What composers of today will people be talking about in 100 years? Is there anyone you feel that has created art that will last well after their lifetime?
I nominate Per Nørgård as someone whose legacy will only grow as time wears on. Nørgård's music posesses a depth of expression that hasn't been seen since the beginning of the 20th century. The balance he strikes between chaos and order reflects to me a musical language influenced by an ever-optimistic worldview, and seems to be very relevant to our modern times. Sergiu Celibidache himself said of Nørgård, "Only the mind of a new time in the new millennium will be able to understand the scope of Nørgård's music." I'm inclined to agree.
I agree completely with Norgard.
I also nominate Einojuhani Rautavaara.
Another vote for Rautavaara.
i also agree with Norgard. :)
as for other composer.... hm, i think the only minimalist composers whose legacy will grow is John Adams. After that, others: Saariaho, Lindberg, Penderecki, Ligeti, to name a few.... and probably Rautavaara, though i haven't heard much of his stuff
I like Dr. Karl.
Quote from: Haffner on August 26, 2007, 09:54:43 AM
I like Dr. Karl.
me too!
i've seen the future............
and good things are in store for Mr.Henning 8)
oh yeah, not to mention that Schoenberg will become a household name in 100 years, alongside Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, and Tchaikovsky......
it's a process that developed which is hard to explain but..... eventually pop music realized that it all sounded the same and couldn't make up anything new, so it looked back to Schoenberg and pop music became atonal 0:) 0:) 0:)
Quote from: greg on August 26, 2007, 10:00:40 AM
oh yeah, not to mention that Schoenberg will become a household name in 100 years, alongside Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, and Tchaikovsky......
it's a process that developed which is hard to explain but..... eventually pop music realized that it all sounded the same and couldn't make up anything new, so it looked back to Schoenberg and pop music became atonal 0:) 0:) 0:)
I agree here. Also, I realize that Schnittke isn't necessarily "today", but I feel that his Viola Concerto, late Symphonies, and String Quartets will be very highly regarded in the future.
and in the future, there will be old ladies who are disappointed if "their" Schnittke isn't played
Quote from: greg on August 26, 2007, 10:13:34 AM
and in the future, there will be old ladies who are disappointed if "their" Schnittke isn't played
Schnittke becomes salon music? Salon music makes a comeback? Will we have another
fin de siècle period? ;D
Quote from: Corey on August 26, 2007, 10:25:33 AM
Schnittke becomes salon music? Salon music makes a comeback? Will we have another fin de siècle period? ;D
it's a lot more complex than you will ever imagine :o
All right, back on topic now. $:)
Quote from: Corey on August 26, 2007, 12:16:20 PM
All right, back on topic now. $:)
Ferneyhough?..........
Quote from: greg on August 26, 2007, 12:52:05 PM
Ferneyhough?..........
Okay, why do you think so?
Quote from: Corey on August 26, 2007, 01:01:40 PM
Okay, why do you think so?
i don't know, i just took a wild guess, is it right?
Steve Reich & John Adams.
Quote from: greg on August 26, 2007, 01:02:30 PM
i don't know, i just took a wild guess, is it right?
Don't be an ass.
Amongst the recently (last 20 years) deceased, Ligeti and Lutoslawski are I think likely to become mainstream, as I think will some Feldman.
Composers whose profile may rise: Ustvolskaya, Scelsi and Nono, all very distinctive personalities who pushed musical limits.
I don't like making judgement calls on living composers, so I won't. ;)
Quote from: edward on August 26, 2007, 02:23:23 PM
Composers whose profile may rise: Ustvolskaya, Scelsi and Nono, all very distinctive personalities who pushed musical limits.
I don't know... they seem too
ascetic to really be acknowledged by more than a devoted few. I myself find Ustvolskaya painful to listen to, but that says more about me than about her. :)
Quote from: Corey on August 26, 2007, 02:36:42 PM
I don't know... they seem too ascetic to really be acknowledged by more than a devoted few. I myself find Ustvolskaya painful to listen to, but that says more about me than about her. :)
I wouldn't expect any to become mainstream, but they have pretty much no profile right now (at least compared to the Boulezes and Stockhausens of the world) and I don't think that'll remain the case.
Morton Feldman. To put it in his own words, "for some reason, they don't want to give it to me." But I think that eventually they will.
Quote from: edward on August 26, 2007, 02:42:17 PM
I wouldn't expect any to become mainstream, but they have pretty much no profile right now (at least compared to the Boulezes and Stockhausens of the world) and I don't think that'll remain the case.
