Words of Concerns on
Western Musical Culture
in America at
The End of The 20th Century
By Richard Byron Strunk
Delivered to The Salon
At the Foxfire Lounge on November 21,1998
Minneapolis,MN.
The purpose of my speaking to you concerning the 3 works you are about to hear
is simply to clarify and briefly explain the new compositional tools that I
invented and discovered many years ago in the very early ‘80s. Throughout
these many years I have used these new compositional tools to author a number
of new works including these recent works you are about to hear.
However, before I speak concerning these new works
I’d like to give you some sense of where I am coming from as a composer.
You are welcome to like or dislike; agree or disagree with what I am about to
say. I am not primarily trying to convince you to think like me concerning music,
but after many years of studies, observations, and thoughtful consideration
I have reached the point where I am prepared and ready to share with other people
some understanding of myself as a composer. Please bare with me.
‘New Music’, simply put means, ‘New developments in Music’,
or as the California composer David Cope put it for his 1970’s book title,
‘New directions in music’. It is quite possible and often done that
a composition of music is made containing, inferring, or implying no knew development
in craft, skills, tools. and techniques of musical composition within the full
context of Western Culture. These pieces might be called a new work, such as,
a new song; a new sonatina; a new fugue; etc., but they are not New Music, since
their is nothing substantively new in terms of musical tones (lyrics don’t
count) in what they offer. Much music has been written or made that adds little
to expanding the composers resources of craft. Yet, there are still composers
well studied in the craft of their profession within the context of tools, skills,
and methods of Western Culture, who knowingly reach beyond the well-known ways
of cliche, of merely making and remaking more and more old coherent sense patterns
in very worn, well traveled, and quite familiar tonal territories and methods
of musical craft. These composers choose to step into unknown and unexplored
possibilities of making a kind of music never before heard, or thought, or felt
within Western Culture.
These composers by their courage and works give
to the rest of us and later generations additional new compositional resources
and options in the art of making music in Western Culture. Thanks to these New
Music composers our hearts, minds. and souls now have additional musical options,
new musical possibilities, and greater freedom for musical expression of fresh
and newly born musical sense-patterns. Without these composers continuing contributions
to Western Culture and the continuing performance of these sometimes evolutionary,
sometimes revolutionary, and sometimes revelatory new works, music making might
simply degenerate into the performance of old, well-worn, and very familiar
works by long dead composers turning the creative art of music making into merely
a history museum of performing art of the past with some sadly, desperately
or smugly trying to convince us that music ism’t primarily a living, vital,
and present-tense creative form of art. It is ironic that much of the music
of the past that we now find so familiar and is so well understood and is so
well accepted by audiences was often New Music in its day breaking into new
musical possibilities of its time and many times these unfamiliar, misunderstood
or not understood, works were rejected by audiences rather than enjoyed.
Years ago I was told by a composer -who -teaches, that Mozart had one time been
in a bit of a financial pickle and needed to generate some quick cash. He decided
to write a string quartet and have a concert to make some quick bucks. It was
a dismal failure financially and was quite unpopular. Why? In this quartet he
had used two violas and one violin for an overall darker timber rather than
the tradition up to that time of the brighter timber of two violins and one
viola. What Mozart had done was an innovation. something new and unfamiliar,
and added a new possibility in the writing of string quartets for all the generations
of composers since that time. Thus, this work was important and significant
by expanding music into new possibilities and new freedom or options of expression
for the heart, mind, and soul of the composer in the art and craft of making
music for audiences.
Beethoven, in his 4th Symphony, because of some of its innovations was severely
panned by the young critic-composer Weber as ‘being a madhouse with the
instruments being the insane inmates’ although he did add that their were
flashes of genius. This work although important and significant to advances
in the art and craft of making music in the West was not popular. Yet today,
audiences now quite familiar with its innovations take it almost for granted
and ‘naturally’ enjoy it on its’ once innovative musical terms
rather then with Weber’s limited prescribed expectations of the tonally
familiar of his time.
Stravinsky’s premier of ‘The Rite of Spring’ with its innovative
use of quickly changing meter and the utilization of a compositional form based
in discontinuity (like putting to gather puzzle pieces to make the whole) rather
than the traditional formal structures based in continuity methods, caused a
riot in the audience because it was so incomprehensible and unfamiliar to their
prescribed learned expectations of what is music. Decades later, now at the
end of this century this reaction by that audience to this New and innovative
music seems really surprising to us, for we now accept Stravinsky’s then
radical innovations as simply an expansion of new compositional resources for
the serious composer. This work , ‘The Rite of Spring’, is enjoyed
today and known as an extremely significant and important work of music wan’t
a popular work at its premier.
In these examples, as in countless others, historic significance or importance
in the art of music making has to do with innovation and adding new resources
to the craft of making music and not simply because a work is popular. In fact,
Clementi was a popular composer in his day (the Italian Mozart), but without
the significant contributions to the art of music that were provided by Mozart
and so historically now sounds a bit run-of-the-mill and has much less significance.
