https://www.youtube.com/v/pdeckwHGoog
https://www.youtube.com/v/UfxQDoLC7H8
In the 1970s Julius Eastman used his music to promote gay sensibility in a militant way, famously offending John Cage in a performance of the Song Books, and also in his Gay Guerilla above. His address at Northwestern university seems to me to be very inspiring -- I mean when he's talking about niggers and guerillas.
https://www.youtube.com/v/E2XtFZMpwm0
Are there any other composers who are exploring queerness through their music?
Forgive the ignorance of an old guy, but are "queer" and "gay" exact equivalents?
Yes
Maybe this thread will prompt me to finally get round to seriously exploring The History of Photography in Sound. Here is Seventeen Homosexual Poets.
https://www.youtube.com/v/SNFuyCJLAC4
and there's an interesting discussion of the Gershwin Arrangements here
https://britishmusiccollection.org.uk/article/50-things-michael-finnissys-gershwin-arrangements
(It appears that there are now three recordings of the complete Gershwin Arrangements, Nicholas Hodges, Dirk Henton and Ian Pace.)
Quote from: J on October 30, 2019, 10:12:14 AM
Forgive the ignorance of an old guy, but are "queer" and "gay" exact equivalents?
No. Queer is quite offensive. So is using the n-word.
My interest in this started after a discussion about Eastman with a composer. He said that he thought that Eastman's music was prescient of a significant trend in contemporary music, a quasi romantic trend where the composer's work is not only informed by the beliefs and values and passions which constitute his identity, but also militates for them.
When I asked for contemporary composers who use their music to militate for queerness, I didn't get a clear answer. I was pleased to be reminded this morning that Finnissy talks in militant terms though.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 05:49:19 AM
No. Queer is quite offensive. So is using the n-word.
No, on the contrary, but let's not let this turn this into a semantic thread, I'll answer you straight away in Cato's Grammar Grumble.
Not sure this quite qualifies, but since you mentioned Finnissy, it's a longtime fave. Cover is by director Derek Jarman, of his AIDS-blinded corneas.
And the piece is fantastic.
[Asin]B00008H2LY[/asin]
--Bruce
Quote from: Mandryka on October 31, 2019, 07:47:04 AM
My interest in this started after a discussion about Eastman with a composer. He said that he thought that Eastman's music was prescient of a significant trend in contemporary music, a quasi romantic trend where the composer's work is not only informed by the beliefs and values and passions which constitute his identity, but also militates for them.
When I asked for contemporary composers who use their music to militate for queerness, I didn't get a clear answer. I was pleased to be reminded this morning that Finnissy talks in militant terms though.
I will ask a fundamental question: how does one militate for queerness (or, more generally, for x-ness, x being any group that is on the fringe, oppressed, suppressed, whatever term you might want to apply). For some groups there might be a musical heritage to draw on, but suppose I happened to turn on a radiocast of music by such a composer, how would I catch on to the fact that the composer is "militating for x-ness" ? (I am premising that there is no text involved to clarify the composer's intent.)
Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 05:49:19 AM
No. Queer is quite offensive.
It's contextual—it's still used primarily as an insult in the american south where I grew up, but when I moved north I found people were more likely to use it as a neutral or positive term, especially in academic disciplines (thus, "queer theory" etc) as well as a self identifier in preference to gay or homosexual. Somewhat political term even in NYC though with anti-assimilationist slogans like "not gay rights but queer liberation". So it really depends on where you are I guess. I've never been comfortable using the word myself but it's clearly not always offensive.
A comment from Claude Vivier, not directly about music, he uses the term
discourse, what he says made me think of Schubert, Susan McClary and Foucault.
QuoteMale discourse, the way it is presented to us in western civilisation, is a discourse that obliges us to be strong, great, dominating, which obliges music to be goal-oriented, which obliges opera to have conflicts, to put the universal on stage. It is this that, on the level of sensibility is called into question. When I talk about a gay discourse, [it's] a way of putting people on an equal footing without discrimination
Anyway it made me dig out his piece called
Beating here, I think it's very good indeed
(https://d27t0qkxhe4r68.cloudfront.net/t_900/776994000028.jpg?1401982557)
Quote from: JBS on October 31, 2019, 05:46:28 PM
I will ask a fundamental question: how does one militate for queerness (or, more generally, for x-ness, x being any group that is on the fringe, oppressed, suppressed, whatever term you might want to apply). For some groups there might be a musical heritage to draw on, but suppose I happened to turn on a radiocast of music by such a composer, how would I catch on to the fact that the composer is "militating for x-ness" ? (I am premising that there is no text involved to clarify the composer's intent.)
The titles. If you listen to the Eastman's speech at Northwestern University in the opening post of this thread, you'll see that the titles are important for him, and maybe that's right. Similarly for Finnissy I suppose.
You know, Eastman's
Nigger Faggot or
Gay Guerrilla would be different if they were called something bland.
Would the composer John Corigliano come into this category with his First Symphony commemorating the victims of AIDS?
Quote from: Mandryka on October 31, 2019, 11:23:39 PM
The titles. If you listen to the Eastman's speech at Northwestern University in the opening post of this thread, you'll see that the titles are important for him, and maybe that's right.
It's a question that's been asked about Eastman before, with variable answers (https://johnsonsrambler.wordpress.com/2017/02/10/a-little-more-on-eastman/).
