Composers who are entering the pantheon/standard repertoire

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Is this really the case? It seems to me (and I've heard the same complaint from those who have followed Schnittke's music from his first exposure in the West) that Schnittke's popularity fell drastically after his death.

I'm going by my personal experience, mainly in Prague and Moscow in the last decade or so. Come to think of it, I can't recall many American performances of Schnittke. Maybe that ties into your point about variations in programming between countries.

[some guy]

sinking from view

Ah, if only it could be true!

under the likes of the everything-by-everyone-and-his-dog-is-equal

OK, I acknowledge that there may indeed be some people who think this way. But I hasten to the point out that I only see this view articulated by people who do not hold it. That is, it only appears in the context of "this is what those people think about things."

As possibly one of those people, I would like to affirm that I, at the very least, do not think everything is equal. Nor far as I know do any of my fellows who question the utility of "the repertoire" (not "repertory," Sean--one is not the less snooty version of the other; they do point to different things) think that everything is equal.

The point, if it's not too fine a point, is that the whole concept of equality is flawed. Or rather, the concept of ranking. Not a very popular position to take on GMG, but "oh well."

We, or to keep it strictly accurate--I, are not saying that everything is equal. What I am saying is that it is possible and even desirable to look at each thing for what it is itself. Or, more to the point, it is possible and even desirable to see that each thing is potentially part of a dynamic relationship with a human person. And the relationship is the real thing.

The cliche that beauty is in the eye of the beholder is a much used distortion of that truth. Beauty is neither in the thing NOR in the eye (or ear) but in the dynamic relationship between the two.

That is, apparently, a frightening or at least an aggravating notion for a lot of people. Gone is the security, the safety, of a fixed reality, independent of any observers. Gone, too, is the special clique of cognescenti who see the fixed reality more clearly and more accurately than anyone else (truly the most pernicious of illusions).* Gone, in short, is the static reality. In its place is the real reality, which is dynamic. And dynamic is not something that stays the same for all the ages.

"Dynamic, static, dynamic, static, dynamic, static."

"Static, please."

"Too bad."

*This reality, which is independent of observers, is only truly understood by this observer, me. It is what it is, independent of me, but I am the only one (or one of the select few) who sees it for what it is. Cake and eat it too, boy howdy.

[Karl Henning]

C'mon, dude, who's your favorite unsung 21^st-c. composer!!!

[Karl Henning]

I'm going by my personal experience, mainly in Prague and Moscow in the last decade or so. Come to think of it, I can't recall many American performances of Schnittke. Maybe that ties into your point about variations in programming between countries.

Could argue that it was Kremer's guest appearance here in Boston which drove the programming of the Cto grosso № 5. (I think it was № 5 . . . .)

[not edward]

Could argue that it was Kremer's guest appearance here in Boston which drove the programming of the Cto grosso № 5. (I think it was № 5 . . . .)

Would make sense as it is a violin concerto in all but name and was written for Kremer.

It doesn't seem to have had a particularly good press, and I'm not sure who else (if anyone) has taken it up.

[mc ukrneal]

Oh dear! Why does every thread I start have to bring about a debate on the meaning of a word!

No offense, but why can't you explain yourself better? If you want members to participate, shouldn't there be some sort of common understanding of what is being asked? If you look at a top 100 list  (for example, this one: http://www.digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best-classic-comp.html, and not implying this ordering is correct), where is the cutoff? Top 10? Top 25? Top 50? All 100?  How can you and I have a discourse (let alone all of us) if we don't understand each other's point of reference? Is the pantheon a group that is historically important? Most influential? Most popular? Personal favorites? All of the above? Or is it a hall of fame? Or perhaps you mean a personal pantheon unique to each of us?

On the other hand, there is a physical pantheon of sorts already in existence (and perhaps more than one - the Budapest opera has busts all over the top of the outside of the building come to think of it). But I was thinking of the old opera in Paris, where there are statues/busts of some of the most famous composers that lived all around the building. Are you perhaps asking what other busts should be added to those already there? 

Or perhaps you are asking something else and I have not quite grasped that, in which case an explanation would reveal that too.

[kyjo]

Offering my own definition (if I even have one) would just lead to more debate, which I most certainly do not want. I think we better get back on topic and debate suggestions given by members rather than the meaning of the word "pantheon".

[vandermolen]

I don't know about "entering the pantheon" but I've noticed some upticks.

Among more recent composers, Lutoslawski, Ligeti, Messiaen and Schnittke seem to be holding steady, and even increasing their performances. Ligeti's piano etudes in particular are almost standard rep now.

Martinu is getting played more, and recorded more too, than he was only a couple of decades ago.

Also, this may just be a regional thing, but I've noticed that British composers are getting a lot more exposure in the US than they used to. (I'm hearing Walton Sym. #1 this Saturday in fact.)

That's very exciting about the Walton - hope you enjoy it. One of my favourite works.

[some guy]

C'mon, dude, who's your favorite unsung 21^st-c. composer!!!

This made me laugh out loud at four minutes to midnight, waking my cat, but hopefully none of my neighbors.

[some guy]

Adjectives are great, aren't they?

You need a little discreet poison for your well, some time? Just drop in a wee adjective there. You won't even have to argue the point, really. The adjective's already there, already done its damage.

Just remember, a little poison goes a long ways.

[jochanaan]

...Gone is the security, the safety, of a fixed reality, independent of any observers. Gone, too, is the special clique of cognescenti who see the fixed reality more clearly and more accurately than anyone else (truly the most pernicious of illusions).* Gone, in short, is the static reality. In its place is the real reality, which is dynamic...

