Atonality and the Avant GardeDec 07 '00 Write an essay on this topic.I want to expound on the survey of 20th century music as previously written. While I feel the post was great, and certain did a good job of relaying a general, broad stroke with regard to developments made in the 20th century music, I want to add more to what 20th century music has to offer the listener, specifically in the genre of what is typically refered to as "Avant Garde" 20th century classical music. Specifically, I want the reader of this post to understand how to approach avant garde and atonal music. First off, I'd like to clarify some comments written in the previous post. Take this statement, for example: "Music is defined as that which is pleasant to the ear, noise as that which is painful. This is bordering on the painful." Though stated as fact, this is really merely the opinion of the author. Music doesn't HAVE a strict and hard definition, it's interpreted differently for each person who experiences it. If music is that which is pleasant to the ear, is that to claim that music can never be "painful" or not pleasent? By the very definition of tonality (the creation and resolution of conflict around a tonal center) music must have a degree of strain to it. But I believe the point of the original author was this: though 20th century music is by and large "painful" it's still music and still brings a certain amount of fulfillment to the listener. Though I'd agree to the latter part of the thesis, not the former. There's too much bias calling 20th century music "painful" and what we must do is understand WHY it SEEMS painful to listen to, and hopefully bring 20th century music, specifically atonal and avant garde styles, to a place where they are not inherently approached as "painful" but rather as what they are -- anything from brutally dissonant and sharp to emmensely beautiful. Arnold Schoenberg developed the concept of serialism, yes, he also "emancipated the dissonance." Schoenberg was the first composer to employ strict atonality. He is quite literally the Father of atonality. Though many composer before him had begun to push the boundary, literally no composer before had gone as far as he did to make atonality a valid form of musical expression. Schoenberg was also the central figure to what would become known as the "Second Viennesse School" which was comprised of two other members: Alban Berg and Anton Von Webern (pronounced Vay-Burn). Understanding these composers and their style will become very important in understand future developments of atonal music. Schoenberg is sometimes, figuratively, described as a late-romantic. His music, despite sound different (and being atonal, of coarse) is really remeniscent of Brahms in terms of melodic treatment. In addition, Bach was "neoclassical" in the sense that he employed many early musical forms of music like Variation (op. 31), the baroque suite (op. 25) and wrote a piano concerto (op. 42). But upon a close analysis, and the real force of Schoenberg, is that Schoenberg revived contrapuntal musical composition, a technique which, had pretty much been lost by the time Liszt had died. Early 20th century composers started developing more contrapuntal writing in their music (Brahms, Stravinsky, and definately Prokofiev), but it was Schoenberg who would bring it back for good. That is, the contrapuntal developments of Schoenberg would have a direct influence on the compositional style of atonal and avant-garde writing -- counterpoint. Alban Berg was the true romantic of the trio. Berg's music is really nothing more than 19th century music written semi-atonally. Though Berg frequently employed serial techniques (after all, he was a student of Schoenberg), it's very interesting because a lot of his music doesn't even sound atonal at all. It's very approachable, and besides the early and late works of Schoenberg, probably remains one of the best starting points for the first-time listener of atonal music. The very important figure of the School would be Webern, however, and he would prove to become God by mid-century. Webern's style is uniquely his own, focusing on short, VERY countrapuntal techniques by which he creates soundscapes of minimal density. It's very crisp, rational, and analytical. Webern would composer in strict seriality. Webern would also stay with this technique until his untimely and early death (a story all it's own). In fact, his opus count only reaches into the early 30's. While Schoenberg abandoned strict seriality in his later years (the piano concerto, for instance, hardly sounds atonal in some places, and the first movement opens in a waltz!), Webern would continue to develop strict 12-tone techniques, and eventually even tried to serialize other aspects of the music besides notes, including timbre, dynamics, and tempo. And it is Webern who would inspire the young composers of the 40's, including two figureheads in avant garde development, Pierre Boulez and Karlheinz Stockhausen. These two composer took serialism and brutal atonality to it's furthest extent. While later composers in the century would demolish music until none remained (Cage, for example), Boulez took neoclassical forms of music and destroyed it from the inside out. With Cage and later composers, music approaches that which is not music. With Boulez, music is destroyed -- yet remains music. Boulez must be heard to be understood. Because I need to wrap up this survey quickly, there are several necessary pieces of music to listen to by Boulez (the composer, not as conducted by boulez). These would be the Piano Sonatas (all three), with careful attention given the second. The second sonata, besides being the STAPLE of avant garde piano pieces, and besides being (IMHO) the most important statement of avant garde philosophy, is an amazing work, and defines avant garde style. His later orchestral works are important too: pli selon pli, and ...explosante-fixe... are good. (BTW, Stockhausen quickly abandoned classical form and went on to composer tons of material, all of which just kind of exists in no particularly definable form...His Klavierstucke series is good) True avant garde writing lasted only two decades, and was dead by the early 60's. By this time most atonal music had branched off into more informal musical writing. Led by Cage, his students would go on to become major figures in classical music: George Crumb, Phillip Glass and Steve Reich, and Terry Riley. Minimalism (the last three composer mentioned) would follow, and played a large part of classical musical development through the 70's and into the 80's. There does remain, however, a loyal group of composer who have stuck to strict atonal writing of formal styles. Babbit, Ligeti, Carter are old-school. New school composers would be represented by Charles Wourinen, William Bolcolm, and maybe John Corigliano, who falls somewhere in between the other composers and these hardcore atonal composers. Let me sum up. While the previous author would mention composers like "Stravisky, Bartok, Copland, Barber, Kabalevsky" as major figures of 20th century music (and I will not deny that), I tend to see 20th century music in terms of it's atonal development, which would be represented by composers like "Webern, Boulez, Stockhausen, Babbit, Carter, and Wourinen." I hope you have found this somewhat helpful. Z.  |
| Write the first comment on this review! |
