Terry Newstrom <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I direct your attention to an article in this week's _The Economist_ about
>Leos Janacek, who is said to represent a "musical third way" after the end
>of "classical music's cold war".

Good to see some praise on Janacek.  I think he is a wonderful composer.
I think he was a composer if wit, as in the Sinfonietta, a one of effective
dramatic characterization, like where the millwheel crushes the ice in the
background as accompaignemt of the reveling of the secret in "Jenufa", one
of psychology, as the portrait of Katja Kabanova, one of philosophy, as in
"The Cinning little Vixen", of humour, as in "Mr.  Brouchecks excursion to
the Moon", and one of intense personal power, as expressed in the Intrada
of "Msa Glagoltjkaja" meanwhile singing so sweet an passionate as in the
Intimate Letters, btw one of my favourite String Quartetts of all.

I don't think that Janacek was as skilled craftsman as Schoenberg, but his
technique served his needs well, still, and he was able at least in the end
of his life, to compose that music he wanted with great power.  I don't
think he was as hot for making revolution as Strawinsky, but he possesed
originality and wit combined to make strinking artworks just being his very
natural himself.

I think that when Wagner streched the borders of Tonality, he bred the
way for Atonality, which in itself well can be said to be somewhat
paradoxic.  Wagner said after the premiere of "Parsifal" in 1882 that
"Romanticism has now come to an end, and the music that will come would
be lighter, swifter..." He senced right in that the very air was smelling
something new, what was a non-musical notion.  He however answered and
followed up his notice inconsequantly with a musical notion.  This means
in clear text that music was about to change, but it hadn't necessary had
to change into what became the music we think of somewhat roughly as "20th
century music".

There was something in the air...something that caused art to visiualize
itself under extatic convultions.  The art of a siecle with a technical
development which raced as never before, and politics that tested out these
new innovations with a bookend that is horrifying (the great losses of
people in the WWs).  After the Wars, we lived in a world of Cold War
between two nations who could both in a few minutes Coventryize our whole
world with just pressing a button.  The century that passed was one of
great unsecurity for the common man, in contrast to the time after the 30
years war say 1660-ca1870, which was the aera of Optimism, in great lines.
I think Gustav Mahler, who had very sensetive antennaes for his times
developments, senced this, and that it was not necessary a random that
his Tragic Symphony was premiered in Gustav Krupps Essen in 1906.

Schonebergs bad habit of constructing music after proto-mathematical
systems, which other composers (do I need to mention Boulez?) draw even
further, represent the "Technologist" Movement of 20th century.  A movement
which is not at all an Artmovement solely, but an approach that acids the
whole [Western] society.  Technology win our wars, technology cure our
illnesses and enlongers our lives.  Etc.  Therefore technology is good,
and therefore spending resources on technology is good.  The way people
have been educated in scools and universitys since say 1860/70 intil our
close days, is a very telling example on this sympthom.  The Technologists
of Art Music argues then that if Technology is good for __________ (pick
your favourite reason), it also makes good music.  This is a responce to a
stream of our time, that I would well grant for valid in various uttrances
of visual art, but when it dominates the Audial Creations, tend to remain
just mathematics.

The other phalanx are those who responded not formally to the technical
rave of modern time, but emotionally to the Extential Angst of it, and
can be represented by Strawinsky.  Everythink has to be gritty, nothing
is allowed to be sweet anymore, then we must be piteous, we are not
allowed to comfort, because those who comforted, like even Mussorgskij
did in "Boris Godunov" - the music after Boris death is the most majoric
reveiled...  - were just too childish and infantile.  Thats at least the
standard argument.  Strawinskys "Le sacre" has an expression - at least I
always felt it so - of raw primitiveness, like when we drop our masks and
looses what is human in us in the grab for money, technology, power.  It is
actaully "man himself" who is sacrificed in "Le Sacre" and the quick pulse
is the worlds always quicker racing forthgo.

I confess I hate that romaticism could not have lived longer then I wanted
to know all masterworks that could still have been created in its spirit.
I guess I have said that when I was self-piteous, but actually I see the
vain and erratic in trying to wrick the clock back to romanticism.  I take
an interest in Modern Music, and I know many with me in this forum does,
but for somewhat different reasons.

I know many also, perhaps to a larger percentance outside this very forum,
takes interest in Modern Music, but are unhappy with what is Modern Music
(at least what has been avant garde).  Then if you are going to hail
Xenakis or Boulez of Webern or even Schoenberg in his avantiworkis, you
many times has to fall back upon audial sequences (because it is not always
music!) that is built upon a mathematical yet logic pattern that is
complicated enough not to be able to percieve it, and thereby one looses
much of the point with it, at least it is very one way in emotional
expression, if so expressive at all.  Either one has to hail Strawinsky
and followers of him of different kinds.  The problem with first Strawinsky
(in the works where he is not serial) is that he with "Le Sacre" changed
the idea of the tempo with which the rythmic and harmonic pulse moves (to
much quicker speed), and replaced "Pause" with "interval" (listen to
Lutoslawskis Chain II!), and this makes this music as demanding to listen
to (may I count in how much energy is needed for it) as Webern or Boulez
are demanding intellectually.

Janacek, and now we finally come to the point, can be said to represent a
"third way" in the sence that 1) his music is not a superficial responce
to technology, and 2) he is not an extensionalist in the self-piteous way.
His music is often about common lifely problems and conflicts yet timeless,
but much closer to earth and than Boulez philosophy of quantum mechanics
(in "Structures").  janacek said in his music that a man can be fine even
if he is not "difficult", and therefore he won no acclaim in his time.
But Janaceks time is I think, to come, for two reasons:  1) despite
antaraxbachteria and all what Bin Laden names I think the more widespread
opinion is that mankind has overcome at elast some of those things which
made our environment unsecure, and yet again some optimism can be smelled,
and therefore problems of another kind becomes more interesting to focus on
in art.  And 2) as most of artlovers I think like me don't want to screw
the time back, Janaceks music can win appeal as it has a sound that easy
can be associated to "20th century"-sound, yet it is very personal and full
of warmth.  And when it comes to me, I at least don't think janacek was
childish or infantile at all when he presented his keen and goodhearted
wiew of the Circle of Life and Nature as presented in "Das schlaue
Fuechslein" (The cunning little vixen).

Originality and wit combined in geniality.

Mats Norrman
[log in to unmask]