Hummel was as popular, perhaps more so than Beethoven, but again without the
major contributions to the art of music making that were provided by Beethoven
and so historically sounds rather run-of-the-mill for that time and has much
less significance. Does this mean that to be historically important in music
one has to write unpopular works. Not at all. Mozart, Beethoven, and Stravinsky
all had some popular successes, but whether their innovations and works were
celebrated or booed; popular or unpopular this wasn't’t ultimately the
primary criteria and determiner of their historic importance to succeeding generations
of creative musicians. What was important to succeeding generations of composers
was their authoring new and innovative open metaphoric tone patterns of content
and/or form making for expansions in the craft of music, whether popular or
unpopular. In many of these cases I personally bet that even though composers
like to shock the audience once in a while that these composers often had hoped
that these innovative works might attain some popular appreciation even though
it was these very innovations that by going beyond the commonly accepted norms
of their time often alienated their audiences. The point is that popularity
or unpopularity of works is not a primary determiner in Western Culture of significance
or insignificance in the history of music.
What of making a livelihood as a serious composer versed in the tools and skills
of their profession? Business, and making a living with money as the medium
of exchange is something we don’t question much in this country and even
though our country is suppose to be a representative democracy it is today very
much a mercantile society with business ways, business priorities, and business
criteria’s of thought often ruling as common sense. Still, money, has
only been with us for an extremely short time in the history and prehistory
of our species and although very real by our current customs isn't’t anything
close to being a component of what has been real since the beginning of the
species. The work of music making has been around for eons before money and
commerce ever entered the picture. Money and commerce are the new punks on the
block in human society, but the work of music making, not meaning to tread on
anyone’s religious faith, according to both the Vedas of the Hindus and
the Bible of the Christians is about as old as creation. What this means is
that the art of music making may have determinates, priorities, and criteria’s
and a way of assessing and living reality that are different and sometimes in
conflict with the commonly accepted business priorities, norms and views of
our current mercantile society in America.
For many centuries serious composers in the West were servants of the church
and the church was our patron. Even though their might at times have been imposed
limitations upon what we did in music by the church still their was innovation
and new developments authored in the craft of musical composition. The 6 main
diatonic modes were developed along with various polyphonic forms of compositions
including the large scale work of the time the mass. If the creative composer
was only limited to getting funds for his work based on its mass appeal or immediate
popularity much significant work in the art of music making might have been
even more delayed then it already was simply by having to convince merely the
church overseers that what innovations we developed were in the best interest
of the church.
Later, serious composers in the West had two patrons for a long time again measured
in centuries between the church and the aristocratic courts. Again we as creative
composers in Western Culture continued with innovations. Bach, synthesizing
an equilibrium and balance between the old horizontal contrapuntal orientation
with the vertical or chord coincidence of tones that eventually led to a primary
interest in the vertical or chord coincidence of tones that came to be called
harmonic progression and led to developing new homophonic compositional forms
such as the Sonata based on harmonic progressions. The chords commonly used
in pop music today were discovered or invented by classical composers. The modes
and keys used by pop music today were discovered or invented by classical composers.
More recently in the past century the serious composer could actually earn a
living by composing quality and substantive musical compositions. There was
a sector of society that was musically trained and literate and these people
wanted new music to play at home. With the advent of records at the beginning
of this century the situation changed. People no longer needed to be musically
literate and buy published works by composers to play at home. Now they simply
bought records of music and played these records. This was the beginning of
the music-business and the end of the serious composer being able to earn a
living by publishing their works. For one of the main priorities in the music
-business was to make a profit and that met that it would mainly produce recordings
of music that would be liked as quickly as possible by as many people as possible
in order to make big bucks. This was a business priority and criteria for success
in business; but was and is not a musical priority and criteria for success
in music.
For most of this century the serious composers in America have simply found
another patron to provide them with funding to continue with their musically
substantive and important creative work. That new patron has been the colleges
and universities. There are pluses such as having college ensembles around to
perform new works, but because of the duties of teaching there is much less
time to devote to composing. For the most part, today, there really are no viable
options for making a livelihood for the serious composer in this country except
by teaching or holding some kind of ‘day-job’ leaving little time
for the serious creative composer competent and well studied in their craft
to compose new music.
Still, during this century there have been significant and important contributions
made to the art of music-making by numerous creative and serious composers well
versed in the craft of music. Debussy’s use of the whole tone scale; Schonenberg’s
intense Chromatic method; Milhaud’s poly tonalities; Bartok’s use
of altered or synthetic scales; and so much more. The craft and art of making
music has expanded incredibly giving the serious composer of today seemingly
unlimited choices with many more kinds of musical expression possible with tones
then ever before known in Western culture.
Meanwhile, The business-music industry in the past 80 to 90 years has grown
steadily until today it has become a huge commercial success and folk music’s
indigenous to our country that were formerly the mainstream of listening for
the musically illiterate general populace have been replaced with various kinds
of uncreative commercial-music’s, plus in the mainstream populace there
is an almost complete lack of appreciation and almost total ignorance of the
creative work done by the serious composers of today and earlier in this century.
