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

[Ian]

I think this is a perfectly clear statement from Richard, tbh. He's saying that yes, one sort of contemporary music chooses to ignore everything that's happened in the arts, culture and society since (let's say) 1945, and that indicates a pessimistic view as it suggests that everything that has happened since then is just not worth addressing, and the cultural forces and values that produced symphonies (e.g. the spread of symphony orchestras, the birth of nationalism, a certain aesthetic around symphonies and "symphony cycles" as an elite "achievement" for composers-as-autocrats to express the glory of God, King and/or Country, etc, etc) are things we should be valuing instead.

I agree that Richard’s statement (which you have attributed to me, btw) is perfectly clear, and I agree that particular statement implies the presence of a type of contemporary music that ignores other types of contemporary music. (Although I’m not sure why that should imply a pessimistic outlook, and I’m even less sure about the motives you then go on to put in composer’s minds regarding ‘God, King and Country’ - it just might be that some composers like the way a particular type of harmony sounds!) However, elsewhere, Richard does make a distinction between writing 'contemporary music' and writing 'non-contemporary' music. (for example, see my 447) and Indeed, unless you make this distinction all you are saying is that it is pessimistic that contemporary composers are writing different types of music!

FWIW, my position is that composers are simply writing different kinds of music and that is nothing to be pessimistic about.

Why does commercial film music hold on to romantic music?

I don’t think it does. Film tends to use whatever music works in a given situation. for example, sometimes music is ‘featured’ or is used to evoke time and place - in which case it could literally be anything. However, when music is required to suggest a psychology not evident from the picture a shared language has to be employed. This is not always romantic (i.e. in the 19th C sense). For example, if impending catastrophe has to be suggested I don’t think Der Freischutz-like diminished chords would quite work as perhaps it once did! In fact I don’t think romantic music features much in film music anymore. Much more common is modal for anything towards the aspirational end of the spectrum, moving towards the atonal for the angst/suspenseful needs of the drama. Please keep in mind that is only an attempt to sum up the contemporary lingua franca in a couple of sentences.

[Serial_Apologist]

I think this is a perfectly clear statement from Richard, tbh. He's saying that yes, one sort of contemporary music chooses to ignore everything that's happened in the arts, culture and society since (let's say) 1945, and that indicates a pessimistic view as it suggests that everything that has happened since then is just not worth addressing, and the cultural forces and values that produced symphonies (e.g. the spread of symphony orchestras, the birth of nationalism, a certain aesthetic around symphonies and "symphony cycles" as an elite "achievement" for composers-as-autocrats to express the glory of God, King and/or Country, etc, etc) are things we should be valuing instead.

Like to answer FHG's question long ago about composers writing in out-of-date styles... Catholic liturgical music. From the 1600s to the... 1900s?... Catholic liturgical works were written in the style outlined by Palestrina in his Missa Papae Marcelli—or something not too far removed from it—as that was what the church demanded. That was the stile antico in which heaps of composers had to prove themselves. Conservatives were numerous; we see a lot of critical reviews of early and mid romantic composers who didn't advance much beyond the style of Mozart and Beethoven, or late-romantic composers who didn't advance much beyond the style of Mendelssohn and Schumann. As late as the 1930s composers like Röntgen and Dohnányi were carrying on with the Brahmsian mid-romantic tradition; the late-romantic tradition never actually ended as its last survivor Korngold introduced it into film music where it has thrived ever since until recently being supplemented by rock, hip-hop, and early modernist techniques (e.g. serialism).

Why does commercial film music hold on to romantic music? Because the commercial film industry is by and large an expression of traditionalist, patriarchal values and that's another facet of the expression. No one's saying it's "wrong" for film composers to write romantic music, we're just looking at the reasons they might (consciously or unconsciously) be driven to do that.

(Still haven't listened to Matthews 8, the only symphony I have time for right now is Bruckner 5)

An excellent reply IIMSS, kea - the patriarchal signifiers abounding in film music being something that had not occurred to me.

The only thing I might disagree with is in your citings from Catholic liturgical music of the 19th/20th centuries. Probably you know more about this area than I, but I would not consider for example Rossini's "Stabat Mater" Verdi's Requiem or even Stainer's "Crucifixion" as belonging anywhere other than when they were composed. The only pieces of "mature" 20th C liturgical music I can think of written in traditional styles are works by Nielsen and Wellesz from late in their respective careers, and even there one can see the ersatz character of the derivations, permeated as they are through and through with diatonic rather than modal thinking. Holst's "Hymn of Jesus" would present a similar case in reverse, so to speak, in which the modality is reinstated but deployed in completely early 20th century ways.

