Main >> Food, Travel & The Arts >> Other Performing Arts

Where did the great composers go?

There was a time when we understood that in every generation there was a great composer, but that time seems long gone. There have been many theories about why composers are so absent from the public “scene.” One question that could be asked is this; what did the "great composer" do for society and who if anyone now fills that role? I propose that these composers functioned as the ombudsman of the imagination. Beethoven was one of them, perhaps the first of them, and for many he still fills that role. He understood something about our human condition that we knew about ourselves internally but that only he could seem to express to the world. People acknowledged it.

Some generalizations:

Beethoven is not thought of as self interested or careerist.

Even though he was not a leader in a composer’s society or guild, there was no shame or loss of status for other living composers who supported the notion that Beethoven (alive) was a better composer then they were.

His world view was not narrow.
Though he was not a writer of speeches, he maintained a public life.

He did not use gamesmanship or personal politics for advantage or to maintain his success.

He tried to make a difference in society with his music.

I'm afraid that the imagination is no longer honored in American society as we have replaced it with media. For every book we now know what every character looks like and how they speak-- and they just happen to talk and act like us. The popular music cartel (also part of the media)has managed to steal some of art music's thunder by focusing on its own alleged integrity and its many charitable works (though they have only recently been interested in music education). Though it is true that popular song can be a point of political galvanization, its the words that are the focus more than the music. Folk songs have no composer. Today, the artistic and financial survival of so many composers is predicated on working in a very narrow context. So they must reject having any appeal outside their own musical "ghetto."

Anyway, even if we all had open and unencumbered imaginations this doesn't sound like any composer we know today.

Waste of time

Why worry about them others?

A question was asked recently about the old uptown/downtown new music split and what if anything it meant. The theory that there are (only) 2 mutually exclusive music scenes (both in New York City) are on the face of it ridicules, and mostly counter productive. However many folks think that this is true, but not as many as those people who want it to be true because they have a vested interest.

Lets review the generalizations:

Uptown	Downtown
Old fashioned and informed by history	New and unprecedented, innovative
Serious	Fun
Establishment	Anti establishment
Artificial	Real
Square	Hip
Academic –disconnected from audience	Folk—audience comes first
Institutional	Independent
Traditional	Experimental
Powerful	Oppressed
Exclusive	Inclusive
Insiders	Outsiders
Intellectual /dry	Emotional/exciting
Accepts serial music	Rejects serial music
Rejects popular and world music	Inclusive of all styles except the above
White Male Dominated	Not!
Rich upper crusties	Just plain folks
Republican	Green
Success oriented- money	Art oriented-love
12 semi tones only please	All kinds of tuning
them-The monolith	us- The Other
Formal	Informal
Old jazz	Beyond Jazz
Great music sounds great	great music must look good too!
Blessed by Babbitt	Blessed by Cage
programing	mashing
institutional	entrepreneurial
Educated	The "street"

Is there something to this?

A cursory look at these generalizations shows enough holes in the logic strings to make a Swiss cheese. Also, downtown sort of looks something like your typical Coke/Pepsi/Sprite advertising campaign. Obviously, in a commercial society art needs to advertise to appeal to its target audience. So what is this all about? Is it simply the new money audience verses the old money? Possibly. Is it an innocent way of “branding” a sound? Is it just a bunch of Alpha Males and Alpha Females gone wild?

Perhaps it's this -- many people, and composers in particular, seem to be hurt by the arts “system” that they don’t control; we don't get the respect we deserve in this country. When the big job or performance we wanted doesn’t come as planned, some of us need to assign blame. All composers fail at times, no matter who they are. The question is: what is your breaking point? I am always surprised at these self-described oppressed folks, who careers are unimpeded. They have big jobs, major awards, etc., but obviously there is a moral high ground to be had as an oppressed person that no amount of success or high position can gratify. It is not a surprise that there are always people who know how to take advantage of that discontent. Those who propose the downtown/uptown schism are saying "see, we are the real avant-garde.".

More wastes of time

Worrying about the unfair competition:

Schnitzel Balm's Law:

In any educational institution an unworthy will be elevated for a term to an exalted position. This happens because teachers have the power to do so, and because the student(s) are oh so grateful. The less worthy the more grateful. The crash and burn of unsustainable expectations are not the teachers concern.

The Schnitzel Balm Syndrome:

If you are a "chosen one" enjoy the ride but remember that you are skating on quicksand. For a quick reality check please see Simon Cowell.

All About Phil

Upcoming Performances & Current Work