Search Results for:

Self-Published Composers Explain What They Do and Why Jennifer Higdon



Jennifer Higdon
photo by Patented Photos

I basically do everything that an established publishing house does: I take orders from customers, print scores and parts, do the binding, mail the music, do the billing, report performances to ASCAP, and negotiate contracts for commissions.

The duplication of music is not that difficult – any copy place can aid in this endeavor. I do my own binding; I bought a $100 binder, which is easy to obtain, from an office supply store. The mailing process is straightforward, as long as you make sure that the music won’t be damaged in shipment (padded envelopes are great for this). When I first started, I created a standard bill on the computer which I still use today. And I’m able to fill requests for program notes, bio information, or a photo much faster than a big publishing house (this has been a consistent experience – substantial delays from the publishing houses!). I find that sometimes people need things FAST…I’m able to turn it around within a couple of hours, which is important. This way, I can make sure the order is correct and meets my customers’ requests.

The one thing that I don’t do, is advertise. I don’t have an advertising pamphlet to distribute, but then I’ve found people don’t perform music based on a piece of paper with a bunch of facts on it. They either have to know your name, have heard your music, or have been recommended by someone that they trust – no pamphlet will convince people to program your music without them having heard from a known source that your music makes an impact. I realize this may sound strange, but I depend on word-of-mouth advertising for my music to get to the public. Musicians are the best advertisement in the world. If they like a piece, they will approach you for more. If they hear a piece that excites them, they will tell others about it. I’ve been fortunate in that this method has worked successfully for me both in getting subsequent performances and in getting commissions.

In the various stages of my career, I have considered going with a publisher, but the more I thought about it, it seemed absurd to me to have to give up the copyright to my own creative work. Something about this idea has always bothered me. I understand the need for a large publisher to cover expenses (they are large, they have a lot more expenses), and sometimes they feel that in order to cover their costs they want to own the copyright. I, however, do not like the idea of giving up ownership of my work and I don’t want to have to buy copies of my own works.

I’ve also found that, as a performer and a conductor, I’ve had way too many experiences of having to wait too long to get music from the established houses. I don’t want my music to be so inaccessible. I don’t want my orchestra pieces to be too expensive for orchestras with small budgets (I ran across this a lot when I had a regular conducting gig)…the music should be affordable to anyone, from the poorest student to the small university chamber orchestra to the biggest budget groups around. This is not to say that I sell myself short by charging little or no money – a composer should be fairly compensated always. But I do make considerably more than I would if I were receiving a small percentage of the cover price or rental fees that are the standard of established publishing houses. I believe that composers should be paid, and I believe they should be paid fairly: 10-20 cents on the dollar is not my idea of fair compensation.

Finally, no one is going to represent me better than me. No one is going to be able to stay on top of things that need to get done better than me. I don’t want to have to check on others to see if they’ve mailed an order or filled a request; having to check can often take as much time as doing it myself.

Self-publishing aids me in being able to make a living as a working composer. This occurs because I collect my own publisher royalties and I have the revenue from music sales. Philip Glass once told me that if I want to make my living as a composer, I should keep the rights to my own music; I think that may have been some of the most valuable advice that I’ve ever received. That extra income definitely makes it possible to set my own hours and have more time and energy to write more music. With the incredible technologies available today, it is quite feasible to be your own publisher and artistic representative.

Self-Published Composers Explain What They Do and Why Donald Martino



Donald Martino
photo by Lourdes Awad, courtesy of Dantalian, Inc.

If not the first, I am certainly very nearly the first composer to establish by himself, for himself, and without banding together with other composers, a fully commercial publishing house which produces engraved or autographed editions in quantity by offset printing. It was the emerging tendency for the large commercial houses, out of financial necessity, to abandon engraved offset prints in quantity of new music in favor of print-on-demand “editions” (often nothing but unedited copies of the composer’s manuscript) implemented by the grossly inferior back room copy machine and then bound even less professionally with spiral bindings that, among many other things convinced me that I should strike out on my own. That “tendency to print on demand” has now become the norm for most composers and I am very glad that I got out when I did.

My company DANTALIAN, INC. was founded in 1978 out of a, by then, overwhelming frustration with my commercial publishers in virtually every domain of what I had come to expect (hadn’t we all) to be their historical responsibility. I am not going to plead the case for self-publishing by providing you with a titillating litany of complaints about a bad, perhaps in my case an unusually bad, relationship with the establishment which has long since been corrected by the action I took back in 1978 and by which I joined them. (And I will readily admit that it is very easy to criticize them until one is faced with the problems they face. Of course one has to be “the little engine that could.”) But I will say that when I founded the company, its in-house motto was ” there is no way we can do worse than they do.” We have done it much better. Our catalogue boasts over seventy items of which all except rental items are offset printed in quantity from autographed or engraved masters. Print delays do not exist. We are speedy in our response to all requests for music no matter how small the order. We advertise, promote, are liberal with complementary copies, and are very much in the black. Some of this is because we do not operate with the same constraints that impede the commercial houses nor do we have expenses of overhead and a large staff. Our mission after all is to promote the composer first, make a profit second.

Self-publishing is a huge undertaking — a full time job if one wishes to do it in a highly professional manner. To obsessive types like myself it brings enormous satisfaction in that I have complete control over every aspect of my work product. But one has to be willing to be president, manager, treasurer, editor, autographer, graphic artist, book designer, proofreader, publicity director, packer, shipper, gopher, and when all is done sweep the floors. When, you ask, do I find time to compose? Luckily I require very little sleep. And I have always found that the more excited I got about a project — composing, publishing, woodworking, playing tennis, practicing my clarinet…, the less time is needed for sleeping.

I would not recommend self-publishing to anyone who has not already achieved a certain degree of recognition. The chances are that no one will buy! Of course the problem with being an uncelebrated composer in a large commercial catalogue is that one is overshadowed by the big shots (such as they are in our art). The advantage to self-publishing is that when the potential buyer receives your catalogue, and when he tosses it in the waste basket along with all the other unsolicited mail (he may do this with the commercial catalogue, too) he remembers your name, not the publisher’s. This may seem like negative advertising; it is. But the next time you send out your catalogue this potential buyer may just take a look at it, the next time you may have a buyer, even a performer, ideally a convert, a crusader for your music.

It also takes a few items that sell and keep selling! You need a self-made subsidy — or a patron. One commercial publisher told me that there were just thirteen issues in his vast catalogue that paid the bills; all else he claimed was window dressing. DANTALIAN, INC. has its unique chorale edition for study, the 178 CHORALE HARMONIZATIONS OF J. S. BACH, which are used in hundreds of college theory classes each year, STRINGOGRAPH, used by composers and arrangers to calculate string passages, and believe it or not, a few Martino compositions that pay the bills.

Finally, there is no praise high enough for Lora Harvey Martino, DANTALIAN’S treasurer, tax accountant, investment officer, and chief financial wizard.

Self-Published Composers Explain What They Do and Why Terry Riley



Terry Riley
photo courtesy New Albion Records

For many years my written music was being handled for me by a publisher which was somewhat unfamiliar with what is needed to send out scores and parts to orchestras and other chamber groups. I supplied them with masters that were for the most part printed out from my computer notation program (Emagic’s Logic) Although this company has administered my publishing successfully in the sense of collecting publishing moneys owed to me, many mistakes were made, the most humorous being on one occasion sending out the parts to an Orchestra all bound together like a score. I decided to try working with some of the well known Publishers but after some futile discussions with both G. Schirmer and Boosey and Hawkes I decided to get up a Web page and offer my scores directly to the public.

At the moment there is also a page for CD’s with some Real Audio samples of the music, although very few of the scores are represented by audio samples. It is all being operated now by my immediate family and a student. We have to run to the copy shop to get things photocopied as we run out and it is starting to require quite a bit of space as we try to accomodate more inventory. People use the order form printed on the Web page and prepay with checks. I must say although it is a lot of work, I am enjoying the direct contact I get with people ordering my music direct and it satisfies an old desire to have a little “mom and pop shop.”

Self-Published Composers Explain What They Do and Why Amy Rubin



Amy Rubin
photo courtesy of Musicians Accord

Self-publishing has permitted me to circulate my music to a wide variety of performers throughout the United States and Europe. I send perusal scores as quickly as possible to ensembles and soloists who express general interest in my work, and in addition I answer “calls for scores” listed in professional journals. Now that my CD Hallelujah Games has been released on Mode Recordings, more people are hearing specific pieces of mine such as “Hallelujah Games” and are programming them.

The performance history of my piece “Hallelujah Games” is a good example of what I’ve been able to do as a self-published composer. “Hallelujah Games,” which was commissioned by Musicians Accord in 1995 and is a direct outgrowth of my study of West African drumming with Dr. William Anku in Ghana, is a game of improvisational choices and rhythmic challenges transformed from the culture of West African drumming to the culture of Western music chamber music ensemble playing. It has been performed throughout the United States and Eastern Europe by such diverse groups as Musicians Accord, New Ear!, Synchronicity, and has been workshopped by the Colorado String Quartet and percussionists from the New World Symphony, in arrangements for two pianos, piano and marimba, marimba quartet, and piano and guitar.

“Hallelujah Games” has no formal score, but exists as a collection of “cells” ranging in length from one to twelve measures long. Each player constructs his or her own part by selecting from about 25 cell choices which can either be played canonically, or simultaneously. Each player chooses which patterns to play, which to omit, how many times to repeat patterns, register, dynamics, articulation and where to join with or counter the other player. Thus, given all the choicemaking, every performance of the piece, by each ensemble configuration necessitates a different score created by the players at hand. I have found it useful to include suggested versions of the piece’s realization in score and recorded format when sending the score out to prospective performers. The concept of the piece requires that no definitive realization exists, meaning, also, that there is no score. Instead, as a composer, I present performers with some specific potentials of combining materials together as well as the infinity of possible choices that may come about with each ensemble’s own realization.

The issue, therefore, is what constitutes a score? As each performance is created as a result of the specific performers’ musical aesthetic, formal sense, pacing and instrumentation, the score is different for each ensemble and for each performance of the work, and ultimately becomes a concrete way to allow players the opportunity to achieve spontaneity and freedom while “owning” the material in their own way. The problem this poses is what do I, as the composer, make available to interested performers, given that no definitive score exists? I have provided players with versions created by other musicians who have performed the work, recordings of these performances, and alternative choices for realization. Should I send out a “score” which consists of individual cells, each on a separate sheet, which the players then can decide to use or not, as they create their own version of the piece? Or, should I send out versions realized by other performers to guide the new performers? Should I provide sequenced versions in audio formats for performers to sample? Do I create my own definitive version of the piece and then urge new performers to take it apart and create their own? Would a score consisting of a random collection of cells, in the manner of playing cards, work, so that each ensemble could arrange the cards in its own unique way?

Self-publishing, thus far, has allowed me to make all the above possible, but it does not provide a definitive set of materials to create the definitive version of the piece.

Self-Published Composers Explain What They Do and Why Andrew Rudin



Andrew Rudin
photo courtesy of Skåne Hill Music

Somewhere in a warehouse in the Midwest, hundreds of copies of a work I wrote for flute & piano lie sequestered by a major American music publisher. After contracting to publish the work, three years elapsed before engraving was accomplished and 1st proofs offered. Another year and a half passed as I attempted in 2nd & 3rd proofs to correct errors. Finally after another six months the work was released for sale, complete with errors, some thrice corrected. Beyond announcing the work in its newsletter the publisher made no attempt to connect the work to potential buyers or performers, or in fact to distribute it to the inventories of even the most well-known music sellers. The fee paid to me upon contract was in the low hundreds, my royalties beginning only if the work went into a second printing. I received six “free” copies as a courtesy. Convincing interested performers, libraries, etc. that the work existed at all required that I be able to tell them the exact publication number of the item. Rather than being made “public” I feel rather as if the work is being held hostage.

Why should I not then find a way to make available my own compositions? And so I established Skåne Hill Music. Today, armed with good music notation software, quality paper, a xerox machine capable of 8-1/2 X 11 double-sided printing (or off-set lithography), and Internet access, any composer can surmount the pitfalls of commercial publishers. All that is missing is the alleged prestige of being represented (if that is the word) by a well-known name in the industry. And, if mistakes occur, they are your mistakes, correctible at the next printing.

Self-Published Composers Explain What They Do and Why Theodore Wiprud



Theodore Wiprud
photo courtesy of Allemar Music

Self-publishing used to be a default position for me: no corporate publisher had brought out my music so I was the one copying scores and parts. Later I made a conscious decision to take my career into my own hands, to claim full responsibility for finding performers and an audience. That’s when I really became a self-publishing composer. Publishing isn’t photocopying and mailing; it’s marketing and promotion and a strategy for building a business and a livelihood. In the short term it’s putting together projects and opportunities and income; in the long term it’s an investment in the value of my copyrights.

Publishing, Self-Publishing, and the Internet

A panel held during the Women’s Philharmonic‘s “Composing A Career” Symposium
The New School for Social Research, NYC
Saturday, November 6, 1999—2:30-3:30 p.m.