I don't think the profile of the Boulezes and Stockhausens will remain the same either. Perhaps we should relegate that (well, Stockhausen) to a "Composers whose legacy will be diminished" thread, or perhaps I am being too presumptuous.
Anyone else?
(http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z245/tapiola/tumbleweed.gif)
There is no doubt that John Adams' music will continue to be an influence. I think Steve Reich will have the favor of the strict minimalists, and early Glass will be played into the near future while his latest stuff becomes a footnote.
The Finns and the Nordic region are producing some of the best composers alive today. Many of them I am sure will last. Lindberg, Salonen, Part, Norgard, etc.
The composers I am unsure about are the Re-romantic sort-of-modernist composers from the late seventies and eighties like Zwilich, Tower, and Harbison. Their sound has a generic feel to it that becomes uninteresting very quickly.
A composer I hope gets his due is Walter Piston. Why his symphonies are not played as often, I have no idea.
Quote from: Catison on August 26, 2007, 08:10:36 PM
There is no doubt that John Adams' music will continue to be an influence. I think Steve Reich will have the favor of the strict minimalists, and early Glass will be played into the near future while his latest stuff becomes a footnote.
The Finns and the Nordic region are producing some of the best composers alive today. Many of them I am sure will last. Lindberg, Salonen, Part, Norgard, etc.
The composers I am unsure about are the Re-romantic sort-of-modernist composers from the late seventies and eighties like Zwilich, Tower, and Harbison. Their sound has a generic feel to it that becomes uninteresting very quickly.
A composer I hope gets his due is Walter Piston. Why his symphonies are not played as often, I have no idea.
Quick — three works that should convince me of Adams's greatness.
Go! ;D
Quote from: Haffner on August 26, 2007, 09:54:43 AM
I like Dr. Karl.
For a moment there I thought you were referring to Karl Jenkins. :o
(http://ec2.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000I2KPFK.01._SS400_SCLZZZZZZZ_V36650680_.jpg)
His reputation certainly is immense already. 0:)
I believe that Dutilleux, Berio, Ligeti, Boulez will be listened as great classics in less than 100 years. Regarding younger composers, I think it is too soon to know. I admire Hugues Dufourt (born in 1943) and Brian Ferneyhough (also born in 1943) but I only know some of their works, so I cannot have a global perspective over them.
Quote from: Corey on August 26, 2007, 08:14:54 PM
Quick — three works that should convince me of Adams's greatness. Go! ;D
Chamber Symphony (1992)
Road Movies (1995, for violin and piano)
The Dharma at Big Sur (2003, for electric violin and orchestra)
--Bruce
I'm a bit surprised to see a few composers I thought already were in the strict canon named here...?
Like Ligeti, Lutoslawski, Dutilleux, Ferneyhough, Scelsi, Nono, Feldman, Berio (the last two I'm not particularly fond of but I have an indelible sense of their immense importance). And yes, definitely Norgard. Not to mention Schnittke or Schoenberg.
I wonder, is my perspective somehow skewed because I listen mostly to 20th and 21st century music? ;)
I'm not sure about Rautavaara or Adams. Or even Stockhausen for that matter. But I'm no prophet. I suspect Pendercki's popularity might decline but at least I hope Dobrowolski's will rise. I'm 100% certain that Paweł Szymański's profile is going to rise - what he's been doing for decades now is new and original - but I'm not betting whether he'll ever become a "classic". Oh dear, look at that rant - but isn't this discussion a bit meaningless, on the whole? ;)
Quote from: Maciek on August 27, 2007, 10:03:43 AM
but isn't this discussion a bit meaningless, on the whole? ;)
No, it's for me to find out which composers you (GMGers) think will have a lasting impact on music. :)
Quote from: Corey on August 26, 2007, 08:14:54 PM
Quick — three works that should convince me of Adams's greatness. Go! ;D
Quote from: bhodges on August 27, 2007, 06:47:35 AM
Chamber Symphony (1992)
Road Movies (1995, for violin and piano)
The Dharma at Big Sur (2003, for electric violin and orchestra)
--Bruce
Fine choices, Bruce. How about:
Naïve & Sentimental Music 1998
El Niño 2000
Violin Concerto 1993
Quote from: Corey on August 26, 2007, 02:55:45 PM
I don't think the profile of the Boulezes and Stockhausens will remain the same either. Perhaps we should relegate that (well, Stockhausen) to a "Composers whose legacy will be diminished" thread, or perhaps I am being too presumptuous.
