You are here:   Civilisation >  Critique > The Loss Of Faith Made Music Mute
 

Church music: Seen here in the medieval treatise "Tacuinam Sanitatis", it forged the basis of classical music

It is a mystery to many people why so few contemporary classical composers seem capable of writing "a good tune". Surely, given the number of students who pursue composition in our universities and conservatoires, and the hugely increased access which technologies such as music-notation software give to prospective composers, we should expect to find at least one or two capable of making a popular impact? Why is it that, with more people than ever engaged in the activity of composing, our culture still seems incapable of fostering a contemporary Verdi or Stravinsky, with the celebrity and popular recognition that such great figures once garnered?

It is certainly true, as Simon Heffer has amusingly put it in Standpoint ("A Raspberry for Emetic Music", November 2014), that the musical establishment is "in hock to the crap merchants" and in thrall to the state, creating a tyrannical orthodoxy of ugliness, admission to which can only be gained by imitating the style of "orchestrated raspberries" currently in vogue. However, the underlying cause—though closely related to the over-reaching influence of the modern state—ultimately goes far deeper than this. To understand the deficit of successful contemporary classical music, what we need to uncover are the feelings which motivated the artistic instincts of the great composers of the past, but which are now absent in the minds of modern composers, thus accounting for their "emetic" output.  

In the year 1900, the following composers were alive, and the majority of them active: Saint-Saëns, Debussy, Ravel, Stravinsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Rachmaninoff, Prokofiev, Bartók, Elgar, Vaughan Williams, Holst, Mahler, Strauss, Sibelius, Grieg, Puccini, Dvořák and Janáček. This list of exalted and well-known figures is far from exhaustive, and should give us pause. We cannot possibly pretend that the world today can boast a similar number or calibre of composers; indeed, any one of these figures is of far more interest to most of us than any of today's most famous composers. Moreover, if one expands this categorisation to include any composer active between the years 1850 and 1950, one possesses pretty much a complete list of the works in the standard orchestral repertoire (save the old German masters), and hence those pieces which one would find overwhelmingly on offer in any events guide produced by today's professional orchestras.

On closer inspection, it is not hard to see the idée fixe that unites this vast array of varied talent: nationalism. To varying degrees of explicitness, whether through the deliberate inclusion of folk elements, or simply a general over-arching style suggestive of national sentiment, all of these figures would quite happily have thought of themselves, not just as composers, but as French, Russian, Hungarian, English, German, Finnish, Norwegian, Italian or Czech composers. It is in fact a statement of the obvious to point out that the feelings that underpin a good deal of what these composers set out to accomplish was driven by a passion for the language, history, customs, traditions, institutions and, perhaps most prominently, the countryside of their native lands.

This surge of nationalist output, produced during the long 19th century, was an obvious accompaniment to the growth of the nation state itself. However, there is another deeper set of convictions which the classical composers held in common, and upon which the nation states of Europe themselves were predicated: Christianity.

Even in opera, a seemingly secular arena, Christianity commonly frames the moral dilemmas of the characters on stage. Mozart's Don Giovanni is dragged off to Hell, Verdi's Leonora takes refuge in a monastery, and Janáček's Jenůfa is just one of the many characters from the operatic repertoire who offers up a Christian prayer in a moment of great despair and need. This isn't merely because the Church held the purse-strings, as some have argued, but because there is a profound and inseparable relationship between music and Christianity; in fact, I would go as far so to argue that there is a sense in which Western music is Christian. The very scales (originally church modes) and harmonies which musicians of any ilk take as a given were forged in the cathedrals and churches of the medieval world. Through a gradual process of setting liturgical texts to music, sonorities such as the dominant-seventh chord were discovered, which then became the basic material of all classical and popular music. Something of the wisdom of the Gospels and the Psalms shines out of the harmonies of Western music—which is that crucial balance between judgment and compassion—and this is why, even on the operatic stage, a Christian moral logic so naturally and fittingly flows forth from the voices of the characters and the machinations of their plots.

Two operas in particular strongly support this line of reasoning, both of which place the suffering of Christ on the cross as a central image around which their respective stories revolve: The Rape of Lucretia by Britten, in which a narrative chorus "view these human passions, and these years/through eyes which once have wept with Christ's own tears", and Wagner's last opera, Parsifal, with its profound insights into the relationship between religious communities and sexual desire. Both operas acknowledge the debt which music owes to Christianity by bringing it back into the realm of secular music-making, and the consequence in the instrumentation of both scores is a remarkable glowing luminosity.

