The opinion of experts

[Dave2002]

For me, criticism is placing the work in its time, in its context, in comparing it with similar works and finding it conformist, derivative, innovative &c. Objective, yes, but in a sense limited - possible even sterile! Who cares? The meaningful relationship is between the composer and the listener. A musicologist - I'm not sure, since music isn't my province, but more focused on the technical aspects? Does this extend to passing judgement or being 'a critic'?

It's not only listeners and composers, but also performers. Performers may be critical of a work for technical reasons, though even that can present issues. Example: A composer writes something which is "impossible" to play in tune. The work is criticised for that. Players find it difficult. Then someone plays it in tune. Then the composer announces that he/she "wanted the sense of struggle of playing that passage which is very hard to play in tune ...." Sometimes one can't win!

[jayne lee wilson]

Perhaps analysis is a better word than criticism. Press music critics are paid to give their opinions (as idiosyncratic or compulsive reading as possible). But what do we base our 'judgements' on? Whether we liked or enjoyed something or were profoundly affected by it in some way? That can't be objective if the next person was unmoved and disliked it: we are not saying something about the work but about ourselves. The 'truth' of our opposing views probably lies in bare numbers. If one person took one view and the other 99 took the opposite view, there is some persuasive 'truth' in that. But if only one person in a hundred enjoyed it, is that person wrong? or is the work worthless for that reason?

For me, criticism is placing the work in its time, in its context, in comparing it with similar works and finding it conformist, derivative, innovative &c. Objective, yes, but in a sense limited - possible even sterile! Who cares? The meaningful relationship is between the composer and the listener. A musicologist - I'm not sure, since music isn't my province, but more focused on the technical aspects? Does this extend to passing judgement or being 'a critic'?

There is some wisdom here but....

First "criticism" in the sense you imply, consdering the historical/artistic context and/ior the structural working-out of a given symphonic creation, is never sterile. Without such writings (Gramophone, Radio 3, Master Musicians and other books), a musically-untrained person like me (straight out of school and on the dole) would never have got very far with classical music in the 1970s. But - yes - such an interest is based on subjective response, love of the music itself - "composer (or at least, music - ) and listener".

You may see that when I had to defend (yet again...) Bruckner here recently, it was inspired both by my deep love of the music but - crucially - by the inability of some, who passed very negative judgements, to have a basic understanding of how the music worked in its use of its own initial ideas. Which in itself, is the essence of what "following a symphony" is actually about. There in the music, palpably NOT a "subjective view". It is all there, you either hear it or you don't. So the objective/subjective distinction in various types of music "commentary" should not be so challenging to distinguish.

As for musicology, of which I guess I am a very imperfect and amateur practitioner, it falls into three categories: historical, ethnographic, analytical. It can be done well or badly. One can take an interest or not. At the end of which I return to my earlier formulation:

Likes/dislikes need no justification; judgements do.

I must add a word of thanks to Auferstehn (Mario) who has shown a graciousness and courtesy, a willingness to listen and to learn, in his own thread that is a model to us all. And teamsaint, who tried to remind everyone here of the meaning and function of Criticism (of any Cultural kind), in its truer, wider-ranging sense.

You can always trust football fans to get to the heart of things....

[vinteuil]

.

Richard Barrett, a composer, claims that composers have a particular competency to judge composers.

I know less about music criticism than I do about literary criticism. But one of the things you pick up in literary criticism is that writers are often poor judges of writers. And particularly that writers are often the worst judges of their own work.

.

[jayne lee wilson]

.

Richard Barrett, a composer, claims that composers have a particular competency to judge composers.

I know less about music criticism than I do about literary criticism. But one of the things you pick up in literary criticism is that writers are often poor judges of writers. And particularly that writers are often the worst judges of their own work.


.

See earlier comments about composers-on-composers! A degree of evidence to the contrary....

But hard to generalise, perhaps? Without Ezra Pound the masterpiece we know as Eliot's The Waste Land would probably not have come down to us in its present, somewhat legendary, form.....