[Richard Barrett]

No one's saying it's "wrong" for film composers to write romantic music, we're just looking at the reasons they might (consciously or unconsciously) be driven to do that.

And the same goes for David Matthews of course: nobody is saying it's "wrong" of him to write the music he does, and I wonder why some contributors to this discussion have consistently misinterpreted the comments made by me and others as claiming that it is.

On one hand surely it's uncontroversial to observe (a) that since the 1980s there has been a general trend towards conservatism in Western political discourse, as the traditional ruling class has gradually rolled back the achievements made since 1945 by social democracy and (b) that in the same period there has been a retrenchment into conservatism in culture in general, and (given the subject under discussion) music in particular, with the music of David Matthews as an example. Indeed, similar rhetoric is frequently found in both areas. On the other hand there seems to be a reluctance on some quarters not to see the connection between these two phenomena. It isn't primarily a question of taste, still less of what the composer's intentions are or can be inferred to be, or of "right" and "wrong". All music should be open to analysis and criticism as a social and political phenomenon.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

One could surely make the counter argument that the "modernist/Darmstadt school" way has sought to ignore everything that's happened in diatonic music.

"One" could - but s/he would merely demonstrate ignorance of the repertoire if such an individual did, to say nothing of explaining what a "modernist/Darmstadt school" might be. (A "Romantic/Bayreuth school", anyone?)

It's not supportable that there have been no advances in the language of predominantly diatonic composers. No one who ever heard the music of Simpson or Maw (to name but two) could ever form the view that their music could have been composed in the 1920s or 30s for example.

I agree (I think; I might need a bit more of a clue as to how you are understanding "diatonic", here) - as I did way back, when I made the same point (but I used ahinton as my example, rather than composers sadly already dead, one of whom for 18 years).

[Serial_Apologist]

I agree that Richard’s statement (which you have attributed to me, btw) is perfectly clear, and I agree that particular statement implies the presence of a type of contemporary music that ignores other types of contemporary music. (Although I’m not sure why that should imply a pessimistic outlook, and I’m even less sure about the motives you then go on to put in composer’s minds regarding ‘God, King and Country’ - it just might be that some composers like the way a particular type of harmony sounds!)

You surely can't deny the rousing intentions behind a piece such as the one in the link below to inculcate heightened feelings of pride and nation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7QLosdev8Q

This to me is the crack cocaine of musical patriotism, and I admit to having been completely bowled over from hearing this piece played in conjunction with the 1953 Coronation at age seven. The idiom is blatantly redolent of the jingoism Elgar was sore put to having had to admit to misgivings about around the use of Pomp and Circumstance No 1 in WWI, and only different in degree from what was expected of modern-day German composers under the Nazis. It could be argued that Bax's effort was more honest at least than Walton's "Crown Imperial", composed for the same event, with its "jazzed up" version of the same message overtly confected to bring the patriotic message loudly up to date for the post-war Britain of HMS Windrush and the Exhibition of Britain - Walton in his pre-Sir days had achieved an even more devastating success in the "parade of the pagan gods" in "Belshazzar's Feast", the ironic aspect of which, not to my knowledge mentioned in writings about the work, was only to be outclassed in terms of irony by the Bax effort in the above link when we remember this composer's one-time sympathies towards Ireland and its struggle for self-determination.

[ahinton]

And the same goes for David Matthews of course: nobody is saying it's "wrong" of him to write the music he does, and I wonder why some contributors to this discussion have consistently misinterpreted the comments made by me and others as claiming that it is.

Not "wrong" as such, no - and I for one have not sought to suggest that you make any such claim - but implicit in allegations of DM's music failure or omission to respond to or reflect his time is that this is somehow not a good thing and that, by conveying the impression to some that because his music is supposedly in denial of dissimilar musics of the past 60 years or so, he cuts some kind of "pessimistic" stance is clearly something about which you and one or two others likewise harbour grave reservations

On one hand surely it's uncontroversial to observe (a) that since the 1980s there has been a general trend towards conservatism in Western political discourse, as the traditional ruling class has gradually rolled back the achievements made since 1945 by social democracy and (b) that in the same period there has been a retrenchment into conservatism in culture in general, and (given the subject under discussion) music in particular, with the music of David Matthews as an example.

