The death of western art music has been greatly exaggerated

[ahinton]

The best thing he's written in my opinion, mainly because it has wider resonances, of, one might say, the kind of "dark night of the soul" which can be related to by most people, whether religious or not, that go far wider than the "display of piety" of someone like Tavener; as does the music of Messiaen with its awestruck vision of the natural world, something else that can be experienced outside a narrowly defined concept of faith. Soul-searching isn't limited to those of a religious persuasion, but it's something alien to Reilly and his ilk, for which the fundamental questioning implied by it would strike at the heart of what is essentially (once more!) a totalitarian view.

Returning for a moment to serialism: I and others have pointed out here many times that, given that it defines a method of composition rather than a style, it's not possible in principle to detect whether a piece of music has been composed using this method just by listening to it (though this may be possible in some cases). So when Reilly thinks he's talking about Schoenberg's serialism, what he is really talking about is Schoenberg's "emancipation of the dissonance", or, to put it another way, Schoenberg's logical and indeed inevitable expansion (if it hadn't been him it would have been someone else) of the harmonic resources of music beyond the point reached by Wagner and Liszt in the late nineteenth century. Cultural conservatives like Reilly (and Scruton) are basically concerned with putting all the stuff back into a Pandora's Box with an arbitrarily chosen date stamped on the outside, in this case something round about 1900, although previous generations back through the centuries have put their own dates on it. Nothing in the history of humankind has ever been "uninvented", although there are always those who claim it's the only way music (or whatever) can be saved from decline. It's a profoundly joyless and pessimistic outlook, therefore hardly Christian in any meaningful sense.

Excellent post; all very much to the point. Many thanks.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I note that you have also completely dismissed Reilly's article describing it as 'worthless', I think. Apologies if I'm mistaken.
If so, isn't that being every bit as 'simplistic' as Reilly himself in his article? Wrongheaded maybe but worthless? Certainly not!

Given that you have previously said

However, there are undoubtedly many music-lovers, no doubt atheists/agnostics included, who share Reilly's intense dislike of the music he himself is 'not keen on'.
Put simply, they prefer a good tune and/or something that stirs their emotions or inspires the spirit.

... what precisely do you find "worthwhile" in the article? You've made approving references to his comments on "spirituality", but given that these are as revelatory as the point that many people don't like Schoenberg's Music, what is of value in these comments? What do you find new in Reilly's writing - what does he say that hasn't been commonly and frequently expressed in the past; the "same old, same old" I mentioned back in #4?

[ahinton]

Rest assured, french frank, I'm well aware what the topic under discussion is supposed to be about ...

I note that you have also completely dismissed Reilly's article describing it as 'worthless', I think. Apologies if I'm mistaken.

If so, isn't that being every bit as 'simplistic' as Reilly himself in his article? Wrongheaded maybe but worthless? Certainly not!

The 'relevance' of pointing out that almost everyone who takes an active part in a debate such as this might also have an 'agenda' is merely to demonstrate that 'agendas' are not particularly peculiar to people like Mr Reilly when they dare to express an opinion some of us here might not particularly wish to read.

The OP presumably thought so as well ... he/she clearly did an excellent job in encouraging the advertising of all sorts of 'agendas' in this thread, that's for sure!

Enough ...

The point here - which you seem bent on avoiding for all that you're worth, for reasons best known to yourself if indeed to anyone - is that many of the negative criticisms of this piece arise as a direct consequence of the total and wilful lack of evidence (or even attempts to provide any) for the "ideas" upon which his premises are based. I could claim that Scotland is part of Wales, but that would not only irk you and Richard Barrett but also be demonstrably wrong and, of course, I would have been able to provide not a shred of evidence in support of such a claim. This might not be the best analogy, but the cap still fits, I believe; in this sense, it wouldn't matter what the subject matter was or whether or not the article addressed music, religious practice and faith, spirituality or anything else when all of its statements are unprovable and unproved. The fact that Reilly appears to have convinced himself not only of the unarguable truths that he propounds but also (it seems) of his readership's preparedness to swallow it all whole without question is a measure of the arrogance with which he writes as he does. I'd not describe it as "worthless" but only becuase its sole "worth" (to the extent that one could describe it thus) appears to be in its demonstration of the kind of person Mr Reilly is and the ways in which he "thinks". Mr Reilly's immemorial "truths" are so only because he claims them to be so; they have no demonstrable relationship with reality.

