--Oswald Spengler, The Decline of the West
I guess this was inevitable. Alex Ross weighs in: The Fashionista Modernism of Yuja Wang
Given this gaudy lineage, it is curious that any controversy should attend the thirty-seven-year-old pianist Yuja Wang, who seldom speaks during performances, presents programs of wide-ranging seriousness, and plays with flawless technique. The debate, such as it is, is confined to her taste in clothes. She favors spangly, skintight ensembles from high-end designers, such as Hervé Leger and Akris, and clomps across the stage in Christian Louboutin stilettos. The late Janet Malcolm, in a 2016 Profile of Wang for this magazine, devoted considerable space to the pianist’s couture, arguing that it is less a contradiction than an accentuation of her athletic performance style: “The sense of a body set in urgent motion by musical imperatives requires that the body not be distractingly clothed.”
All the same, a number of people find themselves distracted. “She’d fit much better in a night club” is one of the politer complaints to be found on Wang’s Facebook page. Ironically, such concern trolling is symptomatic of the very superficiality that it purports to condemn. If you hold music to be a pure, transcendent, anti-physical medium, your attention shouldn’t be meandering to a player’s physique.
Still, one does have the feeling that part of the intense competition between Yuja Wang and, say, Khatia Buniatishvili might come down to who has the sexier presentation. I'm just saying.
* * *
For tragic/comic relief we have this item: DISASTER: CONDUCTOR’S BATON KNOCKS VIOLIN OUT OF SOLOIST’S HANDS
The Czech violinist Pavel Šporcl was playing the Mendelssohn concerto with the Mlada Boleslav Chamber Orchestra when a sideswipe from the conductor’s baton knocked his precious blue violin out of his hands.
Only a swift leg movement by the soloist stopped the instrument smashing onto the floor. Pavel picked up the violin and carried on playing, to the conductor’s evident relief.
Some conductors are more dangerous than others!
* * *
I don't read On An Overgrown Path nearly as often as I should. Here are two recent, interesting posts: A tale of two new audiences
According to his PR spin, Norman Lebrecht’s blog Slipped Disc is the world’s #1 cultural news site, drawing 2 million readers every month. Central to Norman's strategy for building an audience is the use of controversial techniques alien to the predominantly conservative classical music world. These include salacious headlines, innuendo, gossip, and deliberate provocation.
Meanwhile the new CEO of the City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra Emma Stenning has embarked on a strategy for building an audience using controversial techniques alien to the predominantly conservative classical music world. These include multi-media concerts, photography during concerts, and drinks in the auditorium.Slipped Disc's use of alien audience-building techniques draws not a whisper of disapproval. But Ms Stenning's use of alien audience-building techniques prompts howls of disapproval from the same predominantly conservative classical music world. Moreover the howls of disapproval are gleefully expressed on Slipped Disc, thereby reaching the impressively large readership created by alien audience building techniques.
And the other: For young classical audiences the sound is the message
In David Hepworth's recommended history of EMI's Abbey Road studios he makes an observation that may just hold the key to unlocking the new younger audience that classical music has sought for so long in vain. Writing about the increasing importance of pop music in late 1950s Hepworth explains that "whereas the people working in classical music wanted to record music, the people in pop increasingly wanted to record sounds". The ultimate example of studio-created sound taking priority over music culminated in the seminal “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band" which took five-and-a-half months of sound-shaping at Abbey Road for the album's13 tracks to be completed.
Classical dogma dictates that the music takes priority - note perfect interpretations, historically informed performances, pedigree of the musician, concert hall etiquette etc. In the classical world sound is the servant of music, as in the never-ending search for the acoustically perfect concert hall. By contrast popular non-classical music is improvised, has no original score for the performance to be judged against, and the character of the performance is heavily influenced by electronic sound-shaping. Recent scientific research has started to identify the important role played by infrasound vibrations in the 35 to 75 Hz range - gamma rhythms - in human consciousness and perception. The preponderance of these frequencies in popular music compared with classical may well explain why the classical genre struggles to engage with younger audiences.
Read the whole thing for some very cogent observations.
* * *
On the occasion of an important premiere, the New York Times reviews the growth of interest in Native American composers: Amid Orchestral Waves, the Sound of Cultures Conversing
Native American composers and performers are slowly gaining more visibility after having long been largely ignored by institutions associated with the Western classical tradition. Raven Chacon, a Diné composer and visual artist, won the Pulitzer Prize in Music in 2022. In March, the New York Philharmonic premiered an orchestral version of the Chickasaw composer Jerod Impichchaachaaha’ Tate’s “Pisachi.”
And yet Native music, kaleidoscopically varied across the country and its many tribes and heritages, remains only rarely heard, and so only vaguely understood and appreciated, by non-Natives. This is hardly surprising, given the country’s more general neglect of a full, sustained reckoning with its history with — and its often stunningly cruel treatment of — Native Americans.
* * *
Getting any reviews at all these days is difficult. But assuming you do, this offers some good advice: Handling Bad Reviews
Can you identify the composers who were the subject of the following reviews:
“His second symphony is a crass monster, a hideously written wounded dragon, that refuses to expire and thoroughly bleeding in the Finale, furiously beats about with its tail erect.”
“The Finale [of his fifth symphony] is riotous beyond endurance. Instead of applying local color with a brush, [the composer] emptied the paint pot with a jerk.”
“His music which professes to dismiss all elements of melody, appears strangely futile, vacuous, and non-existent.”
The whole piece is worth reading. And at the end it names the composers who were the subject of the above reviews.
