May 15, 2009
Program notes are often digested without question or comment. They provide information (and something to occupy the time) before the concert or during intermission. Ideally, their purpose is to give a musical work context in terms of both the composer’s life and output, but also in relation of the rest of the program. I have been writing program notes for a few years now, and I still get a thrill watching other concert-goers flipping through their program books, looking at the notes, even if they’re just killing time before the lights go down. Every once in a while, however, a tidbit in a program note sparks a discussion or lively debate. For LACO’s “Firsts” concert in April, I wrote a note about Schoenberg’s Chamber Symphony No. 1 in E major. In it, I said the following:
[Schoenberg] was very particular about the way his works were performed and presented. His uncompromising nature and his desire for precision drove him to write careful directions for his works. He often made matters of music theory explicit in his scores (labeling main and subsequent themes) and believed that new music should be listened to in an academic environment rather than as a form of entertainment.
When I wrote that last line, I was thinking specifically of the Statement of Aims for the Society for Private Musical Performances (of which Schoenberg was President). In the statement, Alban Berg talks about the practice of performing new music outside the “corrupting influence of publicity; that is, they must not be directed toward the winning of competitions and must be unaccompanied by applause or demonstrations of disapproval.“
After the concert, LACO received an email from one Larry Schoenberg, Arnold Schoenberg’s son. As you can imagine, I was thrilled not only to get some feedback on the notes, but also to get feedback from someone so close to the composer. (I definitely had a “six degrees of separation” moment.)
Mr. Schoenberg said: “Though I am not sure what constitutes an academic environment I thought that it might be interesting and informative for you to know that in a 1948 interview for a Southern California newspaper he responded to the question about his music and contemporary music.”
Mr. Schoenberg went on to quote the article. Arnold Schoenberg explained that the duty of modern composers and musicians is to help people to become what he called “receptive listeners.” He also explained that the medium of expression in contemporary music tended to be more precise and less repetitious than in previous eras, and consequently, listeners had to be more sophisticated.
So, it wasn’t so much that Schoenberg was concerned with isolating the musical experience from an unfriendly public, it was more that he wanted to cultivate a listening public that could eventually appreciate the new music. This is a distinction I hadn’t made when I was writing my notes, but Mr. Schoenberg’s additional information helped make things clearer. What also became clear is this: over five decades have passed since Schoenberg’s death, and the art music community has indeed become more sophisticated, although our work as performers, educators, composers, and musicians is far from over.
2 comments
How incredible that the composer's son attended the concert, read your program notes and even responded! That must make you feel good.
Absolutely! I was so excited when I got the email. I felt honored and humbled to be part of the discussion.