Impressionism, expressionism...
dial...@mail.com
"depressionism?" Or how about "oppressionism." Another fun topic is how
some works defy national identification - as in "universalism."
Anyone ever written any good books on the taxonomy of serious music?
JKG
Jerry Kohl
> Has there ever existed a musical style which might be called
> "depressionism?" Or how about "oppressionism." Another fun topic is how
> some works defy national identification - as in "universalism."
Back in the 1960s, the vogue term for that sort of thing was
"International Style", which was probably intended to identify those
compositions on which the label was stuck with the architecture already
carrying that name, but was most emphatically applied to composers like
Ginastera and Chávez who were perceived as having left behind their
Nationalisms of the 1920s and 30s in the latter case, and 1940s and 50s
in the former. Of course, some critics decided in the 1970s to rename
the architectural International Style "Modernism", perhaps because
Post-International Style sounded like a retreat into Nationalism.
> Anyone ever written any good books on the taxonomy of serious music?
I don't know of a book, but Henry Leland Clarke wrote a very
interesting article on the subject, some fifty years ago now. It is
titled "Toward a Musical Periodization of Music," and appeared in vol.
9, no. 1 (Spring 1956) of the Journal of the American Musicological
Society, pages 25-30. His system divides music history into seven
periods, and each period into three phases: Experimental, Established,
and Elaborate.
The periods are not discrete, with the Elaborate phase of one always
overlapping at least the Experimental phase of the next, usually with
representatives in the works of one composer. For example, the late
13th and early 14th centuries represent both the Elaborate phase of the
Metaphonic and the Experimental phase of the Polyphonic periods. "If
Guillaume de Machaut in his isorhythmic motets is an elaborator of
metaphony, in his ballades he is an experimenter with true polyphony"
(p. 27).
The most recent period he designates the Neophonic, and regards as
beginning some time in the mid-to-late 19th century. "Since we are
still living in this period, it is impossible to see it in perspective,
but there is no doubt that, as never before, old procedures have been
called back to serve new ends" (p. 29). He sees in the Experimental
phase, for example, Debussy reviving principles of the Diaphonic period
of the 8th-11th centuries, and in the Established phase Stravinsky
reviving the Amphonic principles of the 17th and 18th centuries.
I knew Henry Leland Clarke from my graduate student days, and he was
more interested in stimulating discussion than in making final
pronouncements. I'm sure he would have been the first to welcome
arguments for or against his proposed system, in its whole or in its
details. As far as I am aware, no one has ever followed him up.
--
Jerry Kohl <jerom...@comcast.net>
"Légpárnás hajóm tele van angolnákkal."
dial...@mail.com
"His system divides music history into seven periods, and each period
into three phases: Experimental, Established,
and Elaborate."
Hmmm.... Have you ever heard of Gianbattista Vico? This entire
description sounds like it could have been lifted directly of Vico's
philosophy of history. Down to the teeth. One site reads:
"Vico believed that every period in history had a distinct character,
and that similar periods recur throughout history in the same order. He
departed from the old cyclical theories of history, however, in
asserting that these periods do not recur in exactly the same form, but
are subject to the modifications that new circumstances and
developments impose."
I'll see if I can drum up that article. Thanks!
JKG
Jerry Kohl
> Jerry Kohl wrote:
> "His system divides music history into seven periods, and each period
> into three phases: Experimental, Established,
> and Elaborate."
>
> Hmmm.... Have you ever heard of Gianbattista Vico?
Of course.
> This entire
> description sounds like it could have been lifted directly of Vico's
> philosophy of history. Down to the teeth. One site reads:
[snip]
I think you will find that Clarke's interpretation does not conform to
Vico's cyclical ideas, despite Clarke's notion that very recent music
history has begun to revert to *some* earlier models. His "periods" are
not phases of a periodic repetition--perhaps "eras" would have been a
better choice of word.
Still, the notion that recent music history is reverting to much
earlier methods of operation can be seen to connect with postmodernist
notions of "historicizing", which only becomes possible when we reach a
point where we become truly aware of a history that extends back more
than three or four generations.
> I'll see if I can drum up that article. Thanks!
You're welcome.
dial...@mail.com
"Still, the notion that recent music history is reverting to much
earlier methods of operation can be seen to connect with postmodernist
notions of "historicizing", which only becomes possible when we reach a
point where we become truly aware of a history that extends back more
than three or four generations."
British composer Robert Simpson described Nielsen's use of tonality as
"progressive tonality," which he himself uses. Have you heard of the
term? If so, what does it mean to you?
JKG
Jerry Kohl
I haven't heard this term, no, but it sounds like it might refer to
what I have called on another thread "migratory tonality"--that is, a
movement progresses from one tonality at the beginning to a different
one at the end, and in a multi-movement work this may be compounded
from one movement to the next, until either the initial tonic returns
at the end, or not.
--
Jerry Kohl
Jack Campin - bogus address
That's exactly what Simpson meant by it when talking about Nielsen
(I don't bave the reference handy). There's no normative content to
it; he's not saying "progressive" means "good" or "not retrogressive".
It's surprising it took so long to happen - the first movements of
Haydn's later symphonies are long and complicated enough for it not
to be obvious when he's got back to the key he started in.
I think Simpson's own symphonies are put together the same way, but
for large stretches they might as well be atonal - the overall
effect isn't very different from the symphonies of Peter Maxwell
Davies or Roberto Gerhard. (Of the three of them, Gerhard was the
furthest away from tonality and the easiest for me to "get").
============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ==============
Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557