From: alves@calvin.usc.edu (William Alves)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: tonality and modern music
Date: 16 Nov 1992 17:25:12 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: calvin.usc.edu

In article <x#w1+yc@rpi.edu> mccomt@aix.rpi.edu (Todd Michel McComb) writes:

>There is also the much reported animosity of composers directed at listeners.
>I do not think this really exists.

Neither do I, but I do think that a certain indifference exists among some
composers, which Babbitt and Carter epitomize. It is true that their music
is every bit a personal expression as Beethoven's, but their expression has
moved, I think, to a different level. Beethoven was working in a certain
idiom which described large scale forms, appropriate harmonic progressions,
voice leading, and countless other conventions, but he still was able to
arrange these techniques in such a way that they expressed what he wanted
on a note-to-note basis. His sketchbooks are filled with illustrations of
his process of honing a melody.

With the twelve-tone method and all of the other processes that it spawned,
the composer's work has moved further backstage. The composer invents not
every note, but processes which determine notes (not strictly except in a
few pieces, but I believe the distinction holds). The same is true of Cage
and his music, except that chance instead of deterministic formulas deter-
mine the details of sound.

There is something visceral and direct about a great melody and harmony
conceived of in the conventional idioms of the day - even if it sometimes
stretches those idioms. I think that most people cannot perceive the same
logic and composer's voice, the same balance of surprises and fulfilled
expectations in modern nontonal music. Part of it may be unfamiliarity,
it's true. But I think there is something much more fundamental that dis-
tances many listeners from this music. Babbitt in the article that you
mention recognizes this difficulty, and instead of just suggesting further
listening for familiarity or education towards greater understanding as
many have done, he hits us with the provocative question: why should the
composer be any more concerned with the layman's appreciation than a
physicist working on a new theory?

I don't think it's primarily the dissonance, lack of conventional melody,
or even the atonality that stands in most people's way - it's the fact
that for many composers processes have become the expression instead of
the means to expression.

>But people become frustrated, and hurt.
>If an artist pours out his soul, only to be met with hostile reactions from
>an audience who (perhaps justifiably) has difficulty relating to what is
>being expressed, he will be hurt.  This can easily manifest itself in all
>sorts of invective -- particularly if the composer believes that the audience
>is criticizing without basis.  Composers also say strange things which can
>alienate listeners; I know I do it often.

Why is this? Is it just a lashing out? Certainly Schoenberg was often talking
about his having to deal with openly hostile critics all of his life. But
there's something else, too.

>Babbitt's essay "The composer as
>specialist" is often brought up in these sorts of discussions, and there is
>a point to be made: composers are writing music that they themselves can
>enjoy, and it is hardly out of the question that there are works which might
>demand years of full-time music study in order to absorb.

"The composer as specialist" to me connotes a small number of congescenti
who trade clever esoterica among themselves - it doesn't seem like simply
answering hostile critics. I don't believe this describes most composers,
but I know of audience members who certainly have gotten that impression
of modern music.

>And of course there is still tonal music being written, along with so much
>other exciting and new material.  For me, the greatest thrill is music which
>brings so many of these elements together: tonality, renaissance polyphony,
>other ideas on pitch ordering, and the music of other cultures.  We have
>composers reproducing their ideas and emotions for us -- and though we can
>hardly expect to be in complete sympathy with everyone, I am sure that there
>are modern and atonal works which would appeal to virtually everyone reading
>this if they were to happen upon them.

Absolutely, and I hope that people aren't scared off by impressions formed
about 20th century music based on just a minority of pieces. Personally, I
would prefer to hear a work, ANY work, that I haven't heard before, rather
than hearing yet another interpretation of the Beethoven seventh (though
it is a piece I dearly love).

Thanks for the thoughtful essay.

Bill Alves
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical