D. Stephen Heersink:

>Jocelyn Wang <[log in to unmask]> writes for many of us in her replies
>to Satoshi Akima <[log in to unmask]>.  "Atonal" noise is generally
>incompatible with the deep-seated notions of chromaticism, lyricism,
>tonal center, pleasantly harmonic, and the like, that draw most people
>to "music." Atonal sounds are frequently not the beautiful effects of
>the collection of sounds, but the precision of arranging notes in some
>theoretical paradigm at odds with most people's notion of "song." It may
>be intellectually interesting, but hardly musically arresting.

This is, I think, interesting.  You've hit something very basic - the
notion of "song." I think that's far more powerful an influence on our
judgment of a piece of music than the presence or absence of a tonal
center.  I admit that's one reason why Reger - a tonal composer - is often
hard for me to take.  To the ear, he sometimes seems to be rambling, even
though on paper the scores are highly organized.  The phrases lack the
focussed direction implied by "song."

I find this true of many post-Wagnerian composers, though never true
of Wagner himself.  Many "atonal" composers were influenced by Wagner's
phrasing and many seem rather unfocussed.  However, all sorts of composers
used Schoenberg's basic method.  Some of them used it to create melodies
in the more traditional sense:  Dallapiccola, Gerhard, and Ginastera come
to mind.  Listen to something like Dallapiccola's "Canti di prighiona"
or Ginastera's Piano Concerto No.  1.  I doubt if anyone told you, you
would think of them as "atonal." For that matter, Virgil Thomson used
Schoenberg's row method in his "Acadian Songs and Dances" and "A Solemn
Music." Schoenberg's method differs greatly, depending on who's using it:
that's one of its strengths.  Hell, there's even a bit of dodecaphonic
serialism in Bernstein's "West Side Story." Amazingly, very few people
were outraged.

Steve Schwartz