Dorothy Howell (1898-1982): 7-11/9/24

[Serial_Apologist]

"Composer of the Week is perhaps the most venerated part of the entire Radio 3 output - a fixture on the network for more than 80 years. But it remains unfailingly stimulating and informative ..." etc. etc. Radio Times P.114.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0023f73

Radio Times describes her as a sort of British Richard Strauss, but for all the textural lushness, from listening (for the first time) today to the tone poem Larnia, bursting with whole tone harmonic passages and at one point almost quoting from the middle movement of la mer, I detect more a local counterpart to French composers of the post-Frank school like Chausson and D'Indy, or even the Zemlinsky of The Mermaid period - delayed by 15 or so years. One thing she was not was of the English Pastoralist caste.

[smittims]

I'd say 'venerable' rather than 'venerated' ! I've long felt COTW should be retired in favour of something that gives more attention to the music. However, I did enjoy the series on Coleridge-Taylor, who came over as a more interesting figurer than I had previously thought.

I do feel though that they're doing more 'box-ticking' these days. Dorothy Howell's music is pleasant and well-constructed but it's no better, and in some cases less good than the music of lots of neglected and forgotten male composers who Radio 3 continues to ignore. I know this is but part of a general BBC emphasis of feminism but I feel it lacks fairness and balanced assessment.

[mopsus]

She wrote a lot of church music later in her life but most has never been published. It would be interesting to see if any of it could be given a wider circulation (e.g. by Multitude of Voyces) and gain a place in the repertoire.

[gradus]

I've heard a couple of the pieces being broadcast and rather enjoyed them. I shared her laughter at hearing atonal Schoenberg for the first time, in my case at school and can't remember ever listening to Pierrot Lunaire again. A loss I can live with.

[french frank]

I know this is but part of a general BBC emphasis of feminism but I feel it lacks fairness and balanced assessment.

That presumes that it is/has always been a level playing field, so it's 'unfair' now, to favour one over the other. In positing that women generally are less capable than men in certain fields (though of course 'better' in others), does one also accept that black people are less intelligent than whilte people? Neither women nor black people are 'equal' in always having been treated in the same way. The aim should be gradual improvement from generation to generation.

[Ein Heldenleben]

That presumes that it is/has always been a level playing field, so it's 'unfair' now, to favour one over the other. In positing that women generally are less capable than men in certain fields (though of course 'better' in others), does one also accept that black people are less intelligent than whilte people? Neither women nor black people are 'equal' in always having been treated in the same way. The aim should be gradual improvement from generation to generation.

I don’t doubt that Dorothy Howell suffered from the prejudices of the time but I have to say , based on what I heard yesterday , she’s nothing exceptional as a composer and doesn’t merit a COTW. The composer she reviled - Schoenberg- was a vastly greater talent and she diminished herself by having such a snooty attitude to him, She would have a been better composer if she’d stayed , listened and learnt.

[french frank]

I don’t doubt that Dorothy Howell suffered from the prejudices of the time but I have to say , based on what I heard yesterday , she’s nothing exceptional as a composer and doesn’t merit a COTW. The composer she reviled - Schoenberg- was a vastly greater talent and she diminished herself by having such a snooty attitude to him, She would have a been better composer if she’d stayed , listened and learnt.

At least you now have a reasoned and informed criticism of this particular composer. Part of a long life means I no longer expect everything to be great - or even particularly good. The world is an uneven place. R3's obligation is presumably the BBC's - to inform, educate and entertain and any CoTW should be educational, I would think. Nothing about only having great composers, so there's nothing to 'deserve' about being featured.

I speak in a personal capacity

[Ein Heldenleben]

At least you now have a reasoned and informed criticism of this particular composer. Part of a long life means I no longer expect everything to be great - or even particularly good. The world is an uneven place. R3's obligation is presumably the BBC's - to inform, educate and entertain and any CoTW should be educational, I would think. Nothing about only having great composers, so there's nothing to 'deserve' about being featured.

I speak in a personal capacity

I didn’t hear anything remotely “critical” yesterday - in fact just sympathy at the rough treatment one of her ballet scores received at the hands of the critics. Look it’s pleasant enough stuff but that’s as far a it goes . I don’t think anything should get on Radio 3 COTW unless it is “particularly good.” Not geniuses just some thing that stands out .
By your criterion you could justify featuring every published recorded or performed composer . There has to be some barrier to entry surely? Of course the producers might have a higher opinion of her .If so I’d like to hear them and the “reasons,”

What annoyed me were her contemptuous opinions about Schoenberg. The really great diatonic composers of the 20th century held him , rightly , in respect . t

[french frank]

I didn’t hear anything remotely “critical” yesterday - in fact just sympathy at the rough treatment one of her ballet scores received at the hands of the critics.