[french frank]

First "criticism" in the sense you imply, consdering the historical/artistic context and/ior the structural working-out of a given symphonic creation, is never sterile.

Perhaps I was being a little too self-deprecating, having discovered that the term 'academic' can be a term of disparagement I did not know that

You may see that when I had to defend (yet again...) Bruckner here recently, it was inspired both by my deep love of the music but - crucially - by the inability of some, who passed very negative judgements, to have a basic understanding of how the music worked in its use of its own initial ideas.

But for better or worse isn't this rehearsing the Brexit argument? "Yes, I hear what you say and you may be right. But the important thing is that we take back control!" (or whatever else 'we' must do).

As for musicology, of which I guess I am a very imperfect and amateur practitioner, it falls into three categories: historical, ethnographic, analytical. It can be done well or badlyhere of the meaning and function of Criticism (of any Cultural kind), in its truer, wider-ranging sense.

I may have taken 'musicologist' in too narrow a sense, again hearing some of the comments about musicologists; their technical knowledge is merely the equivalent of my knowledge of historical linguistics. That delivers insights, of a kind, but not all.

You can always trust football fans to get to the heart of things....

Sans commentaire

[Roslynmuse]

My sense is that composers have a unique perspective on other composers' music, simply because of the way they are constantly thinking about their own notes, sounds, ways of organising material, both on the micro and macro scale. There are insights there that anyone not engaged in the process of composition would not necessarily have - just as performers and musicologists will have their own insights. Unfortunately, the soundbites from composers quoted on here don't really reflect more than any soundbite does - a view that may be passionately held, and could be argued coherently, but summed up in a few emotionally charged words!

And there are many types of musicology, from the analytical (and one can identify a range of approaches there), to the contextual (reception studies, gender studies etc) to editorial scholarship which can also take many forms, especially in preparing 'performing' editions. The interested listener has a vast range of material to enhance the listening experience, from the old Master Musicians books, and Tovey's Essays, via the Cambridge Companions (admittedly some chapters require more theoretical knowledge than others) to the writings of Richard Taruskin, Joseph Kerman, Lawrence Kramer et al. We all have our views on the relative merits or otherwise of those commentators. A good writer like Roy Howat will make you want to listen to the music he is writing about (or, lest that reads too subjectively, that was certainly my experience with his Debussy in Proportion and his volume on French Piano Music).

One last thought about composers on composers: Robin Holloway's books of short essays are well worth reading (Essays and Diversions) and are accessible to the general reader, especially when he is writing about composers he enjoys.

[french frank]

One last thought about composers on composers: Robin Holloway's books of short essays are well worth reading (Essays and Diversions) and are accessible to the general reader, especially when he is writing about composers he enjoys.

And another last thought: perhaps composers should only pronounce publicly on the music they like? They can leave it to others to criticise, gently or savagely, depending on merit.

[jayne lee wilson]

Perhaps I was being a little too self-deprecating, having discovered that the term 'academic' can be a term of disparagement I did not know that

But for better or worse isn't this rehearsing the Brexit argument? "Yes, I hear what you say and you may be right. But the important thing is that we take back control!" (or whatever else 'we' must do).



I may have taken 'musicologist' in too narrow a sense, again hearing some of the comments about musicologists; their technical knowledge is merely the equivalent of my knowledge of historical linguistics. That delivers insights, of a kind, but not all.



Sans commentaire

I simply do not understand your Brexit analogy; I detest Brexit (for rational, economic, and Political; and emotional Europhile reasons) and have always said so; I can't see how any conception of it could possibly relate to my repeated attempts to spread knowledge and understanding of Bruckner and other composers; which are far from the ideological deceit and prejudice, the widespread Poltical, economic and social damage of Brexit itself.

