Date: |
Thu, 29 Jun 2000 18:03:06 -0400 |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Ron Chaplin:
>As long as a composer does not put someone elses name on the work, why not
>try to enjoy the music for itself? Weren't a lot of composers influenced by
>Mozart or Haydn? Is a classical composition, for example, valid only if it
>was written during the years 1750 to 1820? I would love to hear a modern
>piece written in the baroque or classical style.
Why? There is so much extant great music from both periods. Who needs
more? But no doubt you have your reasons, so let me add this. No modern
composer can live in the same day-to-day thought world as composers of
the past. The social, artistic and psylchological conditions under which
the composers of the past worked are long gone. Furthermore, no modern
composer can be unaware of the achievements in harmony, form, etc. That
have taken place over the last two hundred years. Even if he attempts to
ignore them, the very fact of ignoring them would constrict his composing
and he would occasionally have to reject a technique or gesture that might
have come to the mind of a Bach or Mozart, always on the lookout for better
and more profound ways of expressing themselves. No matter what he did,
the modern composer could only imitate and there is no way that he could
avoid sound like either an imitator or a very third-rate baroque or
classical composer or, more likely both.
Richard, who invites you to visit his music, outdoors and other Web sites
at http://www.magi.com/~richard/
|
|
|