Fran Richard : Vice President of Concert Music, ASCAP

Ralph Jackson : Assistant Vice President, Classical Music Administration, BMI

Linda Golding : President, Boosey & Hawkes

Jennifer Higdon : Self-Published Composer

Frank J. Oteri : Editor, NewMusicBox



Panel at the “Composing A Career” Summit
photo courtesy of the Women’s Philharmonic

On Saturday, November 6, 1999, NewMusicBox editor Frank J. Oteri moderated a panel entitled “Publishing, Self-Publishing, and the Internet” as part of a Weekend Long Composing A Career symposium organized by the Women’s Philharmonic held at The New School for Social Research in New York City. The panelists were: Frances Richard, Vice President of Concert Music at ASCAP; Ralph Jackson, Assistant Vice President, Classical Music Administration at BMI; and Linda Golding, President of Boosey & Hawkes. Self-published composer Jennifer Higdon was called up from the audience to join the panel midway through the session.

 

FRANK J. OTERI: How many of you out there are published composers? Let’s see a show of hands. All right, let’s divide the categories still some more. How many of you are published by a company – are not self-published, are commercially-published composers? Show of hands. OK. How many of you are self-published composers? How many of you are unpublished composers?

RALPH JACKSON: I don’t think there are unpublished composers. [audience laughs]

FRANK J. OTERI: Why’s that?

RALPH JACKSON: Because I think that if you promote your music, if you send your music out in any way…In other words, if you haven’t told anyone that you write music and you’ve never shown them your scores and you’ve never shown them your tapes, I guess you’re unpublished. But if you’ve gotten out into the world somewhat, you’re published on some level.

LINDA GOLDING: That goes to the definition of what publishing is, I guess, and maybe we should even ask what people think.

FRANK J. OTERI: To follow Ralph’s thread I should ask how many of you have never shown your scores to anybody [audience laughs], and have never told anybody that you write music? Nobody? Well, this is good. [audience laughs] We’ve passed step one here, this is very good. OK. That is a good question, who out here would like to begin to address that – what do you think the role of a publisher is? Somebody? Or should I call on somebody? I used to be a high school teacher, this is so much fun. [audience laughs]

RALPH JACKSON: Why doesn’t someone tell us the dream that they have about a publisher?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Someone who would help with promotion and help generate performances, and help negotiate commissions…

LINDA GOLDING: That’s an extremely enlightened view [audience laughs], I think. Thank you.

RALPH JACKSON: …The fact that you said, “someone who would help”…What I expected to hear was, “Someone to discover me and change my life, and take over everything that I do except for writing music,” which does not exist, I think.

FRANK J. OTERI: There are four concepts that people are responding to that I thought we could all further explore: 1) promotion; 2) distribution (those are very different things); 3) income (from works that are already created); and 4) generating commissions for new works. So we’re really looking at four categories. I think it was interesting for me to hear that income was the third in that list and not the first. [audience laughs] And that promotion was first, above distribution. I thought that was kind of interesting too, because I think to the general public, when people think of a book being published, the first word that comes to their mind is distribution, but in many ways, promotion is even more important than distribution. So, who wants to address the issue of promotion of music? I’ll give this one to Fran for a second. And then we’ll all jump in.

FRAN RICHARD: Promotion? A composer writes a piece, has the confidence in the quality of that piece, and now begins the task of informing the rest of the world. Or it’s the opportunity to interest a performer or ensemble, to let somebody know about the piece. And if you hit for a performance, let people know that it’s going to be performed. This is a joint venture. Promotion is very important – about your self, about your career, to have the materials ready – we’re not even going to talk about the music itself (I’ll let Linda do that), about what condition the score and parts should be in, and you’ve heard some of that already this morning from the conductors. You need to have a bio, a list of your pieces, with the timing and the instrumentation. You have a performance and somebody wants to know about your work and the body of work you’ve created – your job is to write music, but it’s also to assist the rest of us to find out about it. And the more active you are in assisting with that chore, the more you enhance the prospects of your career.

LINDA GOLDING: That’s a really good way to start. And I think, so far, we’ve heard several pieces of information that I think categorize what music publishing is about today. Music publishing today is a collaborative effort. So, it’s terrific to hear from one of you already, sitting here, understanding that, and for Fran to emphasize that. This is a partnership between a composer and – whether it’s a publisher, or a publicist, or some kind of promotion representative, or an attorney, or anyone of the number of people whose life work it is to assist composer in developing their profiles, which usually happen through performance activity, and through creating new works. Promotion is about the work itself, the music itself, but it requires lots and lots of people in order to make one performance happen, in order to make one person interested enough to invest their time and resource and energy in now producing the performance. And I guess I’m trying to paint a slightly grim picture only so that you understand that the world is full of luck. Very often I’m sure you have colleagues who say, “I got a performance the first time out when I sent something to a conductor.” It doesn’t happen like that all the time. It’s very rare. It takes lots and lots of folks, and lots and lots of time and energy from everybody that you know.

RALPH JACKSON: This morning, I think the two most important things that were said were said by Chen Yi and by Joan Tower, and they were basically saying the same things, which was that you need to be in your music. And this is something that male composers don’t talk about a lot, so this is really good news today, and I hope everybody gets that. You can carry that idea into every element of the promotion of your music. When the music is promoted, that essence that’s in the music – hopefully, if it’s there – needs to be in the promotion too. One of the things that Boosey &
Hawkes does beautifully is that they have a small group of composers relative to all the composers in the world, and they are very careful. They’ve chosen very well. The way they promote those composers is based, in my estimation, on the music. In other words, Boosey & Hawkes may not promote Steve Mackey the way they promote Elliot Carter, so if you’re in your music, and you’re promoting it, you need to be sure that you’re still there in the promotion. You know, we went through a period with performers a few years ago, where they wanted to take publicity pictures that were cool, interesting, and attractive. And you could go through Musical America and see a violinist on the wing of an airplane. [audience laughs] And you know, you came to the concert, and there was no airplane. [audience laughs] So, whatever it is that’s special about you needs to make it into your music, and then it needs to make it into all those other things, into the promotion, into the distribution, into whatever else it was. What else was it?

FRANK J. OTERI: Income and generating commissions.

RALPH JACKSON: Well, yeah, you definitely want to get yourself into your income. [audience laughs]

LINDA GOLDING: And one of the things that I think is also useful to point out is that any promotion strategy devised by anybody must be tailored to who you are, and to your music. There really is no pat answer. There are a bunch of guidelines and structures that most people consider, but there absolutely is no one way to successfully promote music. It is entirely individual.

FRAN RICHARD: I do agree somewhat with Ralph that if you are out there on your own, having to promote your own music, that you are functioning as your publisher. What we are trying to discuss now is making the conscious decision to self-publish your music in a legal and technical sense, in order to professionalize your output and your outreach to the general public, to the professionals in the field, and even to your own colleagues. By “professionalize,” I mean to come to that place, and many of you have already, with a business sense, with an understanding of your rights, of the needs of your work, and what it requires, and also with the self-confidence that you exude when you conduct yourself as a professional. It is this sense that makes a composer a professional. You may not have yet all of these experiences, but you do know that you are a composer. You have declared yourself, and declared that you want to establish contact on the highest professional level that you are capable of creating.

LINDA GOLDING: I came to publishing relatively recently, and had only talked to one or two live composers before I did that, so it was a little bit of a shock to me – I had to learn very quickly. One of the mysteries of publishing is that a lot of people think that because they have the name of a publisher attached to their names, it makes them a composer. It doesn’t. What makes you a composer is what you’re working on, what you’re writing. How your music is getting out there is, I think, an extension of you, as Ralph was saying – what it looks like, how it happens, and, what Fran is saying is, what your business attitude is towards it. There are many advantages to being published by a recognized firm, and there are many advantages to being self-published. There are disadvantages on either side, and we can certainly talk about those. I don’t think any of us is here to say one way is better than the other, but to say, as Fran said, that you need to be making choices, and you need to have the knowledge and the people to talk to in order to make those informed choices, so that you don’t lose income, so that you protect your copyright, so that you have an opportunity to do what it is that you want to do, which is to write music.

FRANK J. OTERI: Let’s get back to this issue, to these four key words, which I think are sort of a mantra for our whole session this afternoon. For the composers out there who are self-published, how many of you feel that you are sufficiently capable, as self-published composers, to promote your own music? Let’s see a show of hands. Wonderful. Bravo. How many of you feel that you are sufficiently capable to distribute your music? A couple more hands… And I want to talk about what those means of distribution are, but I want to go through the rest of the list. How many of you have made income on your self-published music in the past year? Even more hands go up. This is interesting, because that was number three on the list, but we seem to be getting larger. So, maybe everyone will raise their hand now: How many of you have been able to generate commissions as self-published composers? This is very interesting – so you have a reverse pyramid effect happening, and the key is, how do you make that connection? You’re able to get the commissions, you’re able to generate income, you’re less able to distribute the work, but what’s really, really difficult is promoting the work. We’re dealing with a society at this point that has information overload beyond belief. It’s impossible to promote anything to a large segment of the population, given all of the options that are out there. So, I would like to have the person who raised her hand for “successful promotion of your music” – you’re on the line. [audience laughs] Tell us your secrets! Come on down. [She joins panel]

Jennifer Higdon Joins the Panel
Jennifer Higdon Joins the Panel
photo courtesy of the Women’s Philharmonic

FRAN RICHARD: Jennifer Higdon.

JENNIFER HIGDON: How do I get myself into these positions? I think actually some of the rules I go by have to do everything with that Joan said earlier today. Being a performer, because I’m a flutist, has helped me a lot because I can play my flute works – I can’t play the piano works, but I can play the flute works. I try to always be articulate, but the thing that I think helps me the most is thinking about the performers, and thinking about whether a piece is succeeding. If a performer doesn’t come up to me and say they want to do the piece again, I know I haven’t done my job. I don’t ever start a commission without thinking about the performers first – always, always. And I do five or six commissions a year. So, what I do for promotion – and I know you all aren’t going to believe this – it’s totally word of mouth. I don’t advertise or anything. I figure if my music isn’t getting out there, than I’m not doing something right in the writing of the notes, so I let word of mouth do the entire thing. And people find me. I don’t have a Web page, if you can believe this. I’m going to have one soon, but people find out how to contact me a lot of times I think through ASCAP. I think they call the office at ASCAP and say how do we find this person? So, the promotion is totally word of mouth. I mean, at some point I’m sure I’ll probably change that, but I want to be able to get the music out quickly, and, as a performer, I’ve had not such good experiences with the established publishers. I played with Chamber Music Society at Lincoln Center three years ago, and we did a piece by a very major composer with a very major publisher, and we couldn’t get the music. And that to me was the ultimate lesson. I said, I don’t want my music to be that inaccessible to people. So, when people call up, and they want something, I get it out immediately. And if they’re students, I send it to them for free. If they can’t afford to buy the music, I send the music out to them. Some school in South Africa wrote me and said, we
don’t have money, we have a library, we really would like some music. So I made a huge package and sent all of my music to that little school in South Africa. And they’ve played about four or five of the pieces. So it’s little things like that. But just being out there, you know, attending things like this, meeting performers, and talking to people. But I always think about the performer when I’m writing, and that really has done a lot.

FRAN RICHARD: Five years ago, I commissioned you through the ASCAP Foundation to write an orchestral piece. You were not the only one – there were three composers. Tell them what you did to promote it.

JENNIFER HIGDON: I just sent the scores out to people. Well, I have to say, even when I was writing the piece I was thinking, all right, what’s going to speak to the audience and what’s going to speak to the orchestra. I thought about that a tremendous amount, and I thought about what I’m bored by in music and what I’m excited by. I really compared notes with what my emotional reaction is, and then I sent out the scores. I sent the scores to orchestra conductors, which actually led to one or two other performances, and I did one thing that – actually, this one little thing had a domino effect. There was a listing…I think it was actually an AMC opportunity update that had come to me a little late. The Louisville Orchestra had a competition connected with Indiana State University, and Indiana had sent their submission to AMC late, so when I got the newsletter, the deadline was that day. So I called up the university and said, I know the deadline is today, but can I FedEx a score to you tomorrow? I was going to have to drop everything I was doing and FedEx that score out, and they said sure. And they ended up selecting the work. Well, unbeknownst to me, they had a music critic there at the festival, David Patrick Stearns, who writes for USA Today. And he really liked the piece a lot, so when the end of the year came, and he was writing his classical picks for 1997, he chose that work. So suddenly this piece got a mention in USA Today. Well, all sorts of orchestras starting calling at that point and asking to see the score, and they didn’t all perform the work, but a couple did. And so that one little orchestra piece has been played so much, it’s scheduled for a concert in Wichita, which I found out about accidentally by just kind of surfing the Web. I saw this piece was scheduled. [audience laughs]

FRAN RICHARD: Tell them about the CD, also.

