Composing "past is prologue?"

[Szykneij]

Would it be possible for a "classical" composer of today to become relevant without training and/or knowledge of traditional theory and harmony? Would his music, regardless of what form it takes, be deemed worthy of consideration if he was unfamiliar with the elements of, say, the baroque and classical styles? I'm sure Glass, Carter, Stockhausen, Part, Xenakis, and Schnittke could all turn out a nifty little chorale or minuet if they wanted to, and the reason we even know the name "John Cage" is because of his formal training (including studies with Cowell and Schoenberg) that gave cachet to his non-traditional works. Programs of studies for composition majors still include a heavy concentration of music from past eras, although the ultimate goal is not to become a composer of  that style of music. So, could a contemporary composer succeed in today's classical world without a traditional foundation? Are there any current composers that are?

[Mirror Image]

If I was going to be a composer, which I have a very high interest in becoming, I would probably find a good teacher and study with them for a few years until I get the basics of music composition under my belt. If the teacher thinks I need further instruction, then I would find another composition teacher. I prefer to study privately than be in a class with other students. I feel I can get more out of a one-on-one situation.

I don't think a person can just start composing without some kind of training. There's so much that goes into composing a piece of music that I think going in blindly would result in a piece of music so full of errors in terms of notation that other musicians couldn't even play it (i. e. GMG's infamous troll, Saul).

[PaulSC]

Would it be possible for a "classical" composer of today to become relevant without training and/or knowledge of traditional theory and harmony? Would his music, regardless of what form it takes, be deemed worthy of consideration if he was unfamiliar with the elements of, say, the baroque and classical styles? I'm sure Glass, Carter, Stockhausen, Part, Xenakis, and Schnittke could all turn out a nifty little chorale or minuet if they wanted to, and the reason we even know the name "John Cage" is because of his formal training (including studies with Cowell and Schoenberg) that gave cachet to his non-traditional works. Programs of studies for composition majors still include a heavy concentration of music from past eras, although the ultimate goal is not to become a composer of  that style of music. So, could a contemporary composer succeed in today's classical world without a traditional foundation? Are there any current composers that are?

Xenakis himself profess to have very little grounding in "common-practice" tonality and traditional musicianship; he might be the best example of the type you're talking about. I think some of the musique concrète composers also fit this model, although you'd have to dig through biographies to work out which ones.

[Grazioso]

If there were such a beast, I think he or she would find it hard a) learning the craft without recourse to all the foundations established over previous centuries and b) being taken seriously in a fundamentally conservative and academic artistic milieu. So-called "primitives" in the arts are usually relegated to their own special ghetto, if that. Classical music in particular is built around a veneration for (obsession with?) the past and around pedagogical formalities and lineages (we're always told that "Composer X studied counterpoint under Professor Y at the Hochschule for Very, Very Hoch Musik. Violinist A took master classes with renowned violinist B.").