To gain a proper and complete understanding of what we call "classical" music is to appreciate that it was all written within the context of societies which were predominantly Christian in nature, and where celebrations of traditional national attributes were not seen as old-fashioned or backward-looking as they often are today. This all changed, however, in the 1960s, with the old moral authority of Christianity and nationalism brought into question by two World Wars which had slain "half the seed of Europe one by one", and the dawning of the sexual revolution. Liberated from the traditional restraints of Christian society, not least because of the oral contraceptive pill which spread rapidly throughout the world during the early 1960s, there was a sudden seismic shift in young people's behaviour and attitude towards sex, and one of its many consequences was the beginning of an era of "popular" music which gave expression to the new feelings which they could now experience and communicate publicly without shame or censure.

Let's be honest with ourselves: except for a few tangents here and there, the 1960s, 70s, 80s and 90s were overwhelmingly the decades of popular music. If you ask anyone their choice favourites from the 60s and 70s, only a tiny fraction will say Boulez and Stockhausen—and even they are just kidding themselves. Classical music did not enter a fantastic new period of experimentation and innovation in the 1960s. It died. What really took place was a repositioning of the psychological focus of music from the mature feelings of reflective adults to the more impatient and direct feelings of the young. With its "oohs" and its "aahs", its "come-ons" and its "get-downs", its "rock me" this and its "baby" that, the three-     minute pop song homes in on the cheap thrills of recreational sex. Popular music is primarily about the highs and lows of the casual relationship. Different popular songs capture the feelings of different stages along its rise and fall: the yearning for it to begin ("Love me do"), the exuberance and satisfaction of being in the relationship ("I feel fine"), the little jealousies involved within the relationship ("Tell me why") and the angst of the breakup ("I'll cry instead")—to name but a few early Beatles songs.

None of these remarks are intended to condemn popular music (I would far prefer to listen to a favourite track by Michael Jackson than suffer through another BBC Proms commission). What these observations do illuminate, however, is the connection between the profound changes which affected the regulation of our sexual conduct during the 1960s, and, at the very same time, the decline of enduring new classical works, and the explosion of popular music onto the cultural scene as a new expressive force. In a sense, popular music stole classical music's mojo. Of course, my analysis is a broad gesture that does not take jazz or minimalism into account—which provide, so to speak, a bridge between the world of classical and popular music—nor does it explain the many other popular styles which existed before the 1960s (although these themselves bear witness to a growing liberalism), but it nevertheless represents a key moment, and helps to demonstrate the gradual passing of the baton that took place in music as progressive societies entered modernity.

Musical modernism is what was left behind after the feelings which motivated the great classical composers had dissipated. What you are hearing in the dysfunctional harmony and unattractive groans of Harrison Birtwistle and his many imitators is a massive God-shaped hole, where once natural authority and faith resided. This is what "atonal" music really is: a loss of faith, and this is why anyone who counteracts its dominance is quickly condemned as "naive", in just the same manner as those who continue to hold religious convictions in a scientific age. It is what has led composers such as Robin Holloway to confess that "all we like sheep have dumbly concurred in the rightness of [Schoenberg's] stance; against the evidence of our senses and our instincts".

I would be the first to acknowledge the dramatic talents of Alban Berg, the brilliant textural instrumentation of György Ligeti or the accomplished musicianship of Thomas Adès, but what all these composers have in common—despite the stylistic differences and time which separate their work—is that lack of inspiration within the musical material itself which began with Schoenberg and persists to this day. They all suffer from that excruciatingly dreary, lifeless sound which turns audiences off for want of "a good tune" (even if this phrase doesn't quite capture what they mean), and which is why ultimately none of their music has entered the standard repertoire, or enjoys   anything near the popular recognition of the composers I listed earlier. It is why modern orchestras and opera houses suffer an endlessly commissioned conveyor-belt of "world premieres", forgotten the moment they see the light of day, and it is why the money is now finally starting to run out, with the state less willing to pay for it all and private patronage (for the obvious reason that it is unlovable) unwilling to fill the gap.