Could you please elaborate why you think this is so?
I keep hearing good things being said about the chap whose Naxos biog I'm pasting below:
AHO, KALEVI (b 1949)
Kalevi Aho, one of Finland’s foremost contemporary composers, was born in Forssa in southern Finland on 9th March 1949. He commenced violin studies in his home town at the age of ten, and his first compositions also date from this time. When he went to university (1968) Aho studied the violin and composition at the Sibelius Academy in Helsinki; his composition teacher was Einojuhani Rautavaara.
After graduating as a composer (1971) Aho continued his studies in Berlin (1971-72) as a pupil of Boris Blacher at the Staatliche Hochschule für Musik und darstellende Kunst. From 1974 until 1988 he was a lecturer in musicology at Helsinki University, and from 1988 until 1993 he was a professor of composition at the Sibelius Academy. Since the autumn of 1993 he has worked in Helsinki as a freelance composer, and in 1994 he was awarded a fifteen-year grant from the Finnish state.
The central focus of Aho’s work consists of large-scale orchestral, chamber and vocal works: his output includes four operas (Avain [The Key; 1977-78], Hyönteiselämää [Insect Life; 1985-87], Salaisuuksien kirja [The Book of Secrets; 1998] and Ennen kuin me kaikki olemme hukkuneet [Before we are all Drowned; 1995/1999]), thirteen symphonies (1969-2003), three chamber symphonies for string orchestra, twelve concertos (for violin, cello, flute, tuba, bassoon, contrabassoon, double bass, clarinet, viola, two for piano and a double concerto for two cellos and orchestra), other orchestral and vocal music and a large amount of music for chamber ensembles and solo instruments. He has also made a number of arrangements and orchestrations of works by other composers. The most important of these is the completion of Uuno Klami’s unfinished ballet Pyörteitä (Whirls): Aho has orchestrated the ballet’s first act and composed the missing third act, with the concert title of Symphonic Dances. Since 1992 Aho has been composer-in-residence of the Lahti Symphony Orchestra.
Aho has also gained a reputation as an assiduous writer on music and columnist. All in all, his literary output currently runs to more than 500 essays, presentations, columns and other writings.
Kalevi Aho has occupied a number of important positions in Finnish cultural life and has been received many international and Finnish prizes for his production.
Quote from: Al Moritz on August 30, 2007, 07:54:08 AM
Could you please elaborate why you think this is so?
I don't think I'm really knowledgeable enough to say why exactly I think so (perhaps I shouldn't have said anything). I just don't think his music "carries" very well. From his experiments in "intuitive" music, to his over-the-top stunts like his LICHT cycle and the Helicopter String Quartet — his works seem too difficult (not to mention expensive) to reproduce. Notice how nearly every performance of his work is supervised by Stockhausen himself. Who will bother with it after he's gone?
Quote from: James on August 30, 2007, 08:26:37 AM
Stockhausen, Boulez, Berio, Nono, Ligeti, Birtwistle, Carter & others...these composers names will always remain, they are important in the development of music in the 2nd half of the 20th century whether you like their works or not...just like Stravinsky, Bartok, Schoenberg-Berg-Webern, Ives etc were key in the development of music for the first half of the century...
I would agree with most of that list (and by implication, disagree with a number of other candidates already proposed). The problem is, are people really distinguishing "composers whose legacy will grow" from "composers I particularly like"? I'm not sure I can make such a distinction myself, especially as we have no idea how aesthetic standards will develop in the next 50-100 years. Any number of unforeseen factors can and probably will affect the "legacy" of classical music to come. (I'd argue that has no factor has had a more important impact on attitudes towards music in the past century than the phonograph record or CD ; conceivably, the Internet will play an equally important role in the century to come.)
Quote from: greg on August 26, 2007, 09:58:43 AM
me too!
i've seen the future............
and good things are in store for Mr.Henning 8)
Hear here!
Quote from: longears on August 27, 2007, 06:38:42 PM
Fine choices, Bruce. How about:
Naïve & Sentimental Music 1998
El Niño 2000
Violin Concerto 1993
Yes, yes, yes - those are great choices, too. He has developed quite a body of work!