JENNIFER HIGDON: I got the tape from the Oregon Symphony, and I bugged them about getting a good quality tape, I was able to use that to apply for a bunch of different grants, and it led to a Guggenheim, and a Pew Fellowship in the Arts, which is a $50,000 grant, actually. It led to several other orchestra commissions, including the Philadelphia Orchestra. I got a commission from that orchestra just because someone in the orchestra had played some of my music somewhere, and they heard a tape of this piece. They went to the music director and said: “We’re considering all of these composers for commissions for the centennial of the orchestra, why don’t we consider her work?” So they just called me on the phone, randomly one day. I didn’t even send the score to them cold – they called and asked for a score, and I sent it in. I forgot about it, and about one month later I was walking down the street – I had just come out of Curtis, and the first flute player, Jeffrey Khaner was running down the street, jumping up and down motioning to me. And I thought, what’s wrong with Jeff? He goes tearing across three lanes of traffic, almost getting hit, and he said, the Philadelphia Orchestra is going to commission you. At which point I promptly fainted. No, just kidding. [audience laughs] But, you know, I know the Philadelphia Orchestra went around to a bunch of publishers and asked for scores. They went to a lot of publishers, it turns out, but, for some reason, they made the effort to reach out to people who were self-publishing and ask for scores, and as a result, I got this huge commission for a concerto for orchestra.

And the thing about CDs – I answered another opportunity update in the AMC newsletter, I guess it was four or five years ago. Some guy was saying he wanted to make CDs of composers who are also performers. And I thought, this sounds a little too good to be true. So I actually sent in a resume, that’s all he asked for. And he called me back and he said, I’d like to make a CD of your music and I’ll pay for it. And I said, no kidding! [audience laughs] OK! I’ll do it. I’ll do the legwork. I’ll get the musicians. I’ll practice all the pieces. And then I had to practice my music, but you know what, it was OK. It was great because getting someone to pay for your discs is next to impossible. But the other works that I’ve had recorded have come about from little groups that have heard of a piece of mine, they heard it somewhere or someone told them about it – word of mouth again. They asked for the music, and I sent it to them. Usually in those instances I send the music for free, if I think it’s really going to lead to something. And they decided to record it. I think I’ve had four or five pieces, just single pieces, recorded on other discs. And of course, that gets radio airplay, and then someone else hears about it, and it’s a little bit like a domino effect. But it actually has been a conscious decision not to go with a publisher. I have been approached by several publishers, but Philip Glass once told me if you want to make a living as a composer, keep the rights to your music. So, despite the fact that I was tempted a couple of times, I stayed on my own. So, it’s a little bit of work because, you know, you’re doing the printing, the Xeroxing, the binding, the mailing, the bills, and everything else. But for me, it has worked, and I think some of that has to do with just thinking about the musicians. I think that is just so important. They’re your link. Without the musicians, the composer can’t speak to the world. So…does that kind of answer a question? [audience laughs]

FRANK J. OTERI: [to audience] You had a question?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah, I had a question about the distribution part. Do you make certain numbers of copies right away?

JENNIFER HIGDON: It depends on the piece. If it’s something that I know is probably going to sell, like a flute piece, because now people know that I write flute music, I go ahead and make lots of copies.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: What’s “lots”?

JENNIFER HIGDON: It can be anywhere from 10 to 100. And something else that happened, once the distributors of flute music discovered that I had this music, people were coming in and asking for it, they started calling me, asking how they could get it. So, Flute World in Detroit, which is probably one of the biggest clearinghouses for flute music, calls up with orders all the time, big orders, really big orders.

LINDA GOLDING: Let me just ask a question. I think what you’ve outlined is really fantastic, and it’s the sort of thing that every composer and every publisher dreams of. And what I wanted to ask you is, how much time do you find you’re spending on the administrative part of what you need to do? Because again, this goes back to the idea of making a choice and understanding the kind of risk you might be taking, either financial or time-wise.

JENNIFER HIGDON: That’s a good question. This thing goes in waves, because if I get an order for an orchestra score and parts, obviously that’s going to take a lot longer, but I think I probably spend a couple hours a day doing it. I now have been able to hire an assistant. It got to the point where I needed to, and I talked to Libby L
arsen, who has an assistant, and I said, how did you handle all of this? I’m fortunate in that I opted not to take a university job. I’ve had a couple of offers, but I decided not to do it because I wanted to spend my time writing. So I thought, OK, I won’t have a car. [laughs] I’ll live frugally, I’ll eat peanut butter and jelly, but I want to compose. And because I teach at Curtis, I’m allowed to decide the number of hours that I’m going to teach. I only teach seven hours a week. So I spend most of my time writing, and I spend a couple hours a day working on the administrative stuff. And there is paperwork. You have to turn in the programs – you know, someone has to do that – do the Xeroxing, the binding, the letters, the proposals, grant stuff. But I find that I probably represent myself better than I would imagine anyone else could. And it also gives me the freedom – in places like South Africa, where maybe some school can’t afford music, I have the option to actually send it to them. And I think, sharing music – obviously it’s an excellent thing…

FRAN RICHARD: Did you hire a young woman composer to be your assistant, so you can teach her how to do it at the same time?

JENNIFER HIGDON: Yeah, actually, you know I have had composers come in and work. I guess it depends. Sometimes we go through periods where the students at Curtis are so busy, I can’t hire any of them. I can’t convince them to step away, and I think it’s a good thing, because they’re usually writing orchestra pieces – they have readings at Curtis for the orchestra students there, which is obviously just an incredible benefit. So when I can, I try to involve students in it so they can see how the whole thing operates and how it works.

LINDA GOLDING: And what do you do about contracts? What do you do about copyright protection? What do you do about negotiating something that you’ve never done before?

JENNIFER HIGDON: That’s always a spooky one. [laughs] A lot of times, the organization provides the contract. Philadelphia Orchestra, Oregon Symphony, Da Vinci String Quartet, Lark String Quartet, Philadephia Chamber Music Society – they all provided the contracts. When I needed to make up a contract, I just sat down and put one out on the computer, in a letter form. And I have all of these other contracts, to kind of draw on, and we tailor it according to the group, what their needs are.

RALPH JACKSON: Do you have an attorney?

JENNIFER HIGDON: No, but I do have someone in Philadelphia I can consult. There is an attorney there that also does taxes for artists, just artists. It’s not Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts; it’s just a group of people who like working with artists. So, if I have a question, I call them on the phone, and they answer the question without charging because they like the arts. But negotiations are a little trickier.

FRANK J. OTERI: Jennifer, you said something that I thought was wonderful but scary at the same time. You talked about the performance in Wichita, and you were surfing the Web and found out about it. So had you not surfed the Web and found out about it – this gets into the whole issue of copyright protection – would you have gotten fees? How do you police the performances of your music?

JENNIFER HIGDON: Well, you know eventually they had to contact me about the parts. They couldn’t do an orchestra piece without the parts. But I did something that I thought was more beneficial for me: I sold them the parts, at about what a major publisher rents them for, and they snapped them up immediately.

RALPH JACKSON: Let me say something about that. You sold a set of parts. Let’s say that that was a good deal for you, and for the next ten years, you sell parts to fifteen orchestras. At some point in your life, hopefully your career…

JENNIFER HIGDON: It’s already happened, you’re about to ask that xeroxing question, right? [laughs]

RALPH JACKSON: Well, actually I’m not. Xerox has nothing to do with this. At some point in your life, like Steve Reich and Philip Glass, who are two composers who self-published in a very professional way for a long time, you’re going to need, if your career goes far enough, to go to Linda or to G. Schirmer or one of those major publishers.

JENNIFER HIGDON: Right.

RALPH JACKSON: They’re going to look at that piece and they’re going to say, you already have this piece out in the world…

JENNIFER HIGDON: I know what you’re asking, but it’s more important to have the music out there, because too many composers are having this problem to begin with. I’d rather get the music out there and deal with that problem later on, than have to wait for down the road…

LINDA GOLDING: It’s an interesting point, because it comes back again to the financial realities, the economic realities of what needs to be done. And you know, selling a set of parts, absolutely, you’re going to make some money up front and you’re going to hopefully continue to collect performing rights income, because hopefully that orchestra will be submitting the programs. If you rented each time, you know you’re going to get that income. So you know, you’re balancing it out there a little bit… I think a point that Ralph was heading towards was the amount of activity. You know, at a certain point, sometimes the reason that a composer goes to a commercial publisher or opens up their own actual business, is just because the amount of time required in managing all of these details and making these day to day business choices becomes overwhelming, or just more than they want to handle. Or sometimes, and if you’re really lucky, there’s lots of new things to work out as well, that may be beyond your immediate experience, of how to negotiate. I get very nervous when I hear composers say what you just said, even though I know it really works for you. I get nervous when I hear composers say, “I take the contract that was sent to me, and I look at it, and it seems to make sense to me.” Because of course it makes sense; it’s a reasonable document. That makes me nervous. The other thing that would make me nervous is that you didn’t cut and paste to make another one for somebody else. Ralph’s question about having an attorney goes directly to that sort of thing, of protecting your rights and your copyrights. So, we’re using you as the poster child example [audience laughs] of an incredibly successful way of going about doing this. And I meant what I said before, when I said this is every composer and every publisher’s dream, how this story is turning out. But it’s important to interject little bits of things that you need to think about, regardless of who you are and what kind of an organization you’re running or are attached to.

FRAN RICHARD: And what level of career you’re at, that you start to prepare early. I want to ask how many of you are as far – or wish you were as far as Jenny is… [audience laughs] I mean, you have here a hustler, somebody who does not sit still and wait for an accident to happen, but who goes out there and really beats the bushes, but also was able to connect from one opportunity to the next, to the next, to the next, and the thing starts to go. And it could be an avalanche that Linda’s warned you about…

JENNIFER HIGDON: But I have to admit, it has crossed my mind a couple of times – last year I really hit a point where I thought, uh-oh, I could be in trouble here real fast. I do leave myself open to the option. It’s always in my head that I’m going to consider all possibilities, so I have no doubt that down the road I may have to adjust
what I’m doing, because every year I have to adjust. It’s growing to such an extent now that I do have to have an assistant come in quite a bit, so if it keeps going at this rate, I will have to do something.

FRAN RICHARD: Well, we’re now not only talking about an assistant to help you with the administrative time of mailings and answering phones and letters. Because, remember, it’s very important for somebody at the other end that’s trying to contact a composer to have a responsible person at the other end respond promptly. That’s one thing people are afraid of about living composers: They’re always afraid they’re flaky, or they don’t have a business head, or they’re never going to respond. But what we want to say now with applause and caution, is that you also need to know at a certain point, when you need professional guidance…

JENNIFER HIGDON: Or help. When you need professional help. [audience laughs]

FRAN RICHARD: When you should not sign a contract without a competent attorney looking at it, models or no models. You may need to adjust the contract. You may need to change the terms…

JENNIFER HIGDON: Actually, I probably should have said, I do adjust the contracts. But you’re right, in terms of…especially getting an attorney to look at something…

FRAN RICHARD: What happens, Linda, if ASCAP tells you in your distribution statement that an orchestral performance occurred in Wichita of a piece by a composer you publish, for which you did not rent the scores and parts. What do you do?

LINDA GOLDING: We send out a legal letter, actually. We send out a letter asking them exactly how they did that. Where did they get those materials? And sometimes, there’s a very quick answer to it; often it’s because the composer or conductor gave them the materials…

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Recent developments in technology have made it possible to download entire books off the Internet. Soon, the same could be done with entire musical scores. Obviously, this produces financial risk for publishers but it also can make a lot of materials much more available than they have ever been. Is the music world considering the implications of this?

LINDA GOLDING: This is a fabulous question, extremely complex. The Author’s Guild has done a huge project on this for books. I am not an expert in this, so you’re going to hear a very sort of blunt response to this without a lot of frills. There is this thing called “print on demand.” It’s a little like the Xerox machine – it’s difficult to control, it’s difficult to license, a lot of people are doing it, and you can buy all sorts of printed music on the Internet right now. Most of that music, however, is only a couple or three sheets, and there’s no binding. At the moment, as far as I know, the serious publishers are staying away from it because technology can’t actually satisfy their requirements, and the composers’ requirements, for the look of the piece, but more importantly, for the copyright protection of it. Undoubtedly, it’s going to happen, and probably in all of our lifetimes. But it’s not yet there. The biggest issue I think we have is something maybe Frank and I know Ralph and Fran have a lot of experience with – downloading sound, MP3 files. You know, we can talk about that later. That’s a nightmare. And we have to learn to work with it and to make it useful for composers, but at the moment it’s a licensing problem.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: When you’re looking at submissions, are you looking at genre? Because obviously certain genres usually sell better.

LINDA GOLDING: You mean like chamber as opposed to orchestra or vocal?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: As opposed to choral, for example, or band.

LINDA GOLDING: Every publisher has a range of categories of works for which they’re best suited to market and promote, for which they have the best reputation and the best catalog, or a leading or competitive catalog. So, the broadest answer is that every publisher is looking for, as I think Ralph said, an individual voice. Everybody wants a voice that stands out. In terms of certain types of categories, we all have things that we’re particularly interested in. Sometimes it’s because it’s that particular day of the week that somebody is thinking about it, and they see this stack of music, and they say, oh, you know I think I really would like to look for choral music today. But mainly, it has to do with how a particular catalog is built, and how the people who are running that company want to take that catalog forward.

