This might be something of a stream of consciousness essay. I am somewhat torn between two fundamentally opposing viewpoints on this.
Part of me believes firmly in our capitalist system that a musician or composer, or any artist for that matter, creates a product for a market. If the system works properly, the market should accurately set a value on the product. If it is deemed that the product does not have much worth, the composer / musician may have to turn to a different trade.
I can’t help thinking at the same time that sometimes worthwhile art is created that is of cultural value yet its commercial worth might not be immediately evident.
And it is here we have the fundamental question. How does one accurately measure the value of music in economic and cultural terms? Should it be measured purely in economic terms?
Origins of the patronage system
I imagine the church and nobility to be the first patrons of music, with monasteries and churches that required, or found music to be useful: to bond people together through a shared experience of going to church as well as creating a different consciousness through the music that might bring people closer together and to God. Music at court would have provided suitable entertainment, as well as raising the status of the patron.
At some point in history it became possible to become a professional musician as the skills required were too burdensome for an amateur. The patron literally ordered the music from the composer to serve a particular function, e.g. as entertainment at court, or as part of religious ceremony.
The patronage system survived into the 19th century (and to a lesser extent beyond) because composers had limited means of monetising their music before then. Around the time of Beethoven and Haydn there were changes in technology and society that meant it was now possible for the artist to survive economically and express himself without the need for patrons. These changes include the rise of the middle-class that created a new market for the now cheap published music that could be produced.
In a sense there is a parallel to the patronage system that still exists today. If you take the film, advertising, or games industry (the patrons), they require music to fit their project. The composer is not expressing his innermost feelings, but writing music to order – very much like the church or nobility of yesteryear.
In a similar fashion to the composers following Beethoven, artists nowadays can express themselves and find an audience through all the mass means of communication that exists today. In some ways it has never been a better time to be a creative musician. There are now many different ways on the internet where one’s music can be either promoted or sold. Recent changes in technology mean that it now possible to reach a mass market for the music creator.
The only argument I can think of for subsidising music, such as opera, is that there is a danger that such an art form would disappear from cultural life which would make its society culturally poorer. Personally I do not think that such projects should be subsidized from the taxpayers purse, for what is essentially a somewhat elitist art form. It should be possible for such minority interest art forms to reach out to their patrons directly.
When I started writing this article there was some ambiguity in my mind between the patronage system and the subsidisation of music. I have come to realise that they are somewhat distinct subjects. The patronage system existed largely as the only means for the arts to flourish, funded by the only people who had any meaningful disposable income, the nobility and the church. Today’s technology should mean that all music can find a relevant market without the need for subsidies. Though the fundamental question still remains, how does one actually put a value on the music created?
Dulcian (german) – Also know as ‘fagotto’ in Italian, ‘curtal’ in English, double-bored woodwind instrument, replaced by the bassoon.
Sackbutt or sagbutt – ‘Trombone’ or ‘large trumpet’ in Italian. Ability to play chromatically so far more possibilities than other brass instruments before the advent of the valved instruments. Modern instruments are somewhat bigger than the renaissance / baroque variety.
Cornett – Woodwind instrument covered in leather, 2 part wood construction. Separate mouthpiece attaches to wooden body – so a hybrid woodwind / brass instrument. Very nice sound with a kind of brassy-ish attack but woodwind tail, vaguely reminiscent of a cor anglais but with a higher register.
Bagpipe
Interesting description of bagpipe construction along with some terms I had not come across. The bagpipes consists of the bag and at least 3 pipes: One blowpipe, a drone pipe, and a chanter pipe (similar to a shawm sound) where the melody is played. The origins of the bagpipe go back at least to Roman times.
Shawm
Originating in the middle ages, double-reed instrument, precursor to the oboe. Love the sound of this instrument – sounds quite raw and unsophisticated and has a slightly eastern / arabic flavour in my mind.
Baroque Oboe
Oboe made out of boxwood which is a softer wood compared to the modern oboe made out of blackwood, with a corresponding more mellow & softer tone compared with the modern variant. It also only has two keys and can play chromaticaly through the use of half-holing and cross fingerings. Also interesting to note that tuning is 415hz not 440hz as the modern standard.
Crumhorn – Renaissance, double-reed instrument, sounds similar to a shawm but probably not as loud and more nasal sounding. The mouthpiece is enclosed in a cap so the player’s lip do not touch the reed.