--Bruce
Quote from: Corey on August 30, 2007, 08:17:20 AM
I don't think I'm really knowledgeable enough to say why exactly I think so (perhaps I shouldn't have said anything). I just don't think his music "carries" very well. From his experiments in "intuitive" music, to his over-the-top stunts like his LICHT cycle and the Helicopter String Quartet — his works seem too difficult (not to mention expensive) to reproduce. Notice how nearly every performance of his work is supervised by Stockhausen himself. Who will bother with it after he's gone?
Yes, I agree: "difficult" and "expensive" don't augur well for immortality. But then, who knows? As Larry implies in his comments about the unpredictability of aesthetic standards down the road, additional technological developments will no doubt change the landscape. Imagine someone developing a cheaper, quieter helicopter, that somehow blossoms into a huge mass transit alternative...and then... (I'm only half-joking!)
Also true: that composers' legacies have to be considered, and unless there is a "Stockhausen Trust" to ensure that his instructions are carried out in the way that he wants, the works may not be performed all that much. But I think of Boulez and Stockhausen, the former has a superstar conducting career that will only continue to bolster his compositional career, something the latter doesn't really have. I suspect Stockhausen will continue to be off the radar for many people for this reason alone.
And I do think that list James posted is the core of a list that will endure historically, although it really is difficult to predict these things.
Interesting discussion...
--Bruce
Quote from: bhodges on August 30, 2007, 09:18:04 AM
Yes, I agree: "difficult" and "expensive" don't augur well for immortality.
But "difficult" in the past has augured well. It's the more difficult music of the past - which includes Mozart and Beethoven, Brahms and Wagner - that has survived over their simpler counterparts. (Did someone say "Dittersdorf"?)
Surfersdirt is more compex than most of you think! Ha-ha-ha! 8)
Quote from: Corey on August 30, 2007, 08:17:20 AM
I don't think I'm really knowledgeable enough to say why exactly I think so (perhaps I shouldn't have said anything). I just don't think his music "carries" very well. From his experiments in "intuitive" music, to his over-the-top stunts like his LICHT cycle and the Helicopter String Quartet — his works seem too difficult (not to mention expensive) to reproduce. Notice how nearly every performance of his work is supervised by Stockhausen himself. Who will bother with it after he's gone?
You have a point to some extent. Stockhausen himself has said that his works were children that were difficult to parent. However, he was wise enough to make, for example, reduced excerpts from LICHT that are easily performable (from the expense point of view, not from that of playing the works), e.g. Ave for basset-horn and alto flute from the scene Message in Montag aus Licht. There is even a "Stockhausen-Trio", consisting of truly outstanding players, that has dedicated itself to performances of such works:
http://www.michelemarelli.com/stockhausentrio.htm
And few of these performances are supervised by the composer himself. Also the Klavierstücke (piano pieces) are performed all over the world by diverse players, with Stockhausen rarely being present. Most pieces of the new cycle KLANG (Sound, the 24 hours of the day) are for small forces as well, and easily performable.
During the Stockhausen summer courses in Kürten, Germany, numerous young interpreters are learning the music, often giving tremendous performances. Even though this is all on the level of soloist(s) or small ensemble, understandably this makes Stockhausen happy and hopeful about the future of his music.
Furthermore, as Larry says, live performances only tell half the story about music's future. Time will tell how it all plays out with records, CDs and the internet.
History suggests that in order to endure, art must adhere to enduring values, not just to the fashions of its age.
adams will be around while and i'm glad. don't know about his cohorts.
dj
Oh ditto to John Adams and the Finns born circa 1950s. Thanks Brett and Bruce, that's who I was going to mention too.
It takes a long time for music to spread, I'm still introducing people all the time to John Adams's stuff besides Chairman Dances and Short Ride, they just haven't gotten around to hearing it, and totally love it. Harmonielehre is a masterpiece IMO. And I love most everything of his. And Reich, Glass, Nyman, Corigliano, their legacies have and are certainly growing in recent years.
Very, very few music people I know (in person) are even aware of the Finnish crop, I say I'm into Finnish composers recently, and they say oh, yeah, Sibelius! Well, love him of course, and sometimes they sort of know of Rautavaara, but seriously, you say Saariaho, Aho, Salonen, Hakola, and Lindberg, and they think you're speaking in tongues! ;D Only our composition professor here really knows of them. But when people hear their music they have positive responses, and find their music very attractive.
