Manifesto - Jesse Montgomery

While I accept the possibility that the symphony orchestra may one day become a thing of the past, both as an art form and a major organization, I do not think that day is near.  I contend that the orchestra continues to be one of the best instruments for conveying the full range of sound and emotion, that the classical language still has room for expansion and experimentation, and that living composers are beginning to once again make full use of its capabilities. 

John Cage considered himself the “organizer of a succession of sounds”, and Claude Debussy stated, “Any sounds in any combination and in any succession are henceforth free to be used in a musical continuity”.  However, the most famous composers, Debussy included, have succeeded because of their ability to orchestrate, picking and choosing among 80 some musicians and countless notes to create a palate that moves an audience, not simply combining sounds at random.  A recent ballet performance I attended featured an arrangement of Debussy’s Clair de lune.  Debussy’s original haunting melody and flawless counterpoint aside, the orchestration and recording left me wanting more. The way this particular orchestrator selected instruments, and the lack of a live performance by a giant living organism lessened the art and the experience.  In the right hands, a simple melody, well known melody can either be heightened by orchestration, or in the wrong hands, diminished.

I bring up Cage and his methods to argue that all signs point to orchestral composers once again using the full capabilities of the orchestra to create relevant, accessible compositions and performances.  In concert halls and movie theaters alike, there is a nearly universal language when it comes to classical music, and nearly infinite possibilities for expansion.  If you are a composer with something to say, why not use the richest palate available, and a recognizable language? 

Whether it be Cage, Schoenberg, Webern, Subotnick or Glass, orchestral music (and classical music in general) experienced a period of experimentation in the last 100 years, using mathematical systems, random selection, electronics and bizarre instruments to create compositions.  Even as I finished my undergraduate degree in 2010, composition students were still bent on experimentation, using strange combinations of instruments, complex or nonexistent rhythms, and extensive silence and noise.  They were the product of a generation of composers that didn’t utilize the orchestra to its fullest potential, if at all, and didn’t build upon the groundwork previous composers had laid.

Moving forward, composers are once again beginning to focus on the capabilities of the orchestra, adding elements of Cage, Subotnick and Glass to the more innately pleasing (classical) sounds of Beethoven, Mahler and Debussy.   This focus on orchestration and the classical language is producing music that is lush, vibrant, energetic, and most importantly, accessible to orchestras and audiences alike.  A prime example of a composer reimagining the orchestra as a part of contemporary art and society is Mason Bates.  What I believe has made Bates so successful is that he is not attempting to reinvent the wheel.  Instead, he builds off of a predominately classical palate or vocabulary with subtle variations.  Bates uses the full range of the orchestra, and adds in elements that speak to both the past and the future of composition.  He might use Tibetan prayer bells, a sound more comfortable in the realm of Cage, combined with the computer-generated tones pioneered by Subotnick, all wrapped up in a Phillip Glass-esque groove.  Other times, he uses the string section as a percussion ensemble to replicate electronic sounds.  Bates can successfully combine different compositional elements into an orchestral work that distinctly sounds like music of this time and place, while not seeming very far from music composed hundreds of years ago.