Partch, Nancarrow, Johnston

I am not sure if we should thank America's eschewing of its composers, but Thoreau explains much of America's success thus: "It makes me feel so good that no one is interested in my work, because it leaves me free to go in any direction is necessary." This fact that America's decidedly conservative musical establishment refused our composers meant that they were available to follow their internal pursuits without any need to be popular. Just like most black musicians who were unable to pursue opportunities in the musical establishment and instead were driving forces in production of popular music, progressive American composers could  make their own way. If any of America's most innovative composers had met with initial success, it seems likely that they would have continued to try to reproduce their early successes instead of pressing forward to pursue radical developments. And it is to the radical developments of initially rejected artists that much modern American culture is indebted.

Harry Partch is surely one of the most creative and unique minds in music history. His instruments and music reflect a certain American rebellious do-it-yourselfness and it is not surprising that his free-thinking approach stemmed from his upbringing on the West coast. Partch's music is not particularly interesting to me for its beauty, but I respect his rethinking of every musical dimension. Instead of selling out his ideals to receive WPA funds, Partch found his own way. In Barstow, I do appreciate the interesting rhythms, provocative text, and freewheeling independence. In Partch's music I can hear another, coarse, side of the Depression era: the hobo singing on the train; families moving from place to place questioning everything America had sold them about the Dream, their religion, and why they had left the old world. And it is this questioning that I most respect Partch. He stands as one of the great Americans who rejected the conformity which free capitalism breeds.

Alan Hovaness is a composer I am with whom I am well familiar. His works for orchestra and wind ensemble are performed occasionally, and I find his modal, exotic style appealing. His best works are well-constructed, emotionally powerful, and evocative of some alternate place or universe. Hovaness seems to be one of the few composers in the mid-century to make his own path outside the realm of the establishment and yet achieve a great deal of recognition. Much of his continued success is surely due to the championship provided by conductor Gerard Schwartz who recorded much of his extensive output with the Seattle Symphony. One my favorite works is the St. Helens symphony. It is simple and tuneful with static harmony, yet perfectly captures the idyllic harmony of the mountain and the cataclysmic power of its eruption. I respect Hovaness' reflection, spirituality, and youthful hope.

The music of Colin Nancarrow is fascinating. It's also cool watching some Youtube "performances" that you can watch the roll and see a visual rendering of the sounds you are hearing! This music is freely rhapsodic and doesn't not seem to anticipate minimalism in the way Cowell might have. Nancarrow is creative and constantly changing textures within his impossibly difficult rhythmic designs. The music is spastic, futuristic, vaguely jazzy. In the study #25, I hear Nancarrow experimenting with shifting planes of sound and colliding fragments in the way that makes me think of Varese or other European futurists. There seems to be some underlying mathematical rationale that is in a vein apart from the West Coast group. I am also struck that many of his other works are so sonically uncompromising, that apart from the quirky improvisatory material, the overall effect could be compared to the Second Viennese school, or, more likely, certain post-WWII modernist constructions.