Customer Reviews

Modern Music and After - Directions Since 1945 (Clarendon Paperbacks)

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

MODERN MUSIC AND AFTER should really be kept in print, though the market may be small, as it is the best book on the subject. It serves, among other things, as the best record guide to the post-war avant-garde that I've found, although since '95 it has become somewhat outdated.

Griffiths imbues the story of the serialist avant-garde with high drama. The hero of his story is Pierre Boulez. Messiaen is the mentor, and Stockhausen the brother, a source of friendly but intense rivalry. Schoenberg is the father figure who Boulez "kills" even as he carries on his tradition, but of course crediting Webern. The history gives a palpable sense of the excitement of this avant-garde circle, which came together at Darmstadt. Cage and his zen anarchism presents a radical challenge to the integral serialist Project, and begins to explode it.

This takes us through the 1950s. The second part of the book is equally good, as the linear sense of progress unravels in the 1960s and '70s and fragmentation sets in. A fascinating development which Griffiths documents, but does not comment on, is the resurgence of sacred music as the secular avant-garde disintegrates. The Estonian composer Arvo Part is but one example of this trend, what might be called the reassertion of the pre-modern in the context of the post-modern. The third section is not as good, and resembles other similar books in being more an encyclopedia of entries on various composers and trends. There doesn't seem to be much alternative to this for now, but it's interesting to imagine how the present period may be reconstructed in light of future developments...

In his introduction Griffiths laments the loss of a sense of shared criteria for evaluating the diverse music of the moment. But of course books like this contribute to the construction of those criteria! Peter J. Martin's SOUNDS AND SOCIETY (see my review) is an excellent analysis of how music evaluation is socially constructed -- there are no objective, inherent qualities, and so something like writing a book or even posting reviews to a website serves to shape the reception of the art. An interesting topic to pursue would be the divergent paths of Boulez and Stockhausen, with the former becoming an esteemed conductor and not only championing the avant-garde, but also turning back to the once scorned romantic tradition, while Stockhausen followed an increasingly idiosyncratic path and became a revered figure for the 90s electronica movement, a "Father of Electronic Music"!

MODERN MUSIC AND AFTER is indispensable for anyone trying to understand the rich complexities of contemporary composition. I recommend Morgan's TWENTIETH-CENTURY MUSIC (see my review) for the pre-WWII period, and Gann's AMERICAN MUSIC IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY (see my review) for greater detail on the postwar U.S.

This is pretty obviously THE book on music in the second half of this century. My own copy's pages are much thumbed, and I've used Griffith's desciptions as a guide to build my CD collection. The glaring omission (there was bound to be one at least) is Lutoslawski, one of the century's greatest and most enjoyable composers, who gets barely a mention. To Griffith's great credit, on the other hand, is his championing of Barraque, who's sometimes not even mentioned in other histories. Finally, though I think Griffiths is right to devote so much space to the big theoretical composers (Boulez, Stockhausen, Cage, Babbitt) he sometimes forgets that their music isn't always the best (Cage is barely a composer at all--more of a philosopher who makes his point with sound-events). Boulez's Le Marteau sans Maitre, for instance, is given too much prominence--it sounds really dated now (listening to it, you can just about see the Beatnicks clicking appreciatively, wearing their black berets), while the great music of Lutoslawski or Dutilleux, for instance, is barely discussed because it's less theoretically advanced. Still, Griffiths' descriptions and explanations are about as good as anyone could hope for, and the overemphases and omissions I mentioned are inevitable in writing a history like this. Like I said, this is still THE book on the subject.

My writer brethren here neglected to mention that Griffiths in this reissue,brings us up-to-date a way of completing the tale he began over 20 years ago. Since that time composers have either grown up or become more important, some have fallen from graces completly. Brian Ferneyhough has grown up and Griffiths here gives ample evidence although brief and outlines in form, you read it,and it points you toward a greater exploration of his music. Likewise Morton Feldman became fascinated with the set of problematics concerning longer lengths in music's construction. Likewise the late Luigi Nono, this is the first real description in English of his summary work Prometeo,and gives a good perspective on him.Likewise the late Cage is discussed. Griffiths now writes for the New York Times, and he breathes some new life there of a seasoned reviewer.

This certainly is the book to get the low-down on contemporary music. However, here a few points of interest:

Firstly, I think the most glaring omission is Louis Andriessen, who not only co-wrote The Apollonian Clockwork, but has also composed some of the most important and exciting non-Webernian music around. What is especially important about Andriessen is that his own 'minimal' style is fully aware of the Modernist heritage at the same time as it critiques or refutes it, as oppoesed to others who just dismiss it outright and have no real understanding of post-Webernian serialism. Also, Andriessen's continuing political ideals make him an interesting study in current musico-poltical relations (now that most are dead: Nono, Cardew; or just write rubbish: Henze).

In fact, while I am no authority on comtemporary Dutch music, I certainly know no more about it through reading this book. Which brings me to my second point: the Anglo-West Europe-American-centricity.

Not only does he leave out the Netherlands, Finland, Scandinavia, South America, as well as the bizarre history of post-war Polish music, but also Australia and (South East) Asia. Now while I am no doubt partisan, his only mention of Australia is one line about the Elision Ensemble in relation to Richard Barrett, Chris Dench, and Finnissy. I think Australia has some of the best composers anywhere (Liza Lim, for instance), writing from a variety of perspectives and a fuller account of these

place-specific musics would have interesting, for instance examination of Australia's liminal position between Europe and Asia and how that affects attitudes to composition.

