Music
over the centuries has always been described as a combination of melody,
harmony, and rhythm. In the Western repertoire, they are the 3 components to
music going all the way back to Gregorian chant, which was entirely monophonic
(a singular melodic line without harmony). In the Baroque era, we saw an
exploration of polyphony and rules that prescribed and set the boundaries for
what music was and wasn’t. This continued to develop
and grow though the Classical era and in the Romantic era, a further expansion
of the symphony orchestra as a means of stretching the boundaries of harmony.
Continuing this trend, the last century has been all about the exploration of
the ratios between melody, harmony and rhythm. From impressionism, using
harmony and rhythm to create the same kind of ambiguous fluidity that is
represented in an impressionistic painting, to minimalism utilizing rhythm and
harmony to display new techniques such as gating into the vocabulary of
orchestration, to everything between and beyond. Regardless where music will go
from here, it will always possess some combination of melody, harmony, and
rhythm.
Taking it
a step further, Jerrold Levinson in “On the Concept of Music” defined music as, “sounds temporarily organized
by a person for the purpose of enriching or intensifying experience through
active engagement (e.g., listening, dancing, performing) with the sounds
regarded primarily, or in significant measure as sounds.” The distinction he makes for music having the purpose of
an enriching experience is the defining factor the argument against the belief
that classical music is dead. There are many reasons why a person would attend
a concert or listen to classical music, but what is unique about music is the
ability to transform the context of a piece of music that was written for a
specific time and place to fit the themes of current events without the use of
words or movement. The transformative experience one has listening to a piece
may be entirely different from how another experiences and interprets it.
Levinson
also refers to this in his definition as an “experience
through active engagement”. This particular component of
his definition of music is what will be most important to the artistic vitality
of music in the next century. Musicians, music directors, artistic
administrators, and management alike need to find a way to make the music of
our past relevant. In a recent seminar session by Ara Guzeliman, Dean of the
Julliard School, Ara stated as one of his Ten Golden Rules on Artistic Planning,
“It is critical that
programming promote active engaged listening”,
which specifies Levinson’s definition to programming.
Successful programming is an art in and of itself and requires input from many
moving parts. Starting with the music director and artistic administrator’s vision trickling through operations, and development and
marketing. One major flaw in this model is an insistence on engagement being a
major player in creating successful programming. I’m not saying that a program’s
ability to be marketed or funded should trump the artistic vision of an
organization, but a program’s ability to engage in the
community is essential. By doing so, a program makes itself relevant among the
community and can as a result aid in the marketing and development of the
program. Additionally, this kind of programming helps with promoting the
branding of the organization as an essential part of the community. Meanwhile,
while history has always decided what stands the test of time, composers can
contribute to this movement towards community relevant programming by insisting
on a larger stake in embracing a curatorial role when premiering a work or
having their work performed. By helping to provide context for their pieces,
composers can ensure that their pieces are relevant within a program on a
symphony’s season.
As
orchestras find ways to combat the economic downfall of the last decade,
community relevance is going to become increasingly essential in the artistic
planning of a symphony orchestra. The economy will never be what it was so it
will be the ways that an orchestra proves itself to be relevant and essential
to its community that will determine survival.
Thus -- in the 21st century -- orchestral music must make itself both relevant to the listener and the arts organizations must make the programming frameworks engaging to their audience. You have hence defined 'success for orchestras and, by result, orchestral music' :-) Brava
ReplyDelete