RALPH JACKSON: Can I just add a little thing to that? Just from my perspective, I think that the major publishers – we’re talking about maybe five major publishers in the world in classical music – make most of their money from orchestral music. And so, if a composer…I mean certainly there are composers, like George Crumb for instance, who hasn’t really written much orchestral music, and he is extremely successful. But I think you’ll find the names of composers with the major music publishers, where they take the entire catalog, have had very successful orchestral works. And that’s one reason why I worried about the sale of the parts, because a lot of the money is from the rental of the music. So, a lot of times composers have chamber music printed, and sometimes the publisher loses a lot of money when they do that, simply because the composer is making them money through their orchestral music.

LINDA GOLDING: It’s a good point to raise it that way. It’s a really difficult balancing act. There isn’t a direct answer to your question, and it’s absolutely true that large serious music publishers earn the bulk of their income off of orchestral or rental activity, in part because of the fees and in part because of the performing rights organizations, who are our partners in securing payment both for the publisher and for the composer. And so if you’re looking at it from a financial point of view, you as composer, if you had a choice, what would you be writing? Well, first I hope you’re writing what you want to write, what means the most to you, and what you can write the best. But you also ought to be looking at what’s going to give you some commercial success.

FRAN RICHARD: Income. We want to talk about income. That’s a great segue. Were you going that way, Frank?

FRANK J. OTERI: Yeah. I know that several people have questions, but I thought what Jennifer was saying about recordings was very interesting. We’ve been talking a lot about scores and we’ve been talking about self-publishing, and we’re dealing with a world now with new media, where the printed word or the printed musical manuscript does not reach as many people as many other media have the potential of doing. So I thought for the purposes of our query once again to find out from everybody out there: How many of you out there have CD recordings of your music?

RALPH JACKSON: Wow.

FRANK J. OTERI: That’s really terrific. And then we’re going to divide up the categories once again. Of the people out there who have CD recordings of your music, how many of those are on a label that is not self-distributed but that’s on a recording label, either a major label or an independent label, that has some kind of distribution?

FRAN RICHARD: That’s very good.

FRANK J. OTERI: That’s still pretty impressive. How many of you are issuing CDs of your music on your own and are distributing them yourself? Show of hands. Of the people who have CD recordings of your
music – I know Jennifer said that the CD of her music has been played on the radio. Well, Fran and I know from going to the radio conference every year, and knowing how they deal with new music at the radio conference, that it seems a little bit like a beautiful dream. [audience laughs] Because these radio folks are afraid of any contemporary music, by and large.

RALPH JACKSON: Clarify who is at this conference.

FRANK J. OTERI: OK. Yes, sorry Ralph. [audience laughs] I’m speaking about the annual AMPPR conference – American Music Personnel in Public Radio. There’s an annual public radio conference, and there’s an also annual commercial classical radio conference but they talk even less about contemporary music. Year in, year out, we always hear, oh, contemporary music, people turn the dial with that. And we’re fighting that battle every year. It gets better in some pockets, it gets worse in others.

LINDA GOLDING: Right, and Messaien is, I think, included in that.

FRANK J. OTERI: Oh, Messaien’s contemporary music. Oh, yeah. Schoenberg’s contemporary music, Ives is contemporary music, Harry Patrch…

FRAN RICHARD: Did they take the Philadelphia Orchestra’s definition?

LINDA GOLDING: Yeah, really.

FRANK J. OTERI: But before we get into attack mode here – because I love getting into attack mode – I want to know how many people out here get their music performed on radio stations. Let’s see a show of hands. That’s pretty good. This is good. Now, I want to touch into new media. Now we have this wonderful new tool, the Internet. And we’re constantly finding new applications for this thing. As a self-published, self-distributed composer, as someone who distributes recordings of your own music, you have this wonderful new tool: the Internet. You have a Web site, or you have e-mail, and you know, all of a sudden when you have a concert of your music in three weeks, instead of sending out a mailing, you can send out e-mails to 500 people. Now, whether or not that’s as effective as a nice brochure, you have to weigh the odds with that. But with a Web site – how many of you have Web sites? On those Web sites, how many of you have audio samples of your music of some kind? How many of you use a streaming audio format versus a downloadable format? Do I need to explain those terms? [audience response] OK. On the Internet now there are two ways of encoding audio files. You can either have files that are downloadable. The most popular format of a downloadable file is MP3. I’m sure everybody here has heard that name MP3, but there are lots of other encryption systems besides MP3. That means that somebody grabs the file, downloads it onto their computer, and then can play it forever and ever. It’s like buying a CD. They have it, and you can either sell it, or it’s free, or they can copy it, and that’s it. Streaming audio on the other hand is more like radio. It functions in real time, but after you finish playing it, it’s no longer on your computer, which means that it’s gone, like a radio broadcast. Now, theoretically, you could have somebody with a record button recording it, but it requires a little more effort to pirate a streaming audio signal. In terms of copyright infringement, this is something that both ASCAP and BMI have been dealing with in the past year and a half, and all of the details have still not been worked out. In fact, I’d like both Ralph and Fran both to address that issue, and then we’ll take it to the floor again.

 

RALPH JACKSON: BMI has aggressively licensed the Internet from the beginning. We had the first bot, which searches the Internet 24 hours a day, looking for music files. It doesn’t identify those files – it simply goes into the site anonymously, it sees if there are any music files available, and if there are, than BMI investigates that site to see if it’s something that should be licensed. In terms of collecting money from the Internet, right now there’s virtually no Internet company that’s making money, so BMI’s viewpoint of this is that we should collect a percentage of revenues from Internet companies, which I think is very important because these are the companies that are going to be making literally billions of dollars in the next few years, and if you’re in at the very beginning with a percentage, then you’re going to get a percentage of that billion. So, that’s where we are right now. We’re in negotiations with a bunch of different sites – we have an agreement with broadcast.com and several others. But this is a whole new unknown world, and I would caution you against putting your music out in an MP3 format right now simply because…just for the same reason I’m so cautious about your orchestral scores getting out. Let’s say you put all your music out, and then CRI comes by and says we love your music. And then they say, you know, everybody in the world downloaded your music and has a copy of it already, and can send it to all of their friends in the future. It’s just a little bit dangerous right now, so maybe – excerpts, I’d say.

FRANK J. OTERI: And Fran, do you want to add anything to that?

FRAN RICHARD: ASCAP has licensed MP3. We have a comprehensive ASCAP music license. There were so-called “big pirates,” but we’ve now licensed them, and the next generation of MP3 technology will not allow use without protection. It’s like safe sex, only now it’s safe audio. [audience laughs] We have the technology that seeks out the music sites on the net, and which identifies what’s being played, and our licenses are up on our website. Frank and I were at the radio conference last year, and I thought it was wonderful how many of these radio stations themselves have streams of music, which are not their mainstream fare. If a station plays classical-period music entirely, they may have some DJ who is adventurous, and he’s doing a stream, and they were saying how helpful it is to have that Internet license up on our Web site, so they can calculate what fees are owing and pay them, so that these performances will be protected. We have made distribution for the first time on the Internet, a year or more ago, and will continue to do so. The monies are not gigantic yet, but as Ralph said, it’s important when there’s a new technology to enforce protection and to convince the users as well as the abusers that that’s not a good idea. In general, I have to say, we are presuming that all of you who are so advanced as to self-publish are affiliated with performing rights organizations. Whichever one you choose – you have the good fortune in this country to be able to make an informed choice of which society you want to represent you – make it. If you’re not represented, make a stand. Stand up with your other colleagues to protect your rights and to enforce them, and we will try to guide you. We don’t want you to give your music away for nothing. We’re trying to help you to earn a living. The compensation you might get from rental of orchestral music, if it’s a popular piece, could be a continued source of income for you. That is why we caution you to think through what you would give away for nothing. When somebody wants to play your music in public, and is giving you exposure, you know, that’s what we used to call “Meet the Exposer.” [audience laughs]. They’re claiming to be doing you a favor, but you know you are giving it for nothing. Everybody has a very good argument why you should give it for nothing, at any stage of your career. We’re trying to get you to stop and think whether that’s a good idea for you, and for your colleagues as well. We talked before, in the last panel, about behaving and treating yourself as a professional, and also honoring your own colleagues and making sure that you stand together. So we are licensing the Internet as well. We have about 2500 si
tes licensed by now, and are working very hard. We are also trying to teach people who are about to do without proper education themselves. Those of you who are composers trained in university know damn well that you can have two PhDs in your hand and not have ever been told when you write a piece how long it will be protected. These are things that you need some of us to help you learn, because they are not things that were necessarily taught to you, nor was it taught how to negotiate a rental fee, or a commission fee. And we want to help you in every way so that you receive not only accolades for your good music, but remuneration as well.

FRANK J. OTERI: OK, we have about 10 minutes left. I want to try to get to everybody’s questions. There were questions here, and there are some new questions. I want to try to take them in the order I saw the hands originally, so that I can get everybody’s questions in. We’re going to try our best.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: OK. I’m at the beginning of the process, and my question is, do I just randomly send you a score?

LINDA GOLDING: You know, that’s a great question, and it actually goes to making inquiries at publishers as well as making up a promotion program for a particular work. And I think this is something Jennifer said as well. If you’re going to approach someone, about anything, you ought to know why, and you ought to tell them why: I want you to perform this work because – I’m going to make the match for you, I’m going to show you why this is right for you. I might disagree with that, but at least I know that you thought about me, and why I’m supposed to take the time to consider your inquiry. On the publishing side as well, why is it that you would approach a particular publisher, what is it about that publishing house, about the composers they represent or what their stationery looks like, or what you heard about them, that you would make a contribution to? And that they would make a contribution to you as well – I think this goes back to that collaborative effort. But, please, absolutely, in any of these situations: know why you’re making the approach.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Will you turn away a “nobody,” or will you look at them?

LINDA GOLDING: I think every publisher considers every piece of music that comes in. How it’s done is different at every organization. You need to make it as easy as possible. Again, you’re just talking about a publisher, but it’s the same thing for promotion. People will listen to and look at music if it’s made easy for them, attractive to them, if they want to, if when they open the package they say, yes, I want to spend time with this.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Is a publisher less interested in works that are already circulating out there than in new works?

LINDA GOLDING: No, no, I don’t think so. I think Ralph’s point is to look at any decision that you make in the broadest possible context. Boosey publishes many composers who have directed us to sell materials over the years, and it hasn’t stopped us from working with them.

FRANK J. OTERI: I saw hands back there…

AUDIENCE MEMBER: How do you know what to charge?

JENNIFER HIGDON: I actually had an advantage in that because I conducted an orchestra. And this is one of the reasons why I sell. Because I conducted an orchestra at a university, and we couldn’t afford the rental, and I wanted to do new music, and they wanted to do Beethoven, so… Some of it depends on I think, and correct me if I’m wrong, the reputation of the composer, the size. Also, I know sometimes they consider who they’re renting to, like a professional orchestra would be different than University of Pennsylvania orchestra. You’re asking about specific rates?

LINDA GOLDING: What the market will bear, probably, is a way to think about it. [audience laughs] You know what you might want to do is talk to some of your colleagues. Maybe talk to Jennifer, not putting her on the spot here, but actually talk with your colleagues about how they’re making those kinds of decisions, based on what and where did they start. A lot of people say, well I conducted an orchestra, so I got a whole lot of rental information and I’m just using that, but you know, whatever. Ask around.

FRANK J. OTERI: There’s a question over here.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: I’ve written for films and television, and I’m self-published through BMI, and one of my works is distributed by a small publishing company, but the rest of them are under my own label. If I wanted to or was accepted by a larger company, can I do that? Can I just give up?

RALPH JACKSON: Very easily. Just like anyone can sell anything. [audience laughs] Right? You can do it so simply. You know, if Linda wanted to buy the coat that you have [audience laughs], it’s between you two. If she pays you enough, you can give it to her. [audience laughs] So, you own your publishing company, you can sell it. You can change it immediately.

 

FRANK J. OTERI: Question back there.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Can you ever regain copyright control once it has been relinquished?

LINDA GOLDING: If there’s an individual situation, where a composer wants to recapture copyrights, that composer should look at their contracts and talk to the publisher and see what way there is. I mean, sometimes it turns out there’s a loophole in a contract, and sometimes there’s not. But, I think – again, there is a range of choices that people make, and I would hate for you to leave this room thinking that anybody who has not retained their copyright has made a bad choice. Everybody makes the choice that they need to make based on what they’re interested in. Some composers are extremely interested in business and promotion, as well as composing, and some of them are really good at it. And they want to spend that time and effort, and therefore be compensated for it. Others want to hear about it, they want to check in about ideas, but really they want to be in their studio writing music and traveling to hear their performances, and they don’t want to deal with the business aspect, and it’s fine with them. They’re comfortable that their business arrangement gives compensation to that work on their behalf. You know, when Jennifer says she has an assistant, she is still paying somebody to do work; it just looks a little different.

RALPH JACKSON: And I’ll just say, the only way that major publishers are going to exist into the next millennium is to own the copyright. They don’t make money quickly from a piece of music. I mean, I remember Susan Feder telling me about the John Corigliano’s AIDS Symphony. There were three versions of the piece, and they spent thousands and thousands just doing the parts. It was years before they saw any profit from it. So, if you’re dealing with an absolute top of the line publisher like Boosey & Hawkes, I don’t know. I’m sure you could talk to them about it, but chances are they’re going to want the ownership of the copyright. What that means is if you’re dealing with a smaller company, not a blue chip company, a company that’s only owned by one person, perhaps, be careful.