I've thought long and hard about this, believe me, but I cannot make it add up; if you're considering the period 1945-1980 or thereabouts as being more politically progressive and that since then as more politicall regressive, why is David Matthews singled out as one example of a composer working mainly in the latter period and characterising that retrenchment into cultural conservatism when at the same time is is being alleged that his 8th symphony could have been written some 60 years earlier (i.e. around 1955) during that more politically progressive era?

there seems to be a reluctance on some quarters not to see the connection between these two phenomena.

And a not altogether surprising one, really. As David Mathews is a British composer, let's look only at Britain from 1945 to 1980 for the purposes of this. The 50s and 60s witnessed the rise of the so-called Manchester School, but this and other influences that sought to draw on recent more "modernist" (if you will) developments in music had largely to look outside Britain for them. Whilst the composition of symphonies alone is by no means an illustration of retrenched musical conservatism in Britain between 1945 and 1980, it remains a fact that, during that time, Vaughan Williams, Brian, Bax, Bush, Rubbra, Berkeley, Tippett, Rawsthorne, Cooke, Lloyd, Jones, Searle, Simpson, Arnold, Hoddinott, McCabe and others born before David Matthews wrote at least 100 of them between them in that period and there are plenty of other examples of composers in Britain and elsewhere writing music between those years that is so different to that of those who might be regarded as "avant-garde", "progressive", "modernist" or whatever other less than adequate term might spring to mind that one could easly argue not only that much music from that time was less than obviously reflective of or responsive to postwar achievements in social democracy but also that quite a lot of it since 1980 is likewise less than obviously refletive of or responsive to the retrenchment into cultural conservatism that you opine as having occurred over the past 35 years or so.

It isn't primarily a question of taste, still less of what the composer's intentions are or can be inferred to be, or of "right" and "wrong". All music should be open to analysis and criticism

Of course!

as a social and political phenomenon.

I'm not saying that you're "wrong" about this any more than you're saying that DM's "wrong" to write as he chooses, but I do believe that this is where one can risk getting into very deep water because, for example, so little music seems obviously (still less deliberately) to slot, for example, into those 1945-1980 and post-1980 eras respectively of postwar social democratic achievement and retrenchment into cultural conservatism; I wonder how many composers active over the past half century and more would, if asked, venture either that their music changed in character post 1980 or thereabouts or that they felt increasingly conscious of a need to stick to their guns and not permit such political change to affect how they want/ed to write?

[ahinton]

You surely can't deny the rousing intentions behind a piece such as the one in the link below to inculcate heightened feelings of pride and nation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7QLosdev8Q

This to me is the crack cocaine of musical patriotism, and I admit to having been completely bowled over from hearing this piece played in conjunction with the 1953 Coronation at age seven. The idiom is blatantly redolent of the jingoism Elgar was sore put to having had to admit to misgivings about around the use of Pomp and Circumstance No 1 in WWI, and only different in degree from what was expected of modern-day German composers under the Nazis. It could be argued that Bax's effort was more honest at least than Walton's "Crown Imperial", composed for the same event, with its "jazzed up" version of the same message overtly confected to bring the patriotic message loudly up to date for the post-war Britain of HMS Windrush and the Exhibition of Britain - Walton in his pre-Sir days had achieved an even more devastating success in the "parade of the pagan gods" in "Belshazzar's Feast", the ironic aspect of which, not to my knowledge mentioned in writings about the work, was only to be outclassed in terms of irony by the Bax effort in the above link when we remember this composer's one-time sympathies towards Ireland and its struggle for self-determination.

Oh, believe me, I could deny it all right! In fact I have to admit that my enjoyment of Walton's Orb Imperial and Crown and Sceptre rests largely upon what for me is an ineluctable sense of the composer quite brilliantly taking more p**s than ever there even could be out of that whole Pomp & Circumstance "tradition" rguably inaugurated by Elgar, for much of whose music he had little regard. It's so delightfully funny that I actually wrote to him to tell him so (among other things); he didn't reply, but I'll forgive him that because just five days after I sent that letter he died.

[Serial_Apologist]

I'd love to offer a reply to ahinton, but feel that Richard could make a much clearer statement than I.

However, I think it would be a mistake to take a composer's or artist's comment or lack thereof about any associations to be attributed to his or her work as final arbiter in such matters. Vaughan Williams's dismissal of responses to his fourth symphony that it represented war or the rise of fascism is an instance in point.

[ahinton]

I'd love to offer a reply to ahinton, but feel that Richard could make a much clearer statement than I.

However, I think it would be a mistake to take a composer's or artist's comment or lack thereof about any associations to be attributed to his or her work as final arbiter in such matters. Vaughan Williams's dismissal of responses to his fourth symphony that it represented war or the rise of fascism is an instance in point.