I'm agnostic on the question of how gay/black/etc his music is but I do generally find it more compelling than almost any other minimalist composer's and partly because it's not the result of some kind of abstracted process. Like Cage as compared to Feldman, it feels more genuine. Cage and Eastman use various mechanistic compositional processes to be sure, but it feels like their styles result from a genuine sense of inner necessity, whereas Feldman seems like he just wanted to write Sibelius symphonies but that would mean he didn't get invited to Robert Rauschenberg's house parties anymore, so he had to come up with a compositional formula, & it does "sound" formulaic in the later works in a way that even something like Music of Changes doesn't.
I don't think any of this has anything to do with Cage or Eastman's gayness, except that it made them somewhat outsiders in the musical and artistic establishment, and therefore they didn't have as many people to try to impress.
The irony there is that Cage and Eastman fell out, because Eastman started to do provocatively camp things in his contribution to a performance of the Song Books.
Quote from: https://daily.redbullmusicacademy.com/2018/07/julius-eastman-john-cage-songbooks
Over the next 14 minutes, Eastman delivered a bizarre lecture that focused on the erotic, but played on and exploded notions about race, colonialism and sexuality. As he invited the couple onstage with him to strip — the man ended up naked, the woman only partially so due to embarrassment — he declared them "the best specimens in the world." Of Miss Suzyanna he said, "She comes from a special tribe which is found only in the Great Woods of Haiti." Of Mr. Charles — blonde, almost certainly one of Eastman's boyfriends — he said, "I might congratulate you in the audience who are from Buffalo, because Mr. Charles I found in Buffalo, a very rare and wonderful specimen."
Like an alien anthropologist, Eastman clinically categorized the seductive elements and functions of their bodies, from the way their "oval," "slanted" eyes could drink in potential lovers from the feet up, to the sensitive way the hand could stroke the breast. He joked that he chose members of two races because he wanted "to show the best of both worlds." He referenced an imaginary work about foot fetishism and castigated Americans for smacking their lips.
All the while, his voice growing more theatrical as his fellow ensemble members began singing and playing eery electronics, Eastman was camping things up, to the delight of the audience. He wrapped his leg around his male "specimen" and puckered his mouth with his fingers. "Julius only managed to get the man undressed," recalled S.E.M. founder and director Petr Kotik, "and being an outspoken homosexual, he was making all sorts of 'achs!' and `ahs' as he was pulling his pants down." A review by Jeff Simons in the Buffalo Evening News said, "By the time Eastman's little performance was finished, Mr. Charles was completely undressed, and Eastman's leering, libidinous, lecture-performance had everyone convulsed with the burlesque broadness of his homoerotic satire."
In a final flip-off to convention. Eastman ended his piece by saying, "I am hoping, of course, that most of you will go home and experiment, yes, because I know that you will like it as much as I have. For those of you who would like to have a private lesson, you write Box 202, La Jolla, California, care of Dr. Paga. Thank you so much for listening to this marvelous lecture."
. . .
Amid the crowd's glee, John Cage watched the performance of his piece stonily, even shouting something toward the end. Afterwards, Cage stalked onto the stage and confronted Eastman and Kotik, demanding angrily, "What was this? What was the meaning of this?" The next day at his lecture, Cage was still furious. Normally soft-spoken and gentle, Cage pounded his fists and said, "When you see that Julius Eastman from one performance to the next, he does the same thing, harps on the same thing, in other words does his thing and that his thing unfortunately has become this one thing of sexuality." He said of confronting Eastman that Eastman told him he didn't think he would perform the piece in the future: "I said, 'I'd be very grateful to you if you don't.'"
Why all the fuss, and why has the Song Books incident become so notorious as a changing of the avant-garde? In one sense, the moment was typical of most generational showdowns: A young, iconoclastic upstart directly challenges an eminence grise to confront new ideas and cultural currents or retire to the folds of history. It was even a bit of an ambush: Eastman had performed the Song Books before, also with Cage present, without incident. The homoerotic lecturer swerve came out of nowhere.
What Eastman had displayed onstage wasn't so very new. Hair, with its exuberant nudity, had been playing on Broadway since 1968, gay rights rebellion Stonewall took place in 1969, and many of the artistic and musical happenings of the '50s and '60s contained more shocking material. (What also wasn't new, alas, was men making women feel uncomfortable onstage as part of a performance.) So what had really bothered Cage?
In his lecture, Cage acknowledged that Eastman's performance pointed out a limit of Cage's own compositional technique. In his instruction to "perform a disciplined action," he said, he had failed to make his true intentions known. -You can't do whatever you want, but anything goes," Cage said, banging a nearby piano, typically enigmatic. "By discipline, I understand something that will act as a yoke, or yoga, to the ego, keeping the ego from getting bigger, so that its boundaries will dissolve and you will be free of its likes and dislikes. I don't approve because the ego of Julius Eastman is closed in on the subject of homosexuality. And we know this because he has no other idea to express. In a Zen situation where his mind might open up and flow with something beyond his imagination, he doesn't know the first step to take."
Quote from: vandermolen on November 01, 2019, 12:27:10 AM
Would the composer John Corigliano come into this category with his First Symphony commemorating the victims of AIDS?
