My new piece - Symphonic Suite [WIP]

[Richard Barrett]

I think we live on different planets.

And of course Einstein tells us that different places in the universe will have different views of what the present is...

[ahinton]

There seems to be a constant undercurrent, in discussions such as this, of assumption that if an artist is committed to a particular way of looking at things he/she automatically thinks other ways are invalid or that people aren't "entitled" to do things according to other principles. That really isn't the point.

It's a point; whilst I accept that such dogmatism exists, however, I would doubt that it's a majority attitude (or at least I certainly hope that it isn't!)...

As I've said, what's most important as far as I'm concerned is expressing the freedom of the imagination.

Quite.

Another red herring is the idea of posterity. There is no point in caring about posterity. I don't think there are many creative musicians who would appeal to posterity as a justification for carrying on doing something that conservative audiences find hard to take. And there's no point in second-guessing what audiences are going to think - if one is interested in intelligent listeners with minds of their own, and not in treating them as so many automata that can be trusted to react predictably to this semi-familiar musical stimulus or that, the best one can do is to to say something like: I find this so deeply engaging/exciting/fascinating/deeply expressive that there must exist other people in the world who would also be affected by it, given that so much of our humanity is shared... even if arranging for the music to find its way to those people is something of a challenge!

Indeed. Sorabji, Carter, Birtwistle and others have pointed out that the composer cannot care about audiences and what they might think and, for those who think that this sounds to be an arrogant "who cares if you listen?" kind of assertion, one can only retort that it's a simply pragmatic and practical statement arising from the obvious fact that the composer cannot possibly know of whom that audience will consist in the first place; as the the end of what you write here, there can simply be no sensible and valid argument against it.

[ahinton]

I can only give you my personal perspective - as a composer of the type I’m sure you would think ‘does this’.

If I try to compose a (tonal) lyrical melody (as an example of an aspect of music from a previous generation) I don’t feel as if I’m ‘falling back’ on to an easy solution - I find it very challenging to come up with such melodic ideas that are both uniquely distinctive and original - at least in the sense that it doesn’t infringe an existing copyright. I’m not saying I ever succeed - but it is something I sometimes try and do. It would be easier to reject the concept of tonal lyrical melody all together, but that, for me, would be a cop out.

OK, that's fine; I was not seeking to suggest that you in particular do "fall back onto an easy solution" or, indeed, that any such "solution" would necessarily be easy for you in any case.

Neither would I accept I reject the present - most of my music is influenced hugely by various popular musics. However, don’t see that I have a particular responsibility to conform to any kind of received view that seeks to pre-determine what is worthwhile.

OK - though not all "popular musics" of today are uninfluenced by musics of the past! As to your responsibility, it's the same as that of all other composers - to do what they feel most impelled to do in the ways in which they feel impelled to do it, to the best of their respective abilities and without the kind of concern for its fate with audiences that might risk becoming an influence over how it's done whilst it's being done.

I don’t think music can be nostalgic. It’s people who, sometimes, can be nostalgic. The music I write has nothing to do with what, from time to time I might feel nostalgic about.

I either disagree with you here or don't properly understand what you mean (or maybe even both). To the extent that music is composed (or improvised) by people, if some of those people are being nostalgic then the music that they produce might reasonably be expected to be the same for that very reason.

[Ian]

I either disagree with you here or dont properly understand what you mean (or maybe even both). To the extent that music is composed (or improvised) by people, if some of those people are being nostalgic then the music that they produce might reasonably be expected to be the same for that very reason.

What is feeling nostalgic? Having fond memories of some time in your life? I might, for example come over all nostalgic about loading the old Fender Rhodes in the back of the van and going out to do some Northern Soul gigs. But I don’t see how that would result in music that might (at a pinch, you understand) somehow relate to Debussy, Fats Waller, or Tippett (for example) nor do I think I would be tempted to knock out some Northern Soul!

[ahinton]

What is feeling nostalgic? Having fond memories of some time in your life?

Whatever it might be, shouldn't you be asking yourself that question rather than me? It was, after all, you who wrote
"I don’t think music can be nostalgic. It’s people who, sometimes, can be nostalgic."

I might, for example come over all nostalgic about loading the old Fender Rhodes in the back of the van and going out to do some Northern Soul gigs. But I don’t see how that would result in music that might (at a pinch, you understand) somehow relate to Debussy, Fats Waller, or Tippett (for example) nor do I think I would be tempted to knock out some Northern Soul!

Sure, but then it seems to me as though you've deliberately cited a particularly unhelpful illustration of whatever it was that you might have meant when writing
"I don’t think music can be nostalgic. It’s people who, sometimes, can be nostalgic."

[Ian]

Sure, but then it seems to me as though you've deliberately cited a particularly unhelpful illustrationf whatever it was that you might have meant when writing
"I don’t think music can be nostalgic. It’s people who, sometimes, can be nostalgic."

A real life situation all the same.

But ok, is there a body of music that you would say is intrinsically more nostalgic than another?

