a lot over those two years.  (I had an additional attribute that made me a utility player at Rutgers: I was older than most of my classmates, so when an “old” man was needed, I was at the top of every director’s mind.)

[Carol was always careful not to instruct us or coach us or direct us while we were in production, but she would give us a critique after the show closed if we wished.  After one role, I went to her and explained a new feeling I had while working on that part—something I thought was a small break-through.  Something that used to cause me great angst wasn’t bothering me anymore.

[What Carol explained to me was this: I’d reached a point in my artistic development where I no longer needed to make conscious decisions regarding my “technique”—the external decisions and adjustments I made to particularize a role.  My personal working method now included technique as an integral aspect.  I’d become more relaxed and comfortable with my work, making choices, whether physical or emotional, organically and naturally.

[What used to be affectation was now habitual behavior.  There’s no doubt that this new-found ease had come directly from a conscientious study of acting technique and several years of conscious practice in performance; but it was now part of me and operated automatically as I prepared a role.

[I think that, in acting terms, is what Lotze was talking about with the writers he was examining.  When I read that section of Zimmer’s article, I said, “Hey, that’s me.  That’s what happened to me in The Wood Demon and what Carol told me was the result of my work.”  Good ol’ caudate nucleus!

[Carl Zimmer (born 1966) is a popular science writer, blogger, columnist, and journalist who specializes in the topics of evolution, parasites, and heredity.  The author of many books, he contributes science essays to publications such as the New York Times, Discover, and National Geographic.  He’s a fellow at Yale University’s Morse College and adjunct professor of molecular biophysics and biochemistry at Yale University.  Zimmer also gives frequent lectures and has appeared on many radio shows, including National Public Radio’s Radiolab, Fresh Air, and This American Life.]


16 May 2024

"What Is a Song?"

by Ben Sisario 

[Last year, a federal jury found that Ed Sheeran did not copy Marvin Gaye’s 1973 classic “Let’s Get It On” for his 2014 hit “Thinking Out Loud,” in the music industry’s highest-profile copyright case in years.  But the courtroom didn’t hear Gaye’s sensuously sung original recording.  Instead, the jury was played a bare, electronically recreated track with a robotic voice.  It brought up a curious question: “What is a song?”   

[This is the topic of Ben Sisario’s article in the New York Times “Arts” section of 6 May 2024, republished below.  I’m posting it on Rick On Theater because it harks back to my post of 5 May 2015, “What Constitutes Theft in the Arts?” (Rick On Theater: What Constitutes Theft in the Arts?), about some court cases and accusations concerning charges of plagiarism in the performing arts.]

One response is simply the music flowing out of your earphones. But legally, the answer is quite a bit more complicated.

For most music fans, a song is a simple thing to define: It’s the melodies, the lyrics, the grooves that come out of your speakers.

It’s a much thornier question when it comes to copyright law, one that has been tested in a series of high-profile lawsuits over the last decade, involving stars like Ed Sheeran, Led Zeppelin, Pharrell and Robin Thicke [the Williams-Thicke case, Pharrell Williams, et al. v. Bridgeport Music, et al. (decided on 22 March 2018), is mentioned in the above-referenced post]. Is songwriting defined by what you hear on a recording, or the notes inked long ago on a piece of sheet music? Where does a composer’s work end, and a performing artist’s begin?

In other words, what, exactly, is a song, in the eyes of the law?

In many music copyright disputes, one of the main issues is originality, or how the law sets a boundary between creative expression that is the property of a single artist versus material in the public domain. Last year, a federal jury in New York heard hours of expert testimony about whether a syncopated four-chord sequence in Marvin Gaye’s “Let’s Get It On” was distinctive enough that Sheeran’s song “Thinking Out Loud” infringed on it — or whether, as Sheeran’s lawyers contended, those parts are generic “building blocks” that no musician can own [Kathryn Townsend Griffin, et al. v. Edward Christopher Sheeran, et al. (decided 4 May 2023)]. The jury ruled in Sheeran’s favor, finding that he and a co-writer had created their song independently and not copied from Gaye’s 1973 classic.

But a key question running through that trial was about something even more fundamental: whether the core of “Let’s Get It On” — and what is protected by its copyright — is determined by the sounds we hear on its original recording, or the notes written on yellowing sheet music stored at the Library of Congress.

