Why
"classical" classical music
will never die: the
artistry and psychology of courtly music
from Mozart and Haydn’s time
Frank Manheim
In a previous article
I wrote about the surprising transformation
of programming by a commercial classical
music radio station in Massachusetts
in the later 1990s. That station, WCRB,
went over largely to classical and baroque
music, dropping the former eclectic
playlists that were common at the time.
Under the pressure of declining listenership,
the manager had done market tests and
found out that this music was preferred
by a large potential market of newcomers
to classical music. They sought it out
for its relaxing quality. Recently,
a young nephew of mine reported on a
music appreciation course that he had
taken in his first year of college in
Tennessee. What were some of his big
impressions, I asked. The most striking
to him was the revolution in music in
the early 20th Century. And
what was his favorite music? He immediately
responded "classical and baroque".
It may not be a coincidence that 18-year
old Tim – who presumably grew up influenced
mainly by electronic rock, would respond
in the same way adult commuters in the
Boston Massachusetts suburbs did to
the older classics.
Although the overall
influence of classical performance in
the U.S. has declined in recent decades,
I have noticed an upswing in use of
classical music as background for commercial
firms’ telephone answering services,
in dentist’s offices, and the lobbies
of office buildings. And it’s not just
any music. It’s often music deliberately
selected from the classical era from
about 1760 to 1810. What is it about
this period of music development that
attracts people in the 21st
century, especially people who don’t
have special musical backgrounds?
My late father was
an avocational student of the social
role of music. He pointed out that the
music of Haydn, Mozart, and other composers
of their time has a gracious, relaxed
quality. It was designed to have that
effect. After terrible religious wars
and conflicts of the 17th
Century, stabilization of Europe’s nations
took place under monarchs who were influenced
by "Enlightenment" philosophies.
They cultivated the arts and especially
music. The image that royalty wished
to create was that of power, enlightenment,
and stability. It was in the 18th
Century that the address to royalty,
"Your Serene Majesty" became
widespread. As Ernest Manheim put it:
"Classical music of Haydn and Mozart's
time was entirely focused on melody,
delivered in elegant and complex structures.
It sounded very much alike in all the
European countries because it was created
for royalty whose culture was quite
homogeneous. They often intermarried."
According to musicologist Donald J.
Grout’s History of Western Music "Music
of the Enlightenment was supposed to
meet the listener on his own ground,
and not compel him to make an effort
to understand what was going on….its
language should be universal; it should
be noble as well as entertaining …expressive
within the bounds of decorum … and natural
in the sense of being free of needless
technical complications."
The image as well as
the enjoyment of the aristocratic courts
was enhanced by recruiting the best
players and the most gifted composers.
Lesser royalty and nobility vied with
the big courts in sponsoring music.
A country boy from Rohrau, Austria,
Joseph Haydn, became Europe’s most famous
composer and made his patron, Nicholas
Esterhazy, a wealthy Hungarian prince,
well known throughout Europe. The small
principality of Mannheim became famous
for its orchestra, on which its patron,
Elector Carl Theodor, spent most of
his available resources. The English
music writer Charles Burney (1726-1814)
famously wrote about the Mannheim Orchestra’s
players and composers:" it is an
army of generals, equally fit to plan
a battle, as to fight it."
In this system not
just Haydn and Mozart, but a host of
composers from Germany, Italy, France,
Spain, Belgium and as far away as Finland
and Mexico composed music with the "classical
sound". The courts had the money
to recruit the best musical talent in
their societies, bringing instrumental
virtuosity to new levels. Famous concerti
were written by Luigi Boccherini for
cello; by Haydn for trumpet (Anton Weidinger),
and cello (Franz Weigl); by Carl Stamitz
for viola and double bass; by Mozart
for flute (Ferdinand Dejean), horn (Joseph
Leutgeb), oboe (Guiseppe Ferlendis),
and clarinet (Anton Stadler); and by
Beethoven for violin (Franz Clement).
Along with Mozart’s violin and piano
concerti, some of the foregoing concerti
are not only still mainstays in concert
performance. They have not been replaced
in popularity by later concerti. How
can that be, in the light of the advances
in technique, conservatories of music,
and the large numbers of composers during
the 19th and 20th
centuries?
A key to the perennial
popularity of classical compositions
may lie in the classical emphasis on
melody, simplicity (in principle) and
clear musical structures. Technical
virtuosity should serve and enhance,
but not dominate the music. The above
composers made demands on instrumentalists’
technical skills. But technical display
for its own sake, to break through the
known boundaries, or to achieve novel
but not necessarily esthetic effects,
as is often experienced in the 20th
Century, would have been frowned upon.
In other words, the composers deliberately
used their skills to create music for
others. Expressions of personal emotions
and artistic creativity created tension
within the accepted musical language,
but didn’t break out of or destroy that
language.
People in each age
want "new" music that speaks
to their time. But the classical era
had unique qualities that are sought
after but can’t be found in the diversity
of today’s popular and classical styles.
I’ve referred above to special conditions,
unlikely to be repeated, that gave rise
to the music of Haydn and Mozart and
their contemporaries.
Could contemporary
or future composers achieve the transcendent,
timeless beauty created by the classical
composers - if they worked at it? We’ve
had composers like Tchaikovsky who adored
Mozart and elaborated some of his compositions.
We’ve had virtuoso pianists who could
easily improvise in various compositional
styles. But no one has yet brought to
life new compositions that successfully
emulated the classical masters. One
reason may be that now or in the future,
persons with musical gifts and inspiration
won’t want to copy others’ styles once
they learn their craft. Their internal
genius will want to achieve expression
in new ways and may not agree to discipline
their creativity for the enjoyment of
others. Those who might seek to emulate
the masters would likely be lesser talents,
who would do it mechanically, lifelessly,
without the sense of newness and adventure
of the originals. Finally, living in
a rapidly paced, stress-filled world
might make it hard for composers to
achieve the same cultural and psychological
frame of mind to give expression with
the same sense of grace, simplicity,
and nobility to which the original classical
composers aspired. Sure, Mozart lived
under deadlines and crammed incredible
productivity into his 38 years of life.
But in his artistic work he did not
allow any of that to show.
Frank Manheim
View
from the Audience
