English Contemporary Composers in 1961

[Dundonnell]

This is an introduction to a thread I will be starting shortly about Humphrey Searle

In 1957 a book was published in Britain entitled "European Music in the Twentieth Century". In 1961 a revised edition was brought out by Penguin Books(as a Pelican Edition) It consisted of a collection of essays on a number of extremely distinguished European composers(Bartok, Stravinsky, Hindemith, Schonberg, Berg and Webern, and Skalkottas) and about the music of individual countries(France, West Germany, Italy, the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia and Poland, Switzerland, and England) together with an essay on modern music in Scandinavia. The collection was edited by Howard Hartog and the essay writers included composers like Bernard Stevens, Iain Hamilton, Reginald Smith Brindle, Everett Helm and Alexander Goehr), a conductor/writer-Norman Del Mar and the music critic/author David Drew.

For the 1961 revised edition the chapter on "English Music" (the essay ignores the Welsh composers Daniel Jones, Alun Hoddinott and William Mathias) was a new essay written by the young composer and teacher, Hugh Wood. Wood was 29 years old at the time and is, happily, still with us; he celebrates his 80th birthday this year.

Wood began his essay on English Music by being scathing about the generation of composers which had recently passed away-represented by composers like Vaughan Williams and Bax-and by those living composers he deemed to belong to a defunct tradition-Bliss(then aged 70) and Walton(59).

He devoted a considerable part of his essay to discussing the music of the generation he believed represented the then current establishment:
Alan Bush(61),Edmund Rubbra(60), Lennox Berkeley(58), Alan Rawsthorne(56), Michael Tippett(56), Elizabeth Lutyens(55) and the younger
Benjamin Britten(48) and to the emigre composers he regarded as important figures(Egon Wellesz, Roberto Gerhard and Matyas Seiber)

Wood listed but did not discuss the music of William Alwyn(55), William Wordsworth(53), Robert Simpson(40), the 'eclectics'-Stanley Bate(who had died 2 years earlier) and Richard Arnell(44), the 'Hindemithian' Arnold Cooke(55), and Benjamin Frankel(55) and Bernard Stevens(45). He dismissed the music of the 'popular' Malcolm Arnold(40), was more polite about that of the 'conservative' Anthony Milner(36). Wood briefly mentioned the 'avant-garde' composers Alexander Goehr(29) and Peter Maxwell Davies(27).

As a snapshot in time, although this essay contained only Wood's individual responses to British Composers, it is fascinating to read and Wood's influence as a teacher, latterly at Cambridge, influenced not a few of his many students.

But at the heart of his essay Wood named those composers of roughly the same generation whom he regarded as representing the very best of British composers: Humphrey Searle(46), Peter Racine Fricker(41) and Iain Hamilton(39). These three composers-Hamilton, of course, was actually Scottish -appear to have been those of the post-Rawsthorne, Tippett, and Britten generation whom Wood most admired  and the composers he expected to form the musical 'establishment' from the 1970s onwards.

Whatever one may think of Wood's judgments on particular composers his expectations for Searle, Fricker and Hamilton proved short-lived. For a brief period the three enjoyed the respect of the critics and the BBC(to varying degrees). Fricker's music was certainly often played and broadcast by BBC Radio in the 1970s.
Both Fricker and Hamilton however departed for the USA to take up professorships at American universities(Fricker at the University of California, Santa Barbara and Hamilton at Duke University, North Carolina). When they returned to Britain both discovered that they were now largely forgotten. Their tough, driven, sometimes acerbic music had largely disappeared into an abyss between the revival of interest, certainly in terms of recordings, in the music of their more conservative predecessors and the 'new avant-garde' beloved of the new generation of music critics.

Both Fricker and Hamilton were, to slightly differing degrees, bitter at their treatment by the 'new establishment'. Hamilton returned to tonality in his music but that did him little good; his music was still, occasionally, programmed in Scotland during his lifetime but this ended after his death. Both are now largely forgotten, their music goes unplayed and unrecorded. Neither have benefited from the remarkable decision of the German company CPO to record the complete symphonic output of Benjamin Frankel and Humphrey Searle. Frankel's music had, in fact, been often premiered and more often heard in Germany and Searle, of course, had been a pupil of Webern.