All the phoney "outreach projects", pseudo-pop fusions or desperate appeals to political correctness cannot halt this inevitable financial decline, and, with the copyright on composers like Rachmaninoff and Vaughan Williams due to expire soon, an already ailing publishing industry—which has colluded for far too long in maintaining the illusion that musical modernism was ever worth much—is going to have its coffers hit hard. A list of the most popular rental titles offered by the major music publisher Boosey & Hawkes as of 2012 bears this contention out, since none of the works in question was written after 1960, nor could any of them be remotely considered atonal:

1. Bernstein: Symphonic Dances From "West Side Story"
2. Bernstein: Overture to "Candide"
3. Mussorgsky/Ravel: Pictures at an Exhibition
4. Britten: The Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra
5. Rachmaninoff: Piano Concerto No. 2
6. Britten: Four Sea Interludes
7. Copland: Appalachian Spring Suite
8. Copland: Clarinet Concerto

With all this in mind, therefore, we can start to comprehend those rare instances since the 1960s where some classical music worthy of our attention has been produced, and we should not be surprised to see that they have sprung most prominently from a Christian setting—in particular, the great tradition of choral music which continues in the Oxbridge colleges and cathedrals across England. The best examples include John Tavener's outstanding setting of Blake's "The Lamb", early insightful glances into what a composer like George Benjamin might have been in his magnificent "Twas in the year that King Uzziah died", the admirable liturgical output of Judith Bingham and Judith Weir, and the success of those two wonderful choral works, "Sleep" and "Lux Aurumque" by Eric Whitacre, suffused with his distinctive brand of American televangelism. In addition, another often-forgotten backwater is the world of wind and brass music which, given its ties to the Royal Family, the armed forces and (particularly in the case of brass bands) its commitment to the great Christian hymn tune, has allowed composers like Edward Gregson and Kenneth Hesketh to sneak past a few nationalist contributions which contrast starkly with their usual "squeaky-gate" output. With its tuba trills and macho melodies, Gregson's "The Plantagenets" for brass band masterfully evokes the passions and chivalry of the old English kings, whereas Hesketh's youthful "Masque" and "Whirlegigg"—which enjoy international renown—are straight out of the military banding traditions of Vaughan Williams and Holst. What all of the above examples go to prove is that modern composers do still have it in them, when they are brave enough (or innocent enough) to try; however, these examples still exist on the periphery of the musical establishment, which, as Glare—a new opera presented by the Royal Opera House last November—amply demonstrates, remains stuck in a self-hating modernist rut.

Things might be about to change, however, and I think I can suggest a few reasons why this might be: popular music has run out of steam. The young know this (several students of mine have testified to its truth); they admit that even the best that is on offer these days—the chilly sounds of Coldplay or the Arctic Monkeys—cannot compete with the energetic exuberance of, say, Abba, and that so much that is pumped out of the radio is now empty commercialism.

This decline, I suspect, relates back to the ongoing liberalisation of societies which began in the 1960s. The overthrowing of Christian chastity and discrediting of nationalism went hand in hand with the rights revolutions, which improved the freedoms of non-white races, homosexuals and women, and these causes were also reflected in popular music: hence, "[It doesn't matter if you're] Black or White" by Michael Jackson, "I want to break free" by Queen, or "Eleanor Rigby" by the Beatles. During this period, the young had a lot to rebel against, and many just causes to champion. Now, however, it is fair to say that, in the West. social norms have been established which condemn any form of discrimination based on race, gender or sexuality, and so the young have very little real to rebel against anymore, and the motivations and feelings which inspired so much great popular music, and which pushed the old authority of classical music to one side, have now run dry.

Instead, what has crept into our institutions of late—particularly in education—is a systemic lack of leadership and authority. So, in conservatoires and music departments, nobody teaches harmony and counterpoint any more, although this, as explained above, is fundamental to all Western music. What has happened here is that the baby has been thrown out with the bath-water, and an overshooting liberal agenda has jettisoned all that was of value from the past, as well as those things which needed changing—as Steven Pinker has aptly put it, the rights revolutions have now entered their "decadent phase".

