theatrical music (wrong music)

[zamyrabyrd]

What does a descending minor third express?

Good question. Depends on context presumably.

ZB

[karlhenning]

Might you have this the wrong way round?

No; Stravinsky, Dyagilev and Benois conferred extensively about the scenario while Stravinsky was composing most of the ballet.

[(poco) Sforzando]

No; Stravinsky, Dyagilev and Benois conferred extensively about the scenario while Stravinsky was composing most of the ballet.

Thank you, Mr. Henning. To amplify: it is not invariable in ballet collaborations whether the composer or choreographer has the upper hand - in Sleeping Beauty, Petipa more or less dictated the form and shape of each number to Tchaikovsky; conversely, Prokofiev would change nothing in The Prodigal Son to accommodate the young Balanchine; but in most of their life-long collaborative careers, Stravinsky and Balanchine on the third hand were virtually equal partners with enormous mutual respect.

Regarding Petrouchka, Diaghliev was the impresario, Benois the designer, and Fokine the choreographer, with Benois and Stravinsky responsible for the story. The music was conceived to illuminate the scenario, not the opposite. There are any number of abrupt little musical gestures in Petrouchka that may not exhibit much coherence musically, but every one specifically illuminates an action or expression in the story. The very ending, the famous passage for the trumpets in tritones where Petrouchka's ghost re-appears to frighten the Charlatan, is the most obvious example. And the score includes extensive annotations to explain what parts of the story are represented by each musical passage.

The real question for me is how accurately Fokine's original choreography has been preserved and transmitted, for dance is the most ephemeral of art forms, with many works not captured in dance notation or film.

[karlhenning]

Sforz's remarks are entirely to the point.

Parenthetically I'll add that, in the case of just one of the four scenes, the music was to some degree conceived before there was even the idea of the ballet.

Stravinsky already had the germ of the idea for Le sacre (his dream of the chosen girl dancing herself to death).  After L'oiseau de feu, as a musical contrast, he started to write a concert-piece for piano and orchestra.  He played those sketches for Dyagilev (including the mercurial "Petrushka chord"), and a conversation was set in motion which resulted in plans for a new ballet.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Sforz's remarks are entirely to the point.

Parenthetically I'll add that, in the case of just one of the four scenes, the music was to some degree conceived before there was even the idea of the ballet.

Stravinsky already had the germ of the idea for Le sacre (his dream of the chosen girl dancing herself to death).  After L'oiseau de feu, as a musical contrast, he started to write a concert-piece for piano and orchestra.  He played those sketches for Dyagilev (including the mercurial "Petrushka chord"), and a conversation was set in motion which resulted in plans for a new ballet.

Sure. And I have no doubt that if Petrouchka had remained a piano concerto, it would be a very different work musically from the ballet score we know today.

[karlhenning]

Sure. And I have no doubt that if Petrouchka had remained a piano concerto, it would be a very different work musically from the ballet score we know today.

Indeed.

Offhand I am not certain;  but I suspect that that scene was some distance from complete at the time of that initial sharing with his cousin Dyagilev.

[eyeresist]

And the score includes extensive annotations to explain what parts of the story are represented by each musical passage.

Enlightening, thanks. I wonder how many ballets include what level of stage detail appended to the scores?

[Henk]

The point is that music is NOT subordinate to other things. Programs are just a needless distraction and often a mere way to window dress music that is entirely devoid of true content or meaning. Liszt does this often, and the biggest proponents of programmatic music are usually the most shallow and superficial.

I'm not talking about programmatic music, but theatrical music. This may be a subset of programmatic music. I think music can express something different, but should not represent theatre. The latter is the case with theatrical music. Wagner's use of the Leitmotiv is a simple example of how music becomes theatrical. With the Leitmotiv it's a trick, but listen to Kagel. It's interesting music, but it's not real music anymore, because it represents theatre so music is raped. It really has become a musical genre, van der Aa is a dutch composer making theatrical music, Nono also was one I think. Music is made subordinate to theatre. It really makes me sick. I thought it was the same with Ligeti, but his VC is different. It also expresses something, I don't know what, but it's not representing theatre. In spite Ligeti wrote also more theatrical music, I can't understand why such a great composer does that and why a great conductor as Reinbert de Leeuw conducts theatrical music.

[Henk]

Henk,

The man in your avatar (Handel) spent his whole life composing theatrical music: 42 operas, 29 oratorios. If you think his music is "wrong" music, why do use him as your avatar?

As you know, many other composers have devoted their careers to theatrical music; in many cases they worked exclusively in theatrical forms. Do you think Mozart, Donizetti, Rossini, Verdi, Janacek and Berg wrote "wrong music"?