I used the term uncreative in describing the commercial-music’s. Let me
explain with a simple example. If a child is learning for the first time during
a piano lesson about basic harmonic chords within the traditional tonal modal
system and on its own while at home is playing around with the harmonies and
comes up with the notion of secondary dominates has this child created something
new? Within the limited frame-of-reference of only the individual child’s
life, the child has indeed been significantly creative and has created something
new. However, within the context of Western culture as a whole, secondary dominates
are nothing new and were actually created centuries ago. So within the context
of Western culture nothing creative has been done by this child, yet within
the context of just this child’s individual life the spark of creative
work has truly begun and needs to be encouraged by the teacher. If the child
chooses to continue to devote its life to the learning and study of the musical
literature of Western culture, after many years of study, coupled with application
in composing and / or performance, there may come a time when from this cultivated
original creative spark the child, now an adult and well versed in the craft
of music, might come up with a viable and significant innovation that is indeed
new to Western culture and with this truly creative contribution to the art
of music has now reached the stage where they are both creative within their
individual life and within Western culture as a whole. Commercial-music’s
exist within the greater context of Western culture as a whole and within that
larger frame-of-reference is much like that child making secondary dominates
for the first time. Yes, within the individual life of a commercial musician
they may have done something new for themselves, or new within the severely
limited context of the business of commercialized-music’s, but in the
higher or greater context of Western culture as a whole the commercial musician
very rarely, if ever, does anything that is actually significantly creative
and new.
Currently and for some time now, the vast majority of commercial-music’s
are limited (because of mass profit-incentives) mainly to the writing of songs
or songlike variants (such as rap). This is true in all the various sorts of
commercial music’s, more accurately called business-formats then styles,
such as Rock, Country, Funk, Soul, New Age (a watered down parody of the serious
creative works of the minimalist movement), Hip-Hop, and others. These songs
or lyric-based compositions (for the most part) often have duration’s
of around 3 minutes. The reason why this is the case has to do with business
priorities; not music priorities. In all the different kinds of commercial-music’s
profit-incentive rules. Since the song form is the easiest, fastest, and most
immediately assessable form of music to the most people and the business priority
is to make as quick and large a profit possible you have mainly songs being
done by commercial musicians, produced and recorded by recording companies and
played on commercial radio stations. Plus, there is a business reason why they
so often only have a duration of around 3 minutes. It is because that is the
attention span that sells the most currently with the general listening public.
With business priorities governing they obviously want music that uses harmonies
and modes already long familiar to the most people possible so the songs done
with these long familiar chords and modes will be immediately accepted and liked,
giving nothing new or creative in harmonic or melodic content so as to sell
as many recordings as possible to make as much money as possible. Using more
creative harmonies and modes developed in this century in the serious art of
Jazz (not the commercialized sugar-candy jazz) and by the serious composers
won’t work in the business of commercial-music in America because creative
uses of harmony and mode won’t be nearly as quick to be liked or sell
as much as using already long familiar and uncreative musical materials.
If you flip open a college catalogue of course offerings and majors you will
notice that there are dozens of various disciplines or professions possible
to choose. Business is but one of these. Among many choices a person might become
a Theologian, a Medical Doctor, or possibly a Composer. Today, the commercialized-music
business with the business interest of profit-incentive rules the commercial-music’s
for business priorities, rather then businesses funding the creative work of
studied and competent composers and serving the best interests of the art of
music and our societies cultural life. This means that a kid who has learned
perhaps only a dozen chords on the electric guitar and in a rock band can be
used and promoted by business as a significant and important musician because
they are selling a lot of recordings. That is a lie. This musician prompted
by business and promoted by business for business interests may be significant
and important in the history of business, but is, in fact, insignificant and
unimportant in the history of music in the West. Today, in this mercantile society
if you’ve learned some of the tinker-toy basics of harmony and modes,
about a semester’s worth of study, you ‘re a composer. That is like
a medical student taking one semester in medical school then saying they are
now a medical Doctor. It is a tragic farce, but American society buys it, unaware
of the cultural mediocrity and shame it means to us all.
Unaware, for how can the general public be aware? Most of the radio stations
and TV stations are commercialized and in their profit incentive interest aren't’t
going to tell the people the truth; Most recording companies are basically interested
in making their profits from uncreative, but popular commercialized-music's
rather than promoting recordings of New, and substantive creative music that
would profit our country culturally. High schools spend little to no time in
music classes teaching the students about modern developments in serious music.
Even the Classical stations, and major orchestras often need to program mainly
what they already know will be popular (Old music from previous generations
of composers) to please their listeners and keep their funding secure. I’Ave
been listening to a mainstream noncommercial jazz station for years and I still
haven’t heard any late ‘Trane. How many Americans even know about
and celebrate our great American Symphonists such as: Roy Harris; William Schumann;
Arron Copeland; Samual Barber; and so many more. What of the accolades we traditionally
give to great inventors and explorers in this country like Thomas Edison, Bell,
Lindbergh, and again recently to John Glen. Yet in music in this country within
the context of the general public there is little or no knowledge, appreciation,
or mention of Charles Ives, John Cage, Harry Partch and many others. What about
the accolades we give to people great in sports. What if in professional sports
we as a society gave the highest salaries to the least competent players and
the lowest salaries to the most skilled and competent players and further if
the player is too good, too great at their sport we kick them out of their professional
sport so all they could do is play their sport in sand lots after working their
‘day’ job. This would be ethically and economically unjust. This
is what we do as a society with serious and commercial music. Nothing much has
changed in the past 20 years concerning this situation. In the 1970’s
I told a woman I was a composer and she said, “Oh, like Barry ?Manalow?.”
More recently, I was doing a performance with a group that was doing pieces
from various African cultures and I was asked of what culture was my work? I
replied, “the West.” She had a blank look on her face, so I said,
“Western Culture.” Then a light dawned in her eyes; she figured
I was from somewhere out west, like California.
