On this list, though, there are many fine composers whose works are worthy of attention, as well: probably most of us at some level or other. I would name names but I would leave somebody out so I won't except to say that I don't consider myself in the same league with many on this list.
So even though the names are different for the finale list, the sentiment remains the same: don't look for big names or academic recognition, look for what you feel to be quality music, which is abundant even if not as easy to find as opening a B&H or Oxford or Presser catalogue.
There is much fine music being written which is not part of the mainstream (as has been true throughout music history, I am convinced).
David H. Bailey wrote:
We have entered a period where it has become silly to think only in terms of people who are 'getting the buzz in university ...' or in terms of 'major reputations.'
There are many fine composers who have major reputations but only among those who know their music. Jim Theobald, Tracey Rush, Nancy Bloomer Deussen, Linda Robbins Coleman, Elizabeth Pizer, Adrienne Albert, Sean O'Boyle, Michael Horwood, Bob Wendel, and many other fine o-list composers have huge followings among those who have played and heard their music.
The problem these days is to get one's music looked at by the music directors of the major orchestras who have boards who want only the old chestnuts, who have audiences who want comfortable-but-interesting music, and musicians who want challenges which are musically rewarding, not challenging merely for the sake of being challenging. So quite often they go back to the cheap and available, tried and ture classical and romantic composers.
The biggest problem is so many great talents, whose music is available directly from them due to this wonderful world of computers which we have. So they are able to produce their music even if the big publishers won't have anything to do with them.
Which is great because we have much wider array of music to select from these days, but it is also a curse because it has further fragmented the music selection process, making it harder to become a "name," which is also a blessing because with the internet and self-promotion and lists such as this one it is possible for conductors to find new composers and new music which doesn't have any compositional axe to grind other than to be the proper expression of musical thoughts and emotions. And at the same time composers can find new performing opportunities outside their own geographical areas.
The internet has helped to level the playing field (limited as it is in performance-time and performance slots) somewhat. The big names you mention still get the lion's share of the programming time with the major orchestras, but slowly that is changing, thankfully!
I hope these composers come forward with the URLs for their web-sites.
And tell your friend that composition is alive and well and flourishing even if performances of new music are not as plentiful as they deserve to be.
Stu McIntire wrote:
I'm trying to introduce contemporary music to a musician friend who thinks
nothing has happened since Stravinsky. I've thrown lots of music at him -
Carter, Berio, Schnittke, minimalists in general, neo-Romantics, etc. - but
I realized in the process that I don't really know who is getting the buzz
in university and conservatory music theory and composition programs these
days, and I'd like to know. I'm years away from academe, and my knowledge
of composers working currently is based on available recordings and what I
read in the NY Times, BBC Music, etc., which probably overlaps considerably
with what I'm looking for, but not completely I'm sure. When I was in grad
school in the early 80's, it would have been easy to compile a list of 20 or
so names that would generally be beyond argument, I think. So, who are some
composers currently working, or least still alive with major reputations,
that are generally considered at the top of the ladder by those in academic
music, particularly theorists and composers - Carter still, I assume?
Rochberg, or has attention moved on for the most part? What about Adams,
Corigliano, Schwantner, Tower, Kirchner? Or have we entered a period so
wide open that it is impossible to come up with a relatively short list?
Thanks for any input -
Stu
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
.
-- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