Unless you plan on disavowing opera altogether, you have to admit the validity of writing "in a theatrical way". One can debate the merits of writing concert music "in a theatrical way", but for an opera composer, anything not written in a theatrical way is most defintely "wrong music".

Theatre is something different then opera. I talk about theatrical music in the sense that this music represents theatre. Music doesn't add anything to what's happening, I feel really sad about that, the only thing is that you hear also music. With Kagel there is even nothing to see anymore, because he composed not for a (theatrical) play but only composed theatrical music, music has replaced theatre. Music totally lost it's "function".

[Henk]

Yes, I can think of lots of ways to describe Bruckner's music, but programmatic or story-driven is not one of them.  I suppose you could argue that the way he generally structures a symphony, how he interweaves and returns to themes and uses the connections to build tension, is in some ways analagous to constructing a novel, with the rising and falling action of a plot and interconnecting themes and the like; but that's far from making the case that Bruckner's 4th, say, has an actual story or a specific physical event that it describes, like program music.  I don't see that at all.

I agree with this.

[Henk]

Read the rest of my sentence and I think you'll find that it's clear enough.

And all this business about music being "subordinate" in opera or program music is, to put it bluntly, nonsense.

I never said that.

[Henk]

True, the music at times may take a back seat to the action, but by no means all the time; and in doing so it becomes part of a whole that is even greater than itself.  And there are moments in every great opera (and most not-so-great ones) where the music takes center stage and becomes "absolute music" for a time.

I totally agree with this.

[orbital]

Music is made subordinate to theatre. It really makes me sick.

Music, often times, also is (and has been) subordinate to money  What do you think about that?

(I am guilty of sidetracking topics lately, so feel free to not answer  )

[Henk]

You might consider, though, that if one listener finds the ending of Shostakovich's 5th to be triumphant, and another finds it tragic, is one right and the other wrong? If the expression is somehow encoded in the music then both listeners cannot be right. But supposing that music cannot, as Stravinsky says, express anything? Then we have to conclude that the expressive quality of the Shostakovich 5th originated in the minds of the two listeners. In that case music, is not a transmitter of emotion but a provoker of emtional reactions. The emotion that the listeners feel is not an illusion, but the perception that the emotion comes from the music itself is an illusion.

The great composers, Stravinksy included, are masters of illusion.

Great post! Ok, music doesn't express even emotions. Let's see it from the side of performing. You only can say if it's slow, fast, quiet, loud: technical terms, terms performers work with. If you say to a performer that he has to make it sound for example tragic, he doesn't know how to do that. The expression of a conductor are not expressions of emotions but he gets thrilled by the music. When he gets emotions he doesn't know his profession.

[Henk]

I've noticed something on this thread: Several of those defending program music's validity have extensive performing and teaching experience, such as zamyrabyrd, M forever, and I.  (Although Mark Simon and karlhenning haven't weighed in, I know where they stand.)  Josquin and Henk, what is your experience?  Have you ever played in an orchestra?  School band?  Have you taught in schools or privately?  Have you studied music at the college/university level?

Just curious.

You're not "just curious" as I understand, but I have less experience then you. But read my last posts please, it may clarify some things.

[Henk]

Music, often times, also is (and has been) subordinate to money  What do you think about that?

(I am guilty of sidetracking topics lately, so feel free to not answer  )

So am I.

[DavidRoss]

Some of my favorite pieces were written as incidental music for the theatre.  I suppose they serve that function reasonably well, however, they also work very well just as music.  I don't see how having an underlying program, say, expressing the feelings aroused by a character or incidents on stage, determines the quality of the resulting music, any more than the underlying program of Beethoven's 3rd symphony.

[Henk]

Some of my favorite pieces were written as incidental music for the theatre.  I suppose they serve that function reasonably well, however, they also work very well just as music.  I don't see how having an underlying program, say, expressing the feelings aroused by a character or incidents on stage, determines the quality of the resulting music, any more than the underlying program of Beethoven's 3rd symphony.

I think I don't mean with theatrical music, all music that's made for theatre. I mean a certain kind of music, with represents theatre. Which is in a certain way theatre itself. It's a bit odd form of music, almost scary.

[karlhenning]

Some of my favorite pieces were written as incidental music for the theatre.

And, incidentally, I listened earlier this morning to Shostakovich's incidental music for King Lear . . . .

[Mark G. Simon]

I think I don't mean with theatrical music, all music that's made for theatre. I mean a certain kind of music, with represents theatre. Which is in a certain way theatre itself. It's a bit odd form of music, almost scary.

Reading all of your latest responses, it is clear that the problem is that none of us has the slightest idea of what you're talking about. If you're not talking about opera or incidental music, or even program music, what on earth are you talking about? What is this music which "represents theatre" and what distinguishes it from music which doesn't represent theatre?