# Last 100 years, MVCs (Most Valued Countries)



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Since 1914, which countries' composers have contributed the most enduring value to the CM repertoire? If you list several, please put them in order!


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Russia. No other country comes close. When you can list Shostakovich and Prokofiev and Stravinsky (and Rachmaninoff, even after 1914), you have some big guns on your side. That they managed this despite Stalin and despite the fact that half of them seem to be a bunch of vodka-soaked thugs is even more remarkable.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

brianvds said:


> ...half of them seem to be a bunch of vodka-soaked thugs...


OMG where's sharik when we need him? :lol:


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

One could make a case for the US. The jazz genre heavily influenced almost all of 20th century CM, including the aforementioned Russians. But then I guess it would not be the US composers, just the culture. 

I started to list a few countries with composers I greatly admire, then realized it is nearly all of them equally! I'm not being facile or politically correct. I truly cannot pick one above the others. (Except, I guess you don't hear about too many composers from Bhutan, but you know what I'm trying to say.)


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Depends. Is the _Zimmer Horn_, German or American?

It seems to be turning up in everything.


----------



## Guest (Nov 7, 2013)

Weston said:


> it is nearly all of them equally!


The only possible answer--useful answer--to this thread (to a thread of this sort).

At least putting them in order is no problem:

Argentina
Australia
Austria
Belarus
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Chile
Croatia
Denmark
England
Estonia....

For example. First time that making a list has been easy for me.


----------



## Guest (Nov 7, 2013)

Some of the best composers working post 1914 were also active before that date, so again we have an arbitrary date which causes problems, but nevertheless here's a rough ranking with a non-exhaustive list of composers: 

1. England (Vaughan Williams, Walton, Holst, Britten, Elgar (part of period), Moeran)
2. USA (I'm being generous here in ascribing US nationality to all: Stravinsky, Rachmaninoff, Barber, Ives, Schoenberg) 
3. Russia (Shostakovich, Prokofiev)
4. France (Ravel (part period), Poulenc)
5. Austria (Berg, Webern)
6. Germany (R Strauss9part-period)) 
7. Finland (Sibelius, part-period))
8. Hungary (Bartok)


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

Prokofiev was Ukrainian.

>insert long Phd here on the nature of ethnic identity in the Russian empire during the late 19th century<

Just thought it needed to be mentioned.


----------



## Guest (Nov 7, 2013)

quack said:


> Prokofiev was Ukrainian.
> 
> >insert long Phd here on the nature of ethnic identity in the Russian empire during the late 19th century<
> 
> Just thought it needed to be mentioned.


It says in various normally reputable sources that he was Russian, just as I stated, eg Wikipedia.

In view of what you've said I have checked and it would seem that the town in which he was was born was Sontsovka, which is in modern-day Ukraine, but at the time of his birth this town was part of Imperial Russia.

I'm no expert on these matters but what I've read sounds correct.

Maybe you know more. If so I would appreciate your further advice.


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

Wikipedia isn't a reputable source as Wikipedia itself states in some of its many endless policy pages.

The point though is that these kinds of discussions are prey to the vagaries of nationalism with people trying to 'claim' historical figures based on rather arbitrary lines on a map, lines that regularly change. When people say "Russian composer" it is a shorthand for the usually far more complicated reality which obscures the detail of the past to make some broad nationalistic claim. 

What makes a Russian composer? Place of birth, amount of time lived there, amount of time composing there, the "Russianness" of the music? If Wikipedia was written 30 years ago it would probably say he was a Soviet composer as Russia was only a part of a bigger state at that point. Bartok was born in the Austro-Hungarian empire, Bach was born in the duchy of Saxe-Eisenach part of the Holy Roman Empire Germany wouldn't be a country for many years, Vivaldi was born in the Republic of Venice long before Italy.

You are free to call Prokofiev a Russian composer or Rachmaninov American but I dislike such broad, greedy definitions as they over simplify history.

Also born in the Ukraine: Karol Szymanowski.


----------



## Svelte Silhouette (Nov 7, 2013)

England ... no contest


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

It's a toss up between England and Russia. Britten vs Stravinsky, Vaughn Williams vs Shostakovich, Holst, Delius vs Prokofiev. Tea vs vodka.