Sure, there are pieces of music in all styles from all ages that I might describe as ‘tender and wistful’ but how could I accept that as an intrinsic truth about the music when I’m pretty certain someone else might find the same material ‘cloyingly sentimental’

[ahinton]

A real life situation all the same.

But ok, is there a body of music that you would say is intrinsically more nostalgic than another?

Sure, there are pieces of music in all styles from all ages that I might describe as ‘tender and wistful’ but how could I accept that as an intrinsic truth about the music when I’m pretty certain someone else might find the same material ‘cloyingly sentimental’

No one here (I think) is suggesting that there will not inevitably be divergences of opinion on such matters, but the mere fact that there will be such does not of itself invalidate or even devalue the idea. For example, Sorabji's fulsome admiration of Delius was not such as to discourage him from making the occasional disparaging remark about what he saw as the composer seeming to try to encapsulate in certain of his writing a desire to recapture things of the past that appear to have been lost and to bemoan that loss - in other words, what Sorabji perceived to be a rather hopeless and pointless nostalgia; now I'm not saying that his view on this was necessarily correct, but there's no denying the fact of his deriving that kind of impression sufficiently to warrant his writing about it and about its effect on the music concerned, whether or not one might agree with him.

To return to the origins of this thread, it might be argued that one perceived "problem" (for which no one could reasonably blame you!) with your piece is that it risks comparison with Debussy's Sonate merely because of its instrumentation; it's surely a good thing that composers since Beethoven haven't seen fit to concern themselves with such a risk by eschewing the string quartet medium just because Beethoven wrote his C# minor quartet! - and Richard Barrett has helpfully mentioned that there are far more works for flute, viola and harp than I realised there were until he had the grace to point this out (although I still cannot help but wonder how few of the 200+ that he mentions predate Debussy's Sonate!)...

[Nick Armstrong]

Thanks a lot for your input!

Alex, congrats on prompting such an earnest and robust debate!! I'd love to know your reaction now, just over 36 short hours since your last post (#19!). Amazing that an apparently uncontroversial original post can spark such a wide-ranging discussion (did I spot Jimmy Savile making an appearance at one point?! )

Hope it won't scare you off! Do pitch back in and keep writing - both here, and the music !!

[Ian]

For example, Sorabji's fulsome admiration of Delius was not such as to discourage him from making the occasional disparaging remark about what he saw as the composer seeming to try to encapsulate in certain of his writing a desire to recapture things of the past that appear to have been lost and to bemoan that loss

But I'm not trying to 'recapture' anything that I consider has been lost - and it follows from this that I don't think tonal lyrical melodies are a lost cause either.

To return to the origins of this thread, it might be argued that one perceived "problem" (for which no one could reasonably blame you!) with your piece is that it risks comparison with Debussy's Sonate merely because of its instrumentation; it's surely a good thing that composers since Beethoven haven't seen fit to concern themselves with such a risk by eschewing the string quartet medium just because Beethoven wrote his C# minor quartet! - and Richard Barrett has helpfully mentioned that there are far more works for flute, viola and harp than I realised there were until he had the grace to point this out (although I still cannot help but wonder how few of the 200+ that he mentions predate Debussy's Sonate!)...

I'm not aware of any predating the Debussy, but I'm sure there must be well over 200. (I know of at least 4 by people I know locally) But it's the same small handful that tend to get programmed. After the Debussy the Bax seems quite popular, and if you're standing far enough away from them I'm sure they can seem pretty interchangeable.

One of the dangers of writing any kind of tonal music with tunes is that you are very vulnerable to comparisons - that comes with the territory. Perhaps it depends how high your originality threshold is. Some people might think that once a crime novel has been written any further examples of the genre are inherently pointless - even though their plots might be completely different. (In other words they go differently) While other people look forward to enjoying new twists and turns that they might expect/hope to find in an otherwise familiar genre.

[aeolium]

There seems to be a constant undercurrent, in discussions such as this, of assumption that if an artist is committed to a particular way of looking at things he/she automatically thinks other ways are invalid or that people aren't "entitled" to do things according to other principles. That really isn't the point. As I've said, what's most important as far as I'm concerned is expressing the freedom of the imagination...... the best one can do is to to say something like: I find this so deeply engaging/exciting/fascinating/deeply expressive that there must exist other people in the world who would also be affected by it, given that so much of our humanity is shared... even if arranging for the music to find its way to those people is something of a challenge!

Well, what puzzled me was your suggestion that somehow music written in a "conservative" style was necessarily restrictive to the imagination. How? Has the fact that others write in that style restricted your imagination? Has it restricted Alex's, or Ian Lawson's, or all the many other composers writing in the many different styles that proliferate now not just in Western contemporary music but elsewhere in the world? There is one thing I think that could restrict the imagination of a composer and that is telling him that he should really not be composing in the style in which he is instinctively inclined to write. I don't think I could put it better than ahinton has earlier when he said "there's no point in writing at all unless one writes in the way that one feels motivated to write".