Fricker and Hamilton certainly merit more discussion and most certainly do not deserve their current neglect. I have absolutely no problem with the revival of interest- through recordings if not in the concert hall-in the music of Havergal Brian(whose music I love) or Cyril Scott and York Bowen(on whom I am less keen) or the 'eclectics' Stanley Bate and Richard Arnell(courtesy of Dutton; and whose music I esteem very highly indeed but the neglect of the 'tougher idiom' of Fricker and Hamilton distresses me.

However, it is to Humphrey Searle that I shall shortly return

(I apologise if you have neither the time nor inclination to read an 'essay' of such length but the points, I feel, need to be made.....and you are at perfect liberty to ignore this post if you wish )

[Alan Howe]

Very interesting - thanks! I'm very much looking forward to your forthcoming post on Searle...

[petershott@btinternet.com]

I much appreciated this post....and found Wood's remarks fascinating.

And I'll have to own up to being a veritable old fogey - on the one hand Wood's remarks now seem quite dated, and yet all the composers mentioned here are those with whom I feel most at home.

Part of the interest of the article is that it struck me that if we imagine ourselves back in 1961 (OK that requires a certain effort!) then nearly all of Wood's predictions about the 'durability' of these composers seems thoroughly and utterly reasonable. And if we then progress to 2012, there are a whole host of questions arising about how most of those predictions have been off the mark.

For example he places Britten in the same category of 'current establishment composers' as Bush, Rubbra, L Berkeley, Rawsthorne, Tippett and Lutyens. But what has happened? Britten, rightly or wrongly, towers above the others. We have to remember of course that 1961 was the year of Midsummer Night's Dream, and the works written after that were yet to come and hence unavailable to Wood. But if you were a betting man in 1961 would you, for example, put your money on the claim that 50 years hence there would be 3-4 different first class recordings of just about every Britten opera (and a whole array of recordings of the string quartets) whilst figures like Bush or Rawsthorne have (tragically) more or less dropped off the map?

As soon as the mind starts chewing over why Wood's once seemingly secure predictions turn out far less secure 50 years later you hit quite tricky questions. Sometimes the answer is fairly easy. For example, why can you easily pick up Alwyn in supermarkets? Answer: Naxos. Sometimes an answer isn't immediately forthcoming. For example, why has Maxwell Davies flourished but not Goehr (in 1961 I think I would have put them neck to neck)? Again, why was Tippett once so popular and yet now seems to have receded?

And the question that is fairly central to Dundonnell's post - why are Searle, Fricker and Hamilton, all of whom a competent judge in 1961 would surely have put up there as the very best of current English composers, horribly under-represented both in the concert hall and record catalogues in 2012 (with the exception of course of the series of CPO recordings of Searle - and it would be interesting to know how many copies of those were sold)??

I shall continue to ruminate! In the meantime I much look forward to a Searle thread - a composer I rate very highly.

And my own particular 'agenda' - Peter Racine Fricker. It is a damned outrageous scandal we have available so little of his work. There is an excellent, though now almost historic, recording of the Violin Concerto on Lyrita. The two Violin Sonatas have been recorded by Susanne Stanzeleit (thoroughly musical and ravishing performances), and there's a good Julian Lloyd Weber recording of the the Cello Sonata. And that's just about the lot. A miserable state of affairs.

One wee bit of 'autobiography'. In about 1968 I heard the Amadeus give a private performance of the second String Quartet. Heck, I just about fell off the chair - an utterly staggeringly marvellous quartet. I've spent 44 years (christ, I feel quite ancient!) itching to hear it again. In the last few years I've plagued the websites of quartets such as the Maggini, the Edinburgh Quartet and so forth with requests that they should turn their attention to the Fricker quartets. I nearly always get a considered answer along the lines of 'Ah, that looks a very interesting suggestion'. And then all falls silent. Oh well, perhaps someone is working on it right now. After all about a year or so ago the Edinburgh Quartet gave us a wonderful recording of the three Seiber quartets. That was quite unexpected, a hugely welcome surprise, and if friends on UC don't know it then hide the head in shame!!!!