We have now reached a point, however, where the rot has gone so deep that we can no longer afford to maintain the lie that modernism was ever worth much—and not just because the money is running out. With the many subversive and insidious forces of globalisation beginning seriously to undermine the legitimacy of the nation state, and with Christianity under attack from a new liberal bigotry which has made expressing Christian sentiments all but taboo in much public life, what we need now are forms of culture that will help us to shore up these foundations. However, this is only possible if we allow leadership and authority back into our artistic institutions, if we take a suitably compassionate pride in our national identity, and, without any awkwardness or shame, have belief in the value and virtue of our  Judaeo-Christian roots.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Tim Cavanaugh
March 2nd, 2015
10:03 PM
Not sure what Schoenberg is being blamed for here, but if irreligion is (as it seems to be) the author's explanation for the decline of popularity, something doesn't add up. Schoenberg had no choice but to take his religion very seriously, and the equation of religious discipline and musical discipline is at the center of much of his work -- most notably Moses & Aron, which amounts to a dramatic argument for the tonal row as the musical equivalent of God's will revealed through the commandments. It's certainly true that many or most people don't care for how it sounds, but lack of faith does not seem to explain that lack of appeal. As for the loss of nationalism, connection to the supernatural, direct emotional appeal and the other elements the author mourns, you can find them abundantly in the work of Jerry Goldsmith, Bernard Herrmann, John Williams and dozens of other Hollywood composers working in the period covered by this article.

FRANCIS SCHWARTZ
March 2nd, 2015
8:03 PM
Balderdash.

Derrick Norman
March 2nd, 2015
6:03 PM
How could you leave out the tunefull music of John Rutter? ost of it "faith" inspired.

Callum Hackett
March 2nd, 2015
4:03 PM
It doesn't surprise me any longer that published criticisms of contemporary music are written by people who are wilfully ignorant of the cultural history of the twentieth century, but it still frustrates me. One can tell from the outset that the essential premise of this article is nonsense by the fact that the first composer's name to pop up is 'Verdi'. Whatever the subjects of Verdi's music, Verdi was an atheist, and that this could at least in theory be defended but is not even mentioned shows that the writer does not seriously engage with his theme. One also needn't even bother to follow the deeply biased line of argument to know in advance that it must be false: IF it were the case that classical music has been supplanted because of a severing of its Christian roots, then surely whatever popular medium has replaced it will be a medium that maintains that essential mythology. Look to the kinds of music that has replaced classical in the public consciousness and show me where Jesus is in that miasma of commercial dross. Then, I'm afraid, we have to out the author as a fabricator; a liar; a fraud. He claims, with no substantiation, that conservatoires and music departments don't teach standard harmony and counterpoint any more. On what basis? Why, no basis at all because it's made up! As a recent university student (2013) with ties to classical music (I was an English student but I conducted the nearest orchestra), I know that music curricula still place heavy emphasis on common practice techniques. I also know, as the partner of a musicologist and composer, that knowledge of such things is essential even to the most avant-garde of today's composers. Claims to the contrary are utterly without foundation. Don't even take my word for it - just do the basic research, apparently beyond this article, of looking up a random university or conservatoire prospectus and you will see these foundational aspects of composition as core components. This is specious nonsense dreamt up by a conspiracy theorist living in an imagined world that he supposes must be set against him because he can't quite understand why his tastes have never matured since an adolescent love of sentimental Romanticism. You may do better buying film soundtracks than pursuing art. I would also counter that, as a regular concert-goer and listener of contemporary music, the likes of the venues I attend - whether a small chapel or the Royal Festival Hall - are always packed and always delighted with the programmes, be it Birtwistle, Dutilleux, Ligeti, or some up-and-coming youngsters yet to embed their name in the industry (just to mention composers I have heard from the past few months). Once again, these complaints come from people who do not even attend the institutions they disparage and who therefore have no grounding whatsoever for their laments. If, article reader, you do actually care about your cultural heritage and you want to learn about the genuine history of music, even if you may disapprove of certain styles, then instead of submitting yourself to this effortlessly faked hysteria, read Alex Ross's 'The Rest is Noise'.