Baroque Clarinet and Chalumeau – Surprising instruments in the sense that one would think that the small size of the soprano chalumeau would have a high pitched sound, but this is not the case. It plays the lower fundamental range of a modern clarinet, whilst the larger baroque clarinet plays the higher notes. Both made out of boxwood.
Rebec – Similar intrument to the vieille, originating in the middle-east brought into Europe through the crusades.
Vieille – Medieval bowed string instrument, early form of the fiddle and predecessor of the violin and viol. Sounds deeper and less strident than a modern violin. Use of a double-stopped drones throughout these particular performances which I guess gives it this ‘medieval’ flavour.
Viola da Gamba and Cello
Cello tuned in fifths, viola da gamba (bass viol) tuned in fourths and additionally is a fretted instrument and has anywhere from 5 to 7 strings. The frets themselves can be fashioned from strings and tied round the back of the neck and are therefore movable to accomodate different tunings / intonation.
Theorbo and lute
Lute is derived from the arabic Oud possibly transferred into Europe through the Moorish conquest and occupation of southern Spain. The theorbo is a development of the lute consisting of the addition of the longer bass strings (also known as diapason) played with the thumb.
Just like today where music is used for dance and entertainment, in religious settings, celebrations, etc, the same is true of Renaissance music where ‘music was an essential part of civic, religious and courtly life’ (https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/renm/hd_renm.htm).
The church was initially an important patron of music with the new polyphonic style that developed out of plainchant and organum, notably Leonin and Perotin at Notre-Dame in Paris in the late 12th and early 13th centuries. In the Renaissance court, ‘chapels’ – a group of salaried musicians and clerics employed by a ruler, nobleman, church official or other patron – sprung up all over Europe in the late 14th and early 15th centuries. These musicians composed secular as well as sacred music.
One of the duties of employed minstrels would have been to perform music at court.
Musicians would also have been employed for public occasions such as civic processions, though they may have had other duties as well.
‘…musicians throughout France were hired to participate in civic ritual and customs. The major city of Montpellier, for instance,…regularly contracted in the mid-fourteenth century a five member wind band with two reed instruments, two trumpets and a small kettledrum to precede the city council in processions, as well as two trumpeters to function as watchmen, and another to serve as public crier’. (Burkholder et al)
It is difficult to get a full picture of just how rich (or not) musical life would have been during the middle-ages and Renaissance periods due to the paucity of any accurate historical documentation relating to ‘common folk’. From a purely personal perspectice I’m quite quite sure there would have been many amateur musicians that existed to entertain in taverns and important life events such as weddings.
Like so much baroque keyboard music, this is full of trills, mordents, and other pieces of ornamentation that become a little tiresome after a while. Having said that, the music in this suite really is full of drama and by the sound of it, uses the full extent of the harpsichord of the time – more so than Bach, though I haven’t looked into this in any depth – it just sounds like it. The style is also quite different to Handel or Bach. Quite frankly some of it has the fiery passion of Beethoven with some tremendous thumping chords on the left hand in ‘les trois mains’ movement – yet I realise that the harpsichord is not capable of any dynamics, unlike the piano. Having just written that sentence I have just listened to a passage of the sixth movement ‘La Triomphante’ where there is definitely a quieter ‘echoed’ line (?). I know many harpsichords had 2 manuals so there might be something in this to do with the number of strings that are plucked at one time. I might investigate further at some point…
Also of note: I am, to a certain extent, familiar with the standard Baroque dance suites having looked over the Bach lute suites many years ago, but this Rameau suite contains some unusual movements I have never heard of before.
After the Allemande – Courante – Sarabande there are 3 movements I don’t recognise: Les Trois Mains – Fanfarinette – La Triomphante. The suite finishes with a Gavotte and 6 doubles. The liner notes explain that this set is contained in ‘Rameau’s third collection of keyboard pieces…published in 1728. As with the second collection, dance movements appear, as well as character pieces’. (Naxos CD 8.553048, Keith Anderson)
All in all…quite a discovery and something I enjoyed listening to (a couple of times over).
References
Liner notes Naxos CD 8.553048, Keith Anderson.
Rameau, Jean-Philippe
Platee: Ballet Suite http://imslp.naxosmusiclibrary.com/streamw.asp?ver=2.0&s=167137%2Fimslpcomp01%2F42462
(Accessed 27/04/18)
It makes a refreshing change to listen to this music that sounds at times more Romantic than Baroque, with more space to breathe than anything Bach might write. The Ouverture is reminiscent of Vivaldi with contrasting dynamics between the violin section and the rest of the orchestra and fast ‘exciting’ violin runs. In fact this technique is used to a large extent thoughout this work.
