GMG Consensus: Who was the greatest composer of the 20th century?

[Mirror Image]

It seems you're painting with a broad brush.  There are many composers from the 20th century's second half who, some very consciously, write in styles that are both appealing and challenging.  My own nominee, Olivier Messiaen, certainly did, and so do many others, like Alan Hovhaness, Henryk Gorecki, Arvo Part, Joan Tower, Osvaldo Golijov, and Michael Daugherty.  (Of those, only two, Hovhaness and Gorecki, are deceased, and the list is very incomplete. )

Very good point, Jochanaan. Yes, I guess I was painting with too broad of a brush. I do like a lot of music from post-WWII like Ligeti, Part, Gorecki, etc. I haven't gotten into Messiaen yet. He's a little all-over-the-map sonically for me, but, in time, I'm sure if I keep an open-mind, I'll come to enjoy many of his works.

[Lethevich]

For his reward he gets to argue with Saul. On the longest thread ever.

Sounds like the internet griefer's equivelent of Valhalla

[Mirror Image]

Yes, everyone has a journey & learns things in the process. I just find it hard to deal with ideologues who are closed off to certain things. In my circle of friends & acquaintances who like classical music, I find that there's a lot of flexibility and eclecticism, which I think is healthier than some of the attitudes expressed on internet forums...

My ideology is quite simple: if it moves me emotionally, then I'll engage it intellectually. Who knows what will move me? I will say I'm not closed off to the second half of the 20th Century, because there was still a lot of music coming from composers who lived in the first half, but as far as those born after WWII, I'm finding it hard to find any composers who can bring their very creative ideas onto a more human level. Some people have described Ligeti's music, for example, as otherworldly, but I find a lot of it to be earthy in tone and character. His music, regardless of its high level of creativity and invention, still finds a way to connect with people. It does come down to exposure, but even exposure to a composer doesn't automatically mean acceptance from the listener. That's why I think so much of the second half of the 20th Century is still up in the air.

[(poco) Sforzando]

For his reward he gets to argue with Saul. On the longest thread ever.

Been there, done that.

[some guy]

My ideology is quite simple: if it moves me emotionally, then I'll engage it intellectually. Who knows what will move me?

Interesting ideology. I immediately thought, mine is that if it engages me intellectually, it will move me emotionally. But of course, a moment's reflection tells me that that's wrong. My ideology is that my emotions and my intellect are inextricably intertwined.

[As] far as those born after WWII, I'm finding it hard to find any composers who can bring their very creative ideas onto a more human level. Some people have described Ligeti's music, for example, as otherworldly, but I find a lot of it to be earthy in tone and character. His music, regardless of its high level of creativity and invention, still finds a way to connect with people. It does come down to exposure, but even exposure to a composer doesn't automatically mean acceptance from the listener.

This puts you and your needs and knowledge as being roughly equivalent of "human level." And if you don't believe me, then look at this: "from the listener." Not "from me, Mirror Image," but from "the" listener.

Surely you know that there are many listeners, some of them who post on these forums, who find music of the second half of the century to be "human." (I'm only guessing here, by the way. I have no idea what "human level" means. When I try to make it mean something, all that happens is that Bach, for example, ends up very far from being on a "human level"!!) In any case, I certainly have "accepted" the musics of the latter half of the century, at the very least, which means that they are acceptable. (I put accepted into quotes because that's not how I would phrase it. I enjoy the musics of the latter half of the century. They engage me. Lachenmann. Cage. Fluxus. LaMonte Young. Francis Dhomont. eRikm. Yasanao Tone. Lyn Goeringer.

That's why I think so much of the second half of the 20th Century is still up in the air.

You already know what's coming, don't you? NOT FOR ME.

[Mirror Image]

Interesting ideology. I immediately thought, mine is that if it engages me intellectually, it will move me emotionally. But of course, a moment's reflection tells me that that's wrong. My ideology is that my emotions and my intellect are inextricably intertwined.
This puts you and your needs and knowledge as being roughly equivalent of "human level." And if you don't believe me, then look at this: "from the listener." Not "from me, Mirror Image," but from "the" listener.

Surely you know that there are many listeners, some of them who post on these forums, who find music of the second half of the century to be "human." (I'm only guessing here, by the way. I have no idea what "human level" means. When I try to make it mean something, all that happens is that Bach, for example, ends up very far from being on a "human level"!!) In any case, I certainly have "accepted" the musics of the latter half of the century, at the very least, which means that they are acceptable. (I put accepted into quotes because that's not how I would phrase it. I enjoy the musics of the latter half of the century. They engage me. Lachenmann. Cage. Fluxus. LaMonte Young. Francis Dhomont. eRikm. Yasanao Tone. Lyn Goeringer.
You already know what's coming, don't you? NOT FOR ME.

You seem to generally like throwing composers names out with no rhyme or reason. Who in the hell is Fluxus? I mean who calls themselves this name and is to be taken seriously? Is this a serious composer or someone who thinks triggering a sound on a keyboard is art? Who is eRikm? Again, you throw out these names as if they're a Stravinsky or a Debussy.

[some guy]

You seem to generally like throwing composers names out with no rhyme or reason. Who in the hell is Fluxus? I mean who calls themselves this name and is to be taken seriously? Is this a serious composer or someone who thinks triggering a sound on a keyboard is art? Who is eRikm? Again, you throw out these names as if they're a Stravinsky or a Debussy.

