Confessions from a Melodic Composer
Rachmaninov, the master of great melodies, was born into the blooming tradition of tonal, melodic music. However, later in life, he lived through the rising of the second Viennese School, and its ban on tonality and melody. This places Rachmaninov in a unique position, both as a composer of melody and a time witness to the rising of the «new ways of writing». About the «new ways of writing», void of melody, he said as follows:
«I feel like a ghost wandering in a world-grown alien. I cannot cast out the old way of writing, and I cannot acquire the new. I have made an intense effort to feel the musical manner of today, but it will not come to me…»
And yes, Rachmaninov, you are not alone in feeling that way. I also do. As a living composer, I can never leave «the old way of writing» and «adapt to the new one.» I might just get it out there, plain and bluntly: I’m caught in the «style of the past». I’m one of those composers «stranded» in the «wrong century». And I know there are many more, not just me. We are all «stranded» in the «old idioms of the past», with no point of return. To me, it feels exactly like I’m traveling in a time capsule, straight from the 1800 — century into the present day, musically. And what I see never ceases to shock me and break my heart. Because my heart belongs to the «idioms of the past», yet my body belongs to the present day. I find it almost impossible to navigate in the mess they call the music of the 2000 — century. It’s like going through a dark tunnel or a cave. Where I have to light my own candle. And, I do light my own candle. I think to myself: all I want to know is that the music was able to reach one person’s heart and soul on a deeper level. And if it does, that is all that matters. Playing in a bathing suit or tossing my hair to entice men doesn’t matter, adding a cute kitten to have more views doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter. Just to know that just one person actually listened is all that matters. And, why do I add «deeper level»? Well, to me it’s evident that when music talks to people’s hearts it IS on a deeper level. However, I have come to terms that there is music out there that is not constructed in an honest way. I may step on some toes by saying that. But I feel it needs to be said. I observe artificial crescendoes that trick the listener into thinking there’s something «great» going on in the music when there’s actually not. There is only emptiness and empty phrases, void of any substance. And for that single reason, I add «on a deeper level». Just to make an attempt, trying to force one of the huge rocks and stumbling stones away from my path (that won’t seem to move from my path anyway.) All I can do is do my best, balancing through the confused mess that they call the music of the 2000 — century. While my heart so clearly belongs to the «idioms of the past.»
Let’s return back to Rachmaninov and the reception of his first symphony, which sent the 23-year-old composer into a spiral of depression and caused him to have writer’s block for three years. During this period he had daily therapy sessions with doctor Dahl. A doctor who is known in history for «rescuing the music of Rachmaninov». And, after three years of daily therapy, Rachmaninov finally was able to compose again and wrote his famous second piano concerto. So, what happened, exactly? After the positive reception of his first piano concerto the young Rachmaninov went on composing his first symphony. He expressed excitement and strong feelings about this symphony, and held it close to his heart, as a groundbreaking work, personal to him. As he said: “I believed I had opened up entirely new paths.» However, the premiere is said to have been badly rehearsed, under the baton of a conductor, who was said to be drunk. These factors alone could leave room for empathy and the benefits of doubts before concluding about the music. But a certain critic didn’t offer any empathy to the young composer. One may argue that Rachmaninov, like the rest of us, should be able to handle some criticism. Well. It depends on what is being criticized. Firstly, who criticized? It was the composer Cesar Cui, who also happened to be a harsh critic of the music of Tchaikowsky. Whose music is cherished to this day. Along with the music of Rachmaninov. This is what Cesar Cui wrote as a public statement after the premiere:
«If there were a conservatory in Hell, and if one of its talented students were to compose a program symphony based on the story of the Ten Plagues of Egypt, and if he were to compose a symphony like Mr. Rachmaninoff’s, then he would have fulfilled his task brilliantly and would delight the inhabitants of Hell. To us this music leaves an evil impression with its broken rhythms, obscurity and vagueness of form, meaningless repetition of the same short tricks, the nasal sound of the orchestra, the strained crash of the brass, and above all its sickly perverse harmonization, and quasi-melodic outlines, the complete absence of simplicity and naturalness, the complete absence of themes.»
