# I now know why John Williams elicits such controversy here.



## jojoju2000 (Jan 5, 2021)

The debate in my view centers around a huge shift in the Post World War 2 Era; the rise of Avant Garde Music. This I would assert created a massive split in the Classical Canon. Tonal vs. No Tone. People like John Cage in their attemps to innovate basically broke the whole system of music down. Some people would consider that to be good. Others call it heresy and relegate Cage to the dust bin. I remind everyone that around Cage's " rise to fame ", the attendence rates of concerts went down. Maybe ; just maybe the reason why the average people aren't interested in " Classical Music " anymore is because well..... it doesn't sound " pretty " anymore. And I would agree with that assesment. We Humans like Beautiful sounding tonal music. The same thing happened with Film Music around the same time. The Orchesteral Film Score by 1975 was dying out, being replaced by electronic scores.

My personal view is that John Cage represents a siginificant break with the traditional strand of what is Classical Music up until World War 2. And I think that did not help Classical Music, as it started to struggle to retain mainstream audiences. You don't have to ask me; " An article by teacher and critic Michael Steinberg, Tradition and Responsibility, criticized avant-garde music in general:

The rise of music that is totally without social commitment also increases the separation between composer and public, and represents still another form of departure from tradition. The cynicism with which this particular departure seems to have been made is perfectly symbolized in John Cage's account of a public lecture he had given: "Later, during the question period, I gave one of six previously prepared answers regardless of the question asked. This was a reflection of my engagement in Zen." While Mr. Cage's famous silent piece [i.e. 4′33″], or his Landscapes for a dozen radio receivers may be of little interest as music, they are of enormous importance historically as representing the complete abdication of the artist's power."

Is Innovation neccsarily a good thing ? It might benefit those who can conceptualize the concepts of a piece by John Cage or Phillip Glass; but not everyone can do it. Not the average man or woman for that matter.

Which brings me to the man of controversy. Ironically, enough both Cage and Williams studied at UCLA ( Diffrent times of course ). But this is where Williams comes in. There are 3 points that people often make to not make Williams a " Classical " Composer. Not Experimental, The Role of Movie Scoring, and his works not being studied/appreciated by the Classical music world.

1. Williams of course is not " experimental ". Let's face it. But is he supposed to be avant garde? Where do we draw the line ? Being Deriative is not neccsarily a bad thing. We're supposed to be Classical After all right ?

2. People like San Antoine, say that the role of Movie Composing is to support the film and that it can't go beyond the film itself. That is true for MODERN film scores. However, in Williams's case, it is well not the case. Let's face it, Star Wars was a horrible horrible film. In fact, Lucas often remarked how he was that close to shutting the whole project altogether. The actors were not that great ( Sorry but it's true ). But John Williams basically saved the whole thing from implosion. Just ask George Lucas himself; 



 Look at this scene without the music 



 His Music goes way beyond just supporting the movie ( It actually saved it. ).

I would also say that the reason why Williams has not been taking on much film projects in the last 10 years or so, is because he can't work with the newer directors. The newer directors ACTUALLY WANT THE MUSIC TO JUST SUPPORT THE MOVIE. They don't want the full scale orchestra and themes. Spielberg and Lucas gave Williams almost complete freedom to create the music for the films they have worked together on over the years.

The question I want to ask everyone here is, would you guys love the films Williams worked on, if it did not have Music ?

Remember that before the rise of Hans Zimmer, the composer was king. He or she had complete control over the process, he or she was able to request orchestras and do all kinds of stuff, this was when people like Max Steiner, and Bernard Herrman ruled the land in Hollywood. That era is almost dead. Williams is the last guy left from that time period.

And finally, the talk about people studying Willams's works after he passes. https://www.juilliard.edu/news/1319...uctor-john-williams-bequeath-concert-and-film

He's going to donate his works to Julliard.