That issue was at the  center of an appeals court’s decision four years ago regarding Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven” [Michael Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin, et al. (appeal decided on 9 March 2020)] and it is being considered in another appeal related to Sheeran and “Let’s Get It On.” Many experts believe it’s an underexplored question that gets to the heart of how copyright law intersects with music.

“This is the deep, existential, metaphysical question at the center of music copyright: We don’t even know what it is,” said Jennifer Jenkins, a law professor at Duke.

It is also an important question for an industry that in recent years has poured billions of dollars into deals for song catalogs, partly on the faith that their underlying copyrights offer robust protection against infringement. That may be challenging for older songs, because of a quirk in the law that can restrict how a song is defined and, therefore, just what its author owns.

Getting copyright protection

There is a key date related to this issue: Jan. 1, 1978, when the last major revision of United States copyright law [Duration of Copyright] took effect.

Since then, songwriters have been able to register a composition with the Copyright Office by submitting a recording; all the melodies, chords and lyrics on it are considered evidence of their work. But earlier songs were subject to the Copyright Act of 1909, which required that songwriters submit transcribed sheet music, known as deposit copies.

For a century, these deposit copies were little more than receipts in a copyright paper trail. But since the “Blurred Lines” case a decade ago, when Pharrell and Thicke were found to have copied Gaye’s “Got to Give It Up” and ordered to pay more than $5 million in damages [equivalent to $6.2 million today], these once-obscure documents have taken on a greater significance.

The judge in that case ruled that, under the 1909 law, the deposit copy for “Got to Give It Up” (1977) determined the “scope” of that song’s copyright. In other words, only the notes on its paper submission counted as representing Gaye’s songwriting creation, and any other elements that were on the song’s recording but not the deposit copy — like percussion and studio atmospherics — were not part of the underlying composition. (A separate copyright applies to the recording.) The jury, instructed to consider only what was on Gaye’s deposit copy, found that “Blurred Lines” had copied from it.

These deposit copies can be minimal, sometimes featuring just a vocal melody and indications of chords. The one for “Taurus,” a 1967 piece by the psychedelic rock band Spirit, which Led Zeppelin was accused of copying on “Stairway to Heaven,” is a single-page sketch of barely 100 notes, and a lawyer representing Michael Skidmore, a trustee of the trust that owns rights to “Taurus,” argued that it was not even an accurate transcription.

The deposit copy for “Let’s Get It On” is five pages but omits elements like piano, drums and guitar — including the wah-wah opening guitar lick that has been a Pavlovian call to the dance floor at many a wedding — that are part of the signature sound of Gaye’s original track.

The judge overseeing Sheeran’s trial, citing an appeals court’s detailed decision in the Led Zeppelin case, ruled that the absence of those elements from the “Let’s Get It On” deposit copy meant that lawyers for the plaintiffs — family members of Ed Townsend, Gaye’s co-writer and producer [Townsend had died in 2008; Gaye died in 1984] — had to restrict their arguments to the vocal melody and the chord pattern. That restriction likewise applied to Alexander Stewart, a music professor at the University of Vermont, who testified as an expert witness for the plaintiffs.

“Every time I opened my mouth and said the word ‘bass line,’ I was cut off,” Stewart said in an interview. “It was hard to make any cogent argument.”

Following a ruling by the judge, Gaye’s recording was never played for jurors. Instead, they heard an electronic realization of the deposit copy, submitted by the defense. It included bare piano chords and a robotic-sounding vocal — an oddly cold interpretation of one of pop music’s supreme erotic anthems. As the track played, quizzical expressions came over a few jurors’ faces.

Some scholars say the legal distinction between a composition in a deposit copy and what appears in a finished recording is a sign that the law has not kept up with how pop music has been made for decades. Very often, songs are created in the recording studio, and the line between composing, producing and performing can be fuzzy.

“It is completely divorced from actual music-making practice,” said Joseph P. Fishman, a professor at Vanderbilt Law School.

Jenkins, of Duke, said these cases point to one of the basic complexities of applying copyright — a concept originally made for books and other written material — to music.

“Music is first and foremost an auditory art form, but for most of copyright’s history it’s been defined as something you see,” Jenkins said. “There’s this disconnect, where the signifier — that written thing — is what a composer owns, but the signified is what the song actually is. It’s what we’re listening to.”

