Whitacre, Eric (b 1970)

[ahinton]

Oh, bravo, Bryn. (I though AH disapproved of youTube, so didn't check.)

Thank you very much for your kind remarks.

Yes, the OP of this is indeed elsewhere and so I'm unaware of evidence that anyone inaugurated this thread for the purpose of slagging off EW in any case; even my own brief contribution thereto doesn't actually do that and confines itself instead to idle speculation upon what Malcolm Williamson might have said about EW's work in the light of what he infamously did about ALW's. For the record, there's nothing wrong with what EW does on its own terms, provided that those who listen to his work are not expecting from it an experience that demands of them - or is likely to give more to them - more than Mr Whitacre appears to want to demand or give.

I don't disapprove of YouTube per se; rather the reverse, in fact, for all that I've referred to it more than once as YouBiquiTube. It's just when folks upload entire works there (and elsewhere) without first seeking and obtaining the permission of those involved (composers, artists, record companies/broadcasters) where that is possible - and there are and have been ample examples of this.

[MrGongGong]

Are you sure this thread wasn't calved from the Bath Abbey one?

This might have been as well ?
(though i'm not allowed to see as I was barred ..........)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yq8ADxnq5as

[Richard Barrett]

(can't think why you missed it )

I can't either - the intellectual cut and thrust seems most compelling. I'm not sure on the other hand why I took a look at a thread about Eric Whitacre, given that it was bound to consist of "his music is bland, derivative and instantly forgettable" versus "but people like singing it and he's a nice bloke". Both can be true of course.

[ahinton]

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Quintet-Leo.../dp/B00006LEO1

https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Piano-Solo-Instrumental/Memoriam-John-Ogdon-Organ-Recital-Ronald-Stevenson/B000003IYB

... which, alas, seems to be the only commercially available discs that include his work.

There is also

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Piano-Works-Stevenson-Sorabji-Hinton/dp/B000003IXS

(and I should perhaps note that the reviewer's observation about the inclusion of quotes from Reger, Busoni and Art Tatum are not strictly correct, since there are only allusions to rather than quotes from Reger and Tatum and the variation headed Ommaggio a Busoni has not quotes from that composer either).

Scores/Sheet Music are also available (no Music for choir, it seems - something I hadn't noticed before):

http://www.sorabji-archive.co.uk/hinton/scores.php

No, it's true that I have written no choral music, for which reason (doubtless among many others) I ought swiftly and discreetly to bow out of this thread which is, after all, about Mr Whitacre.

[french frank]

Wow, so this is how discussions of choral music go here! Outstanding. Having said that, starting a thread just in order to slag off a composer seems to me pointless.

Sorry - made it clear on The Choir board that I was removing these posts from a Choral Evensong discussion in response to an alternative suggestion The quote in the first post here was the original OP.

[ahinton]

I can't either - the intellectual cut and thrust seems most compelling.

!!!

I'm not sure on the other hand why I took a look at a thread about Eric Whitacre, given that it was bound to consist of "his music is bland, derivative and instantly forgettable" versus "but people like singing it and he's a nice bloke". Both can be true of course.

And although I don't know him personally so cannot vouch for how nice a bloke he might be and as I am not party to a lot of choristers' opinions as to the extent to which they might enjoy singing his work, they might well be for all that I know - but then not every piece of music by any composer has the same degree of memorability all of his/her others - and blandness and derivativeness, being as they are to some degree in the ear and opinion of the beholder, will not impact upon everyone identically as such.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I can't either - the intellectual cut and thrust seems most compelling. I'm not sure on the other hand why I took a look at a thread about Eric Whitacre, given that it was bound to consist of "his music is bland, derivative and instantly forgettable" versus "but people like singing it and he's a nice bloke". Both can be true of course.

Indeed - and there are always such sabre-rattling exchanges whenever somebody makes a unfavourable comment about a composer/genre: I shouldn't have risen to l_c_b's spleen and instead concentrated on admiring the decor chuff moi.

Having said that, I would be very (and genuinely) interested in pieces by Whitacre that enthusiasts would recommend as being of itself worthy of interest - not merely as encouraging people who don't sing to do so and thereby gravitate to repertoires that they might not otherwise encounter - and which counter the "bland, derivative, and instantly forgettable" suggestion. Chris Watson and oddoneout have made hints in that direction, are there specific examples that might interest other Forumistas less responsive to the man's muse??

[Serial_Apologist]

Nothing wrong with people singing
but i'm not 100% convinced by EW's approach to contemporary music "lite"
and after his ridiculous comments on BBC4 a couple of years ago about "atonality" I find him hard to take seriously
It's a shame that those composers who invented the processes he is happy to use with abandon are so little known

Co-incidentally I caught this on R3 yesterday which is a fine example of one of these processes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foyQDp74vNY

I have to say I found the first episode of EW's TV series both enjoyable and informative, not having really studied pre-Baroque music as much as I should, as one whose main area of interest is the "moderns". The problem, for me, came with his dealing with the 20th century, and I was minded of those students of political economy who choose to foreclose on broadening the remit at the point where Adam Smith is reached - anything theoretically closer and more germane to our own times being treated as if in some way soiling of oneself by virtue of contact.