FRAN RICHARD: Can I just say that it may be every composers’ dream to be published by Boosey & Hawkes or one of the great publishers that has survived and become strong in the 20th century, but those of you who are sitting here have to be realistic about the fact that you probably won’t be. What we are talking about is not to challenge how they operate for the best interest of their composer roster
, and to survive, but rather how you will survive if these publishers remain in this business. And one of the ways they remain strong is to choose carefully, because they know that there are many talented people out there, and they can’t take all of you. It is not that they don’t recognize a talent when they see one, but they know that it is an investment in time, effort, and money, and they can’t possibly take you. And what we want, here, is to sustain your confidence in yourself to enforce your ability to move in your career in an upward spiral to success, and to do everything we can, even if you cannot be taken by these publishers. So, it’s really a moot question whether if Boosey & Hawkes called me at midnight, would I give up my copyright…

RALPH JACKSON: Do it. [audience laughs]

FRAN RICHARD: It is a question of: I have got it, what the hell am I going to do with it, and how am I going to survive. And I just want to say another thing. When you ask these questions about rental fees, don’t believe that you’re getting evasive answers. But publishers, for example, are not allowed to discuss this publicly, especially amongst themselves. There is constraint on monopoly and setting prices and that sort of thing. So with commission fees and other financial concerns you have to begin to feel your way, and to talk with colleagues, and to figure out what the traffic will bear, to temper justice with mercy. So that you know that if this is a small fledgling group, they should pay something even if it isn’t a lot of money, because there’s an example and a principle here, and then little by little as your career builds and your fame escalates, then you can command a higher fee.

LINDA GOLDING: One of the things we should also say about publishing is that being affiliated with a major publisher is not right for everybody. It’s just not, for any number of reasons, and you shouldn’t look at that as a problem, but it should be yet another one of your choices. Being affiliated with a commercial outfit has got a lot of problems for a composer, as well as obviously upsides. But you need to always think of it in terms of what it is going to do for your work.

FRANK J. OTERI: I’m afraid that I’ve been given the time axe, but…yes?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: What about publishing the works of women? That’s why you’re getting all of these self-publishers. I think either we have to start a publishing company for women. You have one woman in your catalog, right?

LINDA GOLDING: No, we have three. Out of 26, I guess it is. When I say 26, that’s 26 composers who are writing today, as opposed to the back catalog.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah, but they’re not American.

LINDA GOLDING: I’m happy to talk about that off the podium. [audience laughs]

FRANK J. OTERI: OK, thank you all so much for coming, and I want to thank Fran and Linda and Ralph.

Elliott Carter: The Career of a Century

Elliott Carter

Elliott Carter
Photo by Kathy Chapman, courtesy Boosey & Hawkes

Frank J. Oteri visits Elliott Carter at his home
February 4, 2000—New York City, NY
Audio/video recordings by Nathan Michel
Video restored in November 2017 by Molly Sheridan
Interview transcribed by Karyn Joaquino

More than 17 years have elapsed since I visited Elliott Carter at his Greenwich Village apartment for the very first time to record a conversation with him for NewMusicBox. But I still remember that day very vividly, as well as many of the things he said.  I also remember several weeks beforehand being extremely terrified at the prospect of having a lengthy discussion with such a formidable figure, feeling inadequate in my understanding of Carter’s music and therefore not up to the task. He had written several compositions I had barely grasped, such as the turbulent Piano Concerto which received its world premiere in Boston half a century ago this year. There were also so many compositions.

Although for decades Carter had a reputation for writing music at a meticulously slow pace, he had begun to be much more prolific after his 80th birthday. He had composed almost as many works between 1990 and when I met with him in February 2000 (37) as he had in the four preceding decades combined (39). (He had turned 91 only a few months before I came to see him and would go on to create another 69 pieces in his remaining 12 years.)

At the time of our talk, Carter was chiefly known and venerated for the extremely complex and erudite works of what is now called his middle period—works such as his Pulitzer Prize-winning Second and Third String Quartets; the Double Concerto for Piano, Harpsichord, and Two Chamber Orchestras which wowed Stravinsky; the overwhelmingly immersive Concerto for Orchestra; and that Piano Concerto I had been afraid of which was something we actually discussed that afternoon. At the time of our talk, I had more of a fondness for what was then Carter’s more recent music—pieces like his dramatic Violin Concerto (which won a Grammy for Best Contemporary Classical Composition in 1994); the unusual Luimen, scored for what was probably the unprecedented combination of trumpet, trombone, vibraphone, mandolin, guitar, and harp; or his first and only opera, the surreally quirky What Next?, which we did manage to talk about a bit. Carter had also composed a great deal of music before the works for which he became known, and I wanted to learn more about that music, too—works such as the Americana-infused Holiday Overture and the Symphony No. 1, which rivals contemporaneous symphonies by Aaron Copland, Howard Hanson, Roy Harris, and William Schuman. Carter had also written tons of choral works. Some of those pieces were actually the first music of his I had ever heard, though they were all written in a style that, by the late 1940s, he had completely abandoned.

A personal aside: I actually met Carter for the very first time on April 17, 1979, when the Gregg Smith Singers performed two of his works at St. Peter’s Church in Manhattan’s Citicorp complex. My high school music teacher, Lionel Chernoff, suggested that I go to the concert. I actually still remember the 14-year-old me shaking hands with Carter, enthralled by this senior composer who was there as he always was when his music was performed. At the time I never imagined he would live for more than three decades after my initial encounter with him. Nor did I imagine after finally visiting his home for that first time on February 4, 2000, that he would go on to compose what I believe to be even more extraordinary pieces: works such as the mesmerizing solo piano miniature Caténaires; the almost Feldman-esque string orchestra piece Sound Fields; or the extraordinary Cello Concerto which he had just begun contemplating. He mentioned this composition briefly during our talk that day. (Yo-Yo Ma would later have to learn it traveling cross-country on a bus after the nationwide airport shutdown following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.)

When Carter was a teenager, he was already deeply entrenched in the avant-garde milieu of his day. Much has been written elsewhere about his legendary and somewhat problematic relationship with Charles Ives, but Carter also told me about hearing lots of works by Edgard Varèse, as well as sitting next to George Gershwin during the American premiere of Wozzeck. He also talked about how we helped organize the American Composers Alliance when he was in his late 20s. In addition to his deep involvement in music, the young Carter was also an avid fan of literature (he was actually an undergraduate English major at Harvard), and literature remained a passion throughout his life.

After our talk, I was more fascinated with Carter’s music than I had been before and remain so to this day. Hearing him explain his conceptions for some of his more “difficult” pieces, I came to a greater understanding and appreciation for everything he had written and why he chose a singular, uncompromising path as a composer. I now deeply treasure everything he ever wrote, including his most challenging vocal works which the fearless soprano Tony Arnold wrote about for us in NewMusicBox back in 2011. Eight years after my extraordinary initial afternoon at Carter’s home, I had the privilege of returning there to talk with him again shortly before his centenary, by which point he had composed 45 more pieces! While I remain extremely proud of both of these talks, I am even more deeply in awe of a talk that Carter’s one-time student Ellen Taaffe Zwilich did with him when she was composer-in-residence at Carnegie Hall, as well as the collegial conversation between Carter and one of his biggest super-fans—believe it or not—Phil Lesh of The Grateful Dead, which we recorded for Counterstream Radio ten years ago.
It is now five years since Carter died, and it has inspired a great deal of reflection about his status today and what his lasting influence might be in our ever more splintered world.  I think that at the end of the day, his music, all of it, is a celebration of life—its marvelous ambiguities as well as its simultaneities, chock full of wit and humor and, ultimately, a reverence for its possibilities. And I do mean all of it—from his earliest unpublished song “My Love is in a Light Attire” (1928) to his withdrawn 1937 String Quartet in C Major written shortly after his studies with Nadia Boulanger (a page of which, from Carter’s original manuscript housed at the Paul Sacher Foundation in Basel, Switzerland, was tantalizingly reproduced in the 2008 book Elliott Carter: A Centennial Portrait in Letters and Documents); from his joyous Tarantella for male chorus (1936) to his iconic 1948 Cello Sonata; from his 1955 Variations for Orchestra, which would be his sole exploration of the 12-tone method, to his perplexing Elizabeth Bishop-texted song cycle A Mirror on Which to Dwell (1975); from his seminal Eight Pieces for solo timpani (1949/1966) to his solo clarinet showstopper Gra (1993); from his whimsical second wind quintet Nine by Five (2009) to his enigmatic final work, the just-recorded piano trio Epigrams (2012). And I’m still just scratching the surface. Hopefully our reflections here will inspire many further musical explorations.

—Frank J. Oteri (November 21, 2017)

Ed. note, as per the way NewMusicBox presented larger format articles back in the year 2000 (both to accommodate much slower bandwidths and to encourage non-linear reading), the talk with Elliott Carter is broken into eight separate pages. Each of these pages also includes audio/video elements so please take time to journey through them in whatever order you prefer, though they are listed below in the order in which the original conversation took place.

  1. 1. New Music Across the Century
  2. 2. Populism vs. Individualism
  3. 3. Connecting Modern Music to Other Art Forms
  4. 4. The Aesthetics of Chamber Music vs. The Orchestra
  5. 5. Being an American
  6. 6. On Difficulty
  7. 7. Vocal Music
  8. 8. Recent Activities

Throughout November 2017, NewMusicBox is marking the fifth anniversary of Elliott Carter‘s death with a series of posts exploring his life and legacy. This content is made possible with the generous support of the Amphion Foundation‘s Carter Special Projects Fund.


1. New Music Across the Century

FRANK J. OTERI: As a composer who’s been a major force for most of the 20th century, I think you’re in a unique position to talk about our time. And, you know, everybody’s been talking about the millennium and whether or not we’re in a new era. I was just wondering what your thoughts were about it and what you feel are the most significant things that have happened in music in your lifetime?
ELLIOTT CARTER: Well, my original interest in music, after all, goes back to the 1920s. I always lived in New York City, and during the ‘20s when I was a high school student, there was a good deal more contemporary music played than in many periods after that time. At that time, for instance, Leopold Stokowski and the Philadelphia Orchestra did Wozzeck staged at the Metropolitan Opera. It was not part of the Metropolitan’s series, and the League of Composers organized it and the house was sold out. I sat next to George Gershwin. But I didn’t dare to talk to him at that performance. And I heard other things. Schoenberg was also done on that series, and then down here in Greenwich Village, there was this big department store, Wanamaker’s, that had concerts, and I heard a good deal of Varèse’s music played.
FJO: Wow. In the ‘20s?
EC: Yeah. In the ‘20s. And so I knew Varèse from that time on. And I also heard works of Charles Ives. There was somebody not far from here on 3rd Avenue, a woman named Catherine Ruth Hayman who played Scriabin and Schoenberg and Charles Ives and Ravel and Debussy and I went to all of these things when I was very young. And I had various friends who were involved with this whole field. One of them was Eugene O’Neill’s son, who went to the same school with me and was in my class. The Provincetown Playhouse gave performances of O’Neill’s plays right here down on MacDougal Street. So that this whole field of avant-garde of that period was something that got me very interested in music. Actually, I came to wish to be a composer through hearing that music, and rather disliking the more conservative music like Beethoven and Mozart, and it was only years later that I began to like that kind of music. So there’s always been this background of that early period of modernism that has remained with me all my life.

The Voice of Elliott Carter

FJO: When you were at the production of Wozzeck, it was sold out and you were sitting next to Gershwin… Would you say that there was more of an attitude welcoming new music in the 20’s than there is today, or at other times in your life?
EC: It’s a very different period, you see. There’s been a big history of change that was caused largely by the big Depression during this time. And in the early days, in those early days, there was the recovery from the First World War and a very great effort on the part of many countries, particularly France, to present their culture in this country so that the French government subsidized a good many performances of all kinds of things in this city in order to recover from the awful shock of the war… And, beside that, there was an income tax difference – it was enormous. These wealthy people were willing to put up a lot of money for the performance of Wozzeck, and wealthy people came to these performances. It was all sort of a very wealthy upper class that was interested in modern art. The Museum of Modern Art was started by such people. When the Depression came and the whole tax thing was entirely changed, there was a very different world of people. And the wealthy people were no longer the wealthy people that supported the arts. Support for the arts came from people who were not that wealthy anymore, and so everything diminished a good deal.
FJO: And that’s something that we’re still experiencing to this day.
EC: Oh, yes. Of course. There’s been a big sociological change. There always were people like myself who were just students or didn’t have a great deal of money who went to these concerts. But in the early days, the concerts were also largely supported by older people who had money, who wanted to be “with it,” who were very interested. Modern music at that time was something to be “with,” something to follow: it was a new and exciting thing.
FJO: So do you feel the changes were more due to changes in economy than changes in the music itself?
EC: I think the changes in the economy were certainly one of the effects of all of this, but that wasn’t all. Even in the post-First World War world, people already began to see, particularly in France and Germany, a new change in music. Composers like Poulenc and Milhaud and Honegger, and in Germany, composers like Hindemith and Krenek began to show a whole new point of view about what was called avant-garde music. And there was a return, in the case of a composer like Poulenc, there was a desire not only to suggest Mozart but to suggest that music be very eclectic. There was a whole period of eclecticism that persisted, first in France, and then it came to this country. And that was also connected with the whole notion of populism, the very advanced, dissonant music that had been written before the war and was being written still a little bit afterward, was considered an elitist thing. And then there was a powerful desire to not write elitist music, and to write music that was more popular. And finally, of course, Aaron Copland, who was a great friend of mine during a good part of this period, wrote Billy the Kid. He started with El salón México, and then wrote Billy the Kid which was on the same program with my Pocahontas in 1939. And Aaron was very concerned with writing music that would draw a different kind of public than the older kind of music had been drawing.