‘A Lousy Rule’

Exactly why deposit copies have gone from obscure legal formalities to hot topics in some of the biggest music lawsuits of the last decade is unclear. One theory is that historically, most accusations of infringement have involved the most prominent elements of a song, like the hook, vocal melody or lyrics — things that even the plainest sheet music would highlight.

But as pop music has evolved, and techniques like sampling have become standard, it has also become more common for background elements and secondary parts to be in dispute. many recent cases, like those over “Blurred Lines” and Katy Perry’s “Dark Horse” [Marcus Gray, et al. v. Katy Perry, et al. (decided 16 March 2020)], have focused on these aspects. (To some observers, the “Blurred Lines” verdict seemed to give the Gaye estate control over a loose rhythmic groove, though lawyers argued that it involved specific notes on a deposit copy.)

David Pullman, an investor whose company Structured Asset Sales is bringing the Sheeran appeal — he is best known for creating “Bowie bonds,” backed by David Bowie’s music royalties, in the 1990s — said he believes that many current artists borrow too much from popular old songs. “It’s easier to take a shortcut and infringe,” Pullman said in an interview, “than write a song that’s original.”

The history of the Sheeran case, now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, is complex. Structured Asset Sales, which owns an 11.11 percent interest in “Let’s Get It On,” filed its own suit over “Thinking Out Loud” after a judge blocked the company from joining the Townsend family’s original action.

Structured Asset Sales’ suit was dismissed by a district court judge shortly after Sheeran won at trial last year. In its appeal, the company argues that a deposit copy does not necessarily define the scope of a song’s copyright under the 1909 law, and that the material on the sheet music only needs to be sufficient to identify it, despite the law’s reference to a “complete” copy. In court papers, Hillel I. Parness, a lawyer for the company, argued that expert witnesses should be able to interpret deposit copies for the jury, as happened at a trial involving the singer Michael Bolton in 1994.

[In Three Boys Music v. Michael Bolton, the jury found on 25 April 1994 that Bolton’s “Love Is a Wonderful Thing” (1991) had infringed the Isley Brothers’ copyright for “Time, Love and Tenderness” (1991). On 9 May 1994, the court entered judgment for $5.4 million ($11.4 million in 2024) in favor of the Isley Brothers. The verdict withstood several appeals and survived as decided in 1994.]

Sheeran’s lawyers argue that the deposit copy rule is clear from the law, and is supported by longstanding guidance from the Copyright Office. At oral arguments last month, Donald S. Zakarin, a lawyer for Sheeran, also warned that straying from a deposit copy’s notation could lead to problems of “subjectivity” when defining a musical work that is in dispute.

“Future authors,” Zakarin said, “are going to be subjected to, ‘No, no, no, I intended to have that bass line. I know it’s not there, but I intended it.’”

In an informal survey of about a dozen intellectual-property experts, most said Sheeran’s side had the stronger argument about deposit copies under the 1909 law. “It’s a lousy rule,” said Fishman. “But that does seem to have been the rule at the time.”

But this rule, as set down in the Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin appeal, has at least one prominent skeptic in Paul Goldstein, a professor at Stanford Law School who is the author of a widely cited copyright treatise.

“Where I disagree with Skidmore,” Goldstein wrote in an email, “is in its assertion that the fact the copyright was secured by deposit of a copy of the musical work implies that the deposit copy defines the scope of copyright in the work to the exclusion of any other relevant evidence.” That evidence, he said, could include things like drafts and correspondence around a song’s creation.

Goldstein pointed to another possible source of evidence: sound recordings submitted to the Copyright Office as a supplemental registration. Under that theory, a songwriter with a deficient deposit copy of an old song could, since 1978, submit a recording of it to cover any additional elements — bass lines or guitar solos, for example — absent from the original registration.

This workaround was suggested by the Copyright Office and the Justice Department in an amicus brief filed in the Led Zeppelin appeal. It was apparently little known at the time, though Structured Asset Sales’ court papers note that in 1988, the music publisher for the Rolling Stones’ song “Sympathy for the Devil” submitted that track’s 1968 studio recording to cover a new “arrangement.”

