One could argue that Beethoven may be a better composer than Bruce Springsteen but that Springsteen is the better songwriter. I think it safe to say that Bruce would be ill-advised to undertake a symphony.
I think what is being left out of the argument is connoisseurship. There are people who do have broad and deep knowledge of various kinds of art who have no talent for producing any art. Also, as a former book review editor, I think I can say with some confidence that novelists are not necessarily the best reviewers of novels. People who read a lot and can write are often better.
Works of art are produced for an audience that is made up largely of people who are not artists. Plenty of musicians will argue that Arnold Schoenberg is a great composer. Very few listeners seem to agree. I am a huge fan of the music of Charles Ives and Carl Ruggles, yet have almost always found Schoenberg's music sterile. I love the quartets of Bartok, but have no time for Elliott Carter's (though I once gave his quartets hours of my time every day for two weeks straight). Yet I am no musician. I am musically literate, and I can play a bit. But that's about it.
Wide reading, listening to a huge amount of music, seeing lots and lots of art, thinking about such things, reading about them -- I think that can make one a judge -- not necessarily of talent; Schoenberg was certainly talented -- but of whether a piece works or doesn't. I have a pretty good idea why Carter's quartets don't work for me, and it has to do with the music, not just my taste.
Yet, Frank, I would argue that you, for instance, have proven yourself someone with talent. Just because you don't write music doesn't mean that you don't have an ear. Lack of development of a skill doesn't mean talent does not exist. So I would stick with my idea that talent can only be really seen by talent. And education doesn't necessarily have to be put into practice but, in music, that education about its construction is necessary for good evaluation. As a book reviewer, you are a student of literature, if not a novelist. You know the components to evaluate, unlike myself with dance. (On another level, the fact that you can see that there is something going on in Ives that doesn't exist in Shoenberg proves that "ear" is there -- talent. It is hard to reliably quantify, though.)
ReplyDeleteIt's hard for me to feel that comparing composers who write in totally different idioms is fair. Judged by the standards of contemporary popular music—which is highly restricted and stylized in style, in form, and in orchestration—Springsteen is a great songwriter. Although I think there are better songwriters, who transcend the limitations of the songwriting pop music tropes and make more universal music. Joni Mitchell and Bruce Cockburn both come to mind in this instance.
ReplyDeleteComparing any of these to Beethoven seems odd to me, but I do understand why people try to make the comparison. I much more fair comparison is to compare Joni Mitchell to jazz; she did after all work directly with Charles Mingus, and has always had a jazz influence on her songwriting and musical choices (chord progressions, etc.).
The idea that a trained musician might get more out of a musical performance seems only logical. But I do agree with you, Frank, about critics who can articulate ABOUT music (or theater; I'm thinking of our Mr. Teachout; or dance, in which case I think of Edwin Denby), are sometimes better when they come from the ranks of the appreciative non-musician writers. I know a lot of composers who cannot articulate about their music very well; for that matter, I know a lot of poets who kill things whenever they try to write poetry criticism.
There are exceptions. Ives' writings about music are great fun to read. Steve Reich wrote a book about his musical ideas that is very informative. John Cage's texts about music are often quite brilliant, as well as musical in their own way.
Overall, though, some of the best writing about music has come from devoted fans who listened well and could convey their experience of listening in words that were evocative and potent. I think of Greil Marcus' writings on punk bands, for example.
I think about this a lot, as a composer who also works with words. I'm not sure I have any better answers, or better questions, than what you've already presented here. It does stimulate my thinking about it all, though.
In the end, I guess the point I am trying to make, is that I agree with both of you. "Talented" and "artistically educated" are the qualifications I referred to in the piece. To me, these qualities can exist in any critic or in an arist. Critics can certainly know their stuff. Art -- I'm with you on Springsteen vs. the others you mentioned -- maybe because HEJIRA has been in my CD player for the last three days . . ..
ReplyDelete"Hejira" was exactly what I was thinking of. LOL ALong with "Mingus."
ReplyDelete