I would never dream of saying "you may be right" to a listener who had not grasped the basic, audible workings of classical symphonic argument, in Bruckner or any other composer (Brahms and Beethoven are really not so very different in that respect). Please try not to misunderstand me. I stand in support of composers, as much if not more than, myself.

So for once I am going to say - explicitly - I find that analogy wholly inaccurate, deeply disrespectful and offensive.

****

Football fans, among whom you may count Shostakovich, Albert Camus and Hans Keller, are all too aware of the role of luck and chance, among a profound tactical understanding, in the failures or successes of their team; whilst never betraying their allegiance.
It does tend to give us a clear-headed, gritty, unillusioned take on Reality.....

[Bryn]

And another last thought: perhaps composers should only pronounce publicly on the music they like? They can leave it to others to criticise, gently or savagely, depending on merit.

No, no, no! Let's have the really acid invective.

Guess who:

Once when I was in Ann Arbor with Alexander Smith, I said that one of the things I liked about botany was that it was free of the jealousies and selfish feelings that plague the arts, that I would for that reason, if for no other, given my life to live over again, be a botanist rather than a musician. He said, “That shows how little you know about botany.” Later in the conversation I happened to mention the name of a mycologist connected with another midwestern university. Incisively, Smith said, "Don’t mention that man’s name in my house."

[Pulcinella]

But for better or worse isn't this rehearsing the Brexit argument? "Yes, I hear what you say and you may be right. But the important thing is that we take back control!" (or whatever else 'we' must do).

Thank you for this.
I have deliberately refrained from commenting on this thread until now.

[jayne lee wilson]

Thank you for this.
I have deliberately refrained from commenting on this thread until now.

And offended me deeply now you have, in confirming this outrageous comment!

The precious tradition of Radio 3 and the Gramophone is evidently over. Even on something called "The New Radio 3 Forum". I though it might be possible to support it on something so named. Too many here have no idea of how it used to be, with Roehre, fhg, Amateur 51 and others who respected it. (Alistair Hinton, thankfully still around...).

My time is evidently wasted here. Dismayed and depressed. Off to the woods to find sanity among Horses, Pheasants, Redwings, Buzzards....

[Richard Barrett]

My sense is that composers have a unique perspective on other composers' music, simply because of the way they are constantly thinking about their own notes, sounds, ways of organising material, both on the micro and macro scale. There are insights there that anyone not engaged in the process of composition would not necessarily have - just as performers and musicologists will have their own insights. Unfortunately, the soundbites from composers quoted on here don't really reflect more than any soundbite does - a view that may be passionately held, and could be argued coherently, but summed up in a few emotionally charged words!

Exactly.

And another last thought: perhaps composers should only pronounce publicly on the music they like? They can leave it to others to criticise, gently or savagely, depending on merit.

So composers shouldn't enjoy the same freedom of speech that other people do? Don't be silly.

[french frank]

Exactly.

So composers shouldn't enjoy the same freedom of speech that other people do? Don't be silly.

I'm not suggesting they should be banned from doing so. Don't be silly. But they often don't do themselves or their reputations any favours. Publish and be damned!

[french frank]

And offended me deeply now you have in confirming this outrageous comment!

I should make it clear, that the point I make is not about the validity of the argument or the person propounding it: it's about the way it's received by those whom we seek to persuade. As a Remainer, I feel that the arguments marshalled to support our case fell on deaf ears because, in large part, our concerns were not their concerns (and, vice versa, theirs were not ours). Never the twain shall meet. The fact that it was a battle we lost doesn't mean that we were wrong.

[teamsaint]

And another last thought: perhaps composers should only pronounce publicly on the music they like? They can leave it to others to criticise, gently or savagely, depending on merit.

I would think that composers would be well placed to make criticisms of works they don’t like, and if they can illuminate , then well so much the better.
A wise head on here told me that Bernstein’s Mass is badly written, without describing how this is manifested .If a composer( or anybody else) can illuminate that comment, then I’m all ears. I’ll still love it though I expect, but perhaps understand a little better.