The Sanity Inspector
March 2nd, 2015
4:03 PM
As has been observed, time puts a stop to all things, and this is commonly mistaken for tragedy. Our civilization is unlikely to ever top the achievements of 18th century classical or 19th century romantic music--but we don't need to. We still have these mighty works. Just as we still have Chartres and Notre Dame, even though we're right out of the habit of cathedral building. As for modernism, the most withering dismissal I ever read was this: "Ives, Vivaldi, Schoenberg, Glass--no matter how much you hate them, they are not "bad" composers. A "bad" composer is the associate professor at South Succotash State who cranks out imitation Hindemith every couple years with a title like "Directions" or "Vortex." It gets played by the student orchestra and is promptly and appropriately forgotten." --Walter C. Koehler

The Sanity Inspector
March 2nd, 2015
4:03 PM
As has been observed, time puts a stop to everything, and this is often mistaken for tragedy. Eighteenth Century classical and 19th Century romantic music are the twin pinnacles of Western music. We are never going to top them, or extend them, using the principles and tools they used. We are used to this in other forms of art. We are right out of the habit of building cathedrals, yet our appreciation of the great Gothic edifices is undiminished. It will be so with music as well. As for modernism, the most withering assessment I ever read was this: "Ives, Vivaldi, Schoenberg, Glass--no matter how much you hate them, they are not "bad" composers. A "bad" composer is the associate professor at South Succotash State who cranks out imitation Hindemith every couple years with a title like "Directions" or "Vortex." It gets played by the student orchestra and is promptly and appropriately forgotten." --Walter C. Koehler

Anonymous
March 2nd, 2015
3:03 PM
Underlying all this is the growing western view of religion as harmful and spirituality as for the weak minded and un-scientific. So I blame the downfall on Darwin. He has become god, making man the equal of dogs, making beauty an accident, making morality laughable, making transcendence meaningless, making the eternal a farce. I'm not debating Darwinism rather am speaking of it's consequences. The great themes of nationalism, Christianity, and spirituality are meaningless on the foundation of materialistic naturalism. Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die (ie YOLO)(pop music's arch-theme?) It's the inescapable consequence of this worldview, fed to generations now as the unable-to-be-challenged truth. It provides meaninglessness as a purpose. Besides, popular music always changes and in 100 years many will be pining for our current pop music of the good old days.

Taeho Paik
March 2nd, 2015
12:03 PM
What nonsense! The problem is how music itself and its purpose is truly misunderstood and people go to schools to learn it! Classical musicians are highly capable technically but in the academies they learn nothing about keeping time and creating a groove. So one falls asleep while listening unless one is looking out for specific musical qualities in the composition. In short great music is played in a boring way. Loss of faith is another matter but only blues musicians go to the crossroads to ask the Lord or the Devil for help.

John Borstlap
March 2nd, 2015
11:03 AM
This article confuses two things: Christianity with spirituality, and entertainment with art music. It was not Christianity perse that inspired classical composers but spirituality, i.e. the faith (however vague) in the existence of a spiritual realm and hence, in ethical values. None of the mentioned classical composers were strong adherents of whatever church. Religion is merely a channel for the inner experience of the spiritual, whatever it may be. Then, although the article rightly observes the sudden increasing dominance, in society, of pop music and youth culture since the sixties, this happened entirely in the territory of entertainment, it had and has nothing to do with art music. For the rest, the article rightly touches a couple of unfortunate but very true points. But nowadays there are composers of great talent who introduce exactly the element that had become missing within the realm of art music, of which I want to mention: Nicolas Bacri and Richard Dubugnon in France, and David Matthews in England, who manage to achieve recognition and success within the very context that cultivates the classical composers. They had and have to battle against the grave suspicion at orchestras and concert promotors against contemporary music, but succeeded to overcome these barriers. It is a new trend that wants to reconnect with the earlier 20C as mentioned in the article, comparable with the resurgence of figurative painting - both movements still strongly ignored and taboo'd by the modernist establishment (who want to keep the decreasing money flow into their direction). Recommended: 'The Classical Revolution', Scarecrow Press 2013, which explores this subject. This book got a very mixed reception, fiercely condemned by some, enthusiastically embraced by others. www.amazon.com/The-Classical-Revolution-Thoughts-Traditionalist/dp/08108...

mr.ed
March 2nd, 2015
10:03 AM
Based on my observation of audiences over the last 40+ years, if it weren't for the high percentage of Jews, there would be no classical music, at least in the west.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.