William F. Buckley's Music Notation System: As Controversial as His Politics

Let all the intellectual and casual political analysis about the late William F. Buckley commence. But when I heard the news he passed away on February 27--I instantly was taken back to an old magazine I used to subscribe to in the 80's and 90's for pianists called Keyboard Classics. Buckley wrote a special article just for the magazine in the early 1990's that complained about the methods taught in reading music. His claim was that finger substitutions and the indications when to cross under one's finger under when playing scales was too confusing and that all basic notation in all the hundreds of years in music was downright terrible. Maybe Buckley just had a differently-wired brain from other people who've learned effectively how to read music through the classic notation system. In fact, essays are still being written on music websites pondering what it was that confused Buckley so much. Yet, his amendments to the classic system are still intriguing.

Leave it up to Buckley to take one old system and revamp it into something more colorful and interesting. You might say it's appropriate that Buckley revamped the Republican Party to being a red state. In the case of his music notation system, he made notes on the page...well, literally red. That didn't necessarily turn musical notes into conservative Libertarians--unless you consider the liberation of the old guard in music writing to be a form of Buckley's politics. But it wasn't just the color red that Buckley used on notes where a black dot used to be. He basically devised a whole color-coded system that would supposedly enable people to create better mnemonic devices in reading musical scores.

When I first read Buckley's piece in Keyboard Classics--I was immediately skeptical as many were. I already knew that he was a well-renowned pianist and harpsichordist who did some occasional concerts as a pastime away from politics and burning people in debates. His initial explanation to why he devised his plan was his forgetfulness in knowing when to cross under his finger when playing a scale. There really wasn't any marker in classic notation method to indicate when to cross your finger under other than numbers that would count 1, 2, 3 and then back to 1 again. Buckley's article pointed out that he simply circled the number where he was supposed to cross under his finger so he'd have a better visual device. Keep in mind this was the pure basics in his primer and already ruffled feathers from classic piano pedagogues. Next came a Bucklified way to differentiate between sharps and flats.

Sharps and flats turn red...
Other articles by Buckley and his newly-named "Buckley Notation System" showed up in Keyboard Classics later indicating how he'd devised that color system to allow students to remember where the sharps and flats were in a score. Buckley had a point that all usual music scores were more challenging in forcing you to remember where all the sharps and flats are on each note in a chord without markings. Old school piano pedagogues considered (and still consider) the habit of learning where the sharps and flats were based on the key signature to be better so the score doesn't get too littered up with editorial markings. Well, Buckley's answer to that was to make all notes that were either a sharp or flat red or other color so you'd remember to play a sharp or flat in the chord. Then came the counterargument that having those devices made for a lazier pianist and not spending time learning the scales by memory and heart rather than having to be reminded by visual aides.

Yep, this started turning into something resembling one of Buckley's political debates. Considering Buckley usually found some kind of inroad to winning any debate he attended--it's interesting to note that it's still up in the air whether he won this one or not.

Because Buckley was an avid Bach fan (he expected Bach's music to be played at his funeral)--he figured his notation devices could come in handy when fingerings are such a problem with a lot of Bach's works. In a series of music books called the eyeball-rolling "Of Course You Can Play!"--Buckley's notation system was employed into numerous and famous classical pieces. Yes, his system grew to the point where it was being used in scores for not only Bach's piano/harpsichord works, but also for Mozart, Chopin and just about every other classical or Romantic-era composer canon of works.

In a nod that maybe Buckley lost a bit of his debate on going against classic notation method: All those above-mentioned "Of Course You Can Play!" books (and all other books employing his method) are long out of print.

While a lot of didactic pedagogues openly opined critically against Buckley messing up what seemingly already worked--he almost had equal the amount of supporters. However, there really wasn't a huge sign his methods were being employed in prestigious music universities. As with his political accomplishments, though, perhaps there was more simmering under the surface until becoming accepted by the majority...

Did Buckley's notation method help a younger generation of piano students?
Keep in mind that a lot of music notation methods have been created in recent years that are quite similar to Buckley's notation system. A lot of them employed the color-coded system he more or less (arguably) started. And based on media reports during the time of Buckley's creation, older students were employing his methods rather than younger ones. A lot of younger ones were probably kept away from the system by their piano teachers--unless those teachers were more flexible on alternative teaching methods. For myself, I never bothered to learn it, because I was already well-learned in knowing where the sharps and flats were from committing all the major and minor keys to memory quite early. It's my own personal opinion that you should learn the keys the normal way first--and only use Buckley's color-coded system if you have a Teflon brain and slip cogs easily on what you learn. His best methods are probably his methods of providing mnemonics for complicated keyboard fingerings that can still give people (including myself) fits.

Perhaps some teachers just don't want any easier methods employed for their students when they had to sweat it out the hard way before and expect everybody else after them to do the same thing. I have no doubt, though, that some younger students likely used Buckley's method (privately and not in the universities) and learned well. It's not much different from those "Learn Piano in One Lesson" books and mail-order tutorials. There really isn't a right or wrong way to learn how to play something on the piano or another instrument in the immediate term. Just as long as you fill in later what you didn't learn first.

What's ironic is that Buckley represented conservative values that adhere to non-radical approaches to things. With his Buckley Notation System--he brought out his liberal side and wanting to be the maverick in the music world. He didn't quite succeed as gallantly at changing things in that world as he did in shaping right-wing politics (for better or for worse)--but still gets his musicianship on the piano and harpsichord mentioned in his bios and obit.

Apparently his music notation method was scrapped from the record--because you won't hear much about his unique approach to music score sight-reading mentioned in anything that details his life. It makes you wonder if the classical musical world (that's usually decidedly liberal) refused it based squarely on Buckley being the direct link to politics they oppose.