John Howell wrote:
At 11:25 PM +0000 1/28/06, Owain Sutton wrote:
John Howell wrote:
(Academic: A composer who earns a living teaching because s/he
cannot write music that earns a living, but argues that any music
that sells is a sellout.)
A thoroughly unfair stereotype. Most composers I know who are in
academia would dearly love to be able to make enough money from
writing music to get out of teaching.
Oh, I agree completely! But are they willing to analyze the marketplace
and produce music suited to it? Mozart did. Haydn did. Bach did. So
did DuFay, Josquin, Palestrina and Byrd. I don't believe anyone has
ever accused them of "selling out"!
And I don't mean just movie scores or pop arrangements, either. There
are markets for good, singable church music that an average choir can
handle, and innovative choral music suitable for both professional and
university choruses that is within their grasp. If a composer insists
on writing music that only 3 choruses or 6 singers or 2 string quartets
in the world can sing well, s/he had better know those performers and
conductors very well! Same thing for symphonic music (when there's a
wide open market for wind band music), solo sonatas and character
pieces, and high quality literature for students at every level. There
are lots of markets, but not for people who look down on them.
John
Some good points, perhaps, although I think you need a bit more evidence
before making such claims about Dufay or Josquin with such certainty!
However, moulding one's music to fit the market expectation is *not*
necessary in order to make a living from composing, and there *are*
composers who do so with music that nobody would describe as toned-down
or sold-out.
However, your general tone seems to look on the composer purely in a
utilitarian manner - particularly in the suggestion that wind band music
is the way forward.
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
