Stay in the Loop
BSR publishes on a weekly schedule, with an email newsletter every Wednesday and Thursday morning. There’s no paywall, and subscribing is always free.
Dan Coren
"When a wise man does not understand something," advises one of my favorite adages, "he says, "'I do not understand'."
To be sure, those are words for a software developer like me to live by. I bring them up here because, even after several readings, I have no idea what Beeri Moalem was trying to say in his recent essay, "So you want to compose serious music?" In part, Beeri's piece seems to be a survey of music history since the Classical era. As such, it's a mishmash of half-baked ideas and some very odd perceptions of music history. For example:
"¢ "Brahms, Liszt and (gasp!) Wagner are discouraged as far too complex, because they don't fit the Classical mold."
What in the world does Beeri mean by the "gasp!"? And while Liszt and Wagner may not use classical forms, Brahms was a past master of sonata-form, and used it as consistently as Haydn, Beethoven, or Schubert.
"¢ "Attempts to notate the improvisations of jazz greats have proven futile."
They have? I own a collection of transcriptions of Bill Evans piano solos. Beeri may be correct in suggesting that, even if I had the chops to play these solos correctly, they wouldn't successfully capture what Bill Evans really sounded like. But I'm glad to have them anyway.
Moreover, judging from the way Beethoven's contemporaries described his playing, it seems pretty clear that the notational system didn't capture what he really intended, either. If we could travel back in time and hear the playing of Beethoven, Mozart or, for that matter, J.S. Bach, it wouldn't surprise me if we said, "Hey, that really swings!" — and in a manner very similar to 20th-Century jazz.
Not so minimalist after all
"¢ "Minimalist composers such as Philip Glass and Steve Reich have successfully taken this simplicity [that is, the simplicity of pop/folk] and reduced it to absurdity."
In two paragraphs, Beeri has taken one if the richest and most complex periods of music history— the golden age of America's contribution to the musical culture of the world— and thrown it rather patronizingly into one big heap. And has Beeri ever listened carefully to the intricate polyrhythms and rich harmonic language of the minimalist composers? What's absurd is his evaluation of this unfortunately named musical genre.
'Grandma music'?
Beeri's portrayal of the training that young composers receive is even odder than his take on music history. He writes:
"…many amateur classical composers end up writing what is sometimes referred to as "'Grandma Music.' This appellation refers to the seas of white hair and walkers that prop up classical music organizations— the 80-year-year-old grandmas who smile and clap after hearing that same 18th-Century symphony for the thousandth time. Neo-classical composers attempt to imitate the likes of Mozart and Beethoven but usually end up sounding like error-riddled imitations of C.P.E. Bach … "
I've never heard the term "Grandma Music" before. And although such incompetent composers surely exist, their music rarely reaches the ears of the paying public.
Generation gap
Beeri Moalem is young and writes with the self-assurance appropriate to his age group, but his statements are just too blatantly ignorant and ageist for a 60-something like me to give him a pass. In recent seasons, Philadelphia audiences have had spread before them a cornucopia of the richest chamber music"“ Beethoven and Haydn quartets, Brahms Piano Quartets, a variety of contemporary works"“ and it is these concerts that attract elderly audiences. It seems clear to me that with age comes the wisdom to appreciate the music that, to use Beeri's words, is "far too complex" for hapless young composers to consider.
And"“ forgive me, I just can't resist this one"“ "error-riddled imitations of C.P.E. Bach"?
Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach was the most adventurous and mercurial of Johann Sebastian's sons. Even Mozart and Beethoven couldn't keep up with his wild experiments. It's difficult to imagine what an "error-riddled imitation" of his music would involve. Maybe Beeri means Johann Christian Bach, whose music, notwithstanding its profound influence on Mozart, is the essence of 18th Century Muzak.
Beeri makes statements like, "Beethoven's late music is usually pooh-poohed as too complex," "Schubert, Mendelssohn and Schumann are considered borderline," and "The 20th Century is hardly even discussed in conservatory music theory classes."
By who? Where? What conservatories does Beeri mean? Are these statements based on his personal experience?
Which brings me to the issue that, more than any of the objections I've raised above, bothers me most about Beeri's article.
Where's he coming from?
Near the beginning, Beeri refers to himself as a "struggling young composer." But that's the last we hear from him personally. What is the nature of his struggle? What music does he carry in his head? What are his own most deeply held musical values?
I would love the answers to these questions. Beeri is obviously a thoughtful, intelligent guy. I value his contributions to BSR. But if he can't share the answers to these questions with us, why did he write his article in the first place?â—†
To read a reply by Dan Rottenberg, click here.