Even our news media of both TV and newsprint cater primarily to what is of mass
appeal and most popular, mistakenly thinking that means important, while often
ignoring the actual substantive and significant new music occurring in performance
venues in our communities. Recently, Mr. Kerrnis(?) won the Pulitzer prize for
one of his musical compositions. I found out by the forum newsletter. I didn't’t
hear about it on the TV news or Newspaper. One of the most important events
of the year in our communities musical cultural life, an event that could even
be considered of national cultural interest, was as far as the news media goes
pretty much ignored. Even more neglected are the smaller accomplishments in
the field and art of music. Was the landmark New Music series covered by Channel
9’s The Buzz; what about the Walker’s New music series? All this
and much more ignored and neglected by the news media. The news media considers
supporting and promoting the commercialized-music events to make more significant
profits for the businesses promoting these events as being the important criteria
for public reporting rather than significant and creative advances within our
culture as determined by criteria’s of importance inherent within the
Fine Arts and not of business. The news media isn't’t reporting the significant
cultural news within our communities to make for a culturally informed public,
but sadly for us all, are simply serving as commercial-music’s news-lackeys.
What of Pop Culture in this country? More accurately called a business formatting
system geared primarily for profit making rather than culture making. A number
of years ago back in the winter of ‘90 through ‘91 I was very financially
poor, and was living in a large basement room of a warehouse without a kitchen
or bathroom. I had little money to spare for food, but had been given a number
of boxes of sugar cookies from my family for the holidays. So, when ever I got
hungry I nibbled on a few sugar cookies and my hunger soon abated. After a couple
of months of this I was hospitalized because I was having manic and paranoia
problems. It was determined that not only was I severely malnourished, but my
body was actually starving. I had lost a great deal of weight. During those
2 months I was eating those sugar cookies I was on an almost constant sugar
high and felt great. If I had not been hospitalized and put back on a nutritious
diet within another month I’d have most probably starved to death, but
with a sugar high smile on my face. It is obvious to most of us that a diet
based solely on sugar isn't’t going to give us the nutrition our bodies
actually need to remain and grow healthy. What if in our country all food stuffs
other then candy store items were no longer offered to the public. Would this
be healthy for the American populace. Much of the uncreative musical materials
used in the making of pop songs in various business formats (styles) is basically
like cotton candy, chocolate bars, and gumdrops. Sure, as a treat now and then,
this is fine, but as the main or only cultural diet for the hearts, minds, and
souls of the American people this is deplorable and unhealthy. Business, in
using music to make the bucks has promoted primarily adolescent fancies, feelings,
and thought in its institutionalization of a business that mandates a perpetual
youth cult and sells this as ‘culture’. Are there no adults in America?
What about someone who wants something more than adolescent frustration, childish
rebellion, immature thought, and juvenile dreams within ones culture? In America,
they are out of luck. I am reminded here of what Saint Paul once said, It went
something like this, “When I was a child I spoke (and acted) as a child;
and now as a man I have put away childish (not child-like) things and I speak
(and act) as a man.” My theory of American beer also relates to this situation
metaphorically. Make the beer as tasteless as possible so to offend no one and
then load all the money in to advertising that it is a great tasting beer that
way you can sell the product to masses of people rather then to just a few.
In Europe quality matters and their beers actually have strong tastes and so
the ones who like it really enjoy it, but it doesn't’t have the mass market
potential of the tasteless beers brewed in America. Since European breweries
are more concerned with quality over quantity in the selling of their beer they
make better beer and enough profit to survive rather than in America where the
breweries make massive profits on massive sales of beer with little taste. So
also the music’s of Europe still have often a strong creative taste and
although sufficient far less profit when compared to the States who have massive
profits with music’s of a weak uncreative taste.
I listened to Lake Hammond's Jazz show on KSJN recently and he was interviewing
a Jazz Saxophonist. This creative musician had located to Germany and put it
simply, “Europe is a better situation for the artist than the states since
it doesn't’t have the ‘Profit Incentive’. In European states
the Radio stations are nationalized and run by the government, so a creative,
competent and studied musician actually has a good chance of getting their CD’s
broadcast, that is near impossible in the states. The recording companies are
often cognizant of their cultural heritage and looking for new significant creative
work in music to record. There is funding from the European governments proud
of their musical heritage, they invest in the creative musician in commissions
and grants and help to support the creative composer. There is far more funding
for the creative arts in Europe than in the states. The people in Europe listening
to their truly public radio and TV stations are exposed to New music in their
culture routinely when compared to the states. What is sad about this is that
in order to succeed a fine American Saxophonist practicing a serious art medium
that as he said was and is an American Art Form had to move to Europe to survive.
What is profitable for business isn't’t always right, good, or healthy
for America or the cultural life in America. Have we forgotten the sweat shops
and children working 12 - 14 hour days at the turn of the century in this country?
In European countries their are national health-care plans so even without money
to pay or insurance if a person is sick the Doctors will treat them. This might
not always be cost effective in the short run, but in their medical professions
the valuing and saving of human life is a higher value and much older priority
than too strict and rigid business points of view and priorities of profit making.