While there are traces of substantial critique in this review, it should be possible to get the message through without resorting to «The Plagues of Egypt», «hell, and labels such as «evil, obscure, meaningless, sickly perverse» and so on. These are all statements of contempt and hate and misplaced in any form of serious critique. To break it down, he could have written about the vagueness of form and the other concerns he had about sound, melody, repetitiveness, and harmonization. And leave it with that. In Rachmaninov’s defense, Cui’s critique seems unreasonable at large. Another critic, mr Findeisen, had a more considerate review (that, sadly, was published too late to solve the damage caused by Cui.) «The climax of the concert, Rachmaninoff’s D minor symphony, was not very successfully interpreted, and was therefore largely misunderstood and underestimated by the audience… The first movement, and especially the furious finale with its concluding Largo, contain much beauty, novelty, and even inspiration….” Besides, the symphony was later successfully revived. To sum this up. This little text spewed out in a moment of contempt, robbed humanity of three years of music that could have been composed. And if Dr. Dahl had not come to his rescue — who knows how many years! And, let’s face it. It’s strikingly similar to what every composer of melodic beautiful music is faced with today.
I’m a witness. «You are delusional!» «Forget about it!» «Your expectations are unrealistic!» «How dare you!!» «None of us is Beethoven!» «It’s ok to compose in that style if you’re a genius. And you are not!» «Get out of my office!! And you dare come back only when you can prove yourself to be a real composer! Tabula rasa! You need to start, from scratch! Come back with eight bars of atonal outpourings to show that you «have it in you to be a real composer!» «I think I have heard that chord progression in a string quartet by Tchaikowsky» (I had never heard a string quartet by Tchaikowsky at that time.) «It’s too tonal, it needs to be replaced by something that is not tonal.» «It’s tonal!» (Trying to soften a teacher by using whole tone scale.) «You listen too much to Mozart, here is a recording by Jan Gabarek». «Have you tried to compose like Arvo Part?» All of this is just over a few and quite sparse attempts at composing. And I have heard accounts that others are told the exact same things and receive the exact same labels:
«How dare you!!»
This is what blooming composers are faced with when presenting any aspiring attempts at composing beautiful, melodic music. Imagine a little girl with the name Alma Deutscher. She composed an opera when she was ten years old. Imagine that, a ten-year-old completing a full-length opera all on her own, packed with arias, memorable highlights, and staggering characterizations. Just like real opera is meant to be. The very definition of opera actually, is where the music is able to describe the characters and lead us seamlessly through the different scenarios. Which this opera masterfully does. A real opera. And not a child’s play. A standing ovation, and critically acclaimed success. At the age of ten. Talking about opera, Mozart comes quite close to Alma, but, to my knowledge, no child in history has been able to compose music with such complexity and emotional range as, for instance, demonstrated in this sonata movement for violin. Which Alma composed when she was eight.
Over the years Alma has made some adjustments to the opera, Cinderella, with some finishing touches on the orchestration. While the melodic and thematic material remains the same as the early version she composed when she was ten. Cinderella was last performed just months ago, with the composer as the conductor. Yet again as a sold-out success. From my perception this final version is ready for any stage, at any opera house, to excite listeners, and reach their souls on a deeper level. And what do established contemporary composers have to say about her opera? «For those not familiar with Deutscher the composer, her works bear no resemblance to the new music that’s being composed today. Simply put, her pieces harken back to a bygone era, the time of the Classical and Romantic periods of Mozart and Schubert. Despite her achieving a lot of media attention and playing to sold-out houses, Deutscher is not taken seriously by contemporary composers. From the academically trained composers I’ve spoken with, they mostly feel that Deutscher’s output is derivative, unoriginal, and banal, albeit entertaining to an undiscerning public.» https://www.ludwig-van.com/toronto/2022/09/29/scrutiny-alma-deutscher-captivates-koerner-hall-audience/amp/
«Deutscher’s output is derivative, unoriginal, and banal, albeit entertaining to an undiscerning public.»? Honestly, such statements make me wonder what kind of world are these people living in. What kind of reality makes it impossible to, at least, acknowledge the achievement of a ten-year-old girl, that seems to be unparalleled in history so far? Recently I had a blood test. The nurse asked me to confirm my name before performing the test. Jokingly I said: «What happens if I say that is not me!» She jokingly replied: «Then I may need to smack you in the head to wake you up.» Someone needs to be wakened up when it comes to relating to real music in the context of music history, and to the real world. The world that we are actually living in. Not the reality of a limited group of people who find it fascinating to copy Cage and explore what funny sounds that can come out of a cactus. They have narrowed their view into this, to the extent, that a cactus, a cabbage, and the cracking sound of dry branches are more valuable and more important than the music of a ten-year-old, who has composed an opera that engages people. An opera that makes people leave countless testimonies in comment sections all over social media, expressing that the music of the ten-year-old girl reached their hearts and souls. On a deeper level.
Written by composer and pianist Randi Botnen.