*Anyway, I'm not a super super fan of Williams.* But I just don't see what's the big issue with him being a part of the " Classical " Canon. Of course, he's not Wagner, Mozart, or Stravinsky. But no one is saying that. What I am saying is, he is continuing on the Tradition that was commonplace in American Life at least up until the 1950s.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

jojoju2000 said:


> I would also say that the reason why Williams has not been taking on much film projects in the last 10 years or so, is because he can't work with the newer directors. The newer directors ACTUALLY WANT THE MUSIC TO JUST SUPPORT THE MOVIE. They don't want the full scale orchestra and themes. Spielberg and Lucas gave Williams almost complete freedom to create the music for the films they have worked together on over the years.


"Almost complete freedom" is almost completely wrong. They wanted "Stravinsky, but ours and better" here, "Hanson, but ours and better" there, and so on. What is true is that (in particular) Spielberg and Lucas did not veto what Williams wrote in response to those requests. Mostly because he has virtually always succeeded in one-upping the temp, owing to his "one in a century" melodic-rhythmic skill and a masterful understanding of harmony, counterpoint, and orchestration, down to the smallest musical cells.

As for modern directors, a part of the problem is that they edit the film endlessly until the release, and require digital mock-ups. Williams works alone, with pencils, paper, and piano. His idea of a mock-up is hiring a real symphony orchestra and recording. Contemporary directors are scared of the wait and uncertainity, and the producers and boards even moreso. Too many cooks and pressure groups and marketing groups in the kitchen to ever really "lock a picture" and let the artist do his thing. Rian Johnson is a notable exception. He did indeed lock _The Last Jedi_ (2017) and the whole project went smoothly.

Williams is picky with projects too. For about 20 years now, he only writes music for the projects done by old friends, projects that are a part of a series of his scores, and a few exceptions where he had read a book that was being turned into a film. It's a mystery just how many jobs are being offered to him.


----------



## jojoju2000 (Jan 5, 2021)

Fabulin said:


> "Almost complete freedom" is almost completely wrong. They wanted "Stravinsky, but ours and better" here, "Hanson, but ours and better" there, and so on. What is true is that (in particular) Spielberg and Lucas did not veto what Williams wrote in response to those requests. Mostly because he virtually always succeeded in one-upping the temp, especially due to his "one in a century" melodic skill.
> 
> As for modern directors, a part of the problem is that they edit the film endlessly until the release, and require digital mock-ups. Williams works alone, with pencils, paper, and piano. His idea of a mock-up is hiring a real symphony orchestra and recording. Contemporary directors are scared of the wait and uncertainity, and the producers and boards even moreso.
> 
> Williams is picky with projects too. For about 20 years now, he mostly writes music for the projects done by old friends, projects that are a part of a series of his scores, and a few exceptions where he had read a book that was being turned into a film. It's a mystery just how many jobs are being offered to him.


What i meant by almost complete Freedom is that unlike modern Composers, they didnt neccsarily needle him constantly. It was more of a collaboration rather than them giving him a job to do ( Does that make sense ) ?


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

jojoju2000 said:


> ..*Let's face it, Star Wars was a horrible horrible film. In fact, Lucas often remarked how he was that close to shutting the whole project altogether*. The actors were not that great ( Sorry but it's true ). But John Williams basically saved the whole thing from implosion. Just ask George Lucas himself;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Where on earth did you come up with that? George Lucas didn't say that Williams' music 'saved the whole thing from implosion' in that link. In what was a tribute to Williams he simply gave credit for the great 'value-added' (my quotes) contribution to the movie which is what Williams has done with other movies such as Superman.

And Lucas wasn't close to shutting down the movie because he thought it was a 'horrible' movie. I stood in line for the 1977 Hollywood premiere of the 'original' Star Wars. It had been advertised in the paper with a tiny ad. No one had a clue what it was going to be other than it was science fiction. The reaction of the crowd in that theater that day was something I haven't seen since.