[richardfinegold]

All very interesting ...

There are clearly some very knowledgeable people on this Forum and the differences of opinion amongst the knowledgeable themselves are quite fascinating but not really that surprising.

Some here may deplore the very idea but I have searched the internet to discover for myself what else Mr Reilly has to say on the subject of music rather than rely on dismissive and clearly 'agenda-driven' howls of disapproval regarding the man's politics and religion. Mr Reilly certainly has his own quite open 'agenda' on music but you don't have to move very far to find plenty of other, quite separate 'agendas' on here, french frank!

So ... I have been perusing the pages of Mr Reilly's book Surprised by Beauty. I have downloaded it, will read it in full at my leisure, and report back to members. I'm sure some will be on tenterhooks awaiting that report so I'll be as quick as possible.

Mr Reilly's views certainly have the benefit of consistency, if nothing else. I like that ... consistency immediately commands my respect and attention. Still, I have just been skimming some of the pages though obviously I must dig an awful lot deeper.

However, I was struck by a chapter on Hans Gál the Austrian-Jewish composer whose music was suppressed by the Nazis and who subsequently fled his homeland and settled in Scotland. It's very interesting indeed. Members who claim Mr Reilly is antisemitic might be particularly interested. Or maybe not.

I won't provide the actual evidence by posting the link. That would be most unfair on some members. Those who really want to see the truth will search for the truth themselves. Often it's the only way ...

I remember reading the Gal chapter. I had never previously heard of Gal or some of the other Composers that Reilly champions (Gal may be known in the U.K. since he worked there; here he was completely unknown until some recordings were released). I think that was why I did read as much of the tome as I did, because there were some worthwhile (if not Earth Shaking) discoveries. My favorite Gal recording is a recording by Antonio Meneses that pairs the Elgar Cello Concerto
With one by Gal.
Regarding Reilly and Anti Semitism, again, as I have stated Mr Tipps, his is of the more subtle variety than that of eliminationist Anti Semites. He views the so called decline of Western Music as do the adoption of Serialism, which was invented and promulgated by Jews, and this Music could only be saved by the explicitly Christian Composers that he extols.
This kind of Culturally oriented Anti Semitism was quite prevalent in Europe before the war, particularly in Germany and France. Furtwanglers's correspondance is filled with references to Jews destroying Music (including his letters written prior to 1933). Ansermet continued to proclaim publicly after the War that Jews had ruined Music and were responsible for the scourge of Communism.
The Holocaust made public expression of these concepts difficult but the attitudes didn't die with Hitler.
People that hold such attitudes, such as Reilly, are still capable of being friends with individual Jews, of admiring Jewish Artists, but are still Anti Semitic. Furtwangler went to some personal risk during the Third Reich to assist individual Jews (including Schoenberg, whose Music he detested). Karl Bohm, who was living in Munich in 1923 and was a fervent Nazi cheering Hitler's aborted comic opera-esq coup, later developed a strong friendship with Leonard Bernstein. And Reilly can champion Hans Gal.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I remember reading the Gal chapter. I had never previously heard of Gal or some of the other Composers that Reilly champions (Gal may be known in the U.K. since he worked there; here he was completely unknown until some recordings were released).

"[C]ompletely unknown" as a composer, but the US Dover scores of the works of Brahms are all the editions made by Gal, rfg.

Regarding Reilly and Anti Semitism, again, as I have stated Mr Tipps, his is of the more subtle variety than that of eliminationist Anti Semites. He views the so called decline of Western Music as do the adoption of Serialism, which was invented and promulgated by Jews, and this Music could only be saved by the explicitly Christian Composers that he extols.
This kind of Culturally oriented Anti Semitism was quite prevalent in Europe before the war, particularly in Germany and France. Furtwanglers's correspondance is filled with references to Jews destroying Music (including his letters written prior to 1933). Ansermet continued to proclaim publicly after the War that Jews had ruined Music and were responsible for the scourge of Communism.
The Holocaust made public expression of these concepts difficult but the attitudes didn't die with Hitler.