Well, that's true, of course but, if one therefore removes the "composer's comments" when asked from this issue and reduces the question to whether or not these two different eras of politics actually inspired much conscious reflection or response thereto and/or much change of approach or attitude to composition, it remains valid, I think.

[Ian]

You surely can't deny the rousing intentions behind a piece such as the one in the link below to inculcate heightened feelings of pride and nation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7QLosdev8Q

.

Given its provenance and the context it was presented, of course, I would not deny its rousing and celebratory purpose. Mind you, it would have been equally credible had you told me it was a piece written for a friend’s wedding.

To be honest, I don’t think it is that brilliant a piece, I only found one bit memorable/distinctive and that's only because it reminded me of Men of Harlech. I much prefer Crown Imperial which has got more ‘I wish I’d thought of that‘ ideas in it, and also doesn't quite take itself so seriously. But even that pales into insignificance compared to, say, Jupiter - which obviously shares something of the same joyous, rousing character.

To a point this sort of thing is still ‘contemporary‘ in the sense that no-one yet has come up with an radically different alternative approach that has succeeded in out-rousing the Holst (for example). Although, having said that, there are certainly regional shades for example, The Big Country - but I don’t think national pride was a part of the brief in that instance.

An afterthought - Perhaps John Barry was able to create a similar effect in quite a different and personal way?

[eighthobstruction]

but I'll forgive him that because just five days after I sent that letter he died.

[Serial_Apologist]

Oh, believe me, I could deny it all right! In fact I have to admit that my enjoyment of Walton's Orb Imperial and Crown and Sceptre rests largely upon what for me is an ineluctable sense of the composer quite brilliantly taking more p**s than ever there even could be out of that whole Pomp & Circumstance "tradition" rguably inaugurated by Elgar, for much of whose music he had little regard. It's so delightfully funny that I actually wrote to him to tell him so (among other things); he didn't reply, but I'll forgive him that because just five days after I sent that letter he died.

While it's true that as a seven year old I was something of a smug matter-of-fact little so-an-so secure in my relatively comfortable background, listening again to the Walton it still strikes me as patriotic in that confected way we were presented in the 1950s - people will remember the background "library music" contributed by British composers in similar vein depicting "our brave boys" returning from Korea or conquering Everest, or some other foreign outpost, as wonderfully satirised, along with the stiff upper lip voiceovers, by The Fast Show.

[Ian]

And the same goes for David Matthews of course: nobody is saying it's "wrong" of him to write the music he does, and I wonder why some contributors to this discussion have consistently misinterpreted the comments made by me and others as claiming that it is.

I’m a bit worried about this. I know for myself I have had no intention in giving the impression you think DM is wrong to do what he does. Perhaps you’re not thinking of me. But I just want to check.

On one hand surely it's uncontroversial to observe (a) that since the 1980s there has been a general trend towards conservatism in Western political discourse, as the traditional ruling class has gradually rolled back the achievements made since 1945 by social democracy and (b) that in the same period there has been a retrenchment into conservatism in culture in general, and (given the subject under discussion) music in particular, with the music of David Matthews as an example. Indeed, similar rhetoric is frequently found in both areas. On the other hand there seems to be a reluctance on some quarters not to see the connection between these two phenomena.

One way of examining this would be to see what correlation there might be between countries with greater or lesser conservative tendencies and the output of their composers. I’ll leave that to you if you don’t mind though.

[Serial_Apologist]

Given its provenance and the context it was presented, of course, I would not deny its rousing and celebratory purpose. Mind you, it would have been equally credible had you told me it was a piece written for a friend’s wedding.

To be honest, I don’t think it is that brilliant a piece, I only found one bit memorable/distinctive and that's only because it reminded me of Men of Harlech. I much prefer Crown Imperial which has got more ‘I wish I’d thought of that‘ ideas in it, and also doesn't quite take itself so seriously. But even that pales into insignificance compared to, say, Jupiter - which obviously shares something of the same joyous, rousing character.

That's because most performances have highlighted its famous "patriotic theme" by slowing it down and thereby effectively divorcing it from the rest of its Petrushka-esque movement - which I understand is not the case in the composer's own recording of the work, in which there is no "jolt" or feeling of different emotional territory. And Holst wasn't too happy about the appended verse that became the hymn whose music quite a few must have encountered in school services before hearing "The Planets".

[Serial_Apologist]

You're not suggesting....... are you??