Finally, like Dundonnell, I offer apologies for the length. He doesn't need to, for the post was genuinely interesting. Mine, in comparison, is mere twittering (no need to voice agreement!)

Postscript: someone who has been pretty lucky (and justifiably so) in terms of recordings is of course Hugh Wood himself. Wonder what the young Wood would have thought of the chance of that in 1961?!!!

[Dundonnell]

Thank you both for your kind words

I could reply immediately to the last post at some length but you have probably heard enough from me for tonight

I will however express my total agreement with its thouight-provoking content and, specifically, with the remarks about Fricker. I should add that Fricker's Symphony No.2 may still be available in the EMI British Composers cd re-release of John Pritchard's 1955 recording and that the Lyrita Violin Concerto is in fact the first of two concertos Fricker wrote for the Violin. The Second Violin Concerto-Rapsodie Concertante of  1953-54- has never been commercially recorded, in common with most of the composer's very substantial output

It is a source of totally immodest pride on my part  that I have been able to contribute so much of Fricker's orchestral output to this site's Downloads
collection and I understand that Latvian has a recording of the Second Violin Concerto which, hopefully, he can upload some time in the future

[Jimfin]

Thank you both for this fascinating post. I consider it a mark of what a blessing the internet is that I can read such intelligent writing for no charge from the comfort of my room. I do love these "snapshots" of composers. My first Pears Cyclopedia from 1982 is old enough to provide a similar one: Rawsthorne is still mentioned, Vaughan Williams dismissed as having undergone a decline in reputation (but rightly predicted to return), Wellesz and Lutyens get a mention too. I also used to have a book somewhere from the 30s or early 40s which discussed contemporary opera, Arthur Benjamin seems popular and George Lloyd is the bright hope of the future (his contemporary Britten having written no operas yet, when he has written two). Sorry, I digress.

[Mark Thomas]

I have to say that, as someone with little interest in the subject of this thread, I found still these posts absolutely fascinating. Thanks.

[albion]

Many thanks, Colin and Peter, for a very illuminating and valuable discussion. In 1966 Frank Howes, music critic of The Times between 1943 and 1960, put his money on Searle and Lennox Berkeley amongst contemporary symphonic writers -

Symphonies that were not bad but showed few signs of spiritual adventure through their neo-academic technique were also written and performed and up to a point admired. Such were the first four of Rubbra's seven symphonies, William Wlwayn's four, a single symphony each by Dyson, Moeran and John Gardner. Such, too, were Karl Rankl's five [...] and symphonies with an implicit war programme by Gordon Jacob and Arthur Benjamin. Two symphonies by Lennox Berkeley and three by Humphrey Searle, though not much more in public evidence, contain matter of greater distinction. (The English Musical Renaissance, 1966)

Of these two, Howes allocates far more space to Searle - There were other influences in Searle's make-up to save him from doctrinaire or merely extreme manifestations of serialism, namely a partiality for Liszt the arch-romantic [...] and an interest in ballet. [...] Searle's use of serialism is free as far as he permits gravitation to a tonal centre to be felt, is not restricted by an obsession with the number twelve, and, though the textures and the counterpoint sound gritty, as the repudiation of the harmonic series in favour of an arbitrary series always does, Searle is the master of his technique and uses it now one way, now in another of his own intuitive choice for his own ends, which are increasingly felt to be those of large-scale instrumental music, as contrasted for example with Britten's reliance on words, but at the same time linked to life's experience and not limited to experiment with musical material. He has indeed been called a romantic and a poet. (The English Musical Renaissance, 1966)

Of Fricker, Howes' opinion seemed to lessen in the interval between 1951, when he wrote of the Symphony No.2,