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Suite from Pocahontas (1939)
American Composers Orchestra, conducted by Paul Lustig Dunkel
From the CRI CD American Masters – Elliott Carter


2. Populism vs. Individualism

FRANK J. OTERI: Now, initially, the music that you were writing was also very much in the populist vein…
ELLIOTT CARTER: Well, when I got interested in music, as I said, it was in the Varèse-and-so-forth period. But when I went to Paris, the new vogue had affected not only the whole musical life but also my teacher, Nadia Boulanger. When Aaron studied with Nadia Boulanger in the ‘20s, they went over Wozzeck with her. By that time I was there she disliked this kind of music. She was right up to the minute, even when she was dying, she was telling me how wonderful Boulez was. I can’t say that she changed, but she had a desire to follow things. She was always interested in what was new and tried to understand it. I must say she disliked Honegger a great deal but she did like Poulenc a lot.
FJO: Now, one thing that I’m curious about is your earliest, earliest music predating the stuff that predates your mature style, music that you were writing in the late ‘20s, early ‘30s, before you were writing in a populist vein. Were you writing music in the style of Varèse and the experimentalists?

The Voice of Elliott Carter

EC: Oh, that’s rather complicated. When I was in college, I did try to write what was sort of dissonant, advanced music, and I always was terribly dissatisfied. And it was partially for a very obvious reason: I didn’t have enough training to understand how to do this in a way that the good composers could do it. So it gradually began to be clear to me that I just simply had to go back and study music, the older music and get a background of the composers that I admired, like Stravinsky, for instance, had, and so I did. I studied with Nadia Boulanger and then I wrote some conservative music. I even wrote populist music during that time I was studying, and it was never very good. I don’t know why. I didn’t really begin to write music that I approved of until fairly recently. There is an old song that I sent to Henry Cowell when he was the editor for New Music that I wrote before I studied, a setting of one of the poems of James Joyce. It’s rather embarrassing, I think.
FJO: I love some of those early pieces. I really do.

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s The Defense of Corinth (1941)
John Oliver Chorale
Elliott Carter: Choral Music

EC: Well, I’m talking about very early stuff…
FJO: You’re talking about stuff even earlier than what I’ve heard.
EC: Yeah. When I got going, I began to write these choral pieces. I wrote a lot of choral music. Those are pretty good, I think, for what they are.

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Tarantella (1941)
John Oliver Chorale
Elliott Carter: Choral Music

FJO: Then there are your Robert Frost songs…

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Three Poems of Robert Frost (1942, orchestrated 1980)
Patrick Mason, baritone; Speculum Musicae conducted by David Starobin
The Music of Elliott Carter, Vol. 1 – The Vocal Works (1975-1981)

EC: Yeah, those are good, those are fine, for what they are. I mean, I can’t say I dislike them but they’re not the kind of thing I want to do now.
FJO: Well, certainly, if we’re to look at composers and their careers, from the point when you decided to write in what I’ll call your mature style, which is over 50 years ago at this point, I would say there’s been a remarkable consistency and identity to your music that few composers can claim to have been able to sustain over such a long period of time and development.
EC: Well, that’s nice to hear. [laughs] Part of the problem is I don’t think about it that way. I just write the music that has always meant a lot to me. You see, I switched, actually. About the time of the Second World War, I began to feel that the neo-classical or populist music that I was writing wasn’t strong enough. It didn’t express the feelings that I felt. We had all overwhelming feelings about the war and its result, and Hitler and all that, and this made me feel that I had to write something more serious and much more meaningful, to me at least, if not to the audience.
FJO: So what are some of those feelings that you wanted to express?
EC: Well, I can’t say that I can identify them, but they are in the music. [laughs]

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Piano Sonata (1945-46, revised 1982)
Charles Rosen, piano
Elliott Carter: The Complete Music for Piano

FJO: I know that you’ve said frequently that music should speak for itself and that composers aren’t always the best people to articulate what their music means.
EC: Well, yeah, that’s probably true, but the thing is that I’ve reverted, actually, to what originally interested me in music. And it all began to be much more meaningful to me and then also, I began to feel that, with the coming of the people in France after the war and in Germany, and when people like Boulez and the Darmstadt School went back to that earlier period, I felt that I was on the right track. I was on a track, perhaps not the right one, but anyhow, a track that other people felt. I think that this was a genuine feeling after the war. There was a desire to make music much more vivid and much more meaningful. And it’s always condemned nowadays as being academic. There has always been academic music all the time. And I don’t think, a good piece is not any more academic now as they were in the time of Brahms.


3. Connecting Modern Music to Other Art Forms
FRANK J. OTERI: Well, in talking about music in relation to other trends in the 20th Century, and to talk about your music, I know that you studied literature as an undergraduate, you’re very interested in poetry, you wrote film and theater reviews years ago, and you collect art. You’re very much connected to other disciplines. How do you see music and the advances that happened in music in this century connected to the other arts?
ELLIOTT CARTER: Well, I feel music has kept pace with the best parts of other arts. I mean, with the development of Picasso and the development, even of Bill de Kooning, for instance, this has been something that I think music itself has done, at least I’ve done, and I don’t know whether this is true of other people but in some sense, I looked into the question, for instance, of how musicians play together. And in the course of this whole period you’re talking about, more mature work, I suppose it’s more mature, the desire to make the people that are contributing, contribute with their own individuality, so that we have, most of my work since 1950 have been concerned, so to speak, with deconstructing the normal situation of music. And this has been true, all painting is like that, too, and also a lot of literature.

The Voice of Elliott Carter

FJO: I think music’s in a very strange position, because a lot of people are aware of de Kooning, and have an appreciation for de Kooning, and a lot of people on college campuses to this day name drop James Joyce and Samuel Beckett and maybe even more contemporary writers like Thomas Pynchon or William Gaddis, who are writing really experimental work, or an artist like Frank Stella who is an enormously successful painter doing highly complex work. But in music, we’re still sort of beholden to the standard repertoire and the old works are still sort of the focus of classical music life.
EC: Well, I think there’s a very simple explanation for all that. It’s perhaps mean to say this, but in any case the explanation is, a painting is something you can buy and sell, it’s a physical object that exists. Music isn’t. And furthermore, a good part of my own life was spent in trying to prove that music was worth something… that a composer’s music was something worth paying for. Back in the ‘30s, we—the composers—organized the American Composers Alliance. Up to that time, American composers were not paid for anything. And, I mean, serious music, if you had a piece played by the Philharmonic, you had to find money to pay the Philharmonic to play it, and we organized and did the old union stuff, and finally got orchestras and performers to pay for our performances. It’s still, of course, very primitive. I find in my own case, I was only looking at my quarterly royalties, for the last quarter of 1998, and I have 13 times as much royalties from Europe as I have from America. And this is because we are not as developed in this particular field partly, and partly my music isn’t played as often. But it’s because of this financial situation as much as anything else that these things have persisted this way, in my opinion. Money is right at the basis of all of this, and beside that, the expense of producing these contemporary musical works is great, so it takes lots of rehearsals. So you sink a lot of money in, but you don’t get any of it back. Sotheby’s does mighty well with even minor painters. [laughs]
FJO: Right. Well, we have this whole tradition that we’re working in, a classical music community that plays the old standards and, you know, we’re lucky, in an orchestral program, let’s say, if we get one modern work on a program, and I find it interesting that your music is so very much about now, yet, it has to be tied to the music of Europe’s past, because that’s the music that it gets to be played with. So, you’ll write works that have names such as string quartet or concerto, and these bring up certain associations for listeners, and certain assumptions within the community, although it’s curious to me that you’ve mostly avoided the term symphony. There’s an early Symphony No. 1 that you wrote. You’ve titled your recent three-movement orchestral work “Symphonia,” but you’re not calling it ‘symphony.’

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Symphony No. 1 (1942)
American Composers Orchestra, conducted by Paul Lustig Dunkel
American Composers Orchestra play Thorne, Roussakis and Carter

EC: That brings up lots of different kinds of thoughts. One of them is that I haven’t thought a lot about naming my pieces in different ways, and I realize in hearing many of my colleagues’ works with peculiar names that they were more conventional than mine. So why should I bother? The very fact that the string quartet was called a string quartet and it carries on a newer point of view about a string quartet is, is more important than to call it Ainsi la nuit, for instance, as Mr. Dutilleux did, which is a very beautiful title and, actually, a beautiful quartet too, and his is not so conventional. But I find in general, it’s absurd to bother with that. I mean, I realize, it’s a way to sell your pieces, if you give some kind of funny title to them, but I want mine sold on the basis of what you hear, not what they’re called.

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s String Quartet No. 2 (1959)
The Composers Quartet (Matthew Raimondi and Anahid Ajemian, violins; Jean Dupouy, viola; Michael Rudiakov, cello)
Elliott Carter: String Quartets Nos. 1 & 2


4. The Aesthetics of Chamber Music vs. The Orchestra
FRANK J. OTERI: I was thrilled to be at the awards reception at the Conference of Chamber Music America and to see you being honored with their most important award. It was the first time it was ever given to a composer for the act of writing music. William Schuman got the award years ago, but it was for his work as an administrator. I think your receiving this award is wonderful recognition for having done so much to contribute to the chamber music repertoire, in the writing of string quartets and as well as numerous works for other combinations. Why has chamber music been such an important concern for you throughout your lifetime?
ELLIOTT CARTER: I really can’t answer that in a fundamental way. I can answer it in a superficial way, but I’m not sure that I’m really answering it completely. What I can say is that one of the things that struck me right away as soon as I wrote that first string quartet was that the difference between a group of string quartet players and an orchestra, is that the string quartet will rehearse a piece ‘til they play it well and an orchestra is paid by the hour for a rehearsal. If the number of rehearsals is very limited, it becomes less and less possible, especially in America. That’s one of the reasons why my works are more frequently played in Europe because a lot of those orchestras, like the radio orchestras, are subsidized and have many more rehearsals. And even orchestras that are not as good as our American orchestras, can rehearse so much more than any American orchestra could, so that they give a better performance than we would get here most of the time.
FJO: Last summer, I spoke to Zarin Mehta, who runs the Ravinia Festival, and he gave me a very honest answer about why more new music isn’t being done. Usually people in administration will say, “Well, the audiences don’t like new music.” But he didn’t say that. He said, “We cannot afford the rehearsal time.”
EC: Yes.
FJO: And the standard with orchestra rehearsals is three rehearsals, if you’re lucky, and that doesn’t do justice to most new pieces.
EC: The basic problem turns out that three or four rehearsals, whatever number of rehearsals, is only the beginning. The important thing of a performance is that it has to be played with conviction and with very great musicality, just the way that you would play Mozart or Beethoven. If you get somebody just sort of scraping through, you wouldn’t want to hear it even in a Beethoven symphony.
FJO: And many arguments can be made, like contemporary music is much more difficult… But the older music is not as difficult because people have played it before. How many times has someone in an orchestra played Brahms?
EC: Let me say that just to play a scale beautifully is not so simple. I mean, you can tell that when you hear these people play. Alicia de Larrocha plays a scale and it’s absolutely wonderful. I mean, in a Mozart concerto. This is not something that you do easily. Some things take a lot of practice, and a great deal of taste, intelligence, and sensitivity.

The Voice of Elliott Carter

FJO: Well, what can we do to get around this problem with American orchestras and rehearsals?
EC: I don’t think that there’s any way… I really don’t know. This is, I refuse to think about this. I’ve thought about it a lot and I don’t know how to solve it. I have very great lucky in this particular respect. Mr. Barenboim and Pierre Boulez, both of whom conduct the Chicago Symphony, are willing to take the effort to play my pieces very well. This is very unusual. But I think that in the end, they play them, and the audiences, I suppose, like them. They get good reviews, and here’s Mr. Barenboim bringing my opera to New York, and he might even play that Symphonia, I don’t know, but he’s played all different parts of it, let me say, one time or another, which is more than any orchestra in New York or anywhere else has done. And I think it’s just a matter of having the individual conductor with his vision, and a belief in the music and a belief that it should be done. After all, the whole music profession depends on these people playing this music as if it had a point and had meaning, and was meaningful. And just to go through this in some sort of a desultory way, is a waste of time and it’s hard on the composer and even harder on the audience.