Is a work about or in reflection on a (partially) gay issue and its consequences categorically different from one that somehow expresses queerness itself in some one or more of its manifestations?
Quote from: J on November 03, 2019, 11:40:16 AM
Is a work about or in reflection on a (partially) gay issue and its consequences categorically different from one that somehow expresses queerness itself in some one or more of its manifestations?
OK, thanks Greg.
Quote from: vandermolen on November 03, 2019, 11:49:16 AM
OK, thanks Greg.
Not that I'm sure what I said is even meaningful. Were you convinced?
Quote from: J on November 03, 2019, 12:50:21 PM
Not that I'm sure what I said is even meaningful. Were you convinced?
Yes, it made very good sense to me but I wouldn't have understood this without your explanation.
Quote from: Mandryka on November 01, 2019, 03:03:36 AM
The irony there is that Cage and Eastman fell out, because Eastman started to do provocatively camp things in his contribution to a performance of the Song Books.
Yes, that kind of underlines the difference between "gay" and "queer".
There's a similar kind of ambivalence in Henze's orchestral piece Heliogabalus Imperator, which I'm listening to at the moment—Heliogabalus being a notorious Roman emperor who not only openly took male lovers (not particularly unusual, admittedly, for Roman emperors) but also dressed up in women's clothing, and who nowadays is seen as being either homosexual or transgender, although these categories didn't exist in Roman times. (Although it's equally possible that neither his supposed gender nonconformity, nor his infamous cruelty, ever actually happened—the historical record was mostly written by his political enemies, who definitely had to answer some questions about why they publicly executed an 18-year-old boy-emperor and his mother.) Henze of course, also gay, and also equally uncomfortable with his contemporaries who expressed it more openly (e.g. Sylvano Bussotti).
Quote from: Mandryka on October 31, 2019, 07:49:01 AM
No, on the contrary, but let's not let this turn this into a semantic thread, I'll answer you straight away in Cato's Grammar Grumble.
Does the thread use words? Then it's already a "semantic thread." No turning into.
That's like saying it's a geometric thread because the letters have a shape.
Quote from: Mandryka on October 31, 2019, 07:47:04 AM
My interest in this started after a discussion about Eastman with a composer. He said that he thought that Eastman's music was prescient of a significant trend in contemporary music, a quasi romantic trend where the composer's work is not only informed by the beliefs and values and passions which constitute his identity, but also militates for them.
When I asked for contemporary composers who use their music to militate for queerness, I didn't get a clear answer. I was pleased to be reminded this morning that Finnissy talks in militant terms though.
Having lurched out of the closet at age 16 and now a crotchety old 73 I've never taken offence at being called 'queer' given my early aversion to just about everything 'normal' from political leanings to music. I'm only offended if someone calls me stupid or dishonest. "You a queer, gay, fag, fairy?" etc usually gets a response along the lines of "Why, you looking for a bit" or "Yeh, and what are you going to do about it" or some such. Needless to say an early involvement in the martial arts always came in handy.
As to queer composers/musicians the majority who are out of the closet aren't classical artists. Same for a range of more or less radical political statements, the classical music world has tended to brush queerness under the carpet or disguise it in peculiar ways such as the casting of Richard Strauss's 'Der Rosenkavalier'.
https://www.youtube.com/v/F_MPk_2Uvx8
The first part Finnissy's Other Ground is expressive in an old fashioned sort of way -- think Elgar (without the orchestra in Gerontius) and maybe Britten (De Vere tormented by the weight of his moral decision . . . ) -- and about someone riddled with angst because he's got AIDS. The monologue is by turns poignant, by turns aggressively, militantly, queer, by turns "mystical" (a la Jonathan Harvey). I found it quite disturbing because it brought back memories of people long dead now . . .
Half way through the style becomes more authentically modern -- this is a common trope in Finnissy!
Arguably no longer contemporary, but nevertheless I would say that there's enough frank and mature and authentic lesbian content in Danses Organiques to make it deserve a place in this thread. Or is it pornographic?
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41CY0RVyVpL.jpg)
Luc Ferrari was a man, I'm not sure what conclusions to draw from that.
The subtitle of the piece is Cinéma pour les oreilles, and that seems spot on. Indeed listening to some of the raunchier bits in the second half makes me wonder why the genre hasn't been developed, why creative people haven't worked more on musique cul.
The final section, #6, is the musical equivalent of the end of Ulysses.
Kaki King
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2p_6lFlasA
Eve Beglarian
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2098LqX1e54
https://www.youtube.com/v/FvBP5hXO128&ab_channel=AndrewToovey
Andrew Toovey's First Out, named after the cafe on Tottenham Court Road
(https://2csjj93y1t1a1cak4z2wr44n-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/15/2019/04/First-Out.jpg)
And Queer Sensibility, written for the AIDS doctor Joseph Sonnabend
https://www.youtube.com/v/6G118nrQJvA&ab_channel=AndrewToovey
(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0272/9220/5135/products/image_b4863122-7565-4ccb-a6ed-4b0e2a7f0207_720x.jpg?v=1595125670)
https://www.newworldrecords.org/products/lesbian-american-composers?_pos=1&_sid=d21037c83&_ss=r&variant=32449362329679
Enjoying this anthology.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 05:49:19 AM
No. Queer is quite offensive. So is using the n-word.
