If There Isn't At Least One, Why Not?

[longears]

  That comment is uncalled for.

Not everyone here is as gentlemanly as you, Marvin.  Another poster "called for it" when he referred to my earlier comments as "Wagner bashing" and then further impugned my character and motives for posting.

[Catison]

Wagner strikes again?  Now someone bring up 4'33" and the circle will be complete.

Oops.

[EmpNapoleon]

Not everyone here is as gentlemanly as you, Marvin.  Another poster "called for it" when he referred to my earlier comments as "Wagner bashing" and then further impugned my character and motives for posting.

This was your Wagner bashing: "As for opera, even if we stretch the category to include Wagner's set pieces, he's not even a patch on Mozart, nor, for that matter, on Verdi, Puccini, Rossini, or Strauss.  Of course, not suffering from narcissistic grandiosity, they had the good sense to work with librettists who knew a thing or two about drama, thus produced entertaining works that sparkle with wit and humanity, rather than turgid, stillborn, pretentious monuments to one sad little man's vanity (but he was a genius at self-promotion, I'll sure grant him that!)."

I hope this Wagner bashing feels good.  Does it calm your vanity and increase your self-promotion?

[longears]

Wagner bashing?    I think the comments about his personality are incontrovertible, and the linkage between his character flaws and the flaws in his art seems obvious.   

[Saul]

In the hope of distracting certain people from creeping Pink-Harpism on another topic, allow me to ask the following question:

Who is the THE leading contemporary composer today?

(The answer is NOT Elgar!)

In the later 19th century of course Wagner was #1, even the anti-Wagnerians had to admit that.  Before him no doubt it was Beethoven.

In the last century, there were 2 who held sway for several decades: Schoenberg and Stravinsky.  Perhaps Shostakovich nudged them aside in the 1950's.

Do they have counterparts today?  If not, why not?

I recall when the classical music world waited with excitement for the latest musical statement from Stravinsky and Shostakovich.

For whose work do we wait with excitement today?

In no particular order I offer these nominees: feel free to add your own!

Penderecki, Stockhausen, Glass, Adams, Henze, Valentin Silvestrov, Lowell Liebermann, Aho, Saariaho, Pärt, Rutter...?

(Fill in your nominee!)

And if not one of these qualifies, why not?  Is the classical musical world too fragmented to have one reigning light showing the way?  Too many "-isms" (Minimalism, Neo-Medievalism, Neo-Romanticism) or too many hyper-individualized styles (Stockhausen)?

Bilbo Baggins.

This hobbit wrote some great music...

[RebLem]

Osvaldo Golijov.

[val]

Regarding the last 30 years, I think that the greatest composer is DUTILLEUX. His 2nd Symphony, the cello and the violin concertos and above all the extraordinary string quartet are among the most inspired works of the 20th century.

After Dutilleux I would refer BOULEZ (Pli selon Pli, Le Marteau sans Maitre, Rituel), BERIO (Coro, Sinfonia), NONO (Il Canto Sospeso, Como una ola de fuerza y luz, string quartet an Diotima).

[Cato]

Regarding the last 30 years, I think that the greatest composer is DUTILLEUX. His 2nd Symphony, the cello and the violin concertos and above all the extraordinary string quartet are among the most inspired works of the 20th century.

After Dutilleux I would refer BOULEZ (Pli selon Pli, Le Marteau sans Maitre, Rituel), BERIO (Coro, Sinfonia), NONO (Il Canto Sospeso, Como una ola de fuerza y luz, string quartet an Diotima).

Dutilleux is an interesting choice, but again I wonder about the criteria of influence or at least consensus.  Is he blazing a path where others are following, and then blazing their own paths?  (cf. Schoenberg, Berg, Webern or Wagner, Strauss, Mahler).

One would think that it should be Boulez, but I fear, like with Bernstein, he will remain a might-have-been.

Certainly 50 years ago Boulez had a chance of being perhaps the first influential composer/conductor since Mahler.

What happened?  No great, famous audience pleaser was composed, too much time given to conducting and recording, etc....?

Or will compositions by Boulez be experiencing a resurrection    0:)    of interest?

Or perhaps the man has a few more desk-hidden compositions waiting to shake our ears and souls (cf. Explosante-fixe), and they will establish his reputation as #1 non pareil.     

[karlhenning]

I don't think anyone after LvB has matched his achievement . . . . 