While his bit on Part is a witty piece of pomo gaming, he sometimes trips himself up in his pomo considerations (as other reviewers have pointed out): for instance, he says that the postmodern condition entails the loss (both through desire and circumstance) of the dominant-central figures crucial to the Modernist project (eg. Boulez) because there are now 'many streams' instead of a river, but he then later complains that no new 'Generals' have stood up to replace the these old ones in terms of central importance to the musical world. In this way, he doesn't really trace many new paths in his last section, but simply rings up his old mates (Boulez, Birtwistle, Berio, Stockhausen, Ligeti, etc) and asks them what they've been up to recently. But, then again, that is really what the book is for and it does it admirably.

And not only is his championing of Barraque timely, but Bill Hopkins too, whose music I was unaware of until reading his bit.

One hopes there will be a 3rd edition after most of the 'peace-time Generals' are gone and a final summation of the lasting effects of the immediate post-war project can take place. Until then this is the book to read if you want to know about the good-old music with no tunes that we all love.

Also the Strings and Knots is organised in reverse alphabetical (very postmodern!)

Griffiths gives a survey that is clear, insightful and accessable to both musician and educated listener. After poring over many such books (twentieth century musical surveys), Griffths was a exciting and fun read. The detail on composition in the 1940', 50's and 60's is particularly well organized and concise, as well as ironing out many misconceptions regarding 'modernism' and serialism , to which many texts on modern music have fallen prey. The book is useful both for a didactic text and reference text. Unfortunately the latter half of the book, detailing composition in the 1970's, 80's and 90's, is not as well organized as the first half. The structure of Griffiths' discussion becomes less chronologically linear, focusing on individual concepts and composers, that (particularly in the last section 'strings and knots') seems to be in no particular order. Grittiths also seems less objective in the second half, betraying an odor of postmodern polemic. However, the discussion remains insightful thoughout, and still comprises one of the best texts that I've read on music after WWII.

Most of the books I've found about post WWII composed music are either narrowly focused (like Joan Peyser on Boulez -good, just about worshipping Boulez most of the time) or intent on dismissing "total serialism" and its aftermath (Important to note that "total serialism" was abandoned by its primary practitioners -Boulez, Stockhausen, et al- within a few years of its inception). Even if the plethora of compositional concepts that flooded the world of composed music after total serialism ran its brief course have proven too abstruse to reach wide audiences or have proven (in many post Cage examples) to be too ephemeral to generate much more than transitory "happenings", a great deal of intelligence and discipline has gone into ways of thinking about and organizing sound. It would be sort of tragic to let all those investigations go to waste as many historians (Richard Taruskin in his final Oxford volume, for example) would.

No jazz here, no film scores, no pop, just composers and how they approach the work of organizing sound.

Pretty thorough and engaging. Not recommended for those who think Reich, Glass, and Riley are the summit of musical thought.

MODERN MUSIC AND AFTER is Paul Griffiths' survey of the art music scene from 1945 to 1995, a time when music had first gone from limitless optimism for "progress" after World War II, to the disappointment of the late 1960s, and finally to the thousand forking paths of the 70s and later. I found the work interesting as a quick read, though certainly not a useful reference work.

The initial hero of Griffiths' work is Pierre Boulez, who in post-war Paris was certain that the twelve-tone method of Schoenberg and (even more so) Webern was the future of music, and by relentlessly publishing and composing Boulez was trying himself to make it turn out that way. After speaking something about the French composer's post-war worldview, the author presents the 1950s development of the Darmstadt school, when Boulez was joined at the forefront by Stockhausen and Nono, with important contributions by Cage and Barraque. At the same time, the "classic modernism" of Babbitt and Carter was flourishing. The 1960s and 1970s is shown as six waves, these being the use of quotation, music theatre, politics, virtuosity and improvisation, computer music, and minimalism. Ligeti, Xenakis, Cardew, Reich, Messiaen get the most attention here. The chapter on the 1980s and 1990s gets the title "Many Rivers" and discusses Schnittke, Rihm, Part, Kurtag, Gubaidulina, Ferneyhough, Feldman, Birtwistle, and Berio among others.

As is probably inevitable in such a work, some important people are left out. Per Norgard, whose infinity series is one of the most innovative concepts of contemporary music, is missing, as is Magnus Lindberg, who established himself as Finland's foremost young composer with "Kraft" in 1986. Lutoslawski is simply inexplicably absent. Sofia Gubaidulina scandously gets only about a page. However, Griffiths was prescient in including Tan Dun, who was little known then but is increasingly popular now. Another failing of the book is that for reasons of space, most composers only get a few paragraphs, and really, if you already own recordings of a given composer's work, the musicological essays in the CD notes are probably more substantial than anything you'll find here.

MODERN MUSIC AND AFTER is worth flipping through for any fan of contemporary music, but I think that it works better as a historical document than as a useful resource for said fans to learn more about the music they love.

Good perspective on modern music but the writing can veer towards dryness.For example,there's a huge chunk devoted to Milton Babbitt which seems appropriate enough but you get only the most threadbare sense of why one should actually bother to listen to it!
A fine book but worth supplementing with more colourful commentators.

I am very glad that existance. I thank Mr. Griffiths that he wrote up on this subject.
I don't see what Boulez, Stockhausen, and Cage, who were in the center stage of serious music post WW2, aimed would value of music. I suppose that was great failure of music invension starting with the 12-note serial method.
However there've been many other composers who try to create new sound and their music has attracted people, may be not so many anyway.
Probably the music history should get over the methods and invensions and focus on music itself.

Book provides very thorough info on music post-1945 to music of the last decade (2000). Especially music of the "avant-garde" generation. Sometimes, the reading is a bit dense, making it hard to follow. Definitely not light reading, but informative and detailed, nonetheless.