Though for "queer", and to some extent I believe for the n-word, it depends on who utters it, and in what context. "Queer" is a strongly reclaimed word in some communities.
Also, in today's queer communities, and despite its history, "queer" is no longer an EXACT synonym for "gay". Particularly in conjunction with the modifier "gender" (as in "genderqueer") it connotes, additionally or by itself, a nonconforming or even non-binary gender expression.
Quote from: krummholz on April 03, 2022, 09:47:29 AM
(...)
Also, in today's queer communities, and despite its history, "queer" is no longer an EXACT synonym for "gay". Particularly in conjunction with the modifier "gender" (as in "genderqueer") it connotes, additionally or by itself, a nonconforming or even non-binary gender expression.
Indeed. Danish 'Bisse' (progressive rock) is one, typical example, of this 'playing with identities'. Your picture search function will provide illustrations. He is a talented musician and writer, btw ('Højlandet','Grand Danois' etc)
I don't get this thread. Many composers were/are homosexual, why do they need their own dedicated thread? Not only that, but someone's sexual orientation is really no one's business and this thread, if anything, directly insults these composers. I believe this thread should be deleted or locked.
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 03, 2022, 06:55:13 PM
I don't get this thread. Many composers were/are homosexual, why do they need their own dedicated thread? Not only that, but someone's sexual orientation is really no one's business and this thread, if anything, directly insults these composers. I believe this thread should be deleted or locked.
Actually, I find the content rather more educational than prurient or offensive in other ways. If these people weren't already open about their otherness, they wouldn't enter discussion here in any case. I trust that people will be posting things about which they have knowledge, not a series of speculations about some person's sexual identity.
Not speaking for all the Mods, of course, but I think that NOT suppressing constructive discussion of topics which have previously been taboo will serve to make them less mysterious and correlatively less scary.
GB 8)
I would like a thread for alcoholic composers as well. :)
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on April 03, 2022, 07:41:48 PM
I would like a thread for alcoholic composers as well. :)
NO! Now
they are quick to take offense.... :(
8)
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 03, 2022, 06:55:13 PM
I don't get this thread. Many composers were/are homosexual, why do they need their own dedicated thread? Not only that, but someone's sexual orientation is really no one's business and this thread, if anything, directly insults these composers. I believe this thread should be deleted or locked.
I know where you're coming from, and I never intended this thread to be a list of homosexual composers, just because that wouldn't interest me personally. I intended it to be an exploration of queer composers - composers whose music can be interpreted as a celebration and revindication of a distinctively homosexual sensibility and way of being. I started it after having a discussion with a queer composer here in London about Julius Eastman and John Cage and Benjamin Britten - he argued that Eastman was queer while Cage and Britten just happened to be gay. I don't say my friend was right, but I think his point of view is interesting enough to explore.
In fact, that CD I posted yesterday, Lesbian American Composers, seems to me to contain quite a lot of queer composers. I've just started to explore its companion recording
(https://i.discogs.com/-BATqQeYA8RS51ug0DCR4VQ-SuPNOjKCbRlGEmak_5I/rs:fit/g:sm/q:90/h:600/w:593/czM6Ly9kaXNjb2dz/LWRhdGFiYXNlLWlt/YWdlcy9SLTExMTc4/NDQyLTE2MzA2MDQ4/NjYtMjgzMi5qcGVn.jpeg)
Quote from: krummholz on April 03, 2022, 09:47:29 AM
Though for "queer", and to some extent I believe for the n-word, it depends on who utters it, and in what context. "Queer" is a strongly reclaimed word in some communities.
Also, in today's queer communities, and despite its history, "queer" is no longer an EXACT synonym for "gay". Particularly in conjunction with the modifier "gender" (as in "genderqueer") it connotes, additionally or by itself, a nonconforming or even non-binary gender expression.
I think this is an important distinction. There is a real difference between gay and queer, the latter term being far more politically charged and describing something other than mere orientation (as per Judith/Jack Halberstam, Judith Butler, et al).
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 03, 2022, 06:55:13 PM
I don't get this thread. Many composers were/are homosexual, why do they need their own dedicated thread?
I have no issue with composers/artists celebrating their identity through their music (not suggesting you do either :)), and staking their right to existence and marking their contribution. I am somewhat ambivalent to the gender/orientation/colour/racial background/age/physical or mental disability/religion/politics/worldview of any of the composers I choose to hear, and would never really ignore or seek out a composer based on their protected characteristics. I have grown a little weary of identity politics, but wouldn't want to see a thread removed. I hope that identity and difference matters less than once it did when assessing value, but appreciate that some may wish to champion who they are as they present their work for performance or recording. Having said that, I'm never very sure how serious music (orchestral and so on) can communicate identity particularly, unlike visual or literary cultural contributions. Always open to learn, mind. I only really care whether the music is any good - sadly, we can sometimes end up having second rate art pushed to a place of prominence just because of political expediency.
I probably listen to enough second rate music as it is :)
... very much agree.
