In reply to my statement:

>> I do not think that the music of the finest Flemish composers of
>> this period [and later go on to mention Josquin, Isaac, Ockeghem,
>> Brumel, Pipelare,  de la Rue, and Obrecht] has ever been surpassed.

Bill Hong wrote:

>... to which I might add di Lasso, and Spanish composers such as
>Morales and Victoria, or Englishmen such as Tallis...

I tend to think of the polyphonic music of the 1400's as being
predominantly Franco-Flemish.  By way of contrast the 1500's were a time
of tension between a much richer style (at times almost extravagantly so)
built on the Franco-Flemish school, pitched against the much simpler (often
reactionary) conservative style with it's increasing emphasis on textual
clarity.  Of the former richer style of composition the best examples
include Tallis (in experimental mood), Striggio, Gesualdo, and Gabrieli.
The latter more conservative style is represented by Morales, Palestrina,
Victoria, and Lassus.  Whatever the case regardless of the achievements of
their successors, the Franco-Flemish composers may have at times been
equaled, but never truly surpassed.

I also wrote:

>> This is not to say that I personally object that the term
>> 'Medieval', as applied to either Michelangelo or Josquin are
>> NECESSARILY pejorative...

To which Todd McComb www.medieval.org adds:

>I certainly don't believe it's pejorative at all!

The problem is, that like the expression "Romantic", it's meaning has the
potential to be ambivalent, being something both negative and positive.
My point is that to categorize the Franco-Flemish school as "Medieval" and
composers such as Palestrina or Morales as "Renaissance" is profoundly
misleading.  It tends to IMPLY that some strong line of division can be
demarcated between, which really does not exist.

In any case, although Todd should correct me if I am wrong, I recall from
briefly reading Chaucer at University that modern scholars no longer think
that there was some clearly defined "rebirth" of European culture or any
sort of revolutionary cultural "rejuvenation" from the so called "Dark
Ages" to the "Renaissance" at all as once had been commonly thought.  Any
former stark distinction between the Middle Ages and the Renaissance has
become completely blurred.

This takes me back to the fact that I find all such expressions such
as "Medieval", "Renaissance", "Baroque", "Mannerist"," Impressionist",
"Classicist", "Romantic", or "Expressionist" become, for the most part,
highly objectionable nonsense terms when used as historical pigeon holes,
although they can still occasionally be useful when used as strictly
descriptive terms - in which case certain examples by Gesualdo or even J.S.
Bach might for example be described as being "expressionist".  As Kant
would have pointed out, we do need to create categorical subdivisions -
that's how we make sense of the world.  I tend to do this mainly
historically, and secondarily using a second common reference point such
as geography.  I would then talk of the "Franco-Flemish composers of the
1400s" in preference to the "late Medieval music" or "Post-war 20th century
composers associated with Darmstadt" in preference to "Modernist Avante
garde composers".  As for those of you who still want to have your little
academic cat fight as to whether Josquin is a "Renaissance" or a "late
Medieval" composer, good luck to you.  The same goes for those of you who
want to argue whether Monteverdi is a "pre-Baroque", a "late Renaissance",
or a "Mannerist" composer: I have seen all of these sloppy terms being
plastered on him.  We are sorely in need of neutral historical categories
devoid of any value judgments, or sweeping stylistic generalizations.

Bill Hong goes on to write (perhaps a little tongue in cheek) that:

>...  if one were to REALLY take into account the vast sweep of European
>Classical Music over the last thousand years and not just the narrow
>Common Practice era, the Three Greatest Composers would include Josquin
>and Monteverdi, with "also-rans" such as Bach/Beethoven/ Mozart having to
>fight it out for the last position...

And Krishan Oberoi wrote regarding Josquin that:

>The authors of "The Complete Conductor" (one of my textbooks from last
>semester) note, "There is good evidence that there should be a J among the
>three B's."

Aside from the fact that I like Heinrich Isaac just so slightly better
than Josquin de Prez (the two were held to be on the same level of
inspiration by some contemporaries) and that I am not that always that
keen on Monteverdi, it seems in both instances we are seeing at least an
indirect allusion to Hans von Buelow's statement regarding the Three B's
of Music: Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms.  Without seeming in the least
bit anti-Germanistic, with profound respect for the achievements of
the Austro-German composers, I cannot but point out that the highly
Nationalistic Buelow also thought that the French revolutionary slogan
of "Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite" should be replaced with a Bismarckian
Prussianist slogan of "infantry, cavalry, and artillery".  I am sure
Beethoven would have been turning in his grave when Buelow dedicated a
performance of the Eroica to Bismarck!  Nonetheless, the main point is that
in our times to have our narrow Common Practice Era still dominated by just
roughly the same Austro-German composers of Buelow's time seems outrageous.
Apart from Buelow's obsession with having his slogans packaged in neat
groups of three I also see no reason why we too are compelled to follow him
by picking only three composers.  That we now have tagged on the Two M's of
Mozart and Mahler onto the end of the Three B's provides only scanty
reassurance.

So it is with much deeper reassurance that I once read an interview with
Cecelia Bartoli who in former times would surely have been stereotypically
typecast into singing the usual operatic mezzo roles.  Instead she is
singing a lot more unknown earlier music these days.  In the interview
Bartoli said that she thought that the musical center of gravity was
beginning to shift from the late 18th century /19th century to a
historically much earlier center.  I think this is very true and I strongly
welcome this positive trend.  We have only seen the tip of the iceberg yet.

Satoshi Akima
Sydney, Australia
[log in to unmask]