Nationalistic Music Compared with Modern music and Its Correlation with Sophistication:Is one Type of Music Really Superior or More Sophisticated than Another?
Many people believe that the world may never see a period in history again as when the great symphonic composers of Europe produced such an enormous number of masterpieces during the 17th and 18th centuries. Likewise, the 1960s (and to a lesser extent, the 1970s) are widely regarded as being the "Golden Age of Rock n' Roll," and true aficionados are convinced that rock music can now never be improved upon and that "disco is dead." Nevertheless, when the citizens of one country sufficiently embrace a type of music to the extent that it helps to define and maintain the national character, such nationalistic music can become a powerful force in shaping world events. To this end, this paper provides a discussion of the nationalistic music and the superiority complex it engendered during the 19th century compared with the music of today. An examination of the relative sophistication of contemporary music compared to the elite music of the 19th century is followed by a discussion of the factors that tend to make some types of music attractive to people over others. An analysis of how these factors have influenced world events over the years is followed by a summary of the research in the conclusion.
Discussion and Analysis. According to Merriam-Webster's (2005), sophisticated means "to deprive of naivete and make worldly-wise," and "to make complicated or complex." Therefore, as to a strict analysis of the sophistication of music in general, it would be reasonable to maintain that symphonic music is far and away the superior form of music because of the inherent need for complicated orchestration involving a wide range of instruments, harmonies, tones and styles; however, this strict definition relies solely on the mechanics of the presentation, rather than the quality of its content. The United States was a relative latecomer to developing a nationalistic musical culture; however, by the turn of the 20th century, at a time when the American nation was first beginning to see itself as having a "manifest destiny" outside its borders, the musical developments began to mirror the political changes taking place in the country (Lipman 73). According to this author, "Just as America was late in flexing its muscles in the world, so was it also late in developing any kind of competent professional musical environment, as such an environment was known in Europe" (Lipman 73). In fact, it was not until the early 20th century that Americans composer became good enough to be active participants in the European musical culture; prior to that time, American composers had "not only been imitations of European masters, they had been poor imitations" (Lipman 73). The beginning of the 20th century, though, also represented the "golden era" in American nationalistic music; having achieved a sufficient level of ability, this newfound talent was then applied to the task at hand: elevating American music above the former dominating sphere of Europe: "It was not until Americans had won their spurs on the level of competence that they could set about the proper nationalist task of winning independence from European musical overlordship" (Lipman 1979:73). All of these elements did not just fall into place though, and certain necessary preliminaries to the evolution of nationalistic music took place in earlier decades. The trend, in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, to preserve folk songs on a national basis had resulted in many compilations of source material that were later used by many famous composers. The composers of that period had clearly demonstrated how the elements could be used, and Haydn and Schubert used Hungarian Gypsy idioms; Beethoven occasionally quoted Russian tunes; and both Haydn and Beethoven had studied the folk songs of the British Isles. According to Ulrich, "The nationally minded composers in the period after about 1860 found it necessary to consider the musical worth of their own material in order to utilize and exploit their respective folk heritages. This was doubly desirable; for many composers of the time, faced with the tremendous accomplishments of Haydn, Mozart, and especially Beethoven, and unable to meet those giants on their own terms, were thus forced to express themselves on a smaller, more intimate scale" (244). This point is reiterated by Max Graf (1946), who suggests that "None of the great symphonies written after Brahms and Bruckner are Beethovenish in spirit" (8). According to Ulrich, it was during the last half of the 19th century that some composers first attempted to create regional languages out of the universal language of music. "Their method," he says, "was to make overt use of their own folk songs, idioms, dances, and legends and to transform the universal aspects of the language to fit the new expressive material" (241). It was during this period in history, too, that music became "nationalistic" in character. According to Ulrich, "These composers were active in geographical areas where political oppression or personal subjection were the order of the day -- notably Russia and Bohemia. It is this tendency to employ indigenous materials in musical compositions th
Some common words found in the essay are:
William Morrow, Spain Lipman, According Ulrich, Thomas Carr, According Merriam-Webster's, Age Rock, Brahms Symphony, Indonesia Moro, Italian Polish, Moro Elite, nationalistic music, kim il, according ulrich, 20th century, contemporary music, lipman 73, countries including, emphasis added, 19th century, sophistication contemporary music, music eg, 'song kim il, foss thomas carr, kim il sung', lipman 197973 composers,
Approximate Word count = 5252
Approximate Pages = 21 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