I'm only allowed to name names that you already know? I "throw out" these names because they're people I know and enjoy. (You give yourself way to much credit if you think I pay attention to who you know and purposely mention people you don't know. Really. I don't know who you know.)

And not knowing about Fluxus, well, that just means there's a lot of post-WWII music for you to discover.

Enjoy!

[Mirror Image]

I'm only allowed to name names that you already know? I "throw out" these names because they're people I know and enjoy.

I mean don't take my comment as insulting but I was just wondering, since I didn't make my point clear the first time around, how exactly do the composers you mention stack up against composers like Bartok or Stravinsky who are obviously highly regarded and influential masters of the 20th Century?

By the way, I looked up eRikm and he's apparently a musician who plays turntables. Do you seriously think he could stand against Janacek? I mean seriously, some guy, your musical knowledge of today's music is impressive (I have followed your posts for quite some time now), but come on turntables? Next thing we know you'll be talking about a composer who burps and snorts crack as apart of the music.

[Sid]

I'm only allowed to name names that you already know? I "throw out" these names because they're people I know and enjoy. (You give yourself way to much credit if you think I pay attention to who you know and purposely mention people you don't know. Really. I don't know who you know.)

And not knowing about Fluxus, well, that just means there's a lot of post-WWII music for you to discover.

Enjoy!

This is exactly the kind of point I was trying to make earlier with regards to some of the restrictive & reductionist ideology behind this thread. As I was saying earlier, it should've been about the so-called greatest composer/s of the first half of the c20th. That's the mindset with which many people have come to this party. I personally am not as knowledgeable about some post WW2 composers as some guy, but I am open to hearing new works by current composers - particuarly in chamber and electroacoustic recitals I go to at Sydney Conservatorium. Sometimes I go with a friend, and we NEVER talk about the works afterwards comparing them in quality or whatever to something from say 1911. That just doesn't make sense. Music from 1911 is different to music from 2011 in so many ways. It's silly to come to music of 2011 with a 1911 mindset - and restrictive, because one holds oneself back from enjoying and appreciating the music of today.

I have a friend who studied compostion at the con, and she likes some c20th composers, and not others. She doesn't like Schoenberg or Carter that much, but advised me to get some of the music of Harry Partch. She said "You think Carter is complex - he's not that complex - Partch is more complex!" & when I saw a cd of Partch's music in the cd store, I got it immediately & I connected with it straight away (without any prior knowledge, and much less knowledge of the earlier c20th repertoire than she or even most others here). Likewise, some of the composers which some guy has talked about like Lachenmann and Luc Ferrari have also interested me, I'll have to look into those later. I am gearing up to see the music of Partch live here in Sydney later on in the year, where they will play his music as well as others influenced by him.

I actually respect some guy a great deal because he knows c20th as well as the latest (c21st) music inside out. He tends not to talk about music unless he's heard it. Everyone has an ideology about music, but it's good and healthy to question and expose these ideologies, some of which prove to be outdated and way past their use-by date...

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

You seem to generally like throwing composers names out with no rhyme or reason. Who in the hell is Fluxus? I mean who calls themselves this name and is to be taken seriously? Is this a serious composer or someone who thinks triggering a sound on a keyboard is art? Who is eRikm?

I'm confused. I thought "Fluxus" was a collective name for a whole group of artists:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluxus

As for "eRikm," I find it hard to take seriously someone with a name that looks like a typo.

[Florestan]

As for "eRikm," I find it hard to take seriously someone with a name that looks like a typo.

Ditto. 

As for Fluxus, I find it hard to take seriously any person or goup of persons who susbcribe to the following tenets.

[karlhenning]

Saul.

You win the Internet. Congratulations.

Absolutely! This set me chuckling for near a solid minute. Fit to bust a gut.

[Christo]

Could it, really? I mean, we don't somehow know who the greatest composer of the 20^th century is, until we "discover" that composer in the 21^st century?  How is such a scenario possible?  Draw me a diagram . . . .

  The obvious answer being: Bach. (Greatest composer of the 18th, only recognized as such during the following two centuries).

[karlhenning]

As for Fluxus, I find it hard to take seriously any person or goup of persons who susbcribe to the following tenets.

Then, too, as with the Dadaists, an appearance of unworthy-to-be-taken-seriously is part of the point.

[karlhenning]

  The obvious answer being: Bach. (Greatest composer of the 18th, only recognized as such during the following two centuries).

Dude, we've covered that ground ; )

Separately: not to put too fine a point on it, but, friends, I've earned a PhD in music. Really, I have heard of JS Bach, and of Mendelssohn.  That story is not news to me.

[Christo]

Dude, we've covered that ground ; )

Separately: not to put too fine a point on it, but, friends, I've earned a PhD in music. Really, I have heard of JS Bach, and of Mendelssohn.  That story is not news to me.

Thnx for reminding us (living another daily life sometimes without the GMG forum). 

[DavidRoss]

[karlhenning]

Life! I've heard of it : )

[DavidRoss]

Life! : )

...is what happens while you're busy buying new CDs.

[Florestan]

Then, too, as with the Dadaists, an appearance of unworthy-to-be-taken-seriously is part of the point.

Might be, but then again why should I take seriously someone who doesn't take himself seriously ?