Lucas had stuck his neck out financially and otherwise in creating the movie and was afraid it might be a failure, but didn't think it was a failure as you infer. In any event, Episode IV, A New Hope, rather than being 'horrible' is routinely ranked close to the top of all the Star Wars movies.

Yes, it can appear somewhat dated watching it now. It was made just prior to the availability of CGI (and the Stormtroopers had awful aim ), but it is/was one of the great iconic movies.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

jojoju2000 said:


> What i meant by almost complete Freedom is that unlike modern Composers, they didnt neccsarily needle him constantly. It was more of a collaboration rather than them giving him a job to do ( Does that make sense ) ?


Their expectations were that music in their films was supposed to be an art and a vital part of the Gesamtkunstwerk, in power and proportions close to opera / music theatre. Nowadays nobody who has enough money to commission such a thing cares about it. And if they do, they do it on an embarassingly superficial level: "give me 20 trombones! BrAAA!"*.

*not a direct quote


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

You lost me at Star Wars not being a great movie. Sure, the individual components have weaknesses which you identify. But sometimes those individual elements add up to make something great. Star Wars is one of those. It is certainly helped by the score, and that can be said of a lot of movies. Hitchcock was more attuned to the importance of a good score than most directors. Spielberg is on top of it, too. Both have extended scenes without dialog and they let the photography and music do the work.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Star Wars, and Indiana Jones, are affectionate pastiches by Lucas meant to invoke the overheated serials Lucas enjoyed as a kid. 

They were never meant to be Great Art. 

The music of John Williams is the perfect complement to such an endeavor, being pleasant pastiches of several other composers and the sort of overheated romanticism of the genre. There’s no reason to read any more into it than that.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

jojoju2000 said:


> The debate in my view centers around a huge shift in the Post World War 2 Era; the rise of Avant Garde Music. This I would assert created a massive split in the Classical Canon. Tonal vs. No Tone. People like John Cage in their attemps to innovate basically broke the whole system of music down. Some people would consider that to be good. Others call it heresy and relegate Cage to the dust bin. I remind everyone that around Cage's " rise to fame ", the attendence rates of concerts went down. Maybe ; just maybe the reason why the average people aren't interested in " Classical Music " anymore is because well..... it doesn't sound " pretty " anymore. And I would agree with that assesment. We Humans like Beautiful sounding tonal music. The same thing happened with Film Music around the same time. The Orchesteral Film Score by 1975 was dying out, being replaced by electronic scores. . . .


I call Bullpucky. "Traditional" Classical Music and Avant-garde/experimental Classical Music have been living side by side for a century now.

Something happened with Pop music in the 50s: Rock and Roll took the linear evolution of popular music, and merely grew another branch. R&R was often not "pretty" music to the ears of a public listening to Frank Sinatra, Rosemary Clooney and The Dominoes.

As time went one there was always music that was more raucous than the "ugly" music the year before. It wasn't long before punk and metal and rap came along and sold plenty of tickets, as did the artists that continued to present "pretty" music: Barbra Streisand, Celine Dion, Harry Connick Jr., The Carpenters, The Commodores, Amy Grant, Rick Astley, Mariah Carey, Brooks & Dunn, and Adele. And here they are going head to head with The Clash, Gorillaz, Insane Clown Posse, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Snoop Dogg, and T-Pain.

No one is trying to delegitimize Katy Perry or Taylor Swift because their music is pretty.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

NoCoPilot said:


> There's no reason to read any more into it than that.


Yes there is, namely the quality of music.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Fabulin said:


> Yes there is, namely the quality of music.


It's decent, but I can name probably 100 composers (and 50 from the 20th century alone) who wrote music better than the best of Williams.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Fabulin said:


> Yes there is, namely the quality of music.


If you search YouTube you'll find several videos showing which composers Williams "borrowed" from. Most of the Lucas film soundtracks are pastiches -- fine for what they are, and useful for the films they're in, but not very original.