Since the composition of his first work in this genre Fricker has found increased power in economy and has developed his feeling for baroque tracery both in the formation of his melodic lines and in their textural setting. [...] It is still rich in the devisal of beautiful shapes and sounds [...] and witness the many deft touches of orchestral colour in the finale. [...] If this is not the overpowering experience Fricker's fist symphony was, that is not because it is a less admirable one - in certain respects it shows a marked evolution in his utterance and its expression - but because, when a new planet has swum into our ken, the element of surprise at its existence is gone. What Fricker has achieved and what reaffirms him as a symphonist worth every musician's consideration is the maintainance of a characteristic symphonic flavour, but with a striking freshness that shows there is more to be awaited in the same medium, from the same pen, of equal force and equal beauty. (The Times, July 26th, 1951)

and 1966

the vigorous argument and pungent discourse, harsh counterpoint and acrid harmony, which makes his music superficially sound like not very good Hindemith but which is probably an influence from Bartok exercised through Matyas Seiber, with whom he studied for a time after service in the R.A.F. In general his music is powerful and impressive but often ugly and, in the works written round 1950, full of a fashionable Angst. He is taking time to mellow and to find a greater lyricism. (The English Musical Renaissance, 1966)

Howes' sense of disappointment is almost tangible in his admonishing tone and illustrates the point that (pre-eminently of all the arts the most perilous, perhaps, given the need for repeated performance and engagement which the audience by itself cannot provide) contemporary reputations in music are built on rapidly-shifting sands. Assessing (or attempting to assess and forecast the direction of) a living composer's value is susceptible to many destabilising factors beyond any listener's control: until that composer has either retired from composition completely or died (and the corpus can be judged in its entirety) each new work may radically alter personal (and by extension critical) opinion. The constant craving for novelty and 'new direction' in certain critical minds will always mean that what is hailed as the ne plus ultra one year will be almost invariably forgotten (or at best demoted to promising 'work in progress') very shortly afterwards.

Searle, Fricker and their entire generation were competing for attention as Britten and Tippett continued to build up their tremendous catalogues, and critics of British music somehow seem to prefer things to come in twos - a crude generalisation: Parry and Stanford (perceived c.1900), Elgar and Bantock (perceived c.1910), Vaughan Williams and Holst (perceived c.1920), Bliss and Walton (perceived c.1930, with Bliss' reputation suffering in the long-term), Britten and Tippett (perceived c.1960), Maxwell Davies and Birtwistle (perceived c.1990). Other single figures occasionally drifted into the equation but didn't maintain a lasting position (eg. Bax).

Others (including Searle and Fricker and many of their contemporaries) should have remained at the forefront of perception (and the critical omens were good for many at the outset of their careers) but were perhaps 'killed off' by the sheer volume of competing production both at home and abroad. A reputation for 'difficult' music (with words such as 'serialism' and 'atonality' bandied around as a catch-all term, a bogeyman to scare the largely-conservative public), once acquired, has fed the vicious circle of non-performance-non-awareness.

Until the 1990s, after which it largely gave up the struggle, the BBC was virtually the only outlet for many of these 'peripheral' figures - prestigious premieres were simply not followed up by enough repeat performances (especially of large-scale works) to ensure their place in the canon. Perhaps (by which I mean probably - no, almost certainly) in the concert-hall, the music of these composers (as generally with music of the mid-later twentieth-century) will never be 'popular' in the sense of challenging, or even beginning to compete on a level playing-field with the revered figures of the perceived Baroque-Classical-Romantic continuum. It should, however, still be valued, studied, promoted and made available to listeners in some format.

[eschiss1]

Mr. Shott, in regards the private performance you mention, that reminds me-

The university library here has a 1963? LP of Fricker's 2nd quartet (with Britten's same - also Amadeus Quartet; London CM 9370) but I haven't heard it yet unfortunately- another recording that I am fairly sure has not made it to CD, at that (I do not have it in my own collection, though).

(I did buy the LP of Fricker's 2nd symphony with Simpson's 1st at the semiyearly Ithaca booksale and have not regretted that on either count. Well, ok, the price at a booksale is very cheap, but that's not what I mean!)

To Colin (Mr. Dundonnell?...) and Mr. Shott, thank you. Scarcely too long, and very helpful...

[Dundonnell]

Mr. Shott, in regards the private performance you mention, that reminds me-

The university library here has a 1963? LP of Fricker's 2nd quartet (with Britten's same - also Amadeus Quartet; London CM 9370) but I haven't heard it yet unfortunately- another recording that I am fairly sure has not made it to CD, at that (I do not have it in my own collection, though).