Quote from: foxandpeng on April 04, 2022, 06:23:16 AMI have no issue with composers/artists celebrating their identity through their music (not suggesting you do either :)), and staking their right to existence and marking their contribution. I am somewhat ambivalent to the gender/orientation/colour/racial background/age/physical or mental disability/religion/politics/worldview of any of the composers I choose to hear, and would never really ignore or seek out a composer based on their protected characteristics. I have grown a little weary of identity politics, but wouldn't want to see a thread removed. I hope that identity and difference matters less than once it did when assessing value, but appreciate that some may wish to champion who they are as they present their work for performance or recording. Having said that, I'm never very sure how serious music (orchestral and so on) can communicate identity particularly, unlike visual or literary cultural contributions. Always open to learn, mind. I only really care whether the music is any good - sadly, we can sometimes end up having second rate art pushed to a place of prominence just because of political expediency.
I probably listen to enough second rate music as it is :)
I can certainly relate to what you're saying, but, in my own case, instead of ambivalence, I would insert just flat-out tired of hearing about and being force-fed opinions. In the US, the liberals tell people they must "respect the equality of each individual", but yet, if I say something that is in direct disagreement with their political philosophy, I'm the bigot or "homophone" or whatever other misnomer they want to hurl at their so-called "enemy" (i. e. one who simply disagrees with them). I'm an "old fashioned" guy in many ways and have rather conservative beliefs, but this isn't even a factor when I'm listening to music. In music, it doesn't matter if you're black, white, purple, yellow or blue, just as long as you've moved people and gave them pleasure. This is more important than anything you, me or the Pope believes. And this is why I don't agree with the idea of this thread. It's not important to know whether this composer was gay (or queer or whatever). Only the music is of importance or, at least, this is my own viewpoint.
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 04, 2022, 07:00:08 AMAnd this is why I don't agree with the idea of this thread.
Then just don't click on the thread. Jeez.
It looks like there was productive, interesting conversation happening here before you barged in to yell at everyone and tell them that you're conservative. It's easy to imagine many more interesting discussion topics: music inspired by love affairs or unrequited loves, relationships between composers (e.g. Barber/Menotti), composers whose self-repression led to psychological issues (e.g. Tippett), ways that composers interact with performers or their community, subjects of stage or operatic works, music with explicitly sexual subject material (e.g. Eastman), etc. etc. etc. etc.
If you don't like a subject, you really don't have to barge into a room and tell everyone that you don't like it. Let alone demand that the thing you don't like be censored. If you feel the need to continue doing this, maybe sign up for a pop music board where you can tell them about all the Top 40 songs you hate ;D
Quote from: Brian on April 04, 2022, 10:22:15 AM
Then just don't click on the thread. Jeez.
It looks like there was productive, interesting conversation happening here before you barged in to yell at everyone and tell them that you're conservative. It's easy to imagine many more interesting discussion topics: music inspired by love affairs or unrequited loves, relationships between composers (e.g. Barber/Menotti), composers whose self-repression led to psychological issues (e.g. Tippett), ways that composers interact with performers or their community, subjects of stage or operatic works, music with explicitly sexual subject material (e.g. Eastman), etc. etc. etc. etc.
If you don't like a subject, you really don't have to barge into a room and tell everyone that you don't like it. Let alone demand that the thing you don't like be censored. If you feel the need to continue doing this, maybe sign up for a pop music board where you can tell them about all the Top 40 songs you hate ;D
By the same token, there's absolutely no need for you to tell me what to do. I comment on what I want and when I want. You're not some grand arbiter of what is to be said and not said on this forum. Jeez.
If your response to seeing a thread about queer composers is to walk in, say that it doesn't matter to you if a composer is queer, but nonetheless, the thread should be locked or deleted, then I can imagine why you get bad reactions.
I think it's important to speak against censorship, especially censorship of a group which historically was frequently bullied or marginalized.
Quote from: Brian on April 04, 2022, 01:09:49 PM
I think it's important to speak against censorship, especially censorship of a group which historically was frequently bullied or marginalized.
Let me clear the air by saying I don't care
what the composer is,
to me this thread seems like it marginalizes these composers even further by "grouping" them. If they have something unique to say musically, then they did their job, if they have nothing to say musically, then they failed. This thread seems to propagate homosexual composers as if they're "different" then heterosexual composers. My point is none of this matters if the music is good and touches you emotionally/intellectually. Anyway, this is all I'm going to say in this thread as any further as it's quite evident that I touched a nerve for some members here.
Special edit: Look who my avatar is for Christ's sake! Copland was a homosexual man who wrote some first-rate music. Does his sexual orientation factor into my own enjoyment of the music? Absolutely not! I love the man and his music.
Okay....now I'm DONE. ;D
MI: since I'm a queer person I'll just note here that I wouldn't see a thread like this as marginalising composers unless they're somehow not allowed to have a thread in this board as well, or if it was a crass marketing ploy like those compilation CDs of disconnected movements from random gay composers (and sometimes composers where it's not really clear whether they were gay or not) that were such an awkward example of the 90s trend of chasing the "pink dollar."
A thread like this can be illuminating in the same sort of way that a thread about contemporary American composers, or Black contemporary composers, can. Where most threads in this particular board are about a single composer, threads of this nature group together composers who have something significant in common that will have significantly affected their own life experience. This opens the opportunity to discuss how these shared experiences affected a group of composers; how it created commonalities between their music, and also how different approaches to these experiences led to contrasting results, topics harder to discuss in a single-composer thread.