Of course not; every great composer's oeuvre is sui generis, partly because no two composers work in quite the same "field."

There have been many great composers since Beethoven; but no, no one has 'matched his achievement'.

[Mystery]

Apart from the fact he's dead, Howells. Fantastic Requiem.

[Cato]

A reference to Herbert Howells:

http://www.fasindy.org/Programs/ChoralColors/Howells.html

Amazon lists a good number of recordings, including a CHANDOS release with assorted orchestral works, and a CD with 2 piano concerti.

Howells died in the 1980's: his music seems to be in the tradition of Ralph Vaughan Williams.

[Maciek]

I only bumped into this interesting thread today. And it isn't without a bit of merriment that I contemplate its final outcome: the last man standing turned out to be Herbert Howells...

[Cato]

I wonder if the musical world might be so fragmented today, that finding a handful of leading composers, or even just one, has become impossible.

For example, what would a composer who leans toward e.g. Boulezianism      directly find in Lauridsen or Pärt ?

On the other hand, an eclectic type would not find any contradictions!   0:)

[Teresa]

Cato,

Funny how most of these composers of today are either minimalists or avant-gardists.  I mean, where's the heavy-hitting Romantic composers of today?  There's Atterberg but he doesn't have the depth.  He's good though. 

There really isn't another great Heavy hitter after Shostakovich.  We don't need 'concept' experiments anymore.  That was done already throughout the 1900's and hit the climax at 4"33''.  What's next after absolute silence?  Back to music, that's what!

Quit making noise and actually do something 

Is this what we have to look forward to?? :

Penderecki, Stockhausen, Glass, Adams, Henze, Valentin Silvestrov, Lowell Liebermann, Aho, Saariaho, Pärt, Rutter

Come on... 

There are lots of living neo-romantic, neo-classical and neo-modern living composers.  My biases first, I don't like minimalism or avant-garde.  I like basically tonal music, although it can use dissonance as a device to create excitement as Bartok and Stravinsky have done, however I don't like clashing ugly atonal music.   

Here are my favorite living Classical composers (mostly neo-romantic)
DAUGHERTY, MICHAEL (1954-
DAVIES, SIR PETER MAXWELL (1934-
ELFMAN. DANNY (1953-
GANDOLFI, MICHAEL (1956-
HÖGBERG, FREDRIK (1971-
LINDBERG, CHRISTIAN (1958-
MacMILLAN, JAMES (1959-
MEIJ, JOHAN DE (1953-
NELSON, RON (1929-
THEOFANIDIS, CHRISTOPHER (1967-
ZABEL, FRANK (1968-

And here is my nomination of the finest living Classical Composer:
HIGDON, JENNIFER (1962-

[karlhenning]

My work here has not even begun . . . .

[Sergeant Rock]

And here is my nomination of the finest living Classical Composer:
HIGDON, JENNIFER (1962-

Hurwitz has this to say:

"Jennifer Higdon's lively allegros and poetic slow movements, modern in conception and technique yet approachable and not afraid of a good tune now and then, strikes me as some of the best work being done on the contemporary music scene."

I've ordered the Telarc recording of her Concerto for Orchestra. Thanks for bringing this composer to my attention.

Sarge

[Cato]

For a discography of Jennifer Higdon nominated by Teresa above:

www.jenniferhigdon.com

Thank heavens her name is not Tiffany or Amber or something else "inappropriate" for a composer!  

As for composers named "Danny" or "Ron" ...  

Maybe I will start a new topic on composer's names!

[karlhenning]

Hurwitz has this to say:

"Jennifer Higdon's lively allegros and poetic slow movements, modern in conception and technique yet approachable and not afraid of a good tune now and then, strikes me as some of the best work being done on the contemporary music scene."

I do professionally detest the snide undertone encoded in and not afraid of a good tune now and then. Which, of course, is a remark on Hurwitz, and not at all on the composer.

[Josquin des Prez]

Osvaldo Golijov.

Boring.

[Sergeant Rock]

I do professionally detest the snide undertone encoded in and not afraid of a good tune now and then. Which, of course, is a remark on Hurwitz, and not at all on the composer.

Well, I know Hurwitz's views on much of the music of the last half century, so that kind of remark doesn't register with me. I think it's as ignorant as Cuddles recent remark that Strauss's Salome has no memorable melodies or tunes. You just have to laugh 

Sarge