Lovely moments in the ‘Air de Ballet’ where the legato and somewhat lyrical winds contrast with the playfulness and excited rhythms of the violins, accompanied, and at times echoed, by the rest of the orchestra.
Impossibly frenetic fourth movement ‘Orage’ (the storm), you can almost smell the smoke coming off the strings!
The fifth movement also contains a kind of maniacal contrast between sadness and joy, and indeed the title of the movement reflects this ‘Air pour des fous gais et des fous tristes’ – I can’t help thinking this is something that would feel quite at home in the 19th century.
Things calm down somewhat in the minuet though there is still this contrast between soft and loud sections, again reminiscent of Vivaldi.
Lively and gay feel to the final movement, Rigaudon. Echoed lines, question and answer phrases, terraced and varied dynamics.
Again, very much enjoyed this music and I can understand why Rameau’s works dominated the Paris opera at the time.
Platee was first performed in 1745 at the palace of Versailles to celebrate the marriage of the Dauphin and the Spanish Infanta Maria Teresa. It is a comic opera and the liner notes explain that ‘French opera composers became experts at weaving ballets movements into the dramatic fabric of their works’.
It is the start of a very fruitful and creative period for Rameau. The same year he gains a pension from the king, though he had already acquired the patronage of a rich tax collector named Alexandre-Jean-Joseph Riche de la Poupliniere in the mid 1730s, and from 1745 to 1749 he completes eleven dramatic works. He is something of a late bloomer, being 62 in 1745.
References
Liner notes Nazos CD 8.557490, Simon Heighes.
Burkholder, J. P., Grout, D. J., & Palisca, C. V. (2014). A history of western music (Ninth edition.). New York, N.Y.: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc..
Biography
Jean-Philippe Rameau was born in Dijon in 1683. He was the seventh of eleven children. Despite the fact that his father was an organist, his parents wanted him to study and practice law and he was enrolled at a Jesuit college and subjected to a curriculum that trained him for this future career. As might be predicted, he had no interest in law and by the time he was eighteen it was accepted that he would become a musician.
He moved around France where he was organist in various large towns – Avignon, Clermont, Paris, and Dijon where he succeeded his father as organist at Notre-Dame for a time. In 1713 he was in Lyon, and two years later he was back in Clermont with a contract for 29 years.
‘The limited possibilities in Clermont and his desire to publish in Paris his important ‘Traite de l’Harmonie’ led him to seek release from his contract and when this was not granted, to play such discords with such unpleasant registration that the cathedral chapter agreed to his departure’. (Liner notes, Naxos CD 8.553048, Keith Anderson).
I love these little details.
In fact ‘Traite de l’harmonie’, published in 1722 proves to be an important work. Burkholder et al go so far as to state that it is ‘one of the most influential theoretical works ever written’ (p.425 Burkholder)
Essentially, it seems that Rameau laid the foundations of ‘modern’ harmony, or at least of Western musical harmony until the 20th century. Burkholder et at go on to explain. ‘He goes on to define and use terms such as the ‘tonic’, the ‘dominant’ and the ‘subdominant’ which are terms that form some of the basic pillars of music harmony. Additionally he talks about dissonance and consonance: Seventh chords provided dissonance, triads consonance. As important as this work is, it should be noted that many of these elements had been described by earlier theorists, though Rameau was ‘the first to bring them together into a unified system’ (Burkholder et al).
Rameau was something of a controversial figure as his operas divided opinion between the supporters of Rameau, and the ‘Lullistes’ who found ‘Rameau’s music difficult, forced, grotesque, thick, mechanical, and unnatural – in a word Baroque – because of its complex and dissonant harmony, dense orchestration…’ (Burkholder et al). His eventual popularity and his newer style eventually became accepted, and by the 1750s he was accepted as the most eminent living French composer.
Some other little tidbits: 1726, aged 42, he marries a nineteen year old singer and harpsichordist named Marie Louise Mangot with whom he has 4 children.