[MrGongGong]

I have to say I found the first episode of EW's TV series both enjoyable and informative, not having really studied pre-Baroque music as much as I should, as one whose main area of interest is the "moderns". The problem, for me, came with his dealing with the 20th century, and I was minded of those students of political economy who choose to close off further study at the point where Adam Smith is reached - anything theoretically closer and more germane to our own times being treated as if in some way soiling of oneself by virtue of contact.

I had a similar experience
but once he started talking about the music I knew about I realised what nonsense he was spouting which kind of made me question his whole understanding.

BUT (to repeat) that's what you get with TV

[Serial_Apologist]

I had a similar experience
but once he started talking about the music I knew about I realised what nonsense he was spouting which kind of made me question his whole understanding.

BUT (to repeat) that's what you get with TV

'Twas not always so.....

[jean]

...I would be very (and genuinely) interested in pieces by Whitacre that enthusiasts would recommend as being of itself worthy of interest...

I'm not an 'enthusiast', but I would say from my limited experience that any piece you choose sounds quite impressive - but then all the other pieces sound much the same.

[Vox Humana]

I'm not an 'enthusiast', but I would say from my limited experience that any piece you choose sounds quite impressive - but then all the other pieces sound much the same.

I'd have to agree broadly with that. (In fact not everything by Whitacre sounds the same, but the exceptions I have heard inhabit a cross-over territory that isn't at all to my taste.) When I first heard Lux aurumque I thought it was wonderful. I probably still would if it hadn't been done to death so much. Maybe that says something about its staying power. The general style of lux aurumque has been much imitated, both by Whitacre himself and others. Then again, Fayrfax's and Ludford's masses also sound much of a muchness and there are those who find Howells's choral music "samey". For me the linear interest (viz. counterpoint) of the last three composers is crucial factor in their music's stature. I don't find this degree of interest in the Whitacre/Lauridsen type of soundscape, but I can understand why others feel differently.

[Richard Barrett]

the linear interest (viz. counterpoint) of the last three composers is crucial factor

In an interview I once read, Penderecki asserted that counterpoint was particularly idiomatic to vocal ensembles, and the more I've thought about this the more I'm inclined to think he has a point.

[light_calibre_baritone]

ahinton has already written a great deal of Music that has considerably "more thought put into it" than a conductor could shake a stick at - but you know this already, of course. After all, you wouldn't be so snobbish as to comment on Music that you hadn't heard; nor so closed-minded as to comment on other styles and approaches to Music that you didn't find congenial, would you?

FHL, I guess you were correct in calling my outburst a bit of "spleen venting" (further down this thread), and maybe I should have toned-down said venting, but I find this topic a little frustrating (I need to get out more).

I am aware of Hinton's music, but I have never listen to it (will remedy that tonight).

I feel able to comment on EW as, like Chris Watson, I work with him on a regular basis and come across his music frequently as a pro singer. I find his approach to choral composition to be heavily text driven, which means the words really to find their own space, and the music always compliments (never the other way round).

His sound world is unique and as Chris said it that has been copied (often with far less success) by others... Tho inspiring others to compose is no bad thing. As Jean posted, most of his works are good to listen to. I think EW's 'When David Heard' is exceptional as it treats the text with real care and space; it always moves me in a way I can't explain... But then so does the huge Gombert motet (or possibly by Josquin d P, but that's another thread) with a similar text 'Lugebat David Absalom' - I think it must be the heart-wrenching text(s) that do it for me, and EW's music is a great vehicle for it.

Both are on YouTube.

LCB

[MrGongGong]

In an interview I once read, Penderecki asserted that counterpoint was particularly idiomatic to vocal ensembles, and the more I've thought about this the more I'm inclined to think he has a point.

Good point

It's not my world but I do find the soundworld of much of this music very "consistent" (which might mean "samey" but it never made the Quo or La Monte any the worse for it!).
So I had a listen to Lux Aurumque and it's all very lovely in a soft Andrex puppy kind of way and i'm sure it's great to sing in a huge acoustic......... but to my (not expert in this stuff !) ears there are folks who do it much more effectively. It does, for me, raise the whole issue of compositional identity. There are composers (some of whom might have already said something here?) who can create something for forces that are well used and it still sounds like them.

So, to those in this world a question.
Does EW have a strong individual voice as a composer (aside from the image malarkey) or is he just like the thousands of other accomplished folks composing in this way?