David Stewart:

>I am a couple of months away from taking my 'A' level in Music and need
>some into on Neo-Classicism.  What are the main characteristics of it (if
>that is an answerable question)? I understand Strav's Violin Conc is a case
>in point and I have this.  What else can I get that is a prime example?

Well, this answer will not be sufficient to get you an A level, but it
might help focus your study.  An important thing to realize is that as
a matter of style it owed perhaps as much to Baroque forms, such as the
concerto grosso, as to Classical style.  Neoclassicism was in large part
a reaction to late romanticism, especially post-Wagnerian music, and also
contrasts strongly with the 2nd Viennese school (which it rejected but
eventually succumbed to.) Dynamic and emotionally-expressive restraint are
characteristic.  Harmony is modern, however, embracing intervals usually
considered dissonant.  For Stravinsky neoclassicism was also a reaction
against the "neo-primitivism" of his Sacre du printemps--but this can be
overemphasized, because he carried much of his rhythmic irregularity into
his neoclassical works.  Study everything by Stravinsky from Pulcinella
(especially, but maybe from L'Histoire du soldat) to The Rake's Progress.
Notice his use of ancient classical literature like Oedipus and Persephone
in some of his work.

Besides Stravinsky, Hindemith, Les Six in France, and most of the American
symphonists from Copland to William Schuman (many of whom studied with
Nadia Boulanger near Paris) were neoclassical in style.  Some of them used
ancient classical myths as well--as in some ballets commissioned by Martha
Graham.  One might be able to make out a case for neoclassical inclining
more to dance than to songlike music, but that could take some argument.

Jim Tobin