He dies in Paris in 1764, but before he expires he finds enough strength to admonish the priest giving last rites for bad chanting.
http://www.musicacademyonline.com/composer/biographies.php?bid=38
Naxos liner notes CD 8.553048, Keith Anderson
Burkholder, J. P., Grout, D. J., & Palisca, C. V. (2014). A history of western music (Ninth edition.). New York, N.Y.: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc..
Go on the internet and research the history of music publishing up to 1900. Concentrate particularly on developments in the period covered by this part of the course (around 1740–1800). In what ways did the increasing availability of published music affect the European music scene?
Whilst researching this topic, the impression I get from reading the course notes, as well as other sources, is that music publishing becomes increasingly important as a source of income to the composer as we progress through the 18th and into the 19th century. By the time of Beethoven’s death, it has largely replaced the system of patronage that had been so essential to the composer’s survival. Additionally the rise of the middle-classes, technological advances in printing music, and the massive increase in demand for published music in the 19th century changed to a large extent the way in which music was created and who it was written for.
The system of patronage often restricted composers from publishing their own works. For instance, in Haydn’s original contract with the Esterhazy family he was forbidden from selling or giving away his compositions. It was partly the unauthorised publication of his music in London and Paris and elsewhere that helped to spread his reputation across Europe.
‘A new contract in 1779 allowed Haydn to sell his music to others while continuing to direct opera and musical activities at court. He subsequently wrote most of his instrumental music with the expectation of sales to the public, in manuscript or printed copies. Since copyright at the time did not extend across national boundaries Haydn tried to maximise it’s profits and to prevent pirated editions by selling the same piece simultaneously to publishers in several different countries’. (p.523. A History of Western Music, Burkholder)
In his later years, as Haydn increasingly composed for publication or for other patrons, he gained a measure of independence from his employer.
Beethoven followed in Haydn’s footsteps: Publishers competed for Beethoven’s music. He drove hard bargains, got them bidding against each other, and he followed Haydn’s lead in publishing works in several countries at once to preserve his rights and maximize his returns.
It seems that the problem of copyright infringement, an eternal headache for the creative artist, was a reality even in the earlier days of music publishing:
‘Extensive music publishing from engraved plates began in London and Amsterdam. Estienne Roger set up his shop in Amsterdam about 1690 and was soon engraving small oblong quarto piracies of Bolognese instrumental music…’ Printing and publishing of music Stanley Boorman, Eleanor Selfridge-Field and Donald W. Krummel https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.40101 Oxford Music Online
As a side note, it was ‘Francis Broderip (1776–98), important as the first music publisher to deposit his new publications at Stationers Hall for copyright purposes, and probably the most prolific of all London music publishers in the 1790s’. I point this out because I went through the same process many years ago and it also touches on the subject of copyright law in the UK and the passing into law of the Statute of Anne in 1710 which was effectively the first law to protect the intellectual rights of the author.
In the early 16th century, Petrucci was the first printer to use multiple-impression movable type, and the first publisher of polyphony (Grove Music online). Venice became an important centre for music publishing in the 16th and early 17th centuries.
Subsequent printers copied Petrucci’s techniques, and the different techniques of printing music existed in parallel and persisted almost to the present day. Indeed, different processes were used side by side: At the beginning of the 19th century, for example, Breitkopf and Hartel were printing music from type, from engraved plates and from lithographic stones concurrently. With the techniques that he employed he was able to output a large quantity of music cheaper than other publishers and indeed some publishers had their music printed by Breitkopf. (A History of Western Music, Burkholder Printing and publishing of music Stanley Boorman, Eleanor Selfridge-Field and Donald W. Krummel Oxford Music online)
Before the technique of printing was established and exploited widely, music was preserved and circulated in manuscript, or survived is a repertory carried in oral tradition among priests and professional lay musicians. During the latter part of the 15th century printing became the accepting means of disseminating literary articles, but almost all music was still circulated in hand written form. Manuscript were prepared for sale in this way at least until the beginning of the 19th century: the names of Foucault in Paris, Traeg in Vienna, Breitkopf in Leipzig and Recordi in Milan recall the continuity and significance of this tradition.
During the 18th and 19th centuries music publishing flourished and many firms sprung up, some of which are still in existence today, namely: Breitkopf & Härtel, (founded in 1719, the oldest music publishing company in the world) but also in England, most notably: Samuel Chappell (1810–), Vincent Novello (1811–), Thomas Boosey (working in music from 1816).
In the 19th century the development and popularity of the piano (as explored in my previous assignment), as well as the growing ranks of the middle-class helped to create a seemingly infinitely expanding demand for music.
