I was very happy to get Maready's substantial and insightful contribution to the ongoing discussion of the "score versus musical work" dichotomy, which began with this post.
I have added Maready's contribution to the original "Settling the 'score': Comments and Replies" post.
Here I only want to make a brief comment on the following ontological question raised by Maready:
[Jean Barraque's Violin Sonata] was written 50 years ago and was only published by Barenreiter last year, and then played in public (and disseminated on the internet) two weeks ago. What was the status of this work between 1949 and 2009?
Well... Suppose that in 1949 Barraque also produced a blueprint for a radically new musical instrument - say, a hybrid of saxophone and respirator (like those used in hospitals). Suppose further that this blueprint was discovered only six months ago, and the first instrument - saxpirator - was built only yesterday. What was the status of that instrument between 1949 and today?
The answer is simple: saxpirator did not exist before today, although instructions for building one existed for nearly sixty years. The same, I belive, applies to Barraque's recently premiered sonata. During the past sixty years this musical work existed only as a performance (or performances) in Barraque's 'mind's ear'. (Although instructions for recreating the sound events Barraque heard in his mind's ear - the score - existed since 1949.)
Not much of an existence, to be sure, but then it takes a human being many years of living to evolve into a rich and complex person. I don't see why the same cannot be said about a musical work, whose 'personality' evolves, becomes richer and more complex through many performances by musicians with diverse interpretative agendas and aesthetic backgrounds.
In fact, I see this as the only defensible answer, given the insuperable difficulties with the alternative ontological positions already discussed in an earlier post.