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Triple Duo (1983)
Jayn Rosenfeld, flute; Jean Kopperud, clarinet; Linda Quan, violin; Chris Finckel, cello; James Winn, piano; Daniel Druckman, percussion
Chamber Music of Carter, Davies & Druckman

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Sonata for Flute, Oboe, Cello and Harpsichord (1952)
Rembrandt Chamber Players
20th Century Baroque—Modern Reflections on Old Instruments

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Symphonia (1993-96)
BBC Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Oliver Knussen
Elliott Carter: Symphonia; Clarinet Concerto

FJO: With chamber music, there can be better performances because there’s more rehearsal time and more dedication to detail. Chamber music has allowed you to really explore a unique musical syntax which is actually a chamber music-informed vocabulary in that it allows all the musicians to have their own personalities and to celebrate in the differences between players. Whereas when we think of an orchestra, we usually think of a nameless, faceless group of people. Even when you’ve written for orchestra, you treat the orchestra like a gigantic chamber ensemble.
EC: I’ve tried to do that, yes. It takes an awful lot of work, so many notes. [laughs] But, I mean, I’ve tried to do it in my Concerto for Orchestra and A Symphony of Three Orchestras. It’s a bad habit, I just write these pieces that have all these peculiar things happening in them, and, but it seems to me this is very important. I mean, I know how to write entirely different kinds of music. But I don’t want to. I think it’s a waste of my time.

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Concerto for Orchestra (1969)
Southwest German Radio Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Michael Gielen
Elliott Carter: Piano Concerto; Concerto for Orchestra; Concerto for Orchestra; Three Occasions


5. Being an American
FRANK J. OTERI: I think that with all of this chamber-oriented work you’ve created something that is very uniquely American. I know you once described the Fourth String Quartet as mirroring the democratic ideal of each member in a society maintaining an identity while cooperating on a common goal.
ELLIOTT CARTER: I don’t think about it; I think that being American is being yourself. I think that it’s ridiculous to be American by putting some folk songs in a piece the way Dvořák did…

The Voice of Elliott Carter

FJO: I actually think there’s something very European about that type of approach. It reflects a kind of respect for traditions that I think Americans don’t really understand. Europe is completely surrounded by tradition, it’s saturated by tradition, whereas in America, we’re constantly destroying our older buildings, putting up new ones. There’s always this pioneer spirit, this sense of constant change, and it sort of has resulted in a very different aesthetic that we have as Americans. And I think that your music speaks to that, that individualism, each voice in a string quartet acting independently.
EC: The notion of tradition in Europe is also the notion of a kind of progressiveness we don’t really have as much. I mean, who could build a Pompidou Center here or the new Guggenheim museum in Bilbao. Even though Frank Gehry, an American, was the architect that did it. There’s not going to be any building of that sort in this country as far as I know. Los Angeles has been wanting to put up a concert hall built by Gehry that perhaps will turn up, but the Europeans have spent large amounts of money building new buildings that are very advanced. France is very determined to try to be the most advanced country. I don’t know whether they’ll succeed. But this is partly true in other countries. Americans aren’t thinking about that because we have no unified culture from which we can break away. There are isolated and very remarkable things in this country that have been done, but as you say, they sometimes suffer from not being recognized very much and sometimes just being overwhelmed with other things. I mean, we have a building by Louis Sullivan downtown…
FJO: On Bleecker Street.
EC: Yeah. You can hardly see it anymore. And the Jefferson Market building, that old tower… This building itself is a historic monument, but this is not very meaningful to most people. There’s a little group of people who try to preserve these things, but I’m not sure it’s very meaningful. I have not thought about this as an act in itself in my own life, and so it’s something I’m trying to talk about without being very articulate. I can’t imagine being European, in the sense that I’m not aware of tradition in the way that somebody like Boulez is, for instance.
FJO: So you would consider yourself an American composer?
EC: Oh, of course. We’re a little bit like English composers but not so much. No, no, no, even the English have Holst and Vaughan Williams and Elgar to get rid of.
FJO: Right. Well, I mean, do we have figures that we need to get rid of? People like Ives and Cowell and Gershwin or even Copland at this point?
EC: Well, they never have sunk in that much. We’ve been making great effort to celebrate Copland this year because of his 100th birthday. But I wonder what repercussions that will have when it’s 2001. After we forget very easily our past in this country. MacDowell wasn’t such a bad composer, but he’s particularly unknown.
FJO: And John Knowles Paine…
EC: Oh, yeah, a whole bunch of them. Even Charles Griffes… When I was young, the orchestra at Radio City Music Hall used to play his White Peacock all the time, and now it’s gone.
FJO: He was a very unique composer who had a different approach to Impressionism that’s very original.
EC: Yeah, yeah, very original in his own way. But it’s not anything that hangs on. You know, America’s a peculiar place because it’s so different from what you expect. I wanted to give a friend of mine this book, Tristram Shandy, and I went to the bookstore and I said, “Have you got a nice bound copy?” “Oh, no, we only have paperback because people only read it when they’re in college.” That’s the story.
FJO: And it really puts a damper on creativity and on the arts.
EC: Well, we’re all sort of subversive in a certain sense. We’re doing something that is a little out of step with our society. But on the other hand, the society somehow, this can mean something to lots of people in any case, I think. It’s not something that is found in the spotlight of publicity. In fact, it’s very possible that publicity is the one thing that’s bad about all of this. The world of publicity is so intense now. And it’s what is unfortunately happening, even now, to a certain extent in music. Younger composers follow the trendy thing a good deal, and two years later, it ain’t trendy anymore.
FJO: What would you give as advice to younger composers?
EC: Better do what they like. What they like most.
FJO: You pretty much have managed to stand apart from all of the stylistic camps that we’ve found ourselves in over the past 50 years. You’ve distanced yourself from serialism and you’ve been openly critical of indeterminate music. You’ve spoken out against complex systems that are impossible for listeners to hear. But people who are not familiar with your music might say it’s very complex and difficult to comprehend. What would be your response to that? How should listeners approach your music?
EC: Let me say, you’re asking questions that would have been a very different one, if we had been in a situation like England, where British Broadcasting has played every work of mine over many years from 1950 on. Maybe some people don’t like it, but there are a large number of people who think they ought to like it, and they make an effort to like it, and that’s it. In America I can’t say, “I’m very good. You better listen and learn how to hear it.” You can’t say that. It doesn’t make any sense. So there’s nothing you can do. You just wait. But we know waiting in this country means disappearing, because this has happened. But it happened even with Mark Twain, practically, except for Huckleberry Finn. And it certainly happened with Herman Melville except for Moby Dick. I have a complete set of Hawthorne; I wonder if anybody reads any of it anymore.
FJO: I just got finished reading the complete works of Herman Melville…
EC: Oh, my God! Mardi
FJO: It was very intense.
EC: And then Clarel, that big poem.
FJO: The one that I’m really amazed by is Pierre; or The Ambiguities.
EC: Oh, yes, well, that’s all about incest.
FJO: It’s such a remarkably constructed and conceived parody of 19th century morals.
EC: Well, you know, the most interesting book about Melville is written by a Frenchman. And it’s the same with Poe. Except for Ph.D. dissertations, which don’t get printed in general, except privately or small copies, the general public in America is too busy with whatever it is, and not any of that old stuff.
FJO: Well certainly the American classical music community is still dwelling on music of the past, Europe’s past. Music that’s from another time and another continent, rather than paying attention to what’s happening here now.
EC: This is a very complicated subject. For instance, not so long ago, within the last three or four weeks, Anne Sophie Mutter played a whole series of contemporary music concerts. They all sold out because she’s a famous player. Half the audience goes to see a player; it doesn’t matter what they play.
FJO: It helps that she’s very attractive, too…
EC: Very pretty, yeah. I think that we’re very concerned with performers, and performance, and we don’t really care too much about the music. And there have been very good and very famous performers like Pollini, who plays the Boulez Second Sonata…
FJO: …And music by Luigi Nono…
EC: We’re very performer-oriented, and performers all learn all those famous Chopin, Beethoven, and Mozart pieces, and they all play them well. Mr. Barenboim and Yo-Yo Ma played my cello sonata in Chicago a couple of weeks ago and it was very successful.

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s String Quartet No. 4 (1986)
The Composers Quartet (Matthew Raimondi and Anahid Ajemian, violins; Maureen Gallagher, viola; Karl Bargen, cello)
Three American String Quartets

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Sonata for Cello and Piano (1948)
Fred Sherry, cello; Charles Wuorinen, piano
Elliott Carter: Eight Compositions

 


6. On Difficulty
FRANK J. OTERI: But you must admit that some of your music is very difficult for listeners.
ELLIOTT CARTER: Not to me.
FJO: [laughs] As a composer, and somebody who’s lived with music my whole life, speaking for myself, with some of the pieces, I’m still quite perplexed. And I find that following with the score, I get so much more out of this music, but then there are certain pieces that I tried following with the score and I was completely overwhelmed. I’m thinking of Penthode, or the Piano Concerto, and…
EC: Oh, that Piano Concerto. That’s a wonderful piece.

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Piano Concerto (1965)
Ursula Oppens, piano; Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Michael Gielen
Elliott Carter: Piano Concerto; Concerto for Orchestra; Concerto for Orchestra; Three Occasions

FJO: It’s very, very difficult to understand, though, I think.
EC: Really?
FJO: For me.
EC: Oh my!
FJO: [laughs]
EC: I never thought, well, I don’t know that. I mean, Ursula [Oppens] played it with Michael Gielen in Chicago not so long ago, the audience seemed to think it was fine. I mean, I don’t know what the audience felt, but they applauded a lot and they didn’t boo.
FJO: Well, what do you think is the best approach that somebody should come to your music with? Should they prepare by reading about it, studying a score, or should they just listen to it with completely fresh ears?
EC: I think they should just listen to it. Of course, well, let me put it this way. I think that the whole understanding of music has a background of literary description. I think that the public now wouldn’t like Beethoven symphonies if they hadn’t been told something about them. I wonder whether they would be able to take in all the things that happen, and what the music is and what the character of it is, if they hadn’t been told, or if it hadn’t been pumped into them a little bit. I mean, it gets passed on finally, but it’s familiar… I think the history of music has always had a certain amount of literary explanation that’s gone with it all along. The question, for instance, of counterpoint is a very interesting one. I mean, it’s obvious that most people who are not familiar with music can’t hear counterpoint very well. It’s just confusing to them. Now Bach wrote these pieces of staggeringly complicated counterpoint. The opening of the B minor Mass is one great big thing that, who knows what goes on, as a matter of fact, it’s much, it’s so dense and there are so many things happening. He has a big harmony, and it changes from one thing to another, and that makes an effect. But I don’t think that people would grasp that piece if they were not aware that this is the Kyrie Eleison and knowing what the text was.
FJO: Well, you have to admit, though, with music of the past and with other music of our time, that there are certain things that people can latch on to. Melodies that people walk away humming, things that linger in the mind.
EC: There’re not many, there are lots of sections in Chopin where there’s no melody at all. Some of the Preludes and some of the Etudes don’t have any melody, they just go up and down little tiny scales.
FJO: Those are probably not the more popular pieces, though.
EC: I wonder. Well, no, of course, but they’re the pieces that people play all the time. I feel my pieces are very melodic. People say that. They said my opera was very melodic.
FJO: It is. It really is.
EC: It doesn’t have a melody you can sing because it never repeats. There’s no melodic line that is repeated, so it doesn’t sink in. It’s just a type of melody which goes on and on.
FJO: So, since we’re living in an era where people are maybe going to get exposed to something once, how can they grasp something where there isn’t a single repetition? What can we do to make people understand this better?
EC: Just repeat it over and over again like Philip Glass.
FJO: What is your thought about minimalist music?
EC: I have a feeling about it that is very strong and it’s probably not correct. And that is that we are surrounded by a world of minimalism. All that junk mail I get every single day repeats; when I look at television I see the same advertisement. I try to follow the movie that’s being shown, but I’m being told about cat food every 5 minutes. That is minimalism. I don’t want it and I don’t like it. And it’s a way of making an impression that doesn’t impress me. In fact, I do everything to avoid it. I turn off the television until it’s over. I refuse to be advertised to.
FJO: Could you appreciate music using repetition to attentuate a structure in a piece?
EC: Well, my music repeats in a certain sense all the time. I mean, it uses the same material but it carries on a development that is constantly drawing new ideas out of a basic chordal, whatever it is—I’ve done different things in different pieces, but it’s always one limited thing that it sticks to, that any part sticks to, or any one sound in an orchestra piece that persists throughout the piece. This gives it a structure. I mean, this is not anything really new. For instance, a lot of the Mahler symphonies are like that. There’s not really a repetitive thing in a lot of the Mahler symphonies; it just goes on and on more or less alike all the time.
FJO: But there are themes that always return.
EC: Sometimes, yes.
FJO: There have been a lot of comments, in recent reviews and in the press about music from your Violin Concerto onward claiming that your music has grown more emotional and more expressive, that it has become leaner, that there are sparer textures. It isn’t quite as busy, and it is easier to understand for people. Do you think that’s a fair assessment?