----------



## Garlic (May 3, 2013)

One could make a good case for France, Debussy just makes it, along with Ravel, Messiaen, Dutilleux, Boulez's tentacles, the whole spectral stuff., not to mention the many foreigtn composers who took up residence there


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

quack said:


> Wikipedia isn't a reputable source as Wikipedia itself states in some of its many endless policy pages.
> 
> The point though is that these kinds of discussions are prey to the vagaries of nationalism with people trying to 'claim' historical figures based on rather arbitrary lines on a map, lines that regularly change. When people say "Russian composer" it is a shorthand for the usually far more complicated reality which obscures the detail of the past to make some broad nationalistic claim.
> 
> ...


Which town was Prokofiev born in and in which country was that town at the time of his birth?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Partita said:


> Which town was Prokofiev born in and in which country was that town at the time of his birth?


"Prokofiev was born in 1891 in Sontsovka (now Krasne in the Donetsk Oblast province of eastern Ukraine), an isolated rural estate in the Yekaterinoslav Governorate of the Russian Empire." Regardless of this, he certainly became a "Soviet composer," just as did Mieczysław Weinberg who was born in Warsaw.


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

KenOC said:


> "Prokofiev was born in 1891 in Sontsovka (now Krasne in the Donetsk Oblast province of eastern Ukraine), an isolated rural estate in the Yekaterinoslav Governorate of the Russian Empire." Regardless of this, he certainly became a "Soviet composer," just as did Mieczysław Weinberg who was born in Warsaw.


Chopin was born within the Russian Empire, Finland did not exist as an independent nation when Sibelius was born and Wagner was born and lived a number of years before the 'unification' of Germany-however, in each case their music arguably reflected and significantly contributed to the development of a certain sensibility and 'culture'-Prokofiev may well have been born in a village that is within Ukraine but would he himself have seen his music as part of a broader 'Russian' tradition?-borders shift, countries come and go-would anyone describe Martinu or Dvorak as 'Austro Hungarian' composers?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Paderewski was famous as a Polish composer, and became the second Prime Minister of Poland, but was born within today's Ukraine. The point being...


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

KenOC said:


> "Prokofiev was born in 1891 in Sontsovka (now Krasne in the Donetsk Oblast province of eastern Ukraine), an isolated rural estate in the Yekaterinoslav Governorate of the Russian Empire." Regardless of this, he certainly became a "Soviet composer," just as did Mieczysław Weinberg who was born in Warsaw.


Yes I know that. I said so in my post No 9. In asking the question again it was my way of eliciting a correction to a post by another member suggesting that Prokofiev was not Russian by birth.


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

...that nationalism is a terrible idea and has caused nothing but trouble and threads that perpetuate the idea should be trounced.

(Gently, of course. Violence is a terrible idea, too. Gentle trouncings only. With a soft cushion.)


----------



## maestro267 (Jul 25, 2009)

In terms of a country that hadn't contributed significantly to any previous century, the USA take it easily. I know there are 19th-century American works, but the very best ones, the ones that get programmed regularly, are all from the 20th century. Gerhswin, Bernstein, Barber, Copland etc.


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

Not a big fan of violence, as per my previous utterance.

But there are things that make me very angry. Is that so wrong?

Anyway, Gershwin, Bernstein, Barber, Copland. Yes. The great triumvirate of American music. Plus one.

Oh well. I guess it's no worse than Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven as the great triumvirate of the classical era.

Wait a minute. It's worse. The equivalent for the classical era would be Fasch, C.P.E Bach, and Boccherini.


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2013)

Although I credited the USA with the likes of Stravinsky and Rachmaninoff, if the selection was to be based on more tightly drawn up criteria like "_born, bred, practised thru' most of their lives in country X_" then the USA wouldn't come out as well. By international standards, many of the other US composers who were more clearly "home-grown" were less well regarded than these two, with the possible exception of Barber and maybe Ives to some extent.