So Is the Pop culture without any real redeeming value? There have been some
partially creatively successful efforts by creative Musicians within the Pop
sector of music making. The German band ‘CAN’ did some very creative
work using a rock ensemble format back in the ‘70’s and ‘80’s;
also the English band Henry Cow a name that punned on the name of the serious
American composer Henry Cowell, did some very innovative work with the standard
rock ensemble. Plus, Fred Frith from that band took off with Prepared electric
guitar derived from Henry Cowell’s experiments with prepared piano. Frank
Zappa in our country did some excellent creative work. Early work by King Crimson
was also at times highly creative. Still, these and other creative bands and
musicians haven’t been promoted and successful in the mainstream of the
Pop business industry and for the most part were although musically significant
merely existing on the sidelines of the mainstream pop business world.
Pop music as judged by music criteria’s and priorities rather than by
business criteria’s and priorities does offer us the audience a little
nutrition for our hearts, minds, and souls in three ways mainly. The first is
the 3rd stream efforts of creative bands akin to the ones just mentioned, and
the second is when the pop musician puts their roots back into the folk spectrum
of indigenous music’s of our culture. Folk roots that were originally
exploited by recording businesses primarily for profit making rather then any
altruistic cultural reason. After all, Pop hasn't’t created much, but
rather has exploited musical materials that originated in the serious and creative
fields of classical music, jazz, and the folk music’s of long ago such
as making music with chords derived from 18th century classical harmonic practice,
and using scale-modes invented by Classical composers in the Middle ages, and
the blues note (probably a century old folk music by now, developed originally
in the folk slave-songs of African slaves). Musically Pop isn't’t made
of modern musical materials relevant to and possibly reflecting our times, but
uses musical materials seriously outdated and out molded not to reflect or be
relevant to our time, but to make music with materials already very familiar
to the audiences ear, to sell the pop songs to as many people as possible to
make big bucks. Still, when Pop emphasizes its folk roots it tends musically
to hold a little more musical worth for the discerning ear. Thirdly, Pop, not
in its music, but in its lyrics, occasionally offers us a great reward, such
as the almost pure folk song by Bob Dylan, ‘Blowing in the Wind’,
that musically is without any importance accept to so simply and perfectly support
a mature and thoughtful lyric that might well prove to be timeless in significance.
What of Film music? A composer once told me that is mainly effect for underscoring
the films visual component and usually there is little to no compositional concern
to creating music that can stand up on its own merits. Plus a lot of those film
composers simply rip off and use sound events that were originally created by
a serious composer in a concert piece; these film composers make their movie
effect music derived from the creative experiments and work of serious composers
of the present and past without ever giving those serious composers the accreditation
they deserve, such as using a 12-tone dissonance derivative from Schoenberg’s
work to create a feeling of anxiousness and suspense without ever accrediting
Schoenberg. The composer who told me this, years ago now, also mentioned that
there were a few exceptions to this state of affairs in Hollywood, such as the
composer Bernard Hermann who had developed his own highly personal and creative
method and style of composition. Still, I don’t trust Hollywood much.
I’d like to say now for the record that I am not anti-business, but merely
pointing out that in many areas of our lives business terms, priorities, and
values simply don’t make sense or are inappropriate in regard to bettering
ourselves, our society, our culture, and our country. There are many businesses
that help out with food-drives; and clothing drives; and other worthwhile charities
to help the disabled and/or less economically fortunate among us, and many times
they do this not merely because of tax-write offs. If businesses really want
to help build our culture into greatness in this country they could start by
giving more funding for commissions and grants for new music by serious composers
and serious Jazz artists. This is how for millennia serious artists have made
their livelihood, by patrons, since any significant work in the Fine Arts will
because it is creative work often be either very difficult to mass market or
not immediately liked or simply not yet possible to be appreciated by the often
musically illiterate mass populace. Recently, I heard on the TV news that The
Rolling Stones are making ‘music history’ in the Twin cities since
some of their tickets for their November concert were selling for $150.00 dollars.
In the history annals of business this might be deemed significant, but in the
history of music The Stones even with their huge popularity haven’t actually
done much of creative significance when compared to many less known and sometimes
unknown non-commercial musicians devoted to creating substantive New music in
the West. Garth Brooks was recently acclaimed, “The Greatest Recording
Artist of all Time”, simply because he has sold more recordings than anyone.
What is true here is only that he has sold the most recordings(and this means
he is ‘great’ in and of business), but this does in no way mean
that he has done anything of musical significance in Western Culture. There
are many artists truly far more remarkably skilled and creating in truth great
music in the West that have only a limited appeal to the commercialized mass
media business-manufactured audiences and whose recordings although not selling
nearly as many as Garth, are, unlike Garth, actually music recordings of great
musical significance in Western Culture. It is these recording artists although
often not hot sellers or of massive popular appeal that are by music criteria’s
(not business criteria’s) in truth, “The Greatest Recording Artists
of all Time”. Even though McDonalds has probably sold more hamburgers
than any other restaurant in history doesn't’t mean it ranks as one of
the top world restaurants. On a ranking list of the100 finest restaurants in
the world McDonalds doesn't’t even make the grade. Again, let me emphasize
that in business history these ‘pop’ icons are significant, but
in music history they haven’t even attained sufficient significant musical
accomplishment to earn even a footnote. In most of the countries in Europe,
as well as, some other countries also included in Western Culture unlike as
in America where commercial junk music serves primarily to further real business
interests ,defined in a business perspective, by business priorities, in these
commercial-free countries, business serves primarily to further real music interests,
defined in a musical perspective, by musical priorities (priorities that by
really being creative are often at odds with American business priorities of
mass merchandising). ‘Pop Culture’ isn't’t a real musical
culture, but merely a commercial-mass-media business industry. Why can’t
businesses become patrons of New music composers and perhaps the sometimes rather
outrageous, vain, and superficial Stars of pop music could also start contributing
big bucks for the creation of significant new works of music by serious composers
that unlike their superficial works could actually be important in the history
of Western music culture within America.