But in that case the problem is with the programmes (and perhaps R3 too) rather than the subject.

Look it’s pleasant enough stuff but that’s as far a it goes . I don’t think anything should get on Radio 3 COTW unless it is “particularly good.” Not geniuses just some thing that stands out .
By your criterion you could justify featuring every published recorded or performed composer . There has to be some barrier to entry surely? Of course the producers might have a higher opinion of her .If so I’d like to hear them and the “reasons,”

Most of the time is does feature the great and the good. Sometimes it doesn't.Part of the criticism, I think, with the programme, described as a ' music documentary', is the format: too documentary and not enough music?

What annoyed me were her contemptuous opinions about Schoenberg. The really great diatonic composers of the 20th century held him , rightly , in respect .

A reason to criticise, to be sure. We (FoR3) cårried out a survey of our supporters many years ago, and as far as CoTW was concerned people tended to say: "I listen if I'm interested in the composer, not otherwise." Part of being the 'selective listener' that William Haley envisaged as a Third Programme listener is surely being selective.

[french frank]

By your criterion you could justify featuring every published recorded or performed composer . There has to be some barrier to entry surely?

On that point, I imagine the barrier is not absolute: It varies from listener to listener.

[smittims]

There's nothing 'wrong' with Dorothy Howell's music. It's pleasant, if bland. What I was criticising was the BBC assumption, often stated these days,that if a woman's work is forgotten or neglected it must be because of 'misogyny' (though I suspect half the people who trot out that word haven't looked it up in a dictionary) and it can't be just that her music wasn't sufficiently outstanding. There are dozens of male composers equivalent to Dorothy Howell: Percy Pitt, Nicholas Gatty , Reginald Steggall, and others, who also wrote pleasant but bland music which has been neglected because it wasn't sufficiently outstanding. There simply isn't time to play all of it so we have to select. I suggest the only fair way to select is on grounds of quality, not the composer's race or sex.

[french frank]

What I was criticising was the BBC assumption, often stated these days,that if a woman's work is forgotten or neglected it must be because of 'misogyny' (though I suspect half the people who trot out that word haven't looked it up in a dictionary) and it can't be just that her music wasn't sufficiently outstanding. .

But that spectacularly misses the entire point: it assumes that her music is 'substandard' solely because she actually wasn't very talented. This is why I stress that change in the future will happen over generations, when opportunities and encouragement to women to 'catch up' come to fruition: it could take a while before Louisa Beetfarm surfaces. Not all men want that to happen, of course.

[Serial_Apologist]

I'm conflicted by this. Somehow, previously neglected subjects for COTW are being selected on "easy listening" grounds at the same time as Radio 3 dumbs down by random indiscriminate scheduling intended to elicit a new listenership it thinks is out there waiting, regardless of the feelings of its existing audience, and the RAJAR figures show little appreciable change!

Cognitive dissonance takes on added meaning!

[Master Jacques]

I've heard a couple of the pieces being broadcast and rather enjoyed them. I shared her laughter at hearing atonal Schoenberg for the first time, in my case at school and can't remember ever listening to Pierrot Lunaire again. A loss I can live with.

I can't. As For Miss Howell's laughter, isn't that the equivalent of laughing at the inmates of an asylum? It was certainly a shallow response to a fascinating and multi-faceted work which (whatever you think of it) broke the mould. Her own music is aural polyfilla of the most dispiriting kind. It prompts no response in me, not even laughter. Silly Auntie, for pretending it's some sort of lost treasure trove.

[Ein Heldenleben]

But that spectacularly misses the entire point: it assumes that her music is 'substandard' solely because she actually wasn't very talented. This is why I stress that change in the future will happen over generations, when opportunities and encouragement to women to 'catch up' come to fruition: it could take a while before Louisa Beetfarm surfaces. Not all men want that to happen, of course.

It’s not going for happen -no matter what gender - because the unique set of cultural circumstances that threw up the last one will never happen again. The same goes for Shakespeare and Homer (who might have been a woman of course). There hasn’t really been a composer of musical genius alive, in my view since the deaths of Tippett , Stravinsky , and Britten. I’m beginning to think there never will be again.