Johann Sebastian Bach 1685-1750 My daughter and I like to play a listening game in the early mornings when I drive her to the train station. We listen to the music and try to guess what style period it belongs to. Some are very easy to determine because we already know the piece or can recognized a famous composer's style such as Bach or Mozart or Beethoven. But sometimes we are completely stumped.
Yesterday a piece was playing (of course we turned on the radio after it had been introduced by the announcer) that had a lot of Baroque characteristics, but the instruments used and the phrasings made it seem wrong for that period. Besides, some of the articulations were very modern. Happily our guesses were validated because it was a French Impressionist composer from the late 19th century who had made an arrangement of a Baroque composer's themes.
Nearly every composer learns by studying and using techniques and ideas from previous style periods, at least to start out. Then, as they grow their own skills, and listen to music by contemporaries, they develop their own style characteristics. Then there are those composers who borrow from so many styles and mix and match ideas from many sources, that some pieces sound rather befuddled. That's when "NEO" is applied to their work. For example, if a composition from the 20th century hearkens back to the Classical period it is then called NeoClassicism, and so forth.
Yesterday a piece was playing (of course we turned on the radio after it had been introduced by the announcer) that had a lot of Baroque characteristics, but the instruments used and the phrasings made it seem wrong for that period. Besides, some of the articulations were very modern. Happily our guesses were validated because it was a French Impressionist composer from the late 19th century who had made an arrangement of a Baroque composer's themes.
Nearly every composer learns by studying and using techniques and ideas from previous style periods, at least to start out. Then, as they grow their own skills, and listen to music by contemporaries, they develop their own style characteristics. Then there are those composers who borrow from so many styles and mix and match ideas from many sources, that some pieces sound rather befuddled. That's when "NEO" is applied to their work. For example, if a composition from the 20th century hearkens back to the Classical period it is then called NeoClassicism, and so forth.
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756–1791) and Ludwig van Beethoven (1770-1827)
But how does a composer truly become an original? I'm sure that Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven didn't analyze their own music and consciously say to themselves "I think I'll create a completely new STYLE PERIOD in music today." They may have wanted to push the envelope of music in their day, but I doubt that they worried about how musicologists would categorize their music for future generations. I think Genius plays a big role in whether a composer becomes a transitional figure or not.
Then there are Church Musicians, people who compose for worship services. Those composers have a difficult job because they need to please the worshippers more than themselves. People like what they know. Older people in particular dislike CHANGE. They feel comfort in styles that are familiar in a sacred way. Changes in adopting newer musical idioms for worship services are SLOW in coming, but they do come. Older generations eventually die off. That's partially why we get new hymnals and Children's Songbooks.
But who's to say when adopting newer styles are good or not? When popular styles are used for worship is it because that's the only style of music the song writers or congregants know? I for one am troubled when I hear the Primary children belt out loudly singing a very sacred lyric about the Savior's atonement to a pop power ballad. When the focus of the singing is about how the performer is performing and not about WORSHIP, I cringe. To me that has the same effect as scraping on a chalkboard. (Oh, that's right, we don't do chalkboards anymore.) But that's also true of any performance -- be it Operatic, Classical, Contemporary, Modern, World, Pop, and the list goes on.
True worship can be offered in any STYLE, but only when done intentionally. For that to happen, the performers must think less of themselves and more of giving their offering to God.
For example, here's a piece that could potentially focus more attention on itself than was intended. This is an arrangement of a newer LDS hymn "From Homes of Saints Glad Songs Arise" SATB. It has been given a bit of a lilt by lopping off an eight note every so often. Some people might get mixed up trying to count this one. That was not the intent. The intent was to propel the message forward with a joyful lift. The syncopations should be light in the first two verses, then when the beats become regular 4/4 near the end, the meaning is emphasized and powerful. Enjoy!
Then there are Church Musicians, people who compose for worship services. Those composers have a difficult job because they need to please the worshippers more than themselves. People like what they know. Older people in particular dislike CHANGE. They feel comfort in styles that are familiar in a sacred way. Changes in adopting newer musical idioms for worship services are SLOW in coming, but they do come. Older generations eventually die off. That's partially why we get new hymnals and Children's Songbooks.
But who's to say when adopting newer styles are good or not? When popular styles are used for worship is it because that's the only style of music the song writers or congregants know? I for one am troubled when I hear the Primary children belt out loudly singing a very sacred lyric about the Savior's atonement to a pop power ballad. When the focus of the singing is about how the performer is performing and not about WORSHIP, I cringe. To me that has the same effect as scraping on a chalkboard. (Oh, that's right, we don't do chalkboards anymore.) But that's also true of any performance -- be it Operatic, Classical, Contemporary, Modern, World, Pop, and the list goes on.
True worship can be offered in any STYLE, but only when done intentionally. For that to happen, the performers must think less of themselves and more of giving their offering to God.
For example, here's a piece that could potentially focus more attention on itself than was intended. This is an arrangement of a newer LDS hymn "From Homes of Saints Glad Songs Arise" SATB. It has been given a bit of a lilt by lopping off an eight note every so often. Some people might get mixed up trying to count this one. That was not the intent. The intent was to propel the message forward with a joyful lift. The syncopations should be light in the first two verses, then when the beats become regular 4/4 near the end, the meaning is emphasized and powerful. Enjoy!
RSS Feed