As I said earlier, once in a while I too want a candy bar or possibly a scoop
of ice cream for a treat; and so I too sometimes slip on the Stones, or Moody
blues and give the adolescent within me a treat. Yet I don’t exaggerate
and inflate this music’s importance and deceitfully credit this dance
music that is made primarily for listening and dancing by teens as having major
creative cultural significance. Even Paul McCartney, of the Beatles, I heard
he said a while back, that they were just a good rock band. This was both humble
of him and honest; It was admirable that he said this. He wasn't’t trying
to pass himself off as having the importance in music history, as let us say
Stravinsky, or other significant serious composers of the 20th century. I’am
not saying get rid of these music’s primarily designed for adolescents,
but I am asking the commercial-music industry to reevaluate itself and get honest;
dispense with all the inflated and fraudulent hype (lies) and start helping
to produce and promote serious works of new music by the creative and educated
composers of our time in our country. There won’t be mass profits of money
made in this, but the mass public and American cultural life will reap great
profits musically. Currently, business-music in America sells the illusion of
freedom as freedom, while in Europe they actually have real freedom. Due in
part to a lack of sufficient education in modern music in our public schools
we have a mass populace left pretty much in ignorance concerning new music in
America and they can be and often are manipulated by all the commercial-music's
hype and so the business-music-industry in America sells the delusion of creativity
as creativity, while in Europe they actually have real creativity.
Is the only way to become a real composer is by formal study by attaining a
BA and MA in music theory and composition. Not at all, The important criteria
for having attained at least a minimal competence level and knowledge of musical
craft to be called a composer is by paying the dues of doing and completing
all those studies that will bring you to at least a minimal skill and knowledge
level needed to be a composer. This can be done by apprenticeship, by taking
informal privet lessons, learning from colleagues, or even just doing it by
oneself by going to the library and reading the theory books, and history books,
and musical scores and practicing what you learn from these resources. If all
you want is a little knowledge of harmony, modes, and keys in order to write
folk or Pop songs this can be accomplished within a few months of study, but
just this little bit of knowledge and ability isn't’t sufficient to label
oneself a composer or professional. Calling oneself a composer when one isn't’t
besides being dishonest, disrespects those people who actually have spent the
years of study needed to be called a composer. Call yourself a Hobbyist, Student
composer, Pop songwriter, or Commercial Artist, if that is what you are, but
don’t call yourself a composer, a professional, or an Artist, or creative
Artist unless you’Ave paid your dues in education by either a formal or
informal process. Merely making a lot of money by music isn't’t a determiner
of whether you have attained the minimally required professional know-how in
music to call yourself a professional in music. There are a number of composers,
artist, and professionals in music that are out-of-work, or between jobs, but
they are still professionals even if they aren't’t currently making a
lively hood with music because they do have at least the minimal required professional
know-how in music to call themselves professionals. There are many commercial
musicians with little professional learning that have made it in the “big
time’ with tinker-toy adolescent fast-food like junk music such as Prince,
that still haven’t earned the right to call themselves either Artists,
Professionals, or Composers in the craft of musical composition even though
dishonestly and disrespectfully to the profession and art of music they, or
sometimes others in describing them, undeservedly misuse these labels to describe
these commercial Pop Icons.
One of the hopes, in this great democracy experiment called America, as was
true in other democracies in the world, was that we wanted within our country
to give each of our citizens the opportunity to better themselves. No longer,
was a college liberal arts education only reserved for the upper class aristocrats,
but this possibility was now assessable to anyone of us; No longer, was the
wealth controlled by the heredity of the upper class aristocrats, but the possibility
of succeeding financially was now an opportunity for anyone of us; No longer
would the finer things in life such as the Fine Arts be reserved for the privileged
few, but now would be available for anyone of us to enjoy; and so on.. The idea
in this enlightenment wasn't’t to tear everyone down from being highly
educated into ignorance; or to tear down the creative and substantive works
in the Fine Arts into tinker-toy commercial junk music’s, but just the
opposite, to have the opportunity and freedom to uplift ourselves into a realm
of a bit better material situation; a higher education and allowed to learn
about and enjoy and appreciate the Fine Arts. Today, in mass society we have
developed a new aristocracy of celebrities of wealth, and fame, and in idolization
of these entertainment stars we have in this country neglected and almost forgotten
the Fine Arts. As a society, we have traded our gold for tin. And these entertainers
in our mass commercial society are often promoted and advertised by the mass
commercial news media as heroes, Manafactured-heros-that-often-have-severe-and-habitual-character-defects
might be a more accurate label. What of the real musical heroes in Americas
high arts such as: John Cage; George Crumb; Steve Reich; Terry Riley; Charles
Dodge; Henry Cowell; Fritz Bergman; Harry Partch; Kenneth Garburo; Peter Todd
Lewis; Libby Larsen; Homer Lambrecht; Janika ?Vandervelt?; Steven Paulus; Mary
Ellen Childs; David Unger; Joan Towers; Randy Davidson; Ellen Lease; John Devine;
Elaine Klassen; Eleanor Hovda; Pat Moriarty; Dick Paski; Cari Thomas; Eric Stokes;
Mr. Kerrnis(?); and countless other competent and talented serious artists in
creating new music of our time poorly funded, un promoted by the mass commercial
media, unknown to the general public, yet quietly, humbly, lovingly, faithfully,
steadfastly, and cheerfully continuing the substantial work needed for our real
non-business-manufactured culture to progress and persevere. While, the famous,
the rich, and the sometimes shallow and vain stars of the entertainment industry
are lauded and acclaimed in the commercial daily news fooling themselves they
deserve the adoration of their uninformed or misinformed fans.
