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

[karlhenning]

Part of the trouble thus opposed is, so many people are ready to take seriously those who quite obviously take themselves seriously.  (Why do I suddenly think of A Certain Blogger?) ; )

[petrarch]

Cage is inconsequential if you look at the output. A complete non factor. . 'to free sounds from the bullying effects of human intention & rules so that they could be themselves' .. repudiating tradition with such nonsense, as if what he puts forth even compares. Again, just look at the 200 or so diddles to his name, 99% of that is pure garbage. Believe me, I patiently went through a lot of it.

So you don't like Cage's music; duly noted.

And there aren't any in the 2nd half that really come close to those  indispensable masters like a Debussy, a Stravinsky or a Bartók ... the 2nd half is patchy in it's triumphs .. there is an issue of consistency; but again ..  Ligeti - Requiem, Atmospheres, Lux Auterna, Le Grand Macabre, Lontano, San Francisco Polyphony, Melodien, Violin Concerto, Piano Concerto, Chamber Concerto, Piano Etudes, String Quartets, Trio ..

Who cares which composers are indispensable or not?

[Florestan]

Part of the trouble thus opposed is, so many people are ready to take seriously those who quite obviously take themselves seriously.  (Why do I suddenly think of A Certain Blogger?) ; )

ACD, by any chance? 

[Christo]

Life! I've heard of it : )

Where, when, how?

[vandermolen]

Romantic Era: Bruckner

20th Century: Sibelius (although my favourites are Vaughan Williams, Miaskovsky, Bax, Brian, Copland, Diamond, Tubin, Rosenberg, Holmboe, Shostakovich, Arnold, Bate, Arnell, Braga Santos (symphs 1-4), Lilburn (symphs 1 and 2) etcetcetc).

[karlhenning]

Romantic Era: Bruckner

You know, I'm still apt to say Schoenberg . . . for, his daring adventures with pitch organization notwithstanding, his soundworld always remained richly late-Romantic. Perhaps a bit more sinewy than was the norm late in the Romantic day, but still . . . .

[Grazioso]

Odd, others here seem to understand the gist of the thread .. and that criteria is a reflection of the music.

Ok, if popular appeal is a criterion of musical greatness--because you've said it is, logic be damned--then clearly Mozart is superior to any 20th-century composer, and Michael Jackson is better than any classical composer. Oops.

The real question is: should you ask questions to learn something or ask them to receive a gratifyingly pat answer that reaffirms your pet theories?

When someone asks "Who was the greatest composer of the 20th century?", is your first reaction to generate a little list of your favorite composers, or are you going to ask the harder questions like

* How do we define greatness? Is there an existing definition we can use? Is it sound, or do we need to posit a new one?
* Who counts as a 20th-century composer? Someone born earlier but writing in that time span, someone born in that century, someone who reflects that century in music?
* What shapes the existing narratives of 20th-century musical greatness? Who generated the histories--and what are the biases behind them--the privilege certain composers as important?
* How much exposure to 20th-century music do you need to judge its best composers? No one has heard it all, so where do you draw the line? Do you merely need to have heard the ones that have already been assumed to be great--a self-fulfilling prophecy?

[Grazioso]

Cage is inconsequential if you look at the output. A complete non factor. . 'to free sounds from the bullying effects of human intention & rules so that they could be themselves' .. repudiating tradition with such nonsense, as if what he puts forth even compares. Again, just look at the 200 or so diddles to his name, 99% of that is pure garbage. Believe me, I patiently went through a lot of it.

One man's nonsense is another's profundity. For some, any repudiation of traditional forms and tonality might be deemed unnecessary and self-indulgent. You apparently esteem Ligeti, but listening to a work like Aventures, it would be easy to dismiss him as a masturbatory avant-garde hack. "Hey, Michael Winslow from Police Academy made a song!"

And there aren't any in the 2nd half that really come close to those  indispensable masters like a Debussy, a Stravinsky or a Bartók ... the 2nd half is patchy in it's triumphs .. there is an issue of consistency; but again ..  Ligeti - Requiem, Atmospheres, Lux Auterna, Le Grand Macabre, Lontano, San Francisco Polyphony, Melodien, Violin Concerto, Piano Concerto, Chamber Concerto, Piano Etudes, String Quartets, Trio ..

Which specific composers fail to come close "those indispensable masters like a Debussy, a Stravinsky or a Bartók"?

[mc ukrneal]

When someone asks "Who was the greatest composer of the 20th century?", is your first reaction to generate a little list of your favorite composers, or are you going to ask the harder questions like

* How do we define greatness? Is there an existing definition we can use? Is it sound, or do we need to posit a new one?
* Who counts as a 20th-century composer? Someone born earlier but writing in that time span, someone born in that century, someone who reflects that century in music?
* What shapes the existing narratives of 20th-century musical greatness? Who generated the histories--and what are the biases behind them--the privilege certain composers as important?
* How much exposure to 20th-century music do you need to judge its best composers? No one has heard it all, so where do you draw the line? Do you merely need to have heard the ones that have already been assumed to be great--a self-fulfilling prophecy?

You've really summed up what interests me most here. I have enjoyed those responses that yielded some interesting insights that addressed these (and other) questions and added some unexpected names (that I subsequently have looked into).

[DavidRoss]

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

Perhaps because not taking oneself (too) seriously is a sign of mental health?