Did "the static reality" ever really exist?  Even on Fifties television?

Composers' popularities are always growing and decreasing, a sort of crescendo and diminuendo of reputations.  In many early 20th-century music-appreciation books, Rimsky-Korsakov was ranked above Tchaikovsky for quality and popularity; but now very few people would rank Peter Ilyich lower than Nikolai.  Eighty years ago very few in this country would even have heard of Bruckner and Mahler, but look where their music is now!  So the "pantheon" is always experiencing addition and subtraction.

[DavidW]

I think that we should throw the pantheon part in the dumpster, and just focus on who is being performed a lot more than they used to?  Looking at Kyjo's post I think that is really what he wanted to talk about.

[amw]

As usual Sean makes no sense...

I used to think that too, but the more I read from him, the more sense he started to make. Turns out he's just a sociopath.

(Luckily he seems to be a fairly benign sociopath, he hasn't killed or raped anyone I'm aware of, but his complete disdain and lack of empathy for his fellow human beings disturbs me enough that I prefer not to read his posts.)

I think that we should throw the pantheon part in the dumpster, and just focus on who is being performed a lot more than they used to?  Looking at Kyjo's post I think that is really what he wanted to talk about.

That's what I've been doing more or less the whole time. It's obviously easy to argue about the definition of the "standard repertoire", and I don't believe there is just one "standard repertoire" for that matter—e.g. the big orchestras have one standard rep of Beethoven, Brahms, Mahler, etc, the opera houses have another standard rep of Verdi, Puccini, Wagner, etc, the new-music ensembles have their Schoenberg-Webern-Boulez-Xenakis-etc pantheon, pianists have Alkan and Medtner and Liszt and now possibly Sorabji, unsung-masterpieces alternative-musicology people on internet forums have Braga Santos and Brian and Atterberg and Langgaard and so forth (I never see any of them complaining about the undeserved neglect in which, say, Jean-Pierre Guézec or Ruth Crawford Seeger languish ) and so on ad infinitum. And all of these niche repertoires are not a result of fragmenting in the 60s or whatever but have always, more or less, been around, as well as the national differences someone pointed out above (even in the 18th or 19th century you'd hear very different things in London than in Leipzig or St Petersburg). Which makes any debate about the definition a bit pointless.

Actually, another new repertoire addition might be non-symphonic, non-string quartet Haydn; there seems to have been a massive explosion of interest in the sonatas, trios, concertos, divertimenti, masses, etc (plus the earlier symphonies and quartets; previously one would rarely find anything earlier than Op. 33 or the "Paris" sets) in the last 20 years or so. Perhaps it goes back further than that and I just haven't been paying attention. There does seem to be much more Haydn around than there used to be though.

[relm1]

A few composers who seem to have increasingly more performances are Einojuhani Rautavaara (especially the arctic bird piece and violin concerto), Jennifer higdon(she's actually becoming quite popular in concert programming), Thomas Ades, and Charles Ives. 

[some guy]

Did "the static reality" ever really exist?

Bingo!!

[kyjo]

I think that we should throw the pantheon part in the dumpster, and just focus on who is being performed a lot more than they used to?  Looking at Kyjo's post I think that is really what he wanted to talk about.

You are totally right, David! I should've never included that "pantheon" part in the first place. Gosh, I gotta be so careful around here!

[kyjo]

A few composers who seem to have increasingly more performances are Einojuhani Rautavaara (especially the arctic bird piece and violin concerto), Jennifer higdon(she's actually becoming quite popular in concert programming), Thomas Ades, and Charles Ives.

Thank you, once again, for adhering to the topic of this thread

[some guy]

Gosh, I gotta be so careful around here!

You are otherwise ordinarily careless? In your personal relations? In your job?

Just by the way, getting rid of "pantheon" but leaving "standard repertoire" intact is to do exactly nothing.

Careless!!

Here's something worth trying: listen to everything. Ignore what other people have said or are saying about what you're listening to. You have two ears. Use 'em! Now, did you have some good experiences with some of that "everything"? Let us know about it, why not? We like music, too.

Anyway, just a thought.

Someone I've found who repays repeated listenings but who does not get many performances (any performances?) outside Europe is Luc Ferrari. Amazingly diverse output, too. Acoustic, electroacoustic, mixed. Written out works, improvisation, works assembled from field recordings (assembled so as to create the illusion of simply turning the mic on--his Presque rien series is an obvious nod to Cage). Some stuff of his I find really tacky and annoying, too. Which means he was doing exactly what he should have been doing, creating what he wanted to create without thinking about what I would like or not. After all, we never met. (Though I did see him in the lobby at a show once. And my oldest son went up to him and said, "Hey! You're Luc Ferrari!" Which made him grin.)

I also get a lot out of Francisco Lopez's music. And that is quite a lot in more ways than one, as Lopez has put out a lot of music. Also a lot of diversity. Or at least, every time I try to describe him to someone, I find myself saying saying, "oh but then there's..." over and over again. Kairos, which doesn't usually present Lopez's kind of music, has put out a five CD set of it, which is as good a place as any to start, I suppose.

[Gurn Blanston]

I have cleaned up this thread a bit, I expect that Sean won't be posting in it any longer in the interest of maintaining good relations with the group. If he were to be that injudicious, I would expect the grownups among us to have the good sense to ignore and carry on.

Gurn

[some guy]

Wait a minute! Are you saying that there are grownups among us?

What?

(That changes everything....)