[Nick Armstrong]

Mr Reilly's views certainly have the benefit of consistency, if nothing else. I like that ... consistency immediately commands my respect and attention.

Consistently charming, old Reilly, ain't he... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5268524.html

[ahinton]

Consistently charming, old Reilly, ain't he... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5268524.html

Indeed - and the "consistency" that P. G. attributes to him presumably serves only to enhance that charm...

[jean]

Assuming you mean Tavener...

Well yes, as I was quoting you. But I wrote in haste. Sorry.

I do think it's entirely fair, given the effort he clearly put into appearing almost comically pious whenever his photo was taken!

But we are talking about his music, aren't we? Judging someone's music by their demeanour seems no more justified than judging it by their race.

[Richard Barrett]

Judging someone's music by their demeanour seems no more justified than judging it by their race.

In a way, though, the music someone writes is part of their demeanour, which is freely chosen in a way that for example their race or sexuality are not. But I wouldn't necessarily think of JT's public persona as being "almost comically pious" unless his music also displayed similar characteristics, as far as I'm concerned anyway.

[richardfinegold]

Consistently charming, old Reilly, ain't he... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5268524.html

Good grief...sorry that I partially defended him

[jean]

That's exactly the bit I quoted in my #58 on this thread.

[richardfinegold]

"[C]ompletely unknown" as a composer, but the US Dover scores of the works of Brahms are all the editions made by Gal, rfg.

I knew that he was an academic.
As an aside...why do Brahms scores require an Editor? Brahms spent so much of his time editing works of Schubert, Schumann, Palestrina, among others that I would have thought that those works of his that he didn't destroy would have been combed pretty closely for errors

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

As an aside...why do Brahms scores require an Editor? Brahms spent so much of his time editing works of Schubert, Schumann, Palestrina, among others that I would have thought that those works of his that he didn't destroy would have been combed pretty closely for errors

A not unreasonable thought - nonetheless, engraving errors still appeared in subsequent editions, so that, for example, the 1919 Peters Edition of the Piano Quintet, incorporates some of Brahms' corrections handwritten onto the original published version (Reiter-Badermann in 1865) but neglects to include many of the composer's bowing and phrase markings. (And there are, apparently, engraving errors all of their own in the 1919 edition, too.) Gal produced his editions in the 1920s for Breitkopf & Hartel, using the original publications, Brahms' manuscripts, and later editions to create a published version incorporating more of the composer's ideas (and fewer errors) than had been included in previous published versions. It would not surprise me, of course, to discover that more recent Urtext editions correct errors/glitches in Gal's editions - but for domestic study of the works (and for the joy of "simply" following a broadcast/recording of the works at home) the Dover editions are a very good and inexpensive means of having copies of the scores.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I should add that the Breitkopf & Hartel edition on which Gal worked was for the first "Complete Brahms Edition" (IIRC, in preparation for the Brahms Centenary which occurred in a year overtaken by infamous political events) - and in which the original version of the First Piano Trio was published for the first time (and included in the Dover edition). Gal is refreshingly honest about his work, giving credit where such is due - of the first two String Quartets, he says of Simrock's first publication of 1873:

Scores and parts are nearly flawless ... A comparison with the original manuscripts yielded nothing significant for this edition.

[ahinton]

A not unreasonable thought - nonetheless, engraving errors still appeared in subsequent editions, so that, for example, the 1919 Peters Edition of the Piano Quintet, incorporates some of Brahms' corrections handwritten onto the original published version (Reiter-Badermann in 1865) but neglects to include many of the composer's bowing and phrase markings. (And there are, apparently, engraving errors all of their own in the 1919 edition, too.) Gal produced his editions in the 1920s for Breitkopf & Hartel, using the original publications, Brahms' manuscripts, and later editions to create a published version incorporating more of the composer's ideas (and fewer errors) than had been included in previous published versions. It would not surprise me, of course, to discover that more recent Urtext editions correct errors/glitches in Gal's editions - but for domestic study of the works (and for the joy of "simply" following a broadcast/recording of the works at home) the Dover editions are a very good and inexpensive means of having copies of the scores.

Many thanks for this. Mind you, given that Brahms the Progressive is the largest chapter in Style and Idea by public enemy no. 1 Schönberg, perhaps Reilly ought to have lain some of the blame for the 20th century's musical ills at his door...