‘The first musical fruit of middle-class prosperity appeared in the form of a piano. It was the acquisition of pianos in large numbers which was to vastly extend the market for drawing-room ballads, and to standardize the genre as a song with piano accompaniment (rather than, say, harp). In the early part of the nineteenth century it was taken for granted that a song published with piano accompaniment was intended for home music-making…the tradition of publishing music heard at concerts in versions aimed at amateurs stretched back into the previous century: then the passion for the German flute among gentleman amateurs had lain behind such remarkable publications as Handel’s complete Messiah arranged for flute…’ The Growth of the Market for Domestic Music Derek B. Scott, Professor of Critical Musicology, University of Leeds
All these amateurs needed music to play, creating a boom in music publishing. Technology again proved crucial: lithography, invented around 1796, let publishers print music cheaply with elaborate illustrations that helped it sell.
‘And here is where the history of music publishing should be considered. When it all began in eighteenth-century Europe, some enterprising music lovers put their tastes and talents to the task of satisfying a mounting musical appetite among a steadily growing army of middle-class ama teurs. Everybody sang or played, and the experience of teaming up with others was enormous fun. Composers were more than happy to oblige by writing music that was within the grasp of these amateurs…’ Sturm, George. “Music Publishing.” Notes, vol. 56, no. 3, 2000, pp. 628–634. JSTOR, JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/899647.
‘The market in sheet music gave the public at large unprecedented influence over what music was produced, because publishers had to supply what their customers wanted’ (Burkholder)
The above quotes neatly sum up the change in the way music was composed and the increasing importance of music publishing to the composer. Prior to, and including the Baroque era composers were generally employed by the nobility to compose music for the court or the church. They had little independence and were considered servants or simple employees. Some exceptions spring to mind of course – notably Handel who had much success in England, but his financial independence came as much from independent means such as opera productions, as well as writing works for nobility rather than simply through music publishing. It seems that the 19th century was important to the composer in the sense that there was a large amateur music-making market, with such diverse segments as choral societies, small amateur bands, brass bands, as well as the great popularity of the piano, all of which created a vibrant market for music publishing.
Though not directly relevant in answering the above question, I found myself perusing YouTube and coming across a number of videos that were highly informative and instructive with regards to the art and science of printing music. I was particularly struck by the time, skill, and patience required to engrave music on soft metal.
Haydn has been called ‘the father of the symphony’ not because he invented the genre but because his symphonies set the pattern for later composers through their high quality, wide dissemination, and lasting appeal’. Burkholder, J. P., Grout, D. J., & Palisca, C. V. A history of western music
His earliest symphonies, composed for Count Morzin between 1757 and 1761, were typically scored for 2 oboes, 2 horns, and strings. Most are in three movements in fast-slow-fast sequence but there also exist 4 movement symphonies from this period such as the ‘time of day’ symphonies (Le Matin, le Midi, Le Soir).
As his symphonic style developed, Haydn eventually settled on a 4 movement structure. Indeed, most of Haydn symphonies are in four movements.
They consist of:
1. A fast sonata form movement, often with a slow introduction.
2. A slow movement
3. A minuet and Trio
4. A fast finale usually in sonata or Rondo form.
Each movement is in the same key except the slow movement which is usually in a closely related key.
Haydn would use other instruments such as the bassoon or flute to augment the ensemble. He included solo passages for each instrument, designed to showcase the skills of his players.
From around 1768, the symphonies became longer, were more rhythmically complex, more contrapuntal, and more challenging to play. They are marked by great extremes and dynamic level, more contrast between loud and soft, more use of crescendo and sforzatos. The minor key symphonies from this period have an emotional agitated character that some scholars have associated with the ‘sturm und drang’ movement (named after a 1776 play). Burkholder, J. P., Grout, D. J., & Palisca, C. V. A history of western music
In the 1780s Haydn increasingly composed for the public. By now he consistently wrote for an orchestra of flute, 2 oboes, 2 bassoons, 2 horns, and strings, sometimes augmented by trumpets and timpani.
By the time he wrote the ‘London symphonies’ Haydn was inspired to write in a more flamboyant, more glittering orchestration. As such, the orchestra is expanded with trumpets and timpani now standard, and clarinets in all but one of the last six symphonies.
Beethoven, once one of Haydn’s students, would go on to further transform the genre.
