{"id":52009,"date":"2018-03-27T10:30:48","date_gmt":"2018-03-27T14:30:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.ludwig-van.com\/toronto\/?p=52009"},"modified":"2018-03-28T11:13:12","modified_gmt":"2018-03-28T15:13:12","slug":"why-is-new-music-such-a-hard-sell","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ludwig-van.com\/toronto\/2018\/03\/27\/why-is-new-music-such-a-hard-sell\/","title":{"rendered":"NEVER HEARD OF IT | Why Is New Music Such A Hard Sell?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"In
In this extraordinary age of creative innovation and artistic curiosity, why does new music continue to struggle to find an audience? Or does it?<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

E<\/span>arlier this year, the TSO announced<\/a> the cancellation of its long-running New Creations Festival, a yearly showcase of contemporary classical music. It comes at a time when the TSO and orchestras all over the continent are increasingly programming performances like movie screenings with live music and crossover artists that turn beloved classics into pop music. Is the future of classical music in trouble? Does it mean that Toronto audiences don\u2019t support new compositions?<\/p>\n

Most contemporary composers would disagree with a gloomy diagnosis. \u201cIt\u2019s a great time to be an artist, no question,\u201d says Canadian composer Andrew Staniland.<\/p>\n

Jordan Pal is the RBC Affiliate Composer with the TSO \u201cThere\u2019s always doomsayers,\u201d he notes. \u201cThis art is not going anywhere. You look back at the history of this art \u2014 people have been saying this forever. It\u2019s always managed to thrive.\u201d<\/p>\n

Part of the reason for the conflicting impressions may be that new music itself is hard to define. Contemporary composers have at their disposal a palate of sounds that is unprecedented in scope. Canadian composer, pianist, conductor, and educator Gary Kulesha is also Composer Advisor to the TSO. \u201cIn the 21st century, there is emerging a kind of language which is…everything,\u201d he says. \u201cI\u2019m aware of all the techniques available.\u201d Using that broad range of options, he chooses sounds for their connotative and evocative power.<\/p>\n

As in many other genres, a single category for classical music no longer seems anywhere near adequate. Greek-Canadian composer Christos Hatzis<\/a> would go even farther. \u201cI don\u2019t believe in categorization of any kind.\u201d It\u2019s gone well beyond the simplistic way record stores used to put jazz and classical in different slots. \u201cBoth the listeners and the markets have moved beyond that,\u201d he says. As he points out, it\u2019s the industry and its larger institutions that have to catch up.<\/p>\n

\u201cI think one of the biggest problems around new music is the way people talk about it,\u201d says Andrew Staniland. That, and a preoccupation with dissonant noise music. \u201cIt\u2019s an unfortunate effect.\u201d<\/p>\n

Classical or art music has undergone a sea change over the last two decades or so. Music historians debate over when the Common Practice Period \u2014 characterized by tonality \u2014 began or ended exactly, but most generally put its demise roughly coinciding with the start of the 20th century. When many laypeople think of modern art music, they think immediately of the dissonant Modern period. That\u2019s when composers deliberately eschewed any conventional notions of melody or harmony.<\/p>\n

Innovation on its own can be a difficult listen, and dissonance doesn\u2019t connect as easily with its audience. But, as Gary Kulesha points out, the 20th century was also a time when composers were developing the innovative range of sounds and techniques now available.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s only been in the last 20 years that we\u2019ve moved away from that,\u201d Gary notes. Since about the turn of the 21st century, a new mode seems to be emerging. Is it another sort of Common Practice? \u201cI think we are returning expression to music,\u201d Gary says. With its anything-goes aesthetic, however, it becomes harder and harder to define what any commonality may be. \u201cI don\u2019t think we\u2019re talking about style anymore.\u201d<\/p>\n