It's interesting that those last three, born in 1958, all quite radically changed style around early to mid 90s, going from very modernist, thorny to much more accessible, fun, colorful pieces, I think a degree of accessibilty is something people are really looking for these days. We even have a section on that in our new edition of our Music History text (the Grout/Palisca book), heading "The New Accessibility". A few others, fit in there that are pretty appealing too, Michael Torke, Michael Daugherty, and Richard Danielpour, Christopher Rouse, people seem to enjoy this "intelligent synthesis" going on that is a feature of many of the recent orchestral compositions today.
Other new updates to the widely used text "The History of Western Music", greatly expanded section on John Adams, mentions of Sofia Gubaidulina, Joan Tower, Ellen Twaffe Zwilich. Peter Schickele gets a mention too. ;D Neo-Romantics: late Penderecki, late Rochberg (I hadn't heard of him), David Del Tredici and a feature on "Final Alice". Zwilich as an example of "accessible modernism", Alfred Schinittke as an example of "polystylism".
Quote from: karlhenning on August 30, 2007, 10:10:15 AM
Surfersdirt is more compex than most of you think! Ha-ha-ha! 8)
???
Quote from: Corey on August 26, 2007, 02:55:45 PM
I don't think the profile of the Boulezes and Stockhausens will remain the same either. Perhaps we should relegate that (well, Stockhausen) to a "Composers whose legacy will be diminished" thread, or perhaps I am being too presumptuous.
No more or less presumptuous than to pose the question as you did originally. All I can say is that, if the best we can offer as a legacy are composers on the level of John Adams, Steve Reich, Philip Glass, Michael Daugherty, and Michael Torke, we're in deep doo-doo. Some of it is respectable, and Adams has shown some signs of growth in a work like Naive and Sentimental, but on the whole this group represents an impoverished, diminished level of achievement compared to what the earlier half of the 20th century produced, not to mention later and stronger voices like Lutoslawski, Ligeti, and Carter. A typical Reich or Glass composition seems to me comparable in banality to those enormous structures by Richard Stella currently on view at MoMA in New York, where you wander in and out for a half-hour wondering if there's anything of substance at all, which there is not.
Quote from: Larry Rinkel on August 31, 2007, 04:02:25 AM
No more or less presumptuous than to pose the question as you did originally. All I can say is that, if the best we can offer as a legacy are composers on the level of John Adams, Steve Reich, Philip Glass, Michael Daugherty, and Michael Torke, we're in deep doo-doo. Some of it is respectable, and Adams has shown some signs of growth in a work like Naive and Sentimental, but on the whole this group represents an impoverished, diminished level of achievement compared to what the earlier half of the 20th century produced, not to mention later and stronger voices like Lutoslawski, Ligeti, and Carter. A typical Reich or Glass composition seems to me comparable in banality to those enormous structures by Richard Stella currently on view at MoMA in New York, where you wander in and out for a half-hour wondering if there's anything of substance at all, which there is not.
I'm in total agreement, but I'm not that familiar with Adams's work so I couldn't comment on him.
Quote from: Larry Rinkel on August 31, 2007, 04:02:25 AM
No more or less presumptuous than to pose the question as you did originally. All I can say is that, if the best we can offer as a legacy are composers on the level of John Adams, Steve Reich, Philip Glass, Michael Daugherty, and Michael Torke, we're in deep doo-doo. Some of it is respectable, and Adams has shown some signs of growth in a work like Naive and Sentimental, but on the whole this group represents an impoverished, diminished level of achievement compared to what the earlier half of the 20th century produced, not to mention later and stronger voices like Lutoslawski, Ligeti, and Carter. A typical Reich or Glass composition seems to me comparable in banality to those enormous structures by Richard Stella currently on view at MoMA in New York, where you wander in and out for a half-hour wondering if there's anything of substance at all, which there is not.
I agree about those Richard Serra sculptures. I was at MoMA last Sunday and I couldn't figure out if there was anything more to them than the scale and the fact that I was closer to them than any other sculpture I've seen. I looked through a book of interviews with him at the bookstore and he seems like an interesting guy, so maybe I'll investigate further.
Quote from: paul on August 31, 2007, 09:26:06 AM
I agree about those Richard Serra sculptures. I was at MoMA last Sunday and I couldn't figure out if there was anything more to them than the scale and the fact that I was closer to them than any other sculpture I've seen. I looked through a book of interviews with him at the bookstore and he seems like an interesting guy, so maybe I'll investigate further.
Thank you, Paul. Somehow I confused Richard Stella and Frank Serra in my mind. :D
http://moma.org/exhibitions/2007/serra/flash.html (http://moma.org/exhibitions/2007/serra/flash.html)