Wagner Tuba
I recently attended a performance of The Rite of Spring and noticed that one of the horn players had an instrument that looked a little like a stretched french horn. I am now discovering that this was in fact a Wagner tuba, which is played by the horn players, not by the tuba player as the name implies.
The instrument was conceived by Richard Wagner for use in his opera Das Rheingold, premiered in 1869, and part of The Ring cycle. He was after a particular sound and the Wagner tuba sounds like something between a french horn and a trombone.
There are 2 types of Wagner tuba: Tenor in Bb and bass in F. The ranges are similar to the horns of the same pitches.
Bruckner, Wagner, Stravinsky are some of the prominent composers who have written for the instrument.
Bass clarinet
Part of the woowind family. Developed / in use since the late 19th century.
Sounds an octave lower than a standard Bb clarinet. Often made of grenadilla wood
Conventionally notated on the treble clef but sounding a compound second / major ninth lower. Has also been notated less commonly in the bass clef, in which case it will sound a major second lower than written.
Depending on how modern the instrument is, the lowest note can go from a low C (Bb concert pitch) 3 octaves below middle C up to sounding a D a major ninth above middle C. Not all bass clarinets can go that low, so Eb (written) is a more practical starting note.
Used by:
Berlioz – One of the first composers to use the bass clarinet in the ‘Grande symphonie funèbre et triomphale’ (1840)
Wagner – Tannhäuser (1845)
Stravinsky – Rite of Spring (1913)
Ravel – Daphnis et Chloé (1912)
Mahler (symphonies)
Just some of pieces and prominent composers who have written for the instrument.
Modern composers such as Steve Reich uses 2 bass clarinets in music for 18 Musicians (1976)
Dramatic ominous opening that is immediately repeated more quietly and sadly. Slow string passages, various solo instrumental lyrical passages. Return of the opening motif several times…percussion and cacophonous horns…return of the opening motif on horns…lyrical wind passages, celesta. Overall both beautiful and ominous.
Waltz-like second movement – generally comical and humorous, drunk at times…
…which only enhances the pathos of the third Largo movement…Sounds like a dark night that ends with the glimmers of sunrise.
This version of the final movement is relatively fast. Reminiscent at times of Beethoven’s ninth as the music searches for where it’s going before the triumphant (in this case) ending. Sounds convincing enough to be kept out of the gulag to me.
It is only the final section of the movement that is markedly different to the previous version. The dissonances are very much more obvious, in fact it sounds like a cacophonous mess!!! With some very ‘reluctant’ marching timpani playing. Sounds very, very wrong.
Shostakovich’s 5th symphony
Shostakovich wrote his fifth symphony in 1937. It was premiered in Leningrad in November that year for the celebration of the twentieth anniversary of the Russian Revolution. It originally carried the sub-title “The practical answer of a Soviet artist to justified criticism”.
The ‘justified criticism’ had come in the form of newspaper articles in Pravda, the state mouthpiece. In particular an article entitled “Muddle Instead of Music”. This article appeared shortly after Stalin had attended a performance of Shostakovich’s ‘Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk’ at the Bolshoi Theatre, so it was interpreted as being Stalin’s opinion of the music.
The oppression and murderous brutality of Stalin’s regime is well documented so I’m not going to delve into that unnecessarily. Suffice to say that when Shostakovich wrote his fifth symphony there was a real danger of him becoming persona non-grata in Stalin’s USSR and all the dreadful possibilities that entailed. He had in fact been writing his fourth symphony at the time the “Muddle Instead of Music” article was published. The fourth symphony got as far as rehearsals with the Leningrad Philharmonic but there was pressure from the authorities. As Shostakovich states – “I didn’t like the situation… Fear was all around. So I withdrew it.”
To give an idea of the cultural atmosphere at the time:
At an October 1932 gathering at Maxim Gorky’s Moscow mansion, Stalin mused aloud that writers should be “engineers of human souls,” and the writers debated among themselves what he meant. From the meeting emerged the concept of socialist realism, according to which Soviet artists would depict the people’s lives both realistically and heroically, as if from the standpoint of the socialist utopia to come. Ross, Alex. The Rest is Noise: Listening to the Twentieth Century.
