English Musical Renaissance

[Robert G. Rawson]

A lot of ink has been spilled on the subject of The English Musical
Renaissance. Most endeavors surrounding the topic tend to favour the same
composers again and again and often the discussion revolves around just
exactly what composers *belong*. It all smacks of the old boys club to me.
There was indeed a period of renewed musical activity in Britain which
deserves to be collectively thought of as a renaissance; so why include only
certain composers and exclude others? For example, it would be feeble to
suggest that Dittersdorf was not a "part" of what we now think of the early
Classical period only because he's not as good as Mozart and Haydn. The
Merrion and Hughes book (among many others) on the EMR often suggested that
While RVW was part of the EMR, Coleridge-Taylor was not, nor was Foulds -
yet Warlock was, etc. It is the only section (with the possible exeption of
the new Viennese school) in music history books which reduces an entire era
to club status. Most Elgarians get all excited when they see the quote from
Richard Strauss about how Elgar was "England's first progressivist
composer." I am, of course, a great admirer of Elgar; but "Progressivist"?
In terms of Modernity the so-called leaders of the EMR were a far cry the
true progressivists of the Continent. Britain certainly had some modernist
pioneers, but they are scarcely ever mentioned in survey books. Why?

In the US, where I did my undergrduate work, 20th century British music is
panned entirely. A great pity. I played in several university orchestras
over the course of six years and not one piece by Elgar or RVW or Britten
was ever on my stand. So to whine about the fact that they are all one ever
hears about here in the UK may not warrant consideration, depending on which
side of the Pond you now stand. While the EMR produced many, many,
remarkable composers, and an even greater number of remarkable pieces, when
considered as a whole the "movement" (when considered as a club) was
remarkably conservative.

My gripe in summary: In Britain, survey books (i.e Blackwell's and many
others) try to hold up Elgar and RVW as Britain's "Modernist" composers in
the early 20th century - despite their obvious conservatism, and pan those
pioneers who were in-tune with modern idioms of the Continent. In the US,
this fascinating chapter in British musical history is ,sadly, all but
omitted.

I would like to make it clear ( so that I may avoid being bombarded with
hate mail) that I love the music of both Elgar and RVW. I only hope to
start a discussion about modernism in Britain and it's reception elsewhere -
if anyone is interested. There has been much fine work, both by scholars
and musicians, to seek a clearer view of this period and there is much to be
happy about in this respect.

Best,
Robert G. Rawson
London, England