The neglected: how to get them respected

[Jonathan]

I couldn't agree more Martin!

[JimL]

I believe, Mr. Delicious Manager, you mean Haydn's Symphony No. 80 in D minor.  No. 70 is in D Major.

[Mark Thomas]

much of the "musical establishment" seems to be actively engaged in negating or belittling such efforts whilst endlessly promoting the dubious virtues of the contemporary

Absolutely, Martin. I am always surprised by how incurious so many professional musicians are. Not only that, when confronted with a piece outside their own repertoire, by a non-contemporary composer of whom they know nothing, the knee-jerk reaction is often quite hostile and is usually a  variation of "it can't be any good otherwise it would be in the repertoire". There are many honourable exceptions to this, I know, but there are all too many musicians who conform to the stereotype.

[Double-A]

I keep finding references to the lack of value of contemporary composers.  Am I the only one who suspects that there will be a forum in 100 or 150 years in which people discuss how to revive the unsung composers of the early twenty-first century?

[Mark Thomas]

 No, I'm sure that you are correct. I have no problem with people appreciating contemporary music, I'm just not one of them, and in 100 years I shall be way past caring. Still it would be interesting to know who would would be regarded then as the great composers of our time, and who, amongst the current luminaries, will be relegated to the ranks of the unsung. But that's a subject for another topic in a different forum...

[Delicious Manager]

I believe, Mr. Delicious Manager, you mean Haydn's Symphony No. 80 in D minor.  No. 70 is in D Major.

Thanks, JimL, I meant No 70 in D MAJOR, yes - the one with the finale with lots of false endings (it was a LONG time ago and we did symphonies 60, 70 and 80). Thanks for putting my addled old brain straight.

[Delicious Manager]

"much of the "musical establishment" seems to be actively engaged in negating or belittling such efforts whilst endlessly promoting the dubious virtues of the contemporary"

Absolutely, Martin. I am always surprised by how incurious so many professional musicians are. Not only that, when confronted with a piece outside their own repertoire, by a non-contemporary composer of whom they know nothing, the knee-jerk reaction is often quite hostile and is usually a  variation of "it can't be any good otherwise it would be in the repertoire". There are many honourable exceptions to this, I know, but there are all too many musicians who conform to the stereotype.

Interestingly, my experience has been quite the reverse. In the orchestras I have managed, the 'new' music (from whatever period) was greeted with much enthusiasm (partly because they knew I wouldn't foist anything 2nd rate on them); they were so glad to get their teeth into good music they hadn't encountered before rather than the nth performance of Beethoven's 5th Symphony or Rakhmaninov's 2nd Piano Concerto. I found most soloists similarly keen; on engaging them I always asked "is there a piece you've been burning to do that other orchestras won't allow you to do?". I usually received some very positive responses. It was me who gave a young Tasmin Little her first chance to perform the Britten Violin Concerto - a piece very seldom played even now and one Tasmin has made her own.

[Alan Howe]

the Britten Violin Concerto - a piece very seldom played even now

It is, of course, one of the most difficult in the entire repertoire. There are a good few recordings, though.

[Delicious Manager]

It is, of course, one of the most difficult in the entire repertoire. There are a good few recordings, though.

Indeed - including Tasmin's relatively recent one on Chandos with Edward Gardner.

[Martin Eastick]

I feel that I ought to clarify and perhaps expand on my comments in my previous post! In referring to the musical establishment's negative attitude towards unsung repertoire, I am of course referring to non-contemporary music - i.e. music from the romantic period as we know and discuss on this forum! Furthermore, where I refer to "contemporary" music I should of course wish to include the majority of 20th century mainstream repertoire - in other words that are beyond the remit of this forum!

Obviously it would be wrong to discuss here the would-be merits or not of "modern" music but if, say, for example, one were to substitute the Britten violin concerto with that, say, of Eduard Lassen, in a sort of "innocent ear" experiment, with a random audience, I could guarantee where the majority vote would go.......

But, seriously, what's wrong with including such works as concertos by Herz or even Kalkbrenner, in concerts from time to time, accepting that they are not necessarily "great" music, but for what they are - vehicles for entertainment and sheer fun!. After all, we are not only trying to gain respect - and regular performances - for neglected repertoire, but also to generate a lasting interest for a whole new generation of prospective concert goers, who not surprisingly may be writing so-called "classical music" off as dull, boring and the exclusive preserve of the privileged few!

[eschiss1]

Though I admit to amusement that music that is now over 100, even 120, years old is still regularly, reflexively, called modern (with some equally reflexive exceptions)

[Ilja]

But, seriously, what's wrong with including such works as concertos by Herz or even Kalkbrenner, in concerts from time to time, accepting that they are not necessarily "great" music

For me, a large part of the problem lies in the unfortunate habit of quite a few musicians and critics to divide our musical heritage in "great" and "not great", with the implication that the latter is unworthy of any attention. Contrast this with the attitude applied to painting or even theatre, where the art's diversity (in many aspects including quality) is celebrated as an important and necessary aspect.

[Delicious Manager]

But, seriously, what's wrong with including such works as concertos by Herz or even Kalkbrenner, in concerts from time to time, accepting that they are not necessarily "great" music?

This question answers itself. In the advocacy of including unsung music in concert programmes one has to VERY careful not to feed the ignorance of those who would say "the music is not well known for a reason". Of course, these people don't realise the many and various circumstances that can lead to fine music falling by the wayside, but when there is so much first-class unsung music to choose from, why would one decide to programme a work which is "not necessarily 'great' music"? This would only serve to feed the notion that only 'famous' music is any good; careful, judicious and discerning programming is essential.

[eschiss1]

... which was, much-paraphrased, the response I overheard from people in the audience near me when Hamelin programmed Alkan's piano symphony (in concert - touring with it, I imagine- but specifically, at the university I live near) : that it hadn't been worth resurrecting, that he'd programmed it out of a personal enthusiasm. (They'd got the enthusiasm part right, though- it was an enthusiastic, head-on, passionate performance of the work, at variance with his reputation.)

[Double-A]

But, seriously, what's wrong with including such works as concertos by Herz or even Kalkbrenner, in concerts from time to time, accepting that they are not necessarily "great" music?

Obviously nothing, but with a caveat:  I once heard a chamber music evening which started with Brahms' G-major string sextet and followed that up with "Souvenir de Florence" (not even an unsung work, rather over-sung).  The effect was that the Tschaikowsky appeared shallow and sentimental by contrast.  I bet this would also happen if you programmed one of Beethoven's piano concerto followed by Moszkowky's (never mind that this is unlikely as the convention has been one solo work per evening).

What is important though is to keep in mind that there is such a thing as great music:  Including among the unsung stuff--for example IMHO the piano trio by Fanny Hensel.  And on the other hand not that great music among the sungs--see above.  After all J.S. Bach himself was unsung for 100 years.