(I did buy the LP of Fricker's 2nd symphony with Simpson's 1st at the semiyearly Ithaca booksale and have not regretted that on either count. Well, ok, the price at a booksale is very cheap, but that's not what I mean!)

To Colin (Mr. Dundonnell?...) and Mr. Shott, thank you. Scarcely too long, and very helpful...

No, Eric...Dundonnell is not my surname

[Dundonnell]

Thanks, John, for your interesting contribution. It is indeed fascinating to read what Frank Howes wrote at different times about these composers

I should, perhaps, have made it clear that in, highlighting Searle, Fricker and Hamilton as composers of substance meriting extended discussion as leading members of the generation then aged between 39-46, Hugh Wood most certainly also had his criticisms to make of their music.

Wood argued that all three were still writing "within a broadly late-romantic idiom". Searle's "music inhabits rather the world of intense romantic expressionism".

I personally find it ironic and rather telling that the very aspects to Searle's music which I find most appealing are the very ones which Wood criticises
The first two symphonies "suffer from a Lisztian bravura not always backed up by ideas of substance.....a similiar extrovert recklessness and weakness for the empty grand gesture, which was only part of Liszt's complex personality, vitiates the Second Piano Concerto". He adds "Emotional violence is very severely subject to the law of diminishing returns. The reliance on formulas-ostinato work or extended tremolando passages becomes oppressive."

And, to be fair, I can see exactly where Wood is coming from here

Wood, I think, had higher hopes for both Fricker and Hamilton. He certainly had less criticisms to make of their work.

Fricker's Second Symphony is described as "outstanding among the many symphonies produced by English composers since the war." Wood is less keen on 'The Vision of Judgment' because of its '"public"' qualities and a loss of individuality which, in Fricker's case appears to go with them'.
Wood saw Fricker developing into a British Frank Martin(remember, at a time, when the Swiss composer was more often heard than today).

It was Iain Hamilton who seems to have been Wood's tip as 'the best hope for English(sic) music of his generation'.

It would be incredibly interesting to know what Hugh Wood himself thinks went wrong with that prediction. I referred to the departure of both Fricker and Hamilton to the USA. I do not think that factor should be regarded lightly. As John says, musical fashion is fickle A composer's music needs to be played and heard, in the concert hall, opera house, radio or on record/disc to remain in fashion or come back into fashion either with the critical establishment or with a group prepared to continue to lobby hard on the composer's behalf. The support, for example, of a BBC music producer can be invaluable-the obvious example being Robert Simpson's championing of Havergal Brian in the 1970s.

If a prominent composer has some kind of hold over public attention then that too is invaluable. Briitten and Tippett remained, to differing degrees and for different reasons, 'public figures', loaded with honours. Both possessed a perceived 'public persona'. Others, like the fortunate Hoddinott(and to a slightly lesser extent, the other Welsh composers) had a regional 'power-base''.

By disappearing Fricker and Hamilton lost those immediate personal contacts so necessary to retain notice and attention. And as a generation of BBC producers retired-people like Robert Simpson and Leo Black-their younger successors were simply unfamiliar with or chose to ignore the more 'conservative' Fricker and Hamilton in favour of the younger and newer composers appearing on the scene.

Today there is a most welcome revival of interest in the music of Havergal Brian(fortunate indeed to have had such an advocate as Malcolm MacDonald) through a vociferous and dedicated lobby, and in the music of the more romantic composers of the late 19th and early 20th century up to and including William Alwyn,  together with the 'romantic eclectics'-Stanley Bate, Richard Arnell, Malcolm Arnold. But-let's be honest-that revival is not in the concert-hall(pace the HB Gothic)-but through the medium of the cd and the dedication of the smaller record companies.

Until a company has the determination, the guts AND the money to invest in recording a decent quantity of the music of Fricker or Hamilton their music will sink further and further from public consciousness. Yes, Dutton have recorded a substantial quantity of, say, David Matthews, but David Matthews has the huge advantage of still being alive and that helps

Oh dear..........you will, once again, have to excuse my verbosity

[eschiss1]

No offense intended...- I can be uncomfortable referring to people by their personal names to a point!

[Dundonnell]

No offense intended...- I can be uncomfortable referring to people by their personal names to a point!

No offence taken, I assure you