Quote from: not edward on April 04, 2022, 02:35:03 PM
MI: since I'm a queer person I'll just note here that I wouldn't see a thread like this as marginalising composers unless they're somehow not allowed to have a thread in this board as well, or if it was a crass marketing ploy like those compilation CDs of disconnected movements from random gay composers (and sometimes composers where it's not really clear whether they were gay or not) that were such an awkward example of the 90s trend of chasing the "pink dollar."
A thread like this can be illuminating in the same sort of way that a thread about contemporary American composers, or Black contemporary composers, can. Where most threads in this particular board are about a single composer, threads of this nature group together composers who have something significant in common that will have significantly affected their own life experience. This opens the opportunity to discuss how these shared experiences affected a group of composers; how it created commonalities between their music, and also how different approaches to these experiences led to contrasting results, topics harder to discuss in a single-composer thread.
Thanks for your response, Edward. Perhaps I should've taken Brian's advice and stayed out of the thread. :-[ Sometimes it just makes me upset to see these types of threads not because I'm a homophobe or against the whole LGBT movement altogether, but because I just felt it didn't have a place here since the music seems to be the focal point and not the composer's personal life. Anyway, I'm glad you weighed in on this and I'll kindly exit stage left as I've done enough derailment already.
It is a knife that cuts both ways. Having to point out an artist's status as a member of a marginalized group can seem to reinforce the marginalized status. I remember being somewhat put off by the fact that in Borders Books you had to look in the African American section to find works by Toni Morrison. On one hand Toni Morrison did write from uniquely African American perspective, but on the other she is a literary genius regardless of what group she belongs to. I didn't have to look in some sort of "Jewish American" section to find Philip Roth, who just as clearly wrote from a certain cultural viewpoint.
I tend to think it is more relevant in literature, where we are dealing with stories about the experiences of people who have unique cultural experiences. Music is more abstract, but I suppose we still have to deal with the hurdles members of marginalized groups must get past. I remember reading in the notes to some David Diamond recordings that there is reason to believe that his sexual orientation interfered with the acceptance of his music. That seems plausible, but hard to prove.
It brings to mind an experience I had long ago. Penguin (the book publisher) brought out a series of classical recordings (actually reissues of existing recordings) which were supposed to be presented in a literary context. I ended up getting one issue, Tchaikovsky's 6th Symphony recorded by Karajan/Berlin. I was surprised to find that the included essay made no mention of the music, but instead dwelled on the fact that the Pathetique was the first "gay symphony." Huh?
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41GXQKA5S9L.jpg)
Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 04, 2022, 10:16:36 PM
It is a knife that cuts both ways. Having to point out an artist's status as a member of a marginalized group can seem to reinforce the marginalized status. I remember being somewhat put off by the fact that in Borders Books you had to look in the African American section to find works by Toni Morrison. On one hand Toni Morrison did write from uniquely African American perspective, but on the other she is a literary genius regardless of what group she belongs to. I didn't have to look in some sort of "Jewish American" section to find Philip Roth, who just as clearly wrote from a certain cultural viewpoint.
I tend to think it is more relevant in literature, where we are dealing with stories about the experiences of people who have unique cultural experiences. Music is more abstract, but I suppose we still have to deal with the hurdles members of marginalized groups must get past. I remember reading in the notes to some David Diamond recordings that there is reason to believe that his sexual orientation interfered with the acceptance of his music. That seems plausible, but hard to prove.
It brings to mind an experience I had long ago. Penguin (the book publisher) brought out a series of classical recordings (actually reissues of existing recordings) which were supposed to be presented in a literary context. I ended up getting one issue, Tchaikovsky's 6th Symphony recorded by Karajan/Berlin. I was surprised to find that the included essay made no mention of the music, but instead dwelled on the fact that the Pathetique was the first "gay symphony." Huh?
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41GXQKA5S9L.jpg)
Yes well interpretation is not the same as librarianship. I think that a queer interpretation of Tchaikovsky 6 is possible and interesting, but it isn't forced, it's one of many possible interpretations. The composers life gives it a privileged status maybe, but it doesn't make it inevitable. It's not like it's been pigeonholed, like a librarian finds the right slot on the shelf. In interpretation, there is no right slot, there are many interesting slots.
Quote from: Mandryka on April 04, 2022, 11:08:20 PM
Yes well interpretation is not the same as librarianship. I think that a queer interpretation of Tchaikovsky 6 is possible and interesting, but it isn't forced, it's one of many possible interpretations. The composers life gives it a privileged status maybe, but it doesn't make it inevitable. It's not like it's been pigeonholed, like a librarian finds the right slot on the shelf. In interpretation, there is no right slot, there are many interesting slots.
I certainly think there is a layer of richness that a person gets by listening to a work in the context of the composer's experience. It seems to be taken for granted now that Tchaikovsky was gay. There are many others who were gay with varying levels of openness. Schoenberg, Mendelssohn and Mahler were Jews who embraced Christianity and German nationality, which did not prevent cultural difficulties of various levels of seriousness. But unless there is a text, a program, or reference to folk or ethnic music, music is music. One can look for manifestations of alienation in the music, but that will always be open to interpretation. Brahms also suffered alienation, due to his prickly character.
And I doubt Herr Karajan was instructing his Berliner Philharmoniker musicians to imagine themselves gay as they performed the music...
