In his recent article “Composition is not Research” (Tempo, 69, pp 6-11), John Croft attempts, in my view at least, to argue that conceiving of composition as research is, in essence, a “category-mistake”. I do not think that Croft's arguments hold up. While I completely respect his representations regarding composition, his understanding of the nature of research is not at all convincing and consequently all his attempts to dichotomise composition and research end up as hollow. I think I can argue for the exact opposite conclusion: composition can be research. What is more, and contra Croft's overt intention, with a few tweaks, many of his representations are in fact useful starting points for genuine compositional research
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.