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Violin Concerto (1990)
Ole Böhn, violin; London Sinfonietta, conducted by Oliver Knussen
Carter: Three Occasions, Violin Concerto, Concerto for Orchestra

EC: Well, I wouldn’t know that. I mean, I just do what I like. I never thought about it that way. It’s very possible, as far as I’m concerned, I just write one piece after another as it comes into my head. I do not think that I’ve tried to be simpler, or have tried to reach an audience more easily. No, I do not think that at all. Every composer must have this experience: You write a piece and you hear it, and then you think about it and you write some more, and the second piece is affected by what you heard the last time, by what you heard in the other piece. And in my life, there’s an accumulation of having heard, of having heard many, many of these different pieces, many times, sometimes badly played, sometimes, part of all of what goes on in my head, if I do certain things, it won’t come out very well, you know, or they won’t play it very well if you do this. I mean, there are whole thousands of little thoughts that are all part of the sort of subconscious business. It’s very hard to articulate.
FJO: Have you at all been influenced by other composers’ music that you’ve heard?
EC: I’m not aware of it. I probably have been but I don’t think about it. The only composer that’s influenced me more than others is Mozart. Because the thing that interests me in Mozart is the extraordinary change that we were talking about. The extraordinary ability to get through many things rather rapidly, many different things, like the opening of Don Giovanni, for instance, which is one of the remarkable things in music.

 


7. Vocal Music
FRANK J. OTERI: Literature has always been so important to you, and you wrote a lot of vocal music and choral music in your early career. But when you embarked on the style that was to occupy you for the rest of your life, you turned away from vocal music until the mid-‘70s when you composed an Elizabeth Bishop song cycle, A Mirror On Which To Dwell, which is quite wonderful. I think having a vocal line on top of the music that you were writing made it very different. You can’t write for the voice the way that you write for other instruments.
ELLIOTT CARTER: Oh, no.
FJO: It’s fascinating how much the music articulates the rhythms of the words of the poetry and how much the music is about the poetry. And with your opera What Next?, I was even more thrilled at how dramatic this music can be, and how the music propels the action, and I would dare say, and I know that you say that you don’t notice this, but perhaps my ear perceives it, and I’m looking at the score and perceiving it as another listener, as being simpler and more concise, and maybe with the voice and a dramatic context, you can’t be as complex if you want to get the message across. Am I feeling anything that’s at all logical?
EC: It’s very hard for me to say I’m getting the message across. I mean, I get the person getting the music the message gets across is me. It’s rather hard for me to think about it any other way. I just feel that this is the way it should be. Obviously, in opera there are many kinds of things that go on in one’s head. The problem in the opera, for instance, is the idea that a woman, who is the main character, should be a singer so she would sing almost from beginning to end, with pauses, but she carries on enormous arias. So the opera involved all sorts of different things about how to subordinate, how to have her come in while somebody else is singing, when would she come in, and oh, God, thousands of interesting problems which were fascinating to deal with. I thought about Wagner operas and Strauss operas and I decided that I really wanted to write an opera in which the singing was more important than the orchestra by far. And this is what I did. Now Oliver Knussen said to me that I shouldn’t. Die schweigsame Frau by Strauss is a comedy but there’s an enormous orchestra doing everything all the time, and I said to myself, that’s just what I don’t want! I want to have something in which the people on the stage sing, and they’re the ones that are living characters. And it’s really carrying on the same ideas I had in the string quartets.

The Voice of Elliott Carter

FJO: What was it like working with Paul Griffiths?
EC: Well, I told him what I wanted. And I told him that I wanted an automobile accident, and people recovering from it, and getting sort of disjointed in their lives, and he just wrote the libretto, and there were very few things that had to be changed. It was a very good libretto from the point of view of what I wanted. Some people think it’s an awful libretto, but I think it’s a very good one.
FJO: Oh, I think it’s fantastic. Yeah, I really enjoyed it.
EC: Now, I also chose Paul Griffiths because I decided that he had heard many contemporary operas and he was more familiar with the operatic problem than most writers would be. There are many writers that I know. John Guare lives around the corner. I realized that if I chose a writer who might have had a little bit more publicity connected with him, I would have had to explain to him how to write an opera. Now, this man knew how to write an opera right away.
FJO: And he’s also a very big fan of your music.
EC: He knew my music, and right now, he wrote a libretto that he thought would provoke my music, you see, which is not something I would find in any other writer, except John Ashbery perhaps, but his poetry would have been too disjointed for me to deal with.
FJO: It’s interesting to me that there was such a long period where you did not write any vocal music.
EC: Well, that’s very simple. When I first heard those Robert Frost songs and my Hart Crane setting and the rest of it, they were badly sung. I had never heard a very good performance of them at the time when they were written. And I was rather discouraged. I thought, well, evidently I don’t know how to write in such a way that people will sing these pieces well. That was one thing. And then when I began to decide to write the kind of music that you heard in the First String Quartet, I realized that, if they couldn’t sing those earlier songs, then nobody could sing what I might have written later. And so, granted, this was just in the back of my mind, and finally I just got very interested in writing chamber music. And it was only because Fred Sherry and Speculum Musicae asked me to write a vocal piece and so I did. And then I talked to a friend of mine, and said that I wanted a text that was written by a woman since it was going to be a woman singing the songs, and so he said Elizabeth Bishop.

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s A Mirror on Which to Dwell (1975)
Christine Schadeberg, soprano; Speculum Musicae, conducted by Donald Palma
Elliott Carter: The Vocal Works

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Voyage (1945)
Gregg Smith Singers
Elliott Carter: Orchestral Songs, Complete Choral Music

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s String Quartet No. 1 (1950-51)
The Composers Quartet (Matthew Raimondi, Anahid Ajemian, violins; Jean Dupouy, viola; Michael Rudiakov, cello)
Elliott Carter: String Quartets Nos. 1 & 2

 

8. Recent Activities
FRANK J. OTERI: So what are you working on now?
ELLIOTT CARTER: I’m working on a cello concerto for Chicago Symphony and, I think, Yo-Yo Ma—I’m not sure.
FJO: When is that scheduled for?
EC: It isn’t scheduled. I refuse now to accept a schedule.
FJO: And I hear there’s a second opera awaiting?
EC: Well, they’re hoping that. Since the opera, I’ve written a chamber orchestra piece for the Asko Ensemble in Holland, in Amsterdam, and eight Italian songs, and a number of piano pieces, and some solo violin pieces.
FJO: With all this composing activity, do you actively listen to other music at this point, besides the music that you’re writing? Do you listen to records? Do you go to concerts?
EC: I don’t, as a rule. No, I try not to listen. I must say, the other night my wife and I played over a videocassette of Rosenkavalier and I’ve had an awful lot of trouble getting it out of my head and I’m sorry I heard it. [laughs]
FJO: [laughs] Do you listen to any music outside of the classical music tradition at all? Do you listen to jazz?
EC: If I listen to anything, it’s something like east Indian music.
FJO: In an interview you did with Phil Lesh of the Grateful Dead, you were talking about the Dagar Brothers
EC: Yes, they’re wonderful.
FJO: I love them also. You said that the Dagar Brothers influenced your composition of Penthode, and I was struggling to hear that influence, and maybe that’s one of the reasons that I didn’t fully understand that piece.

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Penthode (1985)
Ensemble InterContemporain, conducted by Pierre Boulez
Boulez conducts Schoenberg, Berio, Carter, Kurtag, Xenakis

EC: Well, I thought of it as one big long line. Maybe that doesn’t come across.
FJO: I want to go back and hear it again… So you don’t really listen to any popular music at all, at this point.
EC: Well, I don’t like it; I don’t like popular music at the present time. I mean, as sound. The words are very entertaining, but the music itself seems to me rather simple and not very interesting to hear. I like Irving Berlin and Cole Porter and Vincent Youmans and Gershwin, but I don’t really like popular music since that time. It bothers me. It seems too childish and simple. I don’t listen to music very much. I go to concerts of music that I think might interest me. I don’t go very much anymore because it’s hard for me to get around easily. But I will go to hear a new piece of Boulez. And I go to hear concerts of George Perle’s music. I go to hear occasionally the new pieces, and I have been just listening off and on to different records of cello concerti, since I’m writing one. I got somebody to get me a lot of them, but I haven’t played many of them. I don’t feel as though I really want to.
FJO: You’ve told me that you don’t really deal with computers and the internet at all. I read a remark that you made a number of years ago where you said that you aren’t interested in writing electronic music because you felt it hadn’t been developed enough yet, and I know that your music is very performer-oriented, so to write music for machines would be antithetical to your whole conception of music, I think. But would you write for electric instruments? Are you at all interested in synthesizers?
EC: No. This is very old-fashioned, but I like to feel that I’m hearing the touch of the musician, and the voice of the musician directly. It’s part of human life. To have it filtered through a machine, or through an amplifier in a concert, is to me rather disturbing. It seems to me it’s falsifying the person. That’s what I feel. Now I listen to records, and I don’t mind it so much, but I don’t like it in a concert. I don’t like it amplified. Now, it’s true that in my Double Concerto it’s often hard to hear the harpsichord, and we sometimes amplify it a little bit. But if it’s amplified too much, then it spoils the piece, because it immediately destroys the sense. You’re not hearing the harpsichord; you’re hearing the amplification.
FJO: So you do listen to recordings from time to time?
EC: Oh, yes.
FJO: Do you listen to recordings of your own music?
EC: I listen to old music. Mozart’s Marriage of Figaro, things like that. And I listen also occasionally to composers whom I would like to know more about. I don’t know as much as I would like to know about Milton Babbitt’s music. I’ve heard some of it, and I wanted to hear more, so I’ll get records of his and play it. Or go to a concert when it’s played. There are other people. Mario Davidovsky interests me a great deal and I like to hear his music. But I don’t listen very much; I listen to or play it once or twice and I don’t want to hear it again.

The Voice of Elliott Carter

FJO: Thank you for taking this time with us. It’s been an immense delight. And I’m very much looking forward to hearing What Next? live next month. It’s going to be very exciting.
EC: Yeah, I’m going to go Chicago for it first. They’re bringing over the cast, you know, from Germany.
FJO: They’re terrific.
EC: I don’t know how they can do things like that.
FJO: They’re amazing.
EC: Mr. Barenboim is a very devoted man. I mean, he’s very devoted to doing my stuff. I don’t get that in other people. There’s no other conductor except for Pierre Boulez that would do that much.
FJO: …Oliver Knussen….
EC: Oh yes, Olli Knussen made that extraordinary new recording
FJO: of the Symphonia…
EC: It’s an amazing performance, and the Clarinet Concerto’s amazing, too.
FJO: Oh, yeah. That was a real delight, hearing that.

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Double Concerto (1961)
Gilbert Kalish, piano; Paul Jacobs, harpsichord; Contemporary Chamber Players, conducted by Arthur Weisburg

An excerpt from Elliott Carter’s Clarinet Concerto (1996)
Michael Collins, clarinet; London Sinfonietta, conducted by Oliver Knussen
Elliott Carter: Symphonia; Clarinet Concerto

American Music’s "Elder Statespeople" Comment on the Future of Music

Henry Brant Henry Brant
“…Genuine indigenous music worldwide is disappearing…”
Marian McPartland Marian McPartland
“…I can’t think of playing music and not including something by Dizzy Gillespie or Thelonious Monk or Wayne Shorter…”
George Perle George Perle
“…I have been offered 100 words to reply to the question, “What is the future of music?” but I need only three…”
George Rochberg George Rochberg
“…Surfaces keep changing, never substrata…”

Does Anybody Really Know What Time It Is?

Frank J. Oteri
Frank J. Oteri
Photo by Melissa Richard

Throughout last year, across the street from Macy’s in New York City, a “Millennium Clock” counted down the seconds until January 1, 2000. Throughout January it stayed at 0, but at some point during this month it started up again counting down the seconds until January 1, 2001. I guess you can have it both ways?

But whether or not we’re in the last year of the 20th century or the first year of the 21st, one thing is clear – “20th century music” and “new music” are no longer synonymous terms. Is there another term than can embrace all this music? Are there qualities that all this music shares? We asked Matthew Tierney to provide us with a hyperhistory of various 20th century American approaches to rhythm, in an attempt to find some common ground. Each section is crammed with RealAudio music samples of a wide variety of repertoire.

When pondering rhythm in contemporary American music, a composer who immediately springs to mind is Elliott Carter, who has made such an important contribution to the exploration of temporal structure. A few weeks ago, I visited Mr. Carter, who at the age of 91 is in a unique vantage point for talking about the 20th century since he lived through most of it. What perhaps is more amazing than that, though, is that he is now more prolific than ever, creating music for the 21st century! (In order to further share this remarkable conversation with visitors to NewMusicBox, we’ve added RealAudio samples of some of Mr. Carter’s comments to each of the pages of the interview in addition to 21 RealAudio samples of his music.)

We also got reactions about what music in the future could or should be from several other important elder statespeople of American music: Henry Brant, George Perle, George Rochberg, and Marian McPartland. We ask you to also try to answer an impossible question: Who is the most important American composer of the 20th century?

While we take this time out to reflect on the 20th century, the clock keeps ticking, of course. In our news section, announcements of important new residencies, commissions and awards continue to sow the seeds of music for the future.