Pullman, of Structured Asset Sales, said that discussion of this workaround during the Led Zeppelin appeal led him to submit the recording of “Let’s Get It On” as a new registration in 2020, to cover any compositional elements not on the deposit copy — which could be more ammunition in a dispute against Sheeran’s “Thinking Out Loud.”

Could it work? So far that issue has not been tested by the courts.

[Ben Sisario has been covering music and copyright for more than a decade, including trials involving Ed Sheeran, Led Zeppelin and the song “Blurred Lines.”  He’s reported on the music industry for the Times since 1998.]


05 July 2023

"Who Wrote Bach's Music?"

by Professor Martin Jarvis 

[uncovering a mystery: Why do the six suites for unaccompanied cello, historically attributed to Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750), sound so different from the sonatas and partitas for solo violin also linked to the German composer?  New evidence shows that Bach’s second wife, Anna Magdalena Bach (née Wilcke, 1701-60; m. 1721), may have composed the cello suites.  The score of the Cello Suite No. 1 from the historical edition is in Anna Magdalena’s own handwriting.

[Martin Jarvis’s “Who Wrote Bach’s Music?” first appeared in the March 2013 issue (113.3) of Allegro, the magazine of the New York City musicians’ union (AFM Local 802).  ALERT: Readers should be aware that since this article’s appearance, several musicologists, musicians, and Bach scholars have disputed Jarvis’s findings.  I’ve appended sections from two Wikipedia pages below which address this controversy.]

Were some of J. S. Bach’s compositions actually composed by his wife, Anna Magdalena? In this exclusive story for Allegro, Professor Martin Jarvis [b. 1951], from Charles Darwin University in Australia, shares with us the intriguing results of his research, just in time for Women’s History Month (and also Bach’s 328th birthday!)

Johann Sebastian Bach is often referred to as the father of Western music. And as a composer, Bach looms large in the minds of just about every musician I have ever met. Therefore, any suggestion that things might not actually be the way we have come to understand them is not likely to be greeted with great enthusiasm!

But it may be time for a serious upheaval in our understanding of who composed Bach’s works. In my book “Written by Mrs. Bach,” (HarperCollins/ABC Books, [2011;] see www.bit.ly/BachBook), I describe my attempt to uncover the origins of the six cello suites and other works long attributed to Bach.

My search for the truth has taken me on a great and rewarding adventure, including a deep foray into a field of scientific investigation called forensic document examination, which is the study of documents and handwriting for the purpose of demonstrating authenticity. The results are astonishing.

Because space is limited, what I have written here is merely a summary of the journey from my early suspicions that all was not right, to how I reached my conclusions.

My first experience of playing the music of Johann Sebastian Bach was when I began studying Bach’s A-minor violin concerto in my early teens. Later, I won a scholarship to study at the Welsh College of Music in Cardiff with Garfield Phillips, the concertmaster of the BBC Welsh Orchestra. I still remember my lessons with Professor Phillips, where we worked on Bach’s unaccompanied violin sonatas and partitas [a term Bach used as a label for collections of musical pieces, a synonym for suite]. He marked up my music with a green ink fountain pen – a very unusual habit!

In 1971, I won a place at the Royal Academy of Music, where I studied violin with the highly respected violinist and teacher Clarence Myerscough. At the same time I also studied viola with Winifred Copperwheat. Professor Copperwheat was only four feet ten inches tall, and I am six feet one inch tall, so I literally towered over this wonderfully insightful and very great musician.

Immediately after I began my studies with Professor Copperwheat, she instructed me to obtain a copy of the six cello suites of Bach, arranged for viola. She was very specific about the edition I was to purchase; she wanted me to get the Lifschey edition, not the Svenky.

What I was not aware of at the time was that in the case of the cello suites, there was a very significant reason for Winifred’s insistence. I was to learn soon that there was no manuscript of the cello suites in Bach’s own hand, and so every editor of the suites (whether for viola or cello) has made decisions about the bowings, and indeed even some of the notes to be played.

These changes were necessary, Winifred informed me, because the only complete manuscript of the suites was in the hand of Bach’s second wife, Anna Magdalena, and it was, according to tradition, full of inaccuracies and all but illegible.