It can be tempting, sometimes, to excessively read biographical details into the work of an author- in fact, I think the last century or so of art analysis has trended away from behaviors like that!
"Queer art", or queer readings of art, I think, are less about going "well, this guy was gay, let's view every single note he wrote under this context" and more on works which - with textual support - fit into a queer context, or lend themselves to being analyzed that way. (and, of course, recently, there are more and more works written explicitly in a queer context, in the same way as some composers may have written in say, a Czech or German nationalist context back when)
It's worth noting that this does not even require the composer to be queer - Rzewski's "De Profundis" (admittedly, the text is by Oscar Wilde) has been taken up by a few queer pianists, for instance.
Quote from: fbjim on April 05, 2022, 05:41:11 AM
It's worth noting that this does not even require the composer to be queer - Rzewski's "De Profundis" (admittedly, the text is by Oscar Wilde) has been taken up by a few queer pianists, for instance.
Another parallel example might be Wuorinen's
Brokeback Mountain, an opera on a gay topic by a gay composer based on a story by a straight woman.
Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 04, 2022, 11:33:01 PM
I certainly think there is a layer of richness that a person gets by listening to a work in the context of the composer's experience. It seems to be taken for granted now that Tchaikovsky was gay. There are many others who were gay with varying levels of openness. Schoenberg, Mendelssohn and Mahler were Jews who embraced Christianity and German nationality, which did not prevent cultural difficulties of various levels of seriousness. But unless there is a text, a program, or reference to folk or ethnic music, music is music. One can look for manifestations of alienation in the music, but that will always be open to interpretation. Brahms also suffered alienation, due to his prickly character.
And I doubt Herr Karajan was instructing his Berliner Philharmoniker musicians to imagine themselves gay as they performed the music...
Which notes are the gay ones? I see this as a cultural issue, not the least as a musical one. It is possible that the otherness of the composer would attract new, curious listeners, which is great, but the music itself is just music, and the innate character of the composer isn't going to add or subtract that nebulous ingredient called 'quality'. 🤔
🤠😎
And then of course there is Tippett's "The Knot Garden", an opera (perhaps the first?) with a gay central character by a gay composer.
Quote from: krummholz on April 05, 2022, 06:07:11 AM
And then of course there is Tippett's "The Knot Garden", an opera (perhaps the first?) with a gay central character by a gay composer.
Alex Ross mentions it (https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-decline-of-opera-queens-and-the-rise-of-gay-opera) as probably the first with an
overtly gay central character although of course before Tippett there were undeclared gay characters like Peter Grimes.
"Thematically queer" doesn't necessarily mean that, as some people say (including bad English teachers attempting to teach the concepts of theme and symbolism to high-schoolers) that a work of art is "actually about" such and such topic. Better to say that - thematically - certain aspects have greater or different meaning to queer readers. Some of these themes can be universal - alienation from society, the suppression of one's self, violation of gender roles, etc- which can have different significance to us when the listener is queer, or if the context or text seriously inclines us to read those themes as queer themes.
This is a more general discussion than I intended, but I did feel like pointing out that stories, art, and music don't have to explicitly be "about" gay or queer people to be, in some way, queer. (Someone mentioned Peter Grimes - Billy Budd is an even more famous example, which Britten of course also set to music)
Quote from: Brian on April 05, 2022, 06:21:05 AM
Alex Ross mentions it (https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-decline-of-opera-queens-and-the-rise-of-gay-opera) as probably the first with an overtly gay central character although of course before Tippett there were undeclared gay characters like Peter Grimes.
I debated whether to say
openly, but I had forgotten about Peter Grimes. I had even been thinking about Britten, but somehow that one just didn't come to mind. Thanks, good catch.
Quote from: Brian on April 05, 2022, 06:21:05 AM
undeclared gay characters like Peter Grimes.
I don't think it helps to say Grimes is gay, and there's nothing in the opera to suggest that he's gay.
I can imagine someone reading Britten's Billy Budd in a queer way though -- though I don't think it's very helpful either. What are Budd and De Vere doing together offstage at the end of the opera, in the stateroom?
For me they key question is: what is gained by highlighting a queer reading of Budd? As opposed to saying it's about morality and the law.
Is Quint gay? Is Aschenbach? I can't help thinking that a queer reading of Death in Venice, though possible, is reductive.
Quote from: krummholz on April 05, 2022, 09:25:32 AM
I debated whether to say openly, but I had forgotten about Peter Grimes. I had even been thinking about Britten, but somehow that one just didn't come to mind. Thanks, good catch.
If that's true, then it suggests that opera is way behind novels in this respect -- I'm thinking a lot about Balzac at the moment and there's a gay character in Pere Goriot (Vautrin)
At school I once argued (childishly in retrospect) that Coriolanus and Aufidius were lovers -- silly in retrospect, but I think it's a possible reading.
Quote from: Mandryka on April 05, 2022, 09:36:40 AM
I don't think it helps to say Grimes is gay, and there's nothing in the opera to suggest that he's gay.
Alternative perspective:
Peter Grimes is an opera written at a time when an explicitly gay character in an opera would lead to the opera not being performed and those associated with it being likely to be prosecuted for obscenity. The role of Grimes was written by a gay composer for his same-sex life partner, and in the opera, Grimes experiences the type of social ostracism typically experienced by people known to be gay at the time the opera was written. What is there in the opera to suggest that he is not gay?