The more I think about it, the more difficult it is to reach any clear views on the question posed. It isn't just a matter of resolving nationality issues but also deciding how the various works of these composers might be rated, as well as taking into account the number of such works written in the relevant post 1914 period. Then there's the problem of how to categorize those famous composers who drifted around various places. Should they left out of account completely or should their efforts be allocated to individual countries on some kind of pro rata basis according to time spent during their active years. Generally the whole thing's a can of worms

I still think that England comes out very well, because I greatly like the composers I listed previously, and the problem referred to above about nationality isn't so much of an issue. Note that I wasn't relying on the inclusion of Delius, whose works I much enjoy, even though he was born/bred in England, spent some composing there, and died there too.


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Paderewski was famous as a Polish composer, and became the second Prime Minister of Poland, but was born within today's Ukraine. The point being...


Exactly!........


----------



## Svelte Silhouette (Nov 7, 2013)

senza sordino said:


> It's a toss up between England and Russia. Britten vs Stravinsky, Vaughn Williams vs Shostakovich, Holst, Delius vs Prokofiev. Tea vs vodka.


I like all of these so am willing to bend away from pure patriotism


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

jim prideaux said:


> Chopin was born within the Russian Empire, Finland did not exist as an independent nation when Sibelius was born and Wagner was born and lived a number of years before the 'unification' of Germany-however, in each case their music arguably reflected and significantly contributed to the development of a certain sensibility and 'culture'-Prokofiev may well have been born in a village that is within Ukraine but would he himself have seen his music as part of a broader 'Russian' tradition?-borders shift, countries come and go-would anyone describe Martinu or Dvorak as 'Austro Hungarian' composers?


A nation is not necessarily defined by political borders, but often more by a common language, a shared culture and a notion of national identity that people ascribe to themselves. A political Germany or a political Finland might not have existed at the time of Wagner and Sibelius, but the notion of a German (or Finnish) nation, a shared language and culture certainly existed. And to my knowledge, Sibelius never defined himself as anything but Finnish, and Wagner, born in Leipzig, Saxony, certainly referred to himself as German, not merely Saxon.


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

SiegendesLicht said:


> A nation is not necessarily defined by political borders, but often more by a common language, a shared culture and a notion of national identity that people ascribe to themselves. A political Germany or a political Finland might not have existed at the time of Wagner and Sibelius, but the notion of a German (or Finnish) nation, a shared language and culture certainly existed. And to my knowledge, Sibelius never defined himself as anything but Finnish, and Wagner, born in Leipzig, Saxony, certainly referred to himself as German, not merely Saxon.


Would you please re read my post...that is essentially the point I am trying to make...a political Czechoslovakia or Czech republic may not have existed but Dvorak may well have primarily seen himself as coming from the cultural environment of Bohemia with its language and history in much the same way as Sibelius saw himself as Finnish even though Finland did not exist as a political entity-where do you get the idea that you and I are in disagreement?-if I am really that ambiguous I will stick to extolling the virtues of individual pieces of music........


----------



## Perotin (May 29, 2012)

1. Russia
2. France
3. undecided between USA or Germany+Austria or Hungary

P. S. It's surprising how Italy has regressed during the 20-th century given it was once one of the most prominent countries in classical music.


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

Has Italy regressed? Pre WWII Italian music was generally kinda stagnant (although Puccini and Resphigi did some fun stuff) but post WWII they produced some absolute giants in Nono, Berio, Dallapicolla, Maderna, Scelsi, Sciarrino who have all been highly influential (and awesome). In balance it has to be a vast improvement over C19 Italian music


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

jim prideaux said:


> Would you please re read my post...that is essentially the point I am trying to make...a political Czechoslovakia or Czech republic may not have existed but Dvorak may well have primarily seen himself as coming from the cultural environment of Bohemia with its language and history in much the same way as Sibelius saw himself as Finnish even though Finland did not exist as a political entity-where do you get the idea that you and I are in disagreement?-if I am really that ambiguous I will stick to extolling the virtues of individual pieces of music........


Did it look like I was arguing? In this case it was me who was being ambiguous. I was absolutely not in disagreement with you, I just posted some thoughts of my own regarding the point of your post.


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2013)

some guy said:


> The only possible answer--useful answer--to this thread (to a thread of this sort).
> 
> At least putting them in order is no problem:
> 
> ...


Oh my gosh. I can't believe you left off Albania! I hate all lists now.


----------

