David Matthews SYMPHONY NO. 8 First Performance 17/04/15

[ahinton]

We seem to have come a long way from David Matthews' latest symphony...

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

We seem to have come a long way from David Matthews' latest symphony...

I think that's been my point all along.

[ahinton]

I think that's been my point all along.

Well, not quite ALL along, surely? the thread did start off with discussion of it per se, including your input, did it not?!

But no, I get the joke all right! - although for it to fit the bill rather better, my "from" might have been better expressed as "since", perhaps.

Anyway, if it goes on much longer, it might be time to start a discussion of his Ninth Symphony...

[jayne lee wilson]

I think that's been my point all along.

All these little barbs fhg...... anyone would think your entire worldview had been threatened...

[Barbirollians]

All these little barbs fhg...... anyone would think your entire worldview had been threatened...

Did I say anything controversial on this thread ??? Looking forward however to hearing DM's 2nd .

[ahinton]

Did I say anything controversial on this thread ??? Looking forward however to hearing DM's 2nd .

Do try his 6th as well.

[Daniel]

Fascinating reading this very interesting thread which now seems at an end.

A couple of not very interesting points to add. I liked the symphony, it doesn't feel superficial and doesn't pretend to be anything other than it is I think. And it seemed to say what it wanted to say quite genuinely and with (to me) a certain amount of craft. I'd agree it kind of adds mass to the canon rather than expands it though and doesn't feel as if it's exploring any new territory. I don't know what repeated hearings will yield, but I am at least inspired to try.


fhg 235

And you are perfectly entitled to so disagree with him for that reason if you so wish, of course - but can you name any work that you love, that you regard as one of the masterpieces of Music, or even that you simply "quite like" that was written in an idiom of sixty years (or more) earlier than it was composed? Can you imagine Tchaikovsky writing in a manner that could be confused with Spohr? Schubert with JC Bach? RVW with Stanford?

I am in sympathy with the feeling that music should be new in spirit and not just in name, if it is to be called new, and that it does something quite different than music that broadly bathes (very alluringly sometimes) in the energy of a previous time. However couldn't it be said that the above is quite a conservative argument itself? That because one cannot think of an historic example of writing successfully in a style from a previous time, it argues against trying it now? Any possibility exists in an a priori sense surely, and one can judge the results on their newness, but not really the means.

Richard (Barrett) - (to a point you make somewhere earlier in the thread about music not feeling as if it's genuinely of its time, thus not reflecting it) I have a not dissimilar experience with quite a bit of (other) new music I hear, which arrives with an apparent a sonic awareness of its immediate predecessors, and a bit of cutting edge bling, but that ultimately feels empty and unexciting. But ironically I think it very much does reflect the society in which its been composed, one where corporations for example often desire a kind of cutting edge to be associated with their brand, but a de-fanged one that stays firmly within safe parameters.

JLW - Regardless of whatever anyone thinks are the virtues or not of this symphony, your impassioned advocacy of this and other music, in my opinion unequivocally makes this forum a better place.

[Richard Barrett]

Richard (Barrett) - (to a point you make somewhere earlier in the thread about music not feeling as if it's genuinely of its time, thus not reflecting it) I have a not dissimilar experience with quite a bit of (other) new music I hear, which arrives with an apparent a sonic awareness of its immediate predecessors, and a bit of cutting edge bling, but that ultimately feels empty and unexciting. But ironically I think it very much does reflect the society in which its been composed, one where corporations for example often desire a kind of cutting edge to be associated with their brand, but a de-fanged one that stays firmly within safe parameters.