Quote from: not edward on April 05, 2022, 11:13:10 AM
Alternative perspective: Peter Grimes is an opera written at a time when an explicitly gay character in an opera would lead to the opera not being performed and those associated with it being likely to be prosecuted for obscenity. The role of Grimes was written by a gay composer for his same-sex life partner, and in the opera, Grimes experiences the type of social ostracism typically experienced by people known to be gay at the time the opera was written. What is there in the opera to suggest that he is not gay?
Thanks, friend; I had never considered the piece in anything like this light.
Quote from: not edward on April 05, 2022, 11:13:10 AM
Alternative perspective: Peter Grimes is an opera written at a time when an explicitly gay character in an opera would lead to the opera not being performed and those associated with it being likely to be prosecuted for obscenity.
I didn't know that. Lulu I guess is an exception to the rule, and anyway it was first performed in Europe. But it may not be so simple -- there's Soldiers in Skirts, for example
https://huddmusichallarchive.wordpress.com/2013/08/20/soliders-in-skirts/
https://www.bloomsburycollections.com/book/drag-histories-herstories-and-hairstories-drag-in-a-changing-scene-volume-2/ch4-soldiers-in-skirts-cross-dressing-ex-servicemen-sexuality-and-censorship-in-post-war-britain
(If I remember right, Grimes displeased the censors anyway at first, they argued that the hut scene was too violent and it was toned down. I may be wrong about that, but it's something I picked up somewhere.)
Quote from: not edward on April 05, 2022, 11:13:10 AM
The role of Grimes was written by a gay composer for his same-sex life partner, and in the opera,
I think you need to distinguish the man from the works.
Quote from: not edward on April 05, 2022, 11:13:10 AM
Grimes experiences the type of social ostracism typically experienced by people known to be gay at the time the opera was written.
Grimes isn't ostracised in Acts 1 and 2. He has a friend in Balstrode and a friend in Ellen, and indeed we have every reason to believe that Ellen would marry him. In Act 3 his is abandoned to his suicide, everyone lets him down.
Quote from: not edward on April 05, 2022, 11:13:10 AM
What is there in the opera to suggest that he is not gay?
There must be a name for this move in a discussion! What is there in Gotterdammerung to suggest that Siegfried is not gay? What is there in Wozzek to suggest that he is not gay?
The last point is worth thinking about -- Wozzek is an opera which Grimes resembles in many ways.
Quote from: not edward on April 05, 2022, 11:13:10 AM
Alternative perspective: Peter Grimes is an opera written at a time when an explicitly gay character in an opera would lead to the opera not being performed and those associated with it being likely to be prosecuted for obscenity. The role of Grimes was written by a gay composer for his same-sex life partner, and in the opera, Grimes experiences the type of social ostracism typically experienced by people known to be gay at the time the opera was written. What is there in the opera to suggest that he is not gay?
That is is based on a story published by Crabbe in 1810? The libretto was written by a man who was a socialist and a heterosexual? Britten may have been attracted to the story because the themes of social and class alienation he saw in it were evocative of the experience of a homosexual in England, but I see it as a story of social alienation and class conflict.
Quote from: Mandryka on April 05, 2022, 09:47:01 AM
If that's true, then it suggests that opera is way behind novels in this respect -- I'm thinking a lot about Balzac at the moment and there's a gay character in Pere Goriot (Vautrin)
And clearly we have the example of
A la recherche du temps perdu, which I forgot yesterday. Proust's
Contre Sainte Beuve is very relevant to this discussion in fact.
https://documents.pub/document/all-sound-is-queer-drew-daniels.html
Drew Daniel, "All Sound is Queer" (The Wire, November 2011)
Michael Finnissy's Hammerklavier
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgoodfghmwg&ab_channel=ZubinKanga
https://www.artforum.com/music/immortal-homosexual-poets-michael-finnissy-s-hammerklavier-87866
"Are there inroads into Beethoven's work that are available to homosexual people that are not open to heterosexuals? . . . My own discourse about the Hammerklavier is underscored by my homosexuality. Do I 'misread' the work?"
A mystery to me that I've noticed a long time ago is how it just seems like compared to the classics (from baroque to late romantic era), there are so few gay composers- yet after that era, especially in the US, it seems like almost half of them are gay. Is it a misperception, or is it just that they are able to be more open about it, or what?
The very concept of hetero/homosexuality as "identity" exists only since the mid-19th century or later. There might have been lots of men with homosexual desires or affairs earlier but it was just that, not an "identity". And of course it was usually at best barely tolerated if handled discreetly, in other cases it could exclude one from polite society or get into real legal trouble (historically it's also frequently connected with and was rarely distinguished from an inclination towards teenaged boys) so obviously people since the mid/late-20th century are more open about it.
Maybe this is the place to mention this year's last night of the Proms
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sDtyJyidhlc
Quote from: Mandryka on September 04, 2022, 09:21:18 AM
Maybe this is the place to mention this year's last night of the Proms
Your link is to the last night of the 2019 Proms.
Quote from: CRCulver on September 04, 2022, 11:23:23 AM
Your link is to the last night of the 2019 Proms.
Ah . . . my bad . . . let's see what happens.