[ahinton]

But I'm not trying to 'recapture' anything that I consider has been lost

OK; once again, I was not suggesting that you were doing so.

and it follows from this that I don't think tonal lyrical melodies are a lost cause either.

Fine; nor do I, as it happens, although they are things that I happen to find the hardest of all to achieve satisfactorily on the occasions when I want to do so.

I'm not aware of any predating the Debussy, but I'm sure there must be well over 200

Not predating the Debussy! - I presume you to be agreeing with Richard Barrett that there are at least 200 altogether.

One of the dangers of writing any kind of tonal music with tunes is that you are very vulnerable to comparisons - that comes with the territory.

If one wants to write such music one has indeed to accept that as a given from before the outset but, as with the need not exercise oneself trying to care about how one's music (tonal or otherwise) might be accepted or otherwise by audiences, there seems little if any point in worrying about such possible comparisons being made or one;s potential or actual vulnerability thereto; as I've said before, the composer's duty is to write what he/she feels impelled to write in the best way that he/she can and in the particular ways in which he/she feels impelled to do so - and then stand or fall by the results.

Perhaps it depends how high your originality threshold is.

Mine is such that I prize individuality above originality per se, though with what degree of success (if any) I cannot say (nor would it be my place in any case to do so).

Some people might think that once a crime novel has been written any further examples of the genre are inherently pointless - even though their plots might be completely different. (In other words they go differently) While other people look forward to enjoying new twists and turns that they might expect/hope to find in an otherwise familiar genre.

I think that your illustration here goes too far, actually, for it would seem tantamout to saying that it would be "inherently pointless" to compose a string quartet or a work scored for that particular ensemble because hundreds of thousands of string quartet pieces have already been composed - and that would surely be rather ridiculous!

[Richard Barrett]

what puzzled me was your suggestion that somehow music written in a "conservative" style was necessarily restrictive to the imagination. How?

I'm talking about music which appears to behave according to preexistent boundaries around what does and doesn't make "a good piece of music", which is the product of restrictions and/or denials placed (consciously or unconsciously) on the imagination of the composer, and I'm saying that as far as I'm concerned, given that artistic creation is one of the few areas of life in which freedom of the imagination can (still) be realised, it seems a shame when it behaves nevertheless as though there's a pressure towards conformity, as of course there is in so many other areas of life. I hope that's a bit clearer. As for "instinct", surely anything that looks like instinct in the domain of artistic creation is likely to consist partly or mostly of received assumptions, and realising that this is the case is an important step towards overcoming them. (Not realising it, on the other hand, is an important step towards being in thrall to them.)

[Ian]

I think that your illustration here goes too far, actually, for it would seem tantamout to saying that it would be "inherently pointless" to compose a string quartet or a work scored for that particular ensemble because hundreds of thousands of string quartet pieces have already been composed - and that would surely be rather ridiculous!

I half agree with you but I think your counter-illustration goes to far. I'm sure you understand what I'm getting at though.

[ahinton]

I'm talking about music which appears to behave according to preexistent boundaries around what does and doesn't make "a good piece of music", which is the product of restrictions and/or denials placed (consciously or unconsciously) on the imagination of the composer, and I'm saying that as far as I'm concerned, given that artistic creation is one of the few areas of life in which freedom of the imagination can (still) be realised, it seems a shame when it behaves nevertheless as though there's a pressure towards conformity, as of course there is in so many other areas of life. I hope that's a bit clearer. As for "instinct", surely anything that looks like instinct in the domain of artistic creation is likely to consist partly or mostly of received assumptions, and realising that this is the case is an important step towards overcoming them. (Not realising it, on the other hand, is an important step towards being in thrall to them.)

OK but, in writing here about a "pressure towards conformity" to something, I presume you to perceive this something to manifest itself in the form of some kind of extenal pressure impose upon the composer by certain people (whoever they may be) rather than it being the consequence of the composer simply deciding to write in the way that he/she does solely because that's the way in which he/she wants to write rather than that someone else cajoles, advises or coerces him/her to believe that it would be in his/her interests to write in such a way. Of course there are, as you point out, all manner of pressures towards conformity in most walks of life but, as long as such pressures are identifable as being of external origin and the motivations behind them understood by those being so pressurised, I don't see that this has always to represent a problem per se.

I'm uncertain that "instinct", at least in that sense, is something necesarily to be "overcome", as you seem to imply or, for that matter, that to seek to "overcome" it might reasonably be perveived as necessary because, "in the domain of artistic creation", it "is likely to consist partly or mostly of received assumptions"; to suggest the latter appears, to me, at least, to represent a view that "instinct" is somehow an inherently flawed concept to be treated with care and, in some cases, even with a modicum of suspicion as it is not implicity to be trusted.

[ahinton]

I half agree with you but I think your counter-illustration goes to far. I'm sure you understand what I'm getting at though.

Because your illustration went too far (at least to my mind), I'm not sure that I do understand this; whilst I agree that what you call my "counter-illustration" also goes too far, it wasnt't intended to serve as a "counter-illustration" at all but as a similar kind of example to your own!