* * *
Let's have pieces by the composers criticized above. The first was Beethoven and here is his hideously written Symphony no. 2:
Here is Tchaikovsky's riotous Symphony no. 5:
Because of the missing audience and the socially-distanced orchestra we know this was recorded during the pandemic madness.
Finally, the pieces reviewed in the last quote are not named, but the composer is Debussy. Here are the vacuous Nocturnes for orchestra:
One of the pieces mentioned in the New York Times article is Pisachi by Jerod Impichchaachaaha' Tate.
7 comments:
It's nice to see recognition of the role that careful sound design plays in the attraction of pop music to listeners who "should" prefer music of more substance. It's worth pointing out that Sgt Pepper's, historically important and excellent though it is, is also pretty primitive-sounding at this point. One thing I discovered when I started getting into pop production seriously is that getting all those instruments layered, mixed, EQed and placed in the sound field is as complex and difficult a job as full symphonic orchestration. When I listen to the radio, I don't hear too many songs that I think are very good, but every production is mind-boggling in the care that gets put into its soundscape. Then if the song does happen to actually be good (they sometimes are excellent!), I start to feel that the poptimists are basically right. I have also felt frustration in dealing with jazz and classical musicians who sweat every detail of their performance but then fall back on the aesthetic of concert realism in their recordings, either out of indifference or conservatism or whatever the reason is. There are so many opportunities to have the sound of "art" music support and enhance the notes-on-the-page aspect of it. There's no reason for classical and jazz recordings to sound so boring when kids with cracked versions of FL Studio are finding fresh new sounds in their bedrooms every day.
Really great comment, Ethan. I think this aspect is right in your wheelhouse. It is rather irrelevant to be expecting structural modulation schemes or layered counterpoint in a pop song, because the sound design is really where the structural attention is focussed. And on the other hand, composers and musicians alike tend to ignore some simple things as how exactly are people in the back of the hall hearing, say the percussion or the low brass? Or, even more a propos exactly how can we make this orchestral or string quartet recording really present for the listener of a recording? Mind you, if we go back fifty years, people like Leopold Stokowski were exploring different techniques of close-miking in orchestral recordings and audio aficionados were listening on very high fidelity home systems and even sometimes on four-channel setups. Now, good lord, how do you make an orchestral recording work for someone listening to it on laptop speakers, or maybe even ear buds?
You go to war with the army oops... you go out and play for the audience you have not the audience you want. In the Americas the spectacle is the thing. The concert repertoire is narrow apart from a few obligatory nods to this or that unsung or unheard composer in vogue with the mgt. 90% will only hear recordings of these works anyway probably not Yuja's thus it seems a price worth paying so that at least something still gets heard.
Re Prof Hein's thoughts,I certainly have no problem with the basic idea, just its implementation. I would note that Decca tried that in the 60s and 79s with their Phase4 classical recordings. They did not make much of a dent and are now reviled. I would think it better if composers specifically wrote works along the lines he mentioned rather than fiddling with orchestral works not orchestrated for that. The problem is that the vast majority of times the results will be annoying or excruciating for the few that hit the sweet spot. Chamber works are a better vehicle for that kind of thing anyway since it more closely approximates the pop experience of concentrating on a few performers rather than sitting back eyes closed.
Actually, I think in the arts it is a bit different. To a certain extent, you are always creating/developing an audience for your work.
But taking a larger perspective, we are currently in a transition. A lot of what has been enjoyed, accepted, believed in for a lot of different areas--not just the arts, but politics, entertainment, media, education and culture generally, is, or is about to be, turned on its head because whatever has been going on is no longer working. And I don't think it is obvious what is going to succeed the present situation.
Are you talking about composers or performers? I was referring to the latter who rarely bring along an audience to something new because they generally want larger audiences not smaller. Sometimes a renowned player can resuscitate a formerly admired work as Heifetz and Milstein did with the Glazunov Violin Concerto but that was a forgotten work not a new innovation.
In the current era where everything is on the net whether gigantic or barely a ripple in a flood to shame Noah I just think that notion of an artist developing their audience as they go along is becoming increasingly unlikely given the fragmentation and disappearance of cultural elites. I suppose if The Taylor suddenly developed an innovative style of music that she might be able to bring people along to it but that is about the level of publicity needed these days.
In terms of the arts near to midterm future I think the main issue is whether there will be an active mass art and an elite art or just a mass art with a museum elite art.
It is true of both composers and performers. Why do I think this? We need to look at how successful artists became successful: it has been through two basic approaches: either present something fresh and attractive (and by this I don't mean "pretty"--Picasso's Demoiselles d'Avignon is both fresh and attractive, but initially only a few people saw this, same with Stravinsky's Rite of Spring) or present something that is predictable and derivative--call this old wine in new bottles. The other is more new wine in new bottles. In the immediate sequel to an artist's presentation the conflicting opinions (based often on bias, familiarity and prejudice more than real evaluation) make it impossible to sort out the former from the latter, but it comes clear over time--a few months, a few decades, a hundred years or so, depends on the details: it took Bach a long time to be realistically evaluated.
With performers it is more immediate: even during their lifetimes it was clear that Segovia, Heifetz and Horowitz were great performing artists, standing out from the crowd. This is also true in popular music, but due to the very different dynamics of career trajectories it is a much messier argument. I might venture that it was clear rather soon that the Beatles were a deeply creative group while U2 were tiresomely uninteresting.
I ran this one by Steven elsewhere but I had to film the first movement of Guitar Sonata on Themes by Thomas Commuck this weekend. June 2, 2024 marks the centennial of the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.
https://youtu.be/_kzNLxH4szg
Post a Comment