It is important to know that the matter of the differing editions is very significant indeed. Cellist Dimitry Markevitch, editor of a 1964 edition of the suites and discoverer of the so-called Westphal manuscripts, claimed that he had 61 editions of the six cello suites in his library and stated that there have appeared, since the first printed edition, some 93 editions or versions of the suites.

It must be stressed that these different editions vary substantially one from another. The cellist Uzi Wiesel says that this caused a veritable mishmash of stylistic interpretations when he attended a series of performances in Paris in the 1990s. Further, Wiesel was most critical of those who played the suites using only Anna Magdalena’s manuscript as the source.

This begs a very interesting question: why does Anna Magdalena’s manuscript, as Wiesel says in his review, sound “strange to my ears”?

It is worth pointing out that the chamber music of Bach was not published during his lifetime, and it has been said that it was composed for domestic consumption or performance. So the cello suites are most likely to have been written for someone within the household, rather than an outsider – which is the traditional view, of course.

As well as the undated Anna Magdalena version, there are two anonymous handwritten copies of the suites from the later 18th century, plus a version written out by Johann Peter Kellner [1705-72], one of Bach’s most important copyists, with a suggested date of 1726.

Let’s return to my early lessons at the Royal Academy of Music in London. The following week, I duly turned up to my viola class with the Lifschey edition. As soon as I began to play the prelude, I was struck by the vast differences between the two sets of music I was studying: the unaccompanied violin sonatas and partitas on the one hand, and the cello suites on the other.

Visually, the violin works appear complex and intellectually very challenging. By comparison, the prelude of the first suite appears to be rather simple, at least on the surface.

I immediately became certain that I what I was playing was not written by the same person. However, I tried very hard to believe that J. S. Bach was, in fact, the composer. As I practiced the suite, I diligently applied all my knowledge and prior experience of Bach as I worked away at the music. But try as I might I could not feel at ease.

Despite the fact that over the ensuing four years I studied all the movements of some of the cello suites and some movements from others, the thought would not go away. There was something wrong with the sound and the structure of the music, but I couldn’t put my finger on it.

When I raised my concerns about the suites with Professor Copperwheat, she told me the story of Pablo Casals’ experience with the cello suites and his long journey to first performing them. The suites were, apparently, “rediscovered” by Casals in 1890 when he was around 14 years old. He and his father, it is said, came across a copy in a music shop. Later, according to a biography by Robert Baldock, “…Casals discovered that, if they were played at all, the Bach suites had been used as academic, technical exercises… For the next twelve years he worked on them in seclusion…at the beginning of his career he began to introduce them into his recital programmes…he performed them on many hundreds of occasions, he never approached them without reverence, humility – and even fear.”

I took heart from that story. Winifred also explained to me that the suites were not performed much, if at all, in concert during the 19th century. As I found out much later, this may be because when they were first published in Paris in 1824, they went under the title “Six Sonates ou Etudes Pour Le Violoncelle Solo” – technical studies for cello! The idea that they were etudes would undoubtedly have led to the perception that they were lesser music.

Even the great 19th-century composer Robert Schumann [1810-56] considered them to be musically incomplete, so he added a piano accompaniment!

Finally, Philipp Spitta [1841-94], the most significant 19th-century biographer of Bach, acknowledged the very different character and proportions of the cello suites, but attributed the difference to what he considered the cello’s limited expressive quality.

All of these reasons may have contributed to the fact that cellists apparently abandoned the suites at that time and why they were not considered an important part of the cellists’ repertoire.

After leaving the Academy in 1975, I first worked as a freelance player with the London Mozart Players and other London-based orchestras before taking up a position with the Halle Orchestra in Manchester. This group was very busy performing all over the world, so there was plenty of time to talk with colleagues about many musical issues, including the cello suites.

The cellists I spoke with had various opinions on the subject. Some believed that the suites were difficult to interpret because there had not been a continuous history of performance, unlike the violin sonatas and partitas. Others believed it was because the suites were not composed by a cellist. Some thought that they were written much earlier than the violin works by a very young J. S. Bach, and this was why they are musically simpler.

But no one could really say conclusively what it was about the cello suites that makes them, as the great Yo-Yo Ma [b. 1955] put it “…considered by many to be the most challenging of the solo repertoire.”

A powerful question kept rattling around in my brain. Was it possible that the cello suites were not actually composed by J. S. Bach?

