An Open Letter to the Colburn School
Today I received an advertising flier in the mail from the Colburn Chamber Music Society, and after reading it, I feel compelled to respond. First let me say that I have attended concerts at the School that were nothing less than breathtaking. The quality of performance by Colburn faculty, students and guests has been superb. But the other day I realized that I had not attended a concert there in several years. Why is that?
When I see an announcement for a concert at Colburn, I generally have no idea who the performers are. I’m sure they are going to be great, based on past experience. But, it’s the program that will decide for me whether to attend. I seem to recall that in the past, Colburn would advertise the program. Lately, that seems to be no longer the case.
Now, I will confess to you that if I don’t see a program advertised, I worry that I might have to sit through something that will annoy me. I suspect that I am not the only one. May we have a moment of straight talk here?
I know that one is not supposed to speak openly of this, but for the composition of what has been called “serious music,” “art music,” or by pro musicians, “legit music,” the past hundred years has been a wasteland of mediocrity, at best. You and I both know that you can’t name one composition from the past century that merits any comparison with the works of the great composers from Bach through Brahms.
The flier I received invites me to attend “concerts blending beloved classics and innovative contemporary works.” If we were to observe Truth in Advertising, that should be rewritten to say “concerts blending beloved classics, and non-beloved works by composers who lack the skill and talent to write tonal counterpoint.” Beginning in the late 19th century, more and more budding composers threw up their hands and despaired of writing works of Beethoven’s caliber, hoping instead to titillate the listener with mere novelty and special effects. One can imagine Johannes Brahms admonishing them, as he often did his sole composition student, Gustav Jenner: ‘So, young man, do not amuse yourself further in this way!’
Some of you who are reading this open letter may be asking yourselves, “Why is this ‘blending’ necessary?” The answer lies in a major campaign launched in the 1950s by an influential organization called the Congress for Cultural Freedom, which insisted that so-called “contemporary music” must be put on an equal footing with classical music, if not elevated above it. It became socially unacceptable to program Bach, Mozart, Haydn, Mendelssohn, or other artists of that stature, without including a bit of György Ligeti, Iannis Xenakis, or Karlheinz Stockhausen. Concert programmers now are conditioned to do this, and perhaps to sneer just a little at people who object, without being aware of how these attitudes developed.
Did I mention that the Congress for Cultural Freedom was later exposed as a CIA front organization? I have no idea why the CIA had an interest in promoting modernism, but I bet that if we ever find out, it will be a fascinating story.
Now, let me hasten to add that I don’t advocate that programmers turn exclusively to “warhorses” and subject the listener to endless performances of Beethoven’s 5th and Mozart’s “Jupiter” (although it nourishes the soul to hear those every now and then.) I am suggesting that there are hundreds of neglected works by composers such as Jan Dismas Zelenka, C.P.E. Bach, Jan Ladislav Dusík, Johann Nepomuk Hummel, Clara Schumann, Fanny Mendelssohn, and Ernő Dohnányi, any one of which towers above the feeble efforts of those tiny, frustrated 20th and 21st century composers. Why not include more of these works in your programming?
But how, you may ask, will we ever start producing first-rate composers again if we don’t offer them some exposure? Well, rewarding mediocrity is not going to solve that problem. Young composers need to hear poetic, idea-rich music, and hear it often, to nourish their talents. As Robert Schumann once wrote, “Our purpose… is to remind our readers emphatically of the distant past and its works. Then, to emphasize the fact that the contemporary artist can secure strength for the creation of new beauty only by drinking from such pure fountains.”
I sincerely believe that Colburn can lead the way in this. It may be too late for KUSC.