So Shostakovich responds with his fifth symphony:
‘I wanted to convey in the symphony how, through a series of tragic conflicts of great inner spiritual turmoil, optimism asserts itself as a world-view … There is nothing more honorable for a composer than to create works for and with the people. The attention to music on the part of our government and all the Soviet people instills in me the confidence that I will be able to give everything that is in my power’. (www.keepingscore.org)
Of course we can’t really take this at face value in the context of political atmosphere at the time. So we need to listen to it… (See comments under each performance.)
The slower the tempo in the last movement suggests something increasingly laborious and forced. The fact that there is some doubt about the marking up of the tempo, and whether it’s a mistake or not, suggest to me that Shostakovich absolutely deliberately created the ‘problem’ around tempo and how triumphant the finale should sound. Marking up a tempo in a score is surely something that a composer is not going to get wrong! The effect of playing the finale at different tempos is quite striking and the effect on the listener is entirely different. The faster tempo is plausibly triumphant. The slower tempo is not. From a listening aesthetic point of view I prefer the faster tempo.
Does it fit with conventional definitions of music?
A reminder of a standard definition:
The art of combining vocal or instrumental sounds (or both) to produce beauty of form, harmony, and expression of emotion.
So, based on the above definition, both much of Cage’s music and the more radical serialist music of Webern and total serialism of Messiaen / Boulez would fail the subjective threshold of music in terms of beauty of form and harmony. However it is difficult to say at what point it stops being music and becomes ‘art’ instead. Objectively speaking the elements of music are there. I’m just not sure how many people would consider it to be music. They say beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder, I think that’s probably the case with chance and serial music.
Do you consider it music?
It is music – it is organised sound – but it’s not something I would choose to listen to.
It is largely subjective where music ends and art begins, and as such attitudes change over time as well. It’s not very ‘fun’ listening. To quote Stravinsky: “To listen is an effort, and just to hear has no merit…”
Consider how you might define what constitutes a work of art, and what your own idea of music is. What elements have to be present to call something ‘music’?
Some sort of organised sound, composed or improvised, has to be present in my view for it to constitute ‘music’. So, with the exception of 4’33’ which I would consider more art installation than music, the compositions of Cage, Nono, Boulez, Messiaen, etc, are music – They have composed these pieces, even if it stretches the musical boundaries and definition at times. In my case I try to respond to these pieces on an intellectual level rather than having an emotional response. If anything, the emotional response for me is more frequently likely to be one of irritation than anything else.
Do you notice any distinct differences between chance music and that composed using a complex system, such as one of the listening examples for serialism?
Yes I would separate Cage from some of the other composers because of the element of chance during both the composition as well as the ‘performance’, e.g. during a performance of Imaginary Landscape, each performance will be different in the sense that the tuning of the radio with pick up different stations and different music each time it is performed. I don’t know whether Cage used any chance systems when writing this particular piece, but there is an element of chance when performing it.
I realise that you can make the same argument for any piece of music. Each performance is different and unique, but Cage takes that to a different level based on chance.
Can you hear the systems used in the serial pieces?Quite frankly, not really. It’s usually obvious that it’s not tonal but to hear the ‘systems used’ would be stretching it.
How far do you consider an understanding of the systems used in composing a piece of music to be essential to the understanding of the work itself?
This clearly depends on the type of music. As a very broad generalization I would say that most pre-20th century music can be enjoyed without ‘understanding’ it as such. For example one can listen to and enjoy a fugue without knowing anything about the intricacies of counterpoint techniques. Other musical movements including classical and romantic are broadly based on the tonal system and have melodies and harmonies that can be appreciated without too much work, intellectually speaking.
However I would say that the same does not hold true for music composed in the latter half of the 20th century, where the appreciation of the art is based very much more on an intellectual level and as such an understanding of the work is not exactly required to appreciate it, but it helps. You approach the music in a different way. The context of the work becomes more and more important.
Is it possible to gain a sense of emotional impact from music without understanding how it was put together?
Most people who are not musicians, and probably many musicians, enjoy music without understanding how it is put together. So yes.
I’m inclined to think that an understanding of music on an intellectual level may create a ‘deeper’ level of emotional impact, but actually, I’m not sure. As I’m writing this I can’t help but think of the film Schindler’s List which is shot entirely in black and white, bar some scenes depicting a little girl wearing a red coat. You kind of wonder why Spielberg has done this and it’s perhaps clear at the end of the movie when Schindler repeatedly says that he wishes he had saved one more life… Just one more.
Devastating.
I digress.
But on further reflection I’m inclined to think that the reverse is true in music: if I’m analysing the music on an intellectual level I’m not responding to it so much on an emotional level.
