The Death of Serialism?

[mikkeljs]

I have got a larger view into the very new music which comes from and inspire the composer student by the time. I went to a composer soire few weeks ago, and the program was really mixed and generelly a lot of it was quite tonal and simple. Even the electronic stuff was extremely simple and banal. It was far away from the 60ths and 70ths, and there were no signs left of serialism. The only danish serialist I know is 83 years old.

Serialism is not only a style/technique like 12-tone music, as I see it, but rather an approach to the art. Why is it not trendy to be academical or mathematical anymore?

[btpaul674]

styles, techniques, and trends change.

[Mark]

Is it, perhaps, that Serialism doesn't appeal to the heart in the same, immediate way that more tonal music can?

[karlhenning]

Why is it not trendy to be academical or mathematical anymore?

"Academic," when applied to art, is generally a negative term, denoting an uninspired adherence to a set of rules.

As to "mathematical," well . . . if composition is only a matter of mathematics, then any mathematician who can whistle can be a composer 

[not edward]

Is it, perhaps, that Serialism doesn't appeal to the heart in the same, immediate way that more tonal music can?

I don't think there's any reason why this should be the case (I can think of many serial pieces that do, at least for me).

I think it's more a change of fashion, which isn't to say that there's not good music around that has taken lessons from serialism without using it per se.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Is it, perhaps, that Serialism doesn't appeal to the heart in the same, immediate way that more tonal music can?

Depends on the particular heart.

[gmstudio]

Serialism is not only a style/technique like 12-tone music, as I see it, but rather an approach to the art. Why is it not trendy to be academical or mathematical anymore?

Because 99% of it is extraordinarily unpleasant to the ear.

[mikkeljs]

styles, techniques, and trends change.

But generel serialism... I think is different from other trends. It´s more like a certain religion or philosofi, that matches the whole western culture.

it helped open new pathways and was something that was bound to happen and absolutely needed to be done...it's old news now, and was fully exploited by Webern & others... it's been assimilated into the musical lexicon...

But that was an early state, I think. The later princip of counting every parameters in rows, that doesn´t have to be 12-tone rows, does reflect a way of thinking that goes beyond style and aesthetics...

[Mark]

Depends on the particular heart.

Quite so. This heart is accustomed to, if not in love with, some Serialist music. Many hearts aren't ...

[c#minor]

Serialism has many "conventions" such as species counterpoint, though that is not the best example. Some say that serialism was taken as far is ever was going to go. At least that what i was taught. I may be wrong, some teachers are not always right.

[Kullervo]

Serialism has many "conventions" such as species counterpoint

Of course, invented by that ascetic serialist, Joseph Johann Fux.

[c#minor]

No way, wow i never knew Fux was a serialist. Interesting stuff.

[lisa needs braces]

Because 99% of it is extraordinarily unpleasant to the ear.

This man speaks truth.

Though some people will say, "not to my ear, it doesn't!"

But consider how often it's the case that such works get programmed on an "affirmative action" basis--sandwiched between Brahms and Beethoven so the audience has no choice but to endure it.

[Haffner]

Wasn't there a noted serial/12-tone composer whom on his death bed recently underwent profound regret in regard to his work?

[Robert Dahm]

There's a lot of bad serial music, to be sure, and I think that it tends to give the good stuff a bad name.

The type of 'affirmative action' type situation that -abe- mentions is the worst way to programme this music. I once attended a sublime concert given by countertenor Christopher Field, with associate artists Samantha Cohen (theorbo) and Geoffrey Morris (guitar). On the whole this was one of the finest concert experiences of my life, and the programme took account of a range of lyrical, transcendent repertoire ranging from Dowland, through Copland, and on to Finnissy. Sandwiched in the middle of the programme, however, was a solo guitar piece by Elliott Carter. Now, I love Carter, and this piece was really good, but it was completely inappropriate to the context, and the entire audience suddenly got very fidgety.

I don't think serial music is dead, but it has evolved somewhat. Many composers (including myself) 'serialise' certain paramaters of their music, but to extremely varying degrees of rigorousness. On the other hand, I think there are very few composers using anything like what Schoenberg would have regarded as a tone row.

The problem that serialism ran into was, in my opinion, the problem of tradition. The great serial works (both 'Schoenbergian' and 'integral') are great not because of serialism itself, but because they were composed by 'good composers' who were entrenched in the Western European tradition (despite, in some cases, actively trying to negate that tradition). There is, therefore, a kind of innate musicality in these works that allows them to be great. On the other hand, during the late 50's and 60's a generation of composers came to maturity who did not speak the musical languages of the past with the same degree of fluency. The musicality is not so innate in their music. I think this was particularly the case with the American serialists.

Serialism did, however, pave the way for some musical developments that seem to me altogether more exciting. The innovations of Xenakis or Lachenmann, for example, would be unthinkable without the democratisation of pitch offered by serial practices.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

This man speaks truth.

Though some people will say, "not to my ear, it doesn't!"

But consider how often it's the case that such works get programmed on an "affirmative action" basis--sandwiched between Brahms and Beethoven so the audience has no choice but to endure it.

You really think this is any kind of gauge for determining quality music? What the suits dole out to the mainstream public?

[c#minor]

I can't stand serialism, to me it sound as if random sounds have been put together. But i realize there has to be some validity to it, it couldn't have gained the popularity it has.

[MahlerSnob]

First of all, let me get this misconception out of the way: serialism is NOT a style. It is a technique and only a technique, just as 16th, 17th, or 18th century counterpoint is a technique and only a technique. The good or bad qualities of a piece written with serial technique should be attributed to the composer and not to serialism.
Second, this birth/death analogy for musical techniques and harmonic systems (tonality, serialism, minimalism, etc.) is fundamentally flawed, for these things are not born and they do not die: they evolve. Serialism emerged, quite logically, from Wagnerian chromaticism. Since the 1970's and 80's serialism has evolved into what is called set theory, in which composers use smaller groups of notes (usually 3-6) to compose. Sets can be manipulated in all of the same ways as 12 tone rows, but have more transpositional possibilities.

[eyeresist]

Maybe some composers would like people to listen to their music? I'm still waiting for someone to have the courage to just write a good tune.

[Robert Dahm]

Maybe some composers would like people to listen to their music? I'm still waiting for someone to have the courage to just write a good tune.

I'm sure every composer wants people to listen to their music. But the key word here is 'their'. A composer should express themselves in the language with which it seems least contrived. There's a (necessary, I think) tendency when starting out as a composer to imitate other composers whose work you respect, but one certainly shouldn't write music that some percieved 'audience' might like, for that reason alone.

For many (good) composers, I think, the experience of creating music is significantly more elemental than 'writing something that I (the composer) want to listen to'. I think the act of composition is the act of exploring the implications of a burning musical question. The nature of music is that no 'answers' exist, per se, so the exploration of 'questions' is invariably an interraction with the incomprehensible and the sublime.

If that makes any sense.