The Commercial-world of music might point out that the situation is merely different
likes and dislikes, that it’s ‘merely different strokes for different
folks.’ Some people like Popular Song and Dance-band music while others
like New Classical music. This is a lie. Adversity can and in the case of the
commercial music ‘s does use ‘Diversity’ as a smoke screen
to mask Adverse, destructive, and unjust motivations of greed using deceit as
its guide and cover. Those in charge in the so called ‘music’-business
consciously promote the slickest, but least creative pop songs geared to capture
the biggest market possible by emphasizing in musical materials what is already
most common to the most people in the people’s listening background rather
than emphasizing and promoting anything that is actually in truth new and creative
and be a learning and broadening of diverse musical experience, knowledge, and
appreciation. The so called ‘music’-business especially is geared
to exploiting the youth of this country through the pervasive musical naivety’
and cultural ignorance of the youth of this country and through these kids the
music business levers the wallets of the parents open to buy for this child
what the child’s musically immature heart has set its sights on to get.
Their is no loyalty in this. When Jazz-bands were easy to sell and easily liked
they were Pop-culture, but as soon as the late 50’s and 60’s came
around wherein Jazz began to develop in to a more highly creative and serious
art tradition, Pop-culture became Rock. Rock, with an easy to sell and easily
liked musical syntax and vocabulary and calling itself counter-culture has in
the past thirty years almost done away in the minds of the masses in America
that any other REAL culture exists. Today, counter culture is passe and if one
wants to go counter to mass musical reality in America it isn't’t counter-culture,
but Pro-culture (New Music in the Fine Arts) that is the place to be. Commercial
music’s rely on music’s made of musical materials and tonal relationships
that are many decades old, even centuries old in order to mass merchandise for
big profits. Meanwhile, the serious composer isn't’t living in an Ivory
Tower during all this, but has continued throughout this century to create new
works of substantive music using new musical materials developed in this century
that musically actually reflect and are relevant to our adult populace and time.
Pop-culture is a perpetual Ivory Tower of youth worship and exploitation musically
devoid of any mature reflection or relevance in American Society and the present
world situation except to make as many bucks as possible from sadly the least
musically informed general populace in the West, the American people.
The commercial- world with its various business-music formats might inaccurately
think and/or advertise itself as being diverse, but this is a lie. Serious composers
have been into real diversity for many decades in this century, and it has been
only very recently that this interest has filtered down to the awareness of
the general public so engrossed in commercial interests is this country. Most
recently, back in the, early ‘60s Terry Riley was studying aspects of
Indian Classical music; around the same time Steve Reich was studying Indonesia
Gamelan tunings that produced a natural phase-shifting and techniques involved
in African drumming; and the list goes on. These and many other serious composers
have studied and made use of various techniques of music making found in cultures
other than our culture in the West. Diversity is nothing knew to us. If the
commercial- Music- Industry was actually promoting and appreciating diversity
within America then they would program these and many other serious composers
works influenced by and emphasizing music of other cultures, as well as, programming
the actual music’s of these other cultures. In fact, the commercial radio
stations don’t even program new serious music of Western culture, possibly
as a 2 hour show on Sundays, much less program serious music’s both Classical
and Folk from other cultures.