Try to describe examples that support your answer. How is emotion created in music?
Emotion in music is created principally through a combination of tension and resolution, dissonance and consonance, and changes in dynamic range over time. Composers manipulate these systems in music to create emotion, e.g. Bach’s Toccata and Fugue in D minor BWV565. Like much of his music, it’s a journey of dissonance and consonance and ultimate resolution when we get to the end. The way the ‘voices’ resolve creates an emotional response, in me at least. This is music at a ‘Physics’ level – laws of harmony, overtones, etc.
The context of a work also has a lot to do with how we respond to music. For example, listening to Shostakovich’s fifth symphony as pure music creates an emotional response. Much like Beethoven’s fifth, there’s no denying the drama of the opening, but listening to it with an understanding of the historical context creates a further dimension by which to respond to the work. Somewhat like the Schindler’s list analogy.
Can the chance pieces deliver the same emotional impact as a systematically composed piece? Give reasons for your answer.
Like the modern artists of the time, such as Jackson Pollock who was randomly throwing paint on the canvas to create art, composers who used chance systems could not be entirely sure how the music was going to end up. It may or may not create an emotional impact, it’s by definition pure chance. A systematically composed piece has the possibility of delivering an emotional impact if the composer wants it to, though it depends on the system being used. Easier to achieve with a tonal system than a serialist system.
In your listening log, describe the main similarities and contrasts that strike you in the chance and serial pieces, and consider your personal response to the works
It seems to me that both serial music and chance music are methods of deconstructing music.
Some composers look for new and innovative ways to create music. Serialism created a set of rules that composers could follow. Chance music is another system by which to compose, but these systems just create a different set of rules to the tonal rules that came before, and they ultimately become a straight jacket. The serialist composer who has used 11 tones in a prior passage does not have a choice as to what comes next! In a sense Cage’s I Ching method also takes the choice out of the composer’s hands. A distinction also needs to be made regarding the chance element and whether it takes place during the composition, or during the performance, or both.
(My response to the works is explained under each piece)
This is an interesting question and something I want to write about further, other than this brief paragraph here. I read another student’s blog who thought they were the same! You could argue for both to a certain extent.
I think Pop music is quite different from classical for a number of reasons: Very broadly speaking:
The type of instruments used are different.
Some of the scales that are used are different, e.g. harmonic & melodic minor scales, wholetone scales in classical, and seldom appear in pop.
Dynamic range – Wider dynamic range in classical.
Form – Varied forms in classical, verse / chorus / middle 8 in pop.
Length – 3-4 minute pop tune, generally longer pieces in classical.
The list above is clearly a simplification of a potentially vast subject, where I am sure there are many exceptions to the above list. Nevertheless the genres are different (in my mind at least) for the reasons given.
What constitutes good music?
I think the answer to this is dependent on the genre of music, and the function it is intended to provide. To illustrate this we can take a couple of different examples.
If we take dance music, the music is there for people to move to. It therefore needs to have a clearly defined pulse. This is probably true for both classical dance styles and modern dance music. So a Strauss waltz and a track by The Prodigy might both have a strong beat so that people can dance to it easily. They could therefore both be defined as successful in the functions they provide.
Most popular and classical music needs to communicate something. Music generally has an emotional impact on us first and foremost, and if the music moves us in this way it could be considered successful.
There are some other commonalities between classical and contemporary music. It helps if there is a good tune that you can hum along to. This is true whether it’s an opera aria or a pop song. Everyone likes a good tune.
Overall my preferences tend to lie in pop and rock. Very broadly speaking, there is an immediacy to pop and rock music that does not exist so much in classical music. A 3 minute pop tune is easier to get into than an hour long symphony. By the same token one can also lose interest with pop music after a few listens. Perhaps.
The prevalence of pop music on radio, film, and TV also explains why I prefer it. I think you become comfortable with the kind of music that you are exposed to and become familiar with. For me, pop music has to be catchy or dancey or convey some emotion. Or all three at once. Something that conveys anticipation and excitement. So what qualifies? something like Michael Jackson’s “Beat It” maybe, where there is a strong groove, an obvious melody, contrasting sections within the song,and a sense of anticipation for a particular riff or moment in the song, e.g the guitar solo perhaps. I’m sure there are the same characteristics in classical music that determine how “good” it is.
Jim Mennell Music 