Richard Todd ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>Steven Schwartz writes:
>
>>One major difference is that it requires a lot more technical knowledge
>>to become a composer than it does a writer.
>
>And women couldn't handle it?

No, they couldn't attend an institution to learn it.....

Susan Juhl ([log in to unmask]) wrote of Maconchy:

>She heard her first symphony orchestra when she was 18.  She later studied
>at London's Royal College of Music and her orchestral work "The Land" was
>performed.  Shortlisted for a highly-prized composition scholarship at the
>college, the Principal refused to give it to her on the grounds that "you
>will only get married and never write another note".

Maconchy's 13 (?) string quartets are considered, by some, worthy of
mention in the same breath as Bartok's and Shostakovich's.

Christopher Webber ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>In particular, I found Steve's suggestion that literature is somehow a
>technically less demanding discipline than music caused me at least one
>raised eyebrow.  In what important sense can this possibly be true?

Well, I might not be quite agreeing with him, but the skills
of instrumentation and orchestration surely need the experience of
*hearing* what you've written.  Anyone can read what they've written.
A composer-pianist can play it back, but as soon as you need more than
two performers you're relying on their being someone else (at least 1)
prepared to take your music seriously enough to play it.

Deryk Barker
[log in to unmask]