In 2000, Bärenreiter published a new edition of the suites as part the commemoration of the 250th anniversary of Bach’s death. The edition included a facsimile of the Anna Magdalena manuscript of the suites. I was quite stunned by what I saw. The music calligraphy was very beautiful, precise and elegant, and not at all hard to read.

I immediately became convinced as I looked at Anna Magdalena Bach’s supposed “copy” of the cello suites that this was not a copy of someone else’s music – but her own. This was mainly because the music calligraphy appeared to flow easily and to be very self-assured, which is consistent with someone writing out material with which they are very familiar. At the same time it lacked any sense of the slowness of execution that would be consistent with someone working to accurately copy from another source, especially if they are trying to mimic the music calligraphy of the original.

I began the slow process of comparing the cello suites with the violin sonatas and partitas. This involved painstakingly deconstructing both sets of music by analyzing the harmonies used.

I examined the movement structures of the suites and aligned them with the movement structures of the violin partitas. The first thing that stood out to me was the apparent symmetry of the suites, when compared to the very non-symmetrical partitas. Was this just a coincidence, or an exception – or was this something important? I needed to find out.

By the end of 2002 my structural and musical analysis of the cello suites had revealed 17 reasons why they did not musically match any other work of J. S. Bach’s in the same genre. But it was the use of the science of forensic document examination that eventually enabled me to identify Anna Magdalena’s own handwriting and music calligraphy in manuscripts dating back to 1713 – seven years prior to the usually accepted date when Anna Magdalena and J. S. Bach first met. I realized finally that Anna Magdalena’s involvement was much deeper than usually believed.

Finally, if we look at one of the earliest copies of the cello suites from 1727 or 1728, we see the words of the chamber musician Georg Heinrich Ludwig Schwanenberger [1696-1774] on the title page. It says, in French, (“ecrite par Madame Bachen Son Epouse”), “Written by Mrs Bach His Wife.” That convinced me that Anna Magdalena was probably the composer.

So who exactly was Anna Magdalena Bach? The evidence strongly suggests that she was a composition student of J. S. Bach. It is known that she was a trained musician, and that when she was employed at the Cöthen Court at the age of 20 she was the second most highly paid musician. [Anhalt-Köthen was a principality of the Holy Roman Empire; Köthen is now the capital of the eastern German state of Saxony-Anhalt.] Only Bach was paid more. This begs a number of questions, including why was she paid so highly and why has she not been recognized as a composer before?

I hope I’ve left you with a tantalizing first course. Readers who wish to know more about Anna Magdalena will find answers to these and many more questions in my book.

One postscript. When the early findings of my research were first published in the very early 2000s I had no support from any of my colleagues, except the principal cellist of the Darwin Symphony Orchestra, Rebecca Harris. But over the ensuing years many cellists and other musicians have contacted me to welcome my findings. For example, one cellist wrote to me, “I have become convinced, at least on an emotional level, that the [cello] suites are indeed not by the same composer [as the violin sonatas and partitas] … I do feel somewhat heretical and have not said much of my thoughts on this subject except to my wife!”

[Professor Martin W. B. Jarvis is professor of music and head of the School of Creative Arts and Humanities at Charles Darwin University in Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia. There he teaches viola, violin and conducting. Professor Jarvis also served as artistic director of the Darwin Symphony Orchestra for 20 years.]

*  *  *  *

[When I first read Martin Jarvis’s “Who Wrote Bach’s Music” in Allegro seven years ago, I found it interesting in the same way that reading the arguments theater and literary scholars use to support claims that William Shakespeare didn’t write his plays and advocating for other claimants to The Bard’s achievement. 

[I know far less about music, let alone Bach, than I do about theater and Shakespeare, but I felt that Jarvis’s “evidence,” as he lays it out in the brief article (I haven’t read Written By Mrs Bach) was largely his impressions and feelings, not to mention his musical intuition.  Since I don’t know Jarvis, even by reputation, I don’t have any idea how much I can rely on that—it’s entirely subjective.

[Since the publication of both Jarvis’s book and the Allegro article, there have been a number of critical responses to his contention that Anna Magdalena Bach was the composer of the cello suites traditionally attributed to Johann Sebastian.  Below, I’m appending two excerpts from the Wikipedia entries on, first, Jarvis, himself (Martin Jarvis (conductor) - Wikipedia), and, second, Anna Magdalena Bach (Anna Magdalena Bach - Wikipedia).] 