Lastly, I’d like to mention that I do think that the Christian Church’s
choice of beginning to use folk music elements and materials in the Mass celebration
was and is a good idea. However, the church can still commission devout serious
composers for scared music for worship and special events and needs to do this
for the sake of accruing and having new substantive works of sacred music for
praising, thanking, and celebrating the Christ. Also, I think it might be a
mistake in the long term (Although it might have short term gains) for Contemporary
Christian music to more and more musically imitate the musical styles in the
popular commercialized-music’s of America; to move away from its legitimate
classical and folk roots, in order to get more converts at a quicker pace, by
using Pop-like sugary, sophisticated, slick, and cliche musical patterns of
orchestration and arrangements to make like in Pop a very polished kind of music,
that (unfortunately for the Church) is also often vapid, banal, trite, and uncreative
in its use of tonal materials, unlike the real substantive musical worth found
in new sacred folk or new sacred classical compositions. Believe me, there is
a lot of this kind of music I do think is of real worth especially in it’s
lyrical content, but I fear, that this Contemporary Christian music except for
its lyric content, is in fact, rather than “being in the world, but not
of the world”, is becoming at least musically more and more of the world
rather than of Heaven or of the Kingdom of God. I talked recently to a Contemporary
Christian Music guitarist and he said the Holy Spirit directed his playing,
but the Holy Spirit might be limited by him as a living vessel to play through
because of his unconscious and conscious limited musical awareness. Substantive
musical works don’t just happen especially by a musician who leaves their
heart in the darkness of ignorance, too stingy or too lazy to educate their
heart in the serious field of music (the ‘It just Growed Theory’;
or the ‘born with it theory’ in the main don’t hold up for
although there are a number of genetic gifts that can be of value to the serious
musician, even with one of these, there is still a lot of learning to do to
master the profession; the ‘gift’ of subtractive music making is
mostly earned by hard work). A musical education is still a good thing for it
can give the heart as well as the mind of the educated musician many more possible
musical options, and techniques in playing and creating new content and forms
in music so that not only does the mind have a deep and comprehensive understanding,
the enlightened heart is also truly free with an intuition far more powerful
than mere ignorance can ever be (examples of the unconscious pouring forth a
great work of music through the musically well educated minds of the day: 1)
Handel: The Messiah; 2) Bartok: a String Quartet;) . So, for this spiritual
musician an education might give the Holy Spirit playing through his heart and
his mind more available options with him as a vessel. This young man thinking
himself versed in Contemporary Christian Music had, believe it or not, never
heard of possibly the greatest Composer of Christian Sacred music in Western
culture of this the 20th century. I’am referring of course to the French
composer, Messiaen.
After all I’Ave said, a person might mistakenly get the impression that
to write a Pop Song is wrong; this is not the case. What is good about Pop music
idioms is that because it is music made up of extremely simple musical materials
and the formation of a piece of Pop music is so easy requiring very little talent
or hardly any compositional skills, it allows almost anyone even compositionally
unskilled people to have the wonderful experience of creating music. However,
with the Mass merchandising of these compositionally very simple pieces (almost
always songs because the music isn't’t interesting enough to hold anyone’s
attention for very long without lyrics) and the show business interests promoting
this level of music making as a Pop ‘culture’ the American public
unknowingly is severely shortchanged mistaking this quite remedial level of
music making as a culture when it is only a mass merchandising business that
has little to do with the Fine Arts and the highly skilled composers of Serious
Music that create music for the highly and deservedly revered Musical Culture
in the West. What is wrong is to accredit the musical worth of a Pop song for
more than it actually is. I write a Pop tune once in a while, but I don’t
lie about it and try to represent it as having major substantive creative musical
worth, however, unfortunately for us all, this is too often the deceitful norm
of the Pop industry in America at the end of the 20th century.
Simply put, I feel that the serious, substantive, and truly creative composers
in this country do not want, nor need to be so wrongly slighted, ignored, and
neglected anymore by the commercial-music-industry and the commercial-mass-media.
When there is a New music concert in town, at least put it on the TV news, and
let the people know about it; I’d go so far to say record it; release
the CD; and promote it; for an uninformed public isn't’t what the forefathers
of this country intended, since it is only with a culturally informed public,
(and not with the current perpetrated common denominator of cultural ignorance),
that the public can preserve their freedoms and the democracy we all enjoy in
this nation.
As for appreciating new Music, you only need to recall this, that the new work
of music has its own patterns of tones and sense and by repetition you can eventually
pick up on these patterns and start to know the piece on its terms, rather than
frustratingly trying to fit the new work into prescribed familiar patterns of
what you think is musical sense. Eventually, you will come to understand it
for what it has to offer on musical terms natural to it; and even if by then
you don’t really like it, you can at least appreciate and respect it for
what it is, and understand that it is possible that another might like it for
what it is.
So do serious composers give up in America, or simply move to Europe? The American
Composer Forum does offer us some little hope in this cultural wasteland. Although
under funded, through no fault of their own, they can still help to sponsor
some performances of new music and fund some commissions and grants to the serious
musician on a yearly basis. This cooperative organization is making strides
in helping to reach out to high school students and our communities so the next
generation might become a bit better culturally informed than the preceding
generation. The Inter-Net may assist Composers to connect with the public directly
and so allow composers to promote and sell their music on CD’s, as well
as, obtain new commissions for new works; all done via the Web. The National
Endowment for the Arts is still with us although severely under funded compared
to many other countries in the West. There are still the universities and colleges
that haven’t yet let down their professional standards. There are new
possibilities that might yet develop in America, and all is not lost in this
country, if we composers keep going; keep trying and succeeding in getting performances
of our new works; keep speaking aloud our concerns; and keep creating new music.
Thank you for letting me share with you some of my concerns about the state
of American culture today and I hope these ‘Words of Concerns’ rather
than simply being dismissed merely as complaint or misinterpreted as being a
slight against commercial musicians (that isn't’t the case or my intent)
are seen as an accurate and just protest against all the injustice, greed and
deceit currently and for some time perpetuated in the popular song and dance
band business a very limited, uncreative, and extremely small fraction of what
is being done in the far larger realm of music in the West and with this essay
I hope to help provoke discussion beyond the current musically bleak status
quo that is a consequence of the music-business. I am thankful for this Salon
initiative and the opportunity this means for composers to share with their
family, friends, and each other new works of music.
|
