Bob Draper wrote:

>... As I and others have sought to show recently there are countless
>lesser known composers who are totally written off dispite having written
>one or two masterpieces (I mentioned Nauman and Mozart's son as examples).
>Yet, again as I've mentioned before, the cd store shelves are stacked with
>dozens of versions of the Mozart sonatas and symphonies including his
>youthful works.

I would affirm that it is true that composers -- as well as whole musical
periods -- are judged by their exemplary output, rather than by their less
successful, more "average" works.  Indeed, I think the idea of an "average"
work of music in this context is not helpful; should one claim that the best
way to represent the works of a composer or of an age is by singling out
the pieces that straddle the line between uninspired and hopelessly banal?
I would hope not.  Unlike the fields of sociology or psychology, where an
intense study of the norms can be extremely useful, in music, as in all
arts, it is the truly great examples that must be considered
"representative."

I imagine that this is the way most musicians view the issue (hope I'm not
being presumptuous).  I first encountered this line of thought in Chuck
Rosen's "The Classical Style", and I would guess that he picked it up from
some ancient tome on aesthetics or what-have-you.

I don't think Bob and Bob (Lyman and Draper) are disagreeing over whether
that is the correct viewpoint, however.  I suppose the disagreement is over
who is "judging" the works.  Mr. Draper thinks the situation is fairly
bleak:

>Of course a lot of this has to do with the record companies and commercial
>interests.  In 1991 the Mozart bicentenary the commercial clamour was
>almost obscene.  I remember Bayan Northcott (write/musicologist) expressing
>disquiet about it at the time.  Sadly his was a lonely voice.

It has been said by someone (I can't recall whom) that the 20th century
is the age of the critic; if I am not mistaken, some postmodernists
believed that the place of the academic literary scholar in society was
more important than that of the author.  Similar developments have taken
place in the realm of music: Heinrich Schenker, crafter of the branch of
musical theory bearing his name, thought so highly of his theoretical work
that he once "proved" that a piece by Stravinsky wasn't actually music
because it made no sense when analyzed using his methods!  Later in this
century, the world of music theory dissolved into squabbles between various
warring camps of critics who claimed their method of analysis was superior
to all others.  Perhaps I am generalizing, but with a few worthy
exceptions, the success of the theorist often takes precedent over the
success of the composer (after all, the composers are mostly dead).

This has resulted in the musicological resuscitation of pieces which, in
all due respect, should probably have been written off as footnotes in
the History of Music.  Instead, thanks to researchers trying to get their
names stapled onto some "major" new discovery, we're given apocryphal Haydn
sonatas and a whole, whole lotta youthful Mozart pieces.  I will concede
they are interesting and useful to a completist, and sometimes our love for
a particular composer overwhelms our critical apparati, but they hardly
merit the consideration they are being given when so many other composers
and pieces are languishing from want of attention.

But -- and this is a big "butt" -- I don't think the marketing of
low-quality music from famous composers changes the public's opinion of
them much, by and large; for many, it is just one more bon-bon from a
famous, already tried-and-true source.  I do wish musicologists would spend
less of their time rifling through Vivaldi's vast oeuvre (not to reopen any
fresh wounds or anything) and spend more time looking for those solitary
masterpieces which are said to dot the musical landscape...although
sometimes I think the phenomenon to the effect of "every man having one
good novel in him (or symphony)" is a little overrated.

Yeah, so to conclude, I just wanted to confirm what Mr. Lyman wrote up
there at the top, though I agree with Mr. Draper that there are definite
problems in the way music is judged, most of them commercial and academic.
Those are my thoughts.

--everitt clark
[log in to unmask]