I agree with you. Of course, as has been said, David Matthews' symphony also reflects its time, in so far as it's a symptom of various wider tendencies I won't go into again now. The same might well go for music with the "cutting edge bling" you mention. The point is IMO to respond to one's time, for example to resist the corporatising tendency that can be seen in cultural institutions in general (and not only there of course) and at the same time to have a vision of how things could be different, in other words an optimistic vision of the potential of (in this case) music, and, by implication, of human beings. So, when you say "because one cannot think of an historic example of writing successfully in a style from a previous time, it argues against trying it now?", this argument is not "against trying it" per se but it questions the motivations of someone who would wish to try it, and what this says about the cultural-political situation we are in. The most creative ways of being inspired by music of the past involve, I think, radicalising it, "making it new" (as in for example Webern's involvement with Renaissance polyphony, or Stockhausen's with Webern, etc.).

[ahinton]

I agree with you. Of course, as has been said, David Matthews' symphony also reflects its time, in so far as it's a symptom of various wider tendencies I won't go into again now. The same might well go for music with the "cutting edge bling" you mention. The point is IMO to respond to one's time, for example to resist the corporatising tendency that can be seen in cultural institutions in general (and not only there of course) and at the same time to have a vision of how things could be different, in other words an optimistic vision of the potential of (in this case) music, and, by implication, of human beings. So, when you say "because one cannot think of an historic example of writing successfully in a style from a previous time, it argues against trying it now?", this argument is not "against trying it" per se but it questions the motivations of someone who would wish to try it, and what this says about the cultural-political situation we are in. The most creative ways of being inspired by music of the past involve, I think, radicalising it, "making it new" (as in for example Webern's involvement with Renaissance polyphony, or Stockhausen's with Webern, etc.).

Good points, but I'm still unclear about, on the one hand "the motivations of someone who would wish to try" (to write in a style from a previous time) - i.e. what intent, purpose or agenda might lie behind a wilful and determined effort to do that in preference to doing something else and, on the other, writing in the way that, say, David Matthews does simply because that's what he hears and wants to do; I think that writing in the ways that he and others do does not necessarily of itself identify a wilful ignorance or denial of other developments in the past half century of Western music but that these composer just write in the ways that they want to because that's what they happen to believe in. I don't think that any of us would genuinely prefer David Matthews et al to write quite differently as though they were someone else. To turn it upside down, if, for example, the fashionable thing for composers to do in Britain today happened to be to explore every conceivable aspect of the history of the indigenous music of the nation as an essential aspect of their creative work, some people might therefore look to you to write music that they might be able to identify as Welsh and reflecting its Welsh heritage which, if that was not at all what you felt impelled to do, would be a ridiculous expectation.

Is there not also the question of responding to one's time, or aspects thereof, negatively - responding against one's time, as it were - because the composer feels impelled at some point to do that; might not your own No (resistance and vision) constitute an example of this on the grounds that you're seeking in music to express - or at least point up - negative sentiments where you see it as appropriate to do so? If I'm talking rubbish here, please feel free to say so, but...

[Daniel]

The point is IMO to respond to one's time, for example to resist the corporatising tendency that can be seen in cultural institutions in general (and not only there of course) and at the same time to have a vision of how things could be different, in other words an optimistic vision of the potential of (in this case) music, and, by implication, of human beings.

I'd certainly agree with this. For some reason the comparison of educating children springs to mind, in that when children are disciplined for being anti-authority, it is sometimes done just to make them manageable for adults, rather than teach them important boundaries (obviously important too). Too much of the former stifles and harms a person obviously, as some behaviour that doesn't suit the adult, suits the child's wellbeing actually very well (and ultimately society's too) ... anyway, blah ...

.. I feel that effect of corporatism on cultural life (and the whole world I/we live in) is very similar to the former, without any of the benefits of the latter. The hold of corporations over all of us is so strong that the power relationship is not unlike the adult-child one I think (and a pretty ruthless adult in this case) so when people such as composers (or whatever) attempt to stand outside of that zone of influence, and become 'bad' boys and girls, I find myself being very glad they're there, even if I don't like the music.

As it happens I often do like the music, and sometimes it is partly because of the electricity of the new, and of qualities only made possible by being 'bad', but that's probably another subject.

