Some of the contents of the pages on this site are Copyright © 2016 NJH Music | [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Marches
In message <115932@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Nigel Horne <njh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes >> But encouraging composers to write marches??? > >Sure, why not. > >> Surely we have enough of this rather archaic form to satisfy our needs, > >Who says it's archaic? I never have enough new music of any genre to >satisfy my needs - that's why I make music. If I felt my musical needs were >satifsied I'd have stopped by now. Marches for actually marching to, I mean. > >> and should be encouraging them to write in more subtle and interesting > >Who ever said that marches can't be subtle and interesting? I didn't. In form, anyway, the march is a specifically unsubtle thing- play a tune, play another tune, change to a related key (preferably the subdominant), play a few more unrelated tunes, and then repeat the first bit. It can be used as a vehicle to develop musical ideas, but how many go beyond the basic form? In fact, it could be argued that doing anything really interesting with a march interferes with it's original and generally most important purpose. This is where we have to separate the point of a march from the more abstract idea that is a march specifically for performance. > >> ways. (Of course, if a composer had a vision which could only be >> expressed as a march, then that's different...) > >The only vision which drives most music these days is pound signs. As has been true for most of musical history. Bach wrote his set of 150-odd cantatas because it was part of his duties as Kantor at Leipzig to produce a new one for performance every Sunday. He still regularly produced masterpieces (not to mention the works that he undertook outside of his duties -Die Kunst die Fuge (The Art of Fugue), for example). Dave Taylor --
|
[Services] [Contact Us] [Advertise with us] [About] [Tell a friend about us] [Copyright © 2016 NJH Music] |