How highly should musicologists rank patronage, sexuality and/or socio-geographic dislocation (i.e. exile music) as factors in their assessment of music? What do you think?

I don't really have the slightest idea what you're on about

perhaps it's an MA essay question?

What?

What's MA?

Maybe this thread should go down as the Most Confusing Thread in this year's awards

Car Expert

I'm guessing here...but in the same way that literature gets categorised and analysed - e.g. women's writing, black writing, gay writing...the question is should music be look at in the same way?

yeah, it's one of the MA essay topics which i'm rather concerned about.

Thanks Maizie, for the ideas in general.

Extrinsic factors such as the ones listed there play a function in musicology. Take Patronage for example, the obvious case study is Haydn V Mozart. What effect did working for the Esterhazy's have on Haydn's Output how does it compare with Mozart who, after he was sacked by the Archbishop of Salzburg worked freelance, and ended up buried as a pauper. Take music in the 16th Century where the chief patrons were italian families attached to the Church. The principal musical form was the Mass. Ask yourself is that due to the patron or not?

My undergraduate dissertation dealt with music deeply effected by Patronage namely Restoration Church Music. It did not affect my assessment of the intrinsic worth of a piece of music, however it did affect the output of the composers I was dealing with.

Similarly with sexuality, why not look at Tchiakovsky. There are paronage issues there too, but then there is the issue of whether he was a homosexual too. Look at Britten's work, what affect did his relationship with Peter Pears have on his output, his standing in the musical canon, and the direction his music took?

Socio-geographic dislocation, how did Shostakovich function within Communist Russia? What would have happened to Korngold if there were no Nazi's. Do these factors affect the intrinsic worth of a piece of music? - They cerainly affect the type of music each composer produces.

It is up to you to come up with your own conclusions, however that's the sort of line of questioning I'd start with. Its a great title, and a title you can approach using many different types of music. Personally my conclusion is that it has little effect on the intrinsic worth of the composer, but it does shape their output.

How many words do you have to answer this question?

Hello Jod,

Wow! Thanks so much for your explanations. It was very motivating and informative indeed. I'm still on my way in onto this research, and yeah i think it's a challenging topic to work on.

I guess knowing how to plan and structure my work will do much help, coz the topic is so massive. I have to stay focus although there are many types of music which i can use here.

I have to write about 7500 words which is going to be due this mid May...

At least you've got a lot of words to expound your arguement, but take care not to waffle!

I've been thinking, this question is probably best answered using music from all periods, but be careful not to make it too bitty.

Composers worth mentioning include, Britten, Shostakovich, Korngold, Walton and Vaughan Williams. With the question of Patronage, start with the Renaissance, look at how Tallis' music changed after the reformation, and contrast this with Palestrina. Contrast Palestrina with the Gabriellis, there is are marked difference between the Venetian Polychoral style and Palestrina's writing.

Antother composer of interest due to Patronage is Henry Purcell who had three different Royal Patrons, and his output reflects that.

Then ask yourself the question what did all of these extrinsic factors affect was it the type of music written or the quality? You will obviously need to back this lot up with musical examples rather than just talk in the abstract. eg compare Korngold's Violin concerto with one of his film scores. Compare some of Purcell's theatre music with his church music. Look at Spem in Allium and compare it with the much sparser style in his anthems.

Did the fact Mozart did not have a patron affect the quality of his output?

There is a lot of scope in this essay, and at the end of the day it is your opinion that counts not mine.

Jo.

This is an interesting topic because I often wonder what effect "patronage" has on composers and performers today. There are examples of composers being "sponsored" and writing to order to please them. Do they then write to please the people who are sponsoring or to satisfy their natural creativity, or both?

I was musing with one of my baby pianists the other day, who was battling with a teaching piece of one of the great musical names from the past, how it would be if I had to keep writing pieces for her lesson everytime she came along? She was greatly surprised that, in the past, composers had had to do that. "Couldn't they just go down to the shop and buy each other's music?" she asked - bless her. I feared she might have been going to suggest Bach bought a little something of eBay but, thankfully, her general knowledge seemed a bit better than that.

However, it raises all sorts of questions about composing because your livelihood depends on it, because someone else is paying you to or because you feel moved to do so.

Could be a cracking essay in this one - keep us posted.

I will definetely look into it. Thanks so much for your ideas, and comments Jod, it's been really helpful indeed.
yeah, i hope to look at different types of genres and periods with the musical extracts to back me up, and perhaps lyrics for operas and arias...if i manage to find the appropriate ones.

perhaps looking at an influential patron and a non-influential patron will make this assessment even clearer.



It's some sort of prejudice that we placed against those with patrons as it affects the types of music which they're originally doing. But i' not sure whether musicians nowadays are affected as much, compared to the past musicians.