So, when you say "because one cannot think of an historic example of writing successfully in a style from a previous time, it argues against trying it now?", this argument is not "against trying it" per se but it questions the motivations of someone who would wish to try it, and what this says about the cultural-political situation we are in. The most creative ways of being inspired by music of the past involve, I think, radicalising it, "making it new" (as in for example Webern's involvement with Renaissance polyphony, or Stockhausen's with Webern, etc.).

Although I'd also agree with most of this, I'd say the David Matthews came across as containing a certain amount of compulsion, as I said a genuine utterance, and I'm glad I heard it. I recognise the pathology you describe in relation to its raison d'etre, but would say I get that feeling more with some more outwardly modernist pieces that talk the talk, but don't seem to me to walk the walk.

[Richard Barrett]

I recognise the pathology you describe in relation to its raison d'etre, but would say I get that feeling more with some more outwardly modernist pieces that talk the talk, but don't seem to me to walk the walk.

That is certainly a phenomenon I recognise, but, once more, it emerges from a (conscious or unconscious) capitulation to tendencies in institutionalised culture towards the elevation of career-building above independent thought. I often hear music that makes me ask silently of the composer "is that really all you think that's at stake?"

[ahinton]

That is certainly a phenomenon I recognise, but, once more, it emerges from a (conscious or unconscious) capitulation to tendencies in institutionalised culture towards the elevation of career-building above independent thought. I often hear music that makes me ask silently of the composer "is that really all you think that's at stake?"

That's a potentially deadly question, though one whose asking is perfectly understandable; it's also something of a conscience-inducer and I can only hope that I've not fallen short of it. Hmmm...

[Quarky]

Fascinating reading this very interesting thread which now seems at an end.

A couple of not very interesting points to add. I liked the symphony, it doesn't feel superficial and doesn't pretend to be anything other than it is I think. And it seemed to say what it wanted to say quite genuinely and with (to me) a certain amount of craft. I'd agree it kind of adds mass to the canon rather than expands it though and doesn't feel as if it's exploring any new territory. I don't know what repeated hearings will yield, but I am at least inspired to try.


fhg 235



I am in sympathy with the feeling that music should be new in spirit and not just in name, if it is to be called new, and that it does something quite different than music that broadly bathes (very alluringly sometimes) in the energy of a previous time. However couldn't it be said that the above is quite a conservative argument itself? That because one cannot think of an historic example of writing successfully in a style from a previous time, it argues against trying it now? Any possibility exists in an a priori sense surely, and one can judge the results on their newness, but not really the means.

Richard (Barrett) - (to a point you make somewhere earlier in the thread about music not feeling as if it's genuinely of its time, thus not reflecting it) I have a not dissimilar experience with quite a bit of (other) new music I hear, which arrives with an apparent a sonic awareness of its immediate predecessors, and a bit of cutting edge bling, but that ultimately feels empty and unexciting. But ironically I think it very much does reflect the society in which its been composed, one where corporations for example often desire a kind of cutting edge to be associated with their brand, but a de-fanged one that stays firmly within safe parameters.

JLW - Regardless of whatever anyone thinks are the virtues or not of this symphony, your impassioned advocacy of this and other music, in my opinion unequivocally makes this forum a better place.

Drawn into this discussion against my will, but on a point of factual accuracy, a recent composition, Suite in the Old Style op. 80, Alfred Schnittke:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vokfi-kKy3Q

may be Schnittke with his polystylism, wasthe precursor of the Internet age of composition?

[Serial_Apologist]

Drawn into this discussion against my will, but on a point of factual accuracy, a recent composition, Suite in the Old Style op. 80, Alfred Schnittke:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vokfi-kKy3Q

may be Schnittke with his polystylism, wasthe precursor of the Internet age of composition?

I think it wold be a shame to drag Schnittke into this discussion, given that he was essentially a late Soviet composer trying to find his feet, as were several others of his era we seldom hear of these days.

Post-Soviet music should be given a mention in the Missing Friends thread, perhaps...

[Richard Barrett]

"The Internet age of composition" - what is that?