From: roger@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: government and the arts
Date: 10 Apr 92 03:19:47 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@ernie.Princeton.EDU

In article <ku95urINN1ah@calvin.usc.edu> alves@calvin.usc.edu (William Alves) writes:
>In article <2038@transfer.stratus.com> jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com writes:
>>
>>The problem is that "government support" doesn't mean the same thing
>
>Meanwhile, Roger Lustig writes:
>
>>I'm not so sure they are.  For one thing, many composers DO have jobs.
>>For another, hardly any "serious" composers have EVER supported
>>themselves by composing.  In the 19th century, I can think of one:
>>Beethoven.  Chopin taught piano.  Mendelssohn was a conservatory
>>director.  Berlioz conducted and wrote.  Brahms conducted and edited and
>>performed.  Wagner got a government subsidy 8-) and conducted.
>>...
>>Before the 19thC, ALL musicians had other jobs than composing.  Look at
>>Bach -- music director of an entire town.  Handel produced his own
>>operas, and had a governmnet subsidy...  Haydn ran a court orchestra.
>>Others had church or court jobs that involved much more than composing.

>>The "potential Mozarts" have decided that they SHOULD be making their
>>money by composing, as opposed to other forms of musical activity.  I
>>find this disturbing.

>I never did say that composers at other times supported themselves soley 
>through the support of patrons, and I don't think composers today are
>expecting that they should be. Most composers today conduct or teach
>as well, but I think the difference between now and then is first of all
>one of degree. Composers in earlier times derived a much greater propor-
>tion of their income from composing.

I'm not sure that this is the case.  A Kapellmeister who composed a lot
didn't make much more than one who composed a little.  Many composers
were virtuosi (and later on conductors) who made the vast majority of
their income from public performance.  This is true of many 20thC
composers, too; others, like Schoenberg, taught.  

What's REALLY new in the 20th century is the composer who doesn't
perform at all.  And THAT is why some composers drive cabs, imho --
because the *possibility* of composing without being a performer is
there.  Yes, some composers who DO perform ALSO drive cabs.  But the job
description has changed.

> Sure Bach had to be an administrator
>and performer and even teach Latin, but a large part of his job was com-
>posing. He was paid to essentially write, rehearse, and perform cantatas
>for weekly services. Imagine finding an analogous gig in the US now!

Not the case at all.  How many cantatas did he write in the last 20
years of his life?

Bach *chose* to write five cycles of cantatas in his early years in
Leipzig.  This gave him a repertoire to work with later, but he was
allowed to -- and often did -- perform cantatas by other composers.

Very little of the music Bach wrote after 1730 was related to his job:
not theClavieruebung, or WTCII, or the B Minor Mass.  

>The university is not too bad as patrons go for many composers (that's
>where I am), but it can sometimes attract and reward ivory tower attitudes.

Sometimes?  8-)  I think the heart of that attitude is the ceding of
performance to the performance department...

>I think too that even the non-composing part of a university job is more
>time-consuming than Bach's administering, 

HAH!  He had to rehearse THREE church choirs, teach in the school, and
manage the Collegium Musicum.  He probably rehearsed the soloists, too.
And practiced the organ...  He was the chief (And only) adminstrator of
ALL musical activities in one of Germany's larget cities.  Only Hamburg
was a bigger job, and Telemann had that one.  

>Brahms's editting, or Chopin's teaching.

Probably the case, but remember that Chopin also performed for a while
there, etc.  In any case, Brahms did a lot of his composing on his
summer vacation, just like modern composers.

> Besides, there are probably plenty of excellent composers who
>simply don't make (or don't want to be) good professors. Steve Reich once
>said that he would sooner drive a cab again than teach at a university.

Well, sure.  But he became a performer in a market he created; he didn't
attach himself to the musical community by performing, first, the way
just about every composer before 1900 did.  (OK, not the opera
composers.)

>Having just done my taxes, this is probably more on my mind. I'm no Steve
>Reich, and I'm grateful for my royalties, commissions, and so on, but that
>income is just a drop in the bucket. I don't expect and I don't think most
>composers expect the government to completely support them, but just the
>chance now and then to write a piece and have it performed while not giving
>up a decent hourly wage would be enough for me. I would GLADLY trade for
>Bach's gig, or Handel's, or Brahms's...

Well, Bach also had those 20 little deductions running around the
house...

Sure, those are GREAT gigs.  

But, with all respect, how many of us in history have ever been -- or
composed like -- those three?  And look at the great composers who
*didn't* have worldly success like that?  Would you settle for
Bruckner's gig?  (Naaah, the lobotomy wouldn't be worth it....8-) 

Roger