Poll
Question:
Yes, or no?
Option 1: Yes, the symphony as a musical genre remains relevant and vital
Option 2: No, the hell you say.
Because I want to know the GMG consensus.
NB: This is not any matter of a Henning symphony hanging in the balance. No, not at all.
Fair disclosure: I voted Yes.
I voted yes.
No, Karl, I don't want you to compose a symphony any time soon. You can do that much later in your career. In the time it takes to compose the symphony you can compose much more of the chamber music and choral works that I enjoy so much.
I also voted yes, but there is one thing that strikes me about the 20th century lists on the other thread.
Let's say there's a guy named Frank who knows nothing about classical music, but he does know DATES. He looks at these lists and what pops quickly into his mind is this - what happened to the symphonies from the latter part of the 20th century?
Quote from: Sammy on May 25, 2012, 10:22:23 AM
I also voted yes, but there is one thing that strikes me about the 20th century lists on the other thread.
Let's say there's a guy named Frank who knows nothing about classical music, but he does know DATES. He looks at these lists and what pops quickly into his mind is this - what happened to the symphonies from the latter part of the 20th century?
I'd point him to my favorite symphony, which arrived in the 21st century: Part's 4th. This site is also not the best when it comes to contemporary music (by which I mean music that was composed after the 1970s, so those lists tend not to be reflective of actuality. They're simply a consensus of a rather a rather narrow subset.)
Also, Henning where the hell is your contribution to the literature? :-X
Quote from: Sammy on May 25, 2012, 10:22:23 AM
I also voted yes, but there is one thing that strikes me about the 20th century lists on the other thread.
Let's say there's a guy named Frank who knows nothing about classical music, but he does know DATES. He looks at these lists and what pops quickly into his mind is this - what happened to the symphonies from the latter part of the 20th century?
There are plenty of them, from Schnittke, Aho, Sallinen, Part (#4), etc. There are also lots that are not being called symphonies, or in Carter's case he called it Symphonia. No worries. In time more will be recorded. Besides, if he is new to it, he may want to start somewhere else anyway.
I voted "yes".
As to where are the recent symphonies? I think the term "symphony" has suffered some degradation with some composers choosing to avoid it and instead use evocative titles for a large orchestral work, which otherwise might be called a symphony.
I certainly do not limit a symphony to a the traditional multi-movement form from the Classical-Romantic period, but think of it as an large scale work written for orchestra when a composer has something he considers significant to express.
Quote from: Arnold on May 25, 2012, 10:31:39 AM
I certainly do not limit a symphony to a the traditional multi-movement form from the Classical-Romantic period, but think of it as any large scale work written for orchestra when a composer has something he considers significant to express.
and, in one sense, that is a restoration: Symphony is a word which applies to a genre of music, but it also applies to a [large] orchestra. The Chicago Symphony Orchestra, for instance, does not violate its name by playing a Strauss tone-poem, e.g.
If I were a composer and wanted my works to be performed and/or recorded, I'm sure I would be less likely to write a symphony today than in the past due to the fewer number of symphony orchestras around to play it.
http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/3985/full (http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/3985/full)
So what should replace the symphony - anything but the symphony - or a category that surpasses it ?
Quote from: Szykneij on May 25, 2012, 11:51:32 AM
If I were a composer and wanted my works to be performed and/or recorded, I'm sure I would be less likely to write a symphony today than in the past due to the fewer number of symphony orchestras around to play it.
http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/3985/full (http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/3985/full)
Well it seems that those who do compose symphonies, these days, have already established themselves, so while they might not be as prevalent as they used to be. I feel that the form is still going strong, relatively speaking.
The symphony is certainly still relevant, but it's perhaps not so dominant as in the 19th century. The French and 2nd Viennese School weren't too fond of the symphony, and they've certainly had an influence across the century.
Different genres' popularity varies with times - the piano sonata wasn't too popular after Beethoven and Schubert, until Scriabin and Prokofiev wrote excellent sonatas, and then there are the single works by Janacek, Berg, and even Bartók Stravinsky, and later Wuorinen and Dutilleux's single sonata.
String quartet, on the other hand, as a name doesn't imply the form so much as 'symphony' and 'sonata' do, and it's always stayed popular as a medium.
Quote from: James on May 25, 2012, 11:05:29 AM
Still relevant but certainly not as much as it used to be .. and the trend seems to be a continual trailing off .. and the dispersal/explosion/fragmentation into other territories & resources which is necessary for renewal.
So what period was this 'used to be', the end of the 18th century? People have probably been declaring the death of the symphony ever since Beethoven died anyway, but it's continued despite that.
I voted yes, but I would add that I don't expect it to stay anywhere near the form of the 19th century symphony (a certain number of movements played in a sort of standardized order of sonata-allegro/slow movement/scherzo with trio/finale), and may not need large instrumental forces (chamber symphonies, for example). Perhaps we should think of it as a work for orchestral sized forces, of several movements or one movement with discernible sections, in which musical means of unifying the work dominate any possible programmatic elements [in shorter English, not a suite], and instrumental concertante and vocal elements are a contributing but not a dominating element [in shorter English, not a concerto or a primarily choral work].
If there were no symphonies, I would have to write my own :D I find the nature of the symphony more satisfying than anything else: an integrated, independent, complex, large-scale musical statement - a masterwork. It's also fascinating to see the interplay of innovation and tradition in the form over the years.
(By "independent" I mean the music is not subordinate to demands of e.g. literary narrative, religious worship or virtuosic display.)
If you wish to look at whether it is still 'relevant' then maybe it's worth looking at why it actually started in the first place.
Yes.
Quote from: eyeresist on May 25, 2012, 10:53:05 PM
(By "independent" I mean the music is not subordinate to demands of e.g. literary narrative, religious worship or virtuosic display.)
So you rule out such artifacts as the Lord of the RIngs "Symphony"? . . .
Quote from: karlhenning on May 26, 2012, 04:34:47 AM
So you rule out such artifacts as the Lord of the RIngs "Symphony"? . . .
What James would say
Quote from: karlhenning on May 26, 2012, 04:34:47 AMSo you rule out such artifacts as the Lord of the RIngs "Symphony"? . . .
There I think the word was misapplied. :P
Quote from: eyeresist on May 27, 2012, 12:57:23 AM
There I think the word was misapplied. :P
Indeed : )
Yes, because it's my favorite form of music. So it better be.
Quote from: karlhenning on May 25, 2012, 10:12:21 AM
NB: This is not any matter of a Henning symphony hanging in the balance. No, not at all.
:'(
Sergey Slonimsky, the Russian composer, just had his 30th Symphony premiered, and is now working on his 32th. Sadly, only little has been officially recorded and released, but he is definitely evolving into a major symphonist, using a caleidoscopic style with many influences - not avant-garde, but comparable to the later Shostakovich (15th Symphony) etc.