You've really summed up...

...the issues that must be settled before we could hope to make a serious attempt to answer the question. 

[karlhenning]

Of course, the point is that some of us understand instead that Cage is of great consequence if you look at the output.

You've really summed up what interests me most here. I have enjoyed those responses that yielded some interesting insights that addressed these (and other) questions and added some unexpected names (that I subsequently have looked into).

Grazioso's post is notably insightful.

My quick back-of-the-envelope input (none of it especially 'new news' — all points I or we have raised repeatedly in the past):

1. Given the slipperiness of defining greatness, the theatre of this discussion is not so much a theatre as a swamp.

2. Trying to settle on a core characteristic of 20^th-c. music is another exercise in nailing Jell-o to the wall;  the temptation to try to do so is part anachronism, part laziness . . . fact is that from the High Baroque (at least) Western music is too rich, interesting and (to use an adjective which will give some here the fantods) diverse, for it to be of much value to settle on iconic musical characteristics for an entire century.

3. That point above is related to Grazioso's query about narrative:  the rich diversity of Western music exploded exponentially in the 20^th century;  so much (and so many different muchnesses) went on, that a list of genuinely important, influential composers cannot be told on one hand.  Even to insist on keeping it to two hands, seems rather Procrustean.

[Florestan]

Perhaps because not taking oneself (too) seriously is a sign of mental health?

Oneself, might be. But one's art? Hardly. The only place where I like clowns is in the circus. 

[karlhenning]

Taking one's art too seriously has been seen in some cases to be quite the aberration.

[Florestan]

Taking one's art too seriously has been seen in some cases to be quite the aberration.

Name three, please. 

[DavidRoss]

Of course, the point is that some of us understand instead that Cage is of great consequence if you look at the output.

Grazioso's post is notably insightful.

My quick back-of-the-envelope input (none of it especially 'new news' — all points I or we have raised repeatedly in the past):

1. Given the slipperiness of defining greatness, the theatre of this discussion is not so much a theatre as a swamp.

2. Trying to settle on a core characteristic of 20^th-c. music is another exercise in nailing Jell-o to the wall;  the temptation to try to do so is part anachronism, part laziness . . . fact is that from the High Baroque (at least) Western music is too rich, interesting and (to use an adjective which will give some here the fantods) diverse, for it to be of much value to settle on iconic musical characteristics for an entire century.

3. That point above is related to Grazioso's query about narrative:  the rich diversity of Western music exploded exponentially in the 20^th century;  so much (and so many different muchnesses) went on, that a list of genuinely important, influential composers cannot be told on one hand.  Even to insist on keeping it to two hands, seems rather Procrustean.

Bravo!

Oneself, might be. But one's art? Hardly. The only place where I like clowns is in the circus. 

Duchamp.

Art is fundamentally a form of play.  Taking it too seriously kills the joyful spirit essential to its vitality.  See Wagner.

[Florestan]

Duchamp.

In spring 2000, Yuan Chai and Jian Jun Xi, two performance artists, who in 1999 had jumped on Tracey Emin's installation-sculpture My Bed in the Turner Prize exhibition at Tate Britain, went to the newly opened Tate Modern and urinated on the Fountain which was on display. However, they were prevented from soiling the sculpture directly by its Perspex case. The Tate, which denied that the duo had succeeded in urinating into the sculpture itself,[16] banned them from the premises stating that they were threatening "works of art and our staff." When asked why they felt they had to add to Duchamp's work, Chai said, "The urinal is there – it's an invitation. As Duchamp said himself, it's the artist's choice. He chooses what is art. We just added to it."

Only too logical. I would do the same, if I had the opportunity.   

Art is fundamentally a form of play. 

As if "greatness" wasn't enough, now we have to define "art". 

[karlhenning]

That's a tall order, but the floor is open for ideas & discussion .. name ones that do.

James invites discussion to which he can simply reply pffff, blah-blah-blah, &c.

ROFL

[Florestan]

James invites discussion to which he can simply reply pffff, blah-blah-blah, &c.

ROFL

+1.

[some guy]

I'm not sure what you're adding with posts like these.

He is reminding you how inutile your dismissive posts are.

And just an aside. Since I'm on the west coast (at least until I leave for Europe next week), many of you are posting merrily away while I'm quietly sleeping. (Who says that I snore? I deny that!) When I get around to firing up the old computer, I have a lot to read. Sometimes it's depressing. Sometimes it's exhilarating.

This morning was the latter. Thanks Grazioso and Apollon (hi Karl) and Leon and DavidRoss and mc ukrneal and petrarch and sid. (Who says I need validation? I deny that!!)

[Grazioso]

In spring 2000, Yuan Chai and Jian Jun Xi, two performance artists, who in 1999 had jumped on Tracey Emin's installation-sculpture My Bed in the Turner Prize exhibition at Tate Britain, went to the newly opened Tate Modern and urinated on the Fountain which was on display. However, they were prevented from soiling the sculpture directly by its Perspex case. The Tate, which denied that the duo had succeeded in urinating into the sculpture itself,[16] banned them from the premises stating that they were threatening "works of art and our staff." When asked why they felt they had to add to Duchamp's work, Chai said, "The urinal is there – it's an invitation. As Duchamp said himself, it's the artist's choice. He chooses what is art. We just added to it."

Reminds me of History of the World Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkz83VFEk1A#t=41s