To read a reply by Beeri Moalem, click here.
To be sure, those are words for a software developer like me to live by. I bring them up here because, even after several readings, I have no idea what Beeri Moalem was trying to say in his recent essay, "So you want to compose serious music?" In part, Beeri's piece seems to be a survey of music history since the Classical era. As such, it's a mishmash of half-baked ideas and some very odd perceptions of music history. For example:
"¢ "Brahms, Liszt and (gasp!) Wagner are discouraged as far too complex, because they don't fit the Classical mold."
What in the world does Beeri mean by the "gasp!"? And while Liszt and Wagner may not use classical forms, Brahms was a past master of sonata-form, and used it as consistently as Haydn, Beethoven, or Schubert.
"¢ "Attempts to notate the improvisations of jazz greats have proven futile."
They have? I own a collection of transcriptions of Bill Evans piano solos. Beeri may be correct in suggesting that, even if I had the chops to play these solos correctly, they wouldn't successfully capture what Bill Evans really sounded like. But I'm glad to have them anyway.
Moreover, judging from the way Beethoven's contemporaries described his playing, it seems pretty clear that the notational system didn't capture what he really intended, either. If we could travel back in time and hear the playing of Beethoven, Mozart or, for that matter, J.S. Bach, it wouldn't surprise me if we said, "Hey, that really swings!" — and in a manner very similar to 20th-Century jazz.
Not so minimalist after all
"¢ "Minimalist composers such as Philip Glass and Steve Reich have successfully taken this simplicity [that is, the simplicity of pop/folk] and reduced it to absurdity."
In two paragraphs, Beeri has taken one if the richest and most complex periods of music history— the golden age of America's contribution to the musical culture of the world— and thrown it rather patronizingly into one big heap. And has Beeri ever listened carefully to the intricate polyrhythms and rich harmonic language of the minimalist composers? What's absurd is his evaluation of this unfortunately named musical genre.
'Grandma music'?
Beeri's portrayal of the training that young composers receive is even odder than his take on music history. He writes:
"…many amateur classical composers end up writing what is sometimes referred to as "'Grandma Music.' This appellation refers to the seas of white hair and walkers that prop up classical music organizations— the 80-year-year-old grandmas who smile and clap after hearing that same 18th-Century symphony for the thousandth time. Neo-classical composers attempt to imitate the likes of Mozart and Beethoven but usually end up sounding like error-riddled imitations of C.P.E. Bach … "
I've never heard the term "Grandma Music" before. And although such incompetent composers surely exist, their music rarely reaches the ears of the paying public.
Generation gap
Beeri Moalem is young and writes with the self-assurance appropriate to his age group, but his statements are just too blatantly ignorant and ageist for a 60-something like me to give him a pass. In recent seasons, Philadelphia audiences have had spread before them a cornucopia of the richest chamber music"“ Beethoven and Haydn quartets, Brahms Piano Quartets, a variety of contemporary works"“ and it is these concerts that attract elderly audiences. It seems clear to me that with age comes the wisdom to appreciate the music that, to use Beeri's words, is "far too complex" for hapless young composers to consider.
And"“ forgive me, I just can't resist this one"“ "error-riddled imitations of C.P.E. Bach"?
Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach was the most adventurous and mercurial of Johann Sebastian's sons. Even Mozart and Beethoven couldn't keep up with his wild experiments. It's difficult to imagine what an "error-riddled imitation" of his music would involve. Maybe Beeri means Johann Christian Bach, whose music, notwithstanding its profound influence on Mozart, is the essence of 18th Century Muzak.
Beeri makes statements like, "Beethoven's late music is usually pooh-poohed as too complex," "Schubert, Mendelssohn and Schumann are considered borderline," and "The 20th Century is hardly even discussed in conservatory music theory classes."
By who? Where? What conservatories does Beeri mean? Are these statements based on his personal experience?
Which brings me to the issue that, more than any of the objections I've raised above, bothers me most about Beeri's article.
Where's he coming from?
Near the beginning, Beeri refers to himself as a "struggling young composer." But that's the last we hear from him personally. What is the nature of his struggle? What music does he carry in his head? What are his own most deeply held musical values?
I would love the answers to these questions. Beeri is obviously a thoughtful, intelligent guy. I value his contributions to BSR. But if he can't share the answers to these questions with us, why did he write his article in the first place?â—†
To read a reply by Dan Rottenberg, click here.
To read a reply by Beeri Moalem, click here.
Sign up for our newsletter
All of the week's new articles, all in one place. Sign up for the free weekly BSR newsletters, and don't miss a conversation.