From: “Martin Jarvis (conductor)
Wikipedia 

Research into Anna Magdalena Bach

During his studies at the Royal Academy of Music, his viola teacher Winifred Copperwheat [1905-76] made him aware of problems with the published editions of the six suites for unaccompanied cello commonly attributed to Johann Sebastian Bach. After research of his own, Jarvis has controversially postulated, using handwriting analysis heuristics, that the suites were composed by Bach’s wife Anna Magdalena [Lindy Kerin, “Bach’s wife believed to have penned cello works,” The Australian [Surry Hills, Australia] 28 Apr. 2006; Barbie Dutter and Roya Nikkha, “Bach works were written by his second wife, claims academic,” Daily Telegraph [London] 23 Apr. 2006]. Other academics such as Stephen Rose have responded that, while Anna Magdalena may have contributed to the labours on his manuscripts, “there is not enough evidence to show that she single-handedly composed the Cello Suites” [Dutter and Nikkha].

Jarvis was awarded a PhD from Charles Darwin University based on his research [“Wife behind Bach’s cello suites,” The Australian 31 October 2007], and presented his findings at an October 2008 meeting of the International Symposium on the Forensic Sciences in Melbourne [Anna Salleh, “Bach’s wife ‘may have been composer,’” ABC [Australian Broadcasting Corporation] News 4 Oct. 2008; Liz Porter, “The missus was the maestro,” Sydney [Australia] Morning Herald 5 Oct. 2008]. Regarding the generally-accepted portrayal of Anna Magdalena Bach’s role in music history and his own differing views, Jarvis himself has acknowledged, “My conclusions may not be wholly accurate, but the way in which tradition has put Anna Magdalena into this pathetic role [as merely the copyist] ... is rubbish” [Salleh]. Jarvis published the book Written by Mrs Bach in 2011; it was made into a documentary film in 2014 [LOOKSfilm, Written by Mrs Bach, wr. Robert Beedham, Martin Jarvis, and Pamela Kaufman; dir. Alex McCall and Irini Vachlioti; prod. Robert Beedham, Ramona Bergmann, et al.].

----------
From: “Anna Magdalena Bach
Wikipedia 

Dismissed claim of composership

Recently, it has been suggested that Anna Magdalena Bach composed several musical pieces bearing her husband’s name: Professor Martin Jarvis of the School of Music at Charles Darwin University in Darwin, Australia, claims that she composed the famed six cello suites (BWV 1007-1012) and was involved with the composition of the aria from the Goldberg Variations (BWV 988) [1741] and the opening prelude of The Well-Tempered Clavier [1722, 1742]. These ideas were also made into a TV documentary Written by Mrs Bach (BBC, 2018).

These claims have been virtually unanimously dismissed by Bach scholars and performers. Christoph Wolff [b. 1940] said:

When I served as director of the Leipzig Bach Archive from 2001 to 2013, I and my colleagues there extensively refuted the basic premises of the thesis, on grounds of documents, manuscript sources, and musical grounds. There is not a shred of evidence, but Jarvis doesn’t give up despite the fact that several years ago, at a Bach conference in Oxford, a room full of serious Bach scholars gave him an embarrassing showdown [Tim Cavanaugh, “Bogus Bach Theory Gets Media Singing,” National Review [New York] 29 Oct. 2014].

Writing in The Guardian, cellist Steven Isserlis [b. 1958] said, “I’m afraid that his theory is pure rubbish,” and continued, “How can anybody take this shoddy material seriously” [Steven Isserlis, “Suite scandal: why Bach’s wife cannot take credit for his cello masterwork,” Guardian [London] 29 Oct. 2014]?

Bach scholar Ruth Tatlow [b. 1956] has written a refutation at length, centred on the TV documentary, in the journal Understanding Bach, where she calls Jarvis’s claims “flawed and untenable” [Ruth Tatlow, “A Missed Opportunity: Reflections on Written by Mrs Bach,” Understanding Bach [Bach Network; Oxford, UK] 10 (2015); www.bachnetwork.co.uk/understanding-bach].