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

jojoju2000 said:


> The debate in my view centers around a huge shift in the Post World War 2 Era; the rise of Avant Garde Music. This I would assert created a massive split in the Classical Canon. Tonal vs. No Tone. People like John Cage in their attemps to innovate basically broke the whole system of music down. Some people would consider that to be good. Others call it heresy and relegate Cage to the dust bin. I remind everyone that around Cage's " rise to fame ", the attendence rates of concerts went down. Maybe ; just maybe the reason why the average people aren't interested in " Classical Music " anymore is because well..... it doesn't sound " pretty " anymore. And I would agree with that assesment. We Humans like Beautiful sounding tonal music. The same thing happened with Film Music around the same time. The Orchesteral Film Score by 1975 was dying out, being replaced by electronic scores.
> 
> My personal view is that John Cage represents a siginificant break with the traditional strand of what is Classical Music up until World War 2. And I think that did not help Classical Music, as it started to struggle to retain mainstream audiences. You don't have to ask me; " An article by teacher and critic Michael Steinberg, Tradition and Responsibility, criticized avant-garde music in general:
> 
> ...


I think this premise is flawed. If "avant garde" music is the cause or a cause of diminishing audiences for classical music, why is it that orchestras continue to perform the old favorites yet we are still talking about the genre's smaller audience? I think any decline in classical music has little to nothing to do with modern classical music but with attention span. Many people don't want to listen to it because they don't want to take the time to try it. I also think that more people would like both older and modern classical music if they would just give it an honest try. Plus, the umbrella term "People like John Cage" is an oversimplification. Modern classical music is more varied than that.



> Which brings me to the man of controversy. Ironically, enough both Cage and Williams studied at UCLA ( Diffrent times of course ). But this is where Williams comes in. There are 3 points that people often make to not make Williams a " Classical " Composer. Not Experimental, The Role of Movie Scoring, and his works not being studied/appreciated by the Classical music world.
> 
> 1. Williams of course is not " experimental ". Let's face it. But is he supposed to be avant garde? Where do we draw the line ? Being Deriative is not neccsarily a bad thing. We're supposed to be Classical After all right ?


I'd agree that not being very experimental is not inherently a bad thing, but I don't think being avant garde is either.



> 2. People like San Antoine, say that the role of Movie Composing is to support the film and that it can't go beyond the film itself. That is true for MODERN film scores. However, in Williams's case, it is well not the case. Let's face it, Star Wars was a horrible horrible film. In fact, Lucas often remarked how he was that close to shutting the whole project altogether. The actors were not that great ( Sorry but it's true ). But John Williams basically saved the whole thing from implosion. Just ask George Lucas himself;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Like mbhaub said, I can't really follow this based on _Star Wars_ supposedly being a bad movie. It's probably my favorite movie, and I imagine many other people in the world agree. And really, how many movies would people want to watch without the music?

Also, John Williams is 89. Don't know how much he can be expected to compose at his age. 



> Remember that before the rise of Hans Zimmer, the composer was king. He or she had complete control over the process, he or she was able to request orchestras and do all kinds of stuff, this was when people like Max Steiner, and Bernard Herrman ruled the land in Hollywood. That era is almost dead. Williams is the last guy left from that time period.
> 
> And finally, the talk about people studying Willams's works after he passes. https://www.juilliard.edu/news/1319...uctor-john-williams-bequeath-concert-and-film
> 
> ...


I agree that Williams gets a bit much criticism, but at the same time, I don't see anything bad about composers that want to try new things.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

John Williams is fine. He isn't original, but he was highly competent and his ability to capture the atmosphere of a large-scale motion picture is what makes him special. 

In my eyes, he is a B-tier classical composer and an A-tier film composer. 

That is, there are other composers I'd rather be listening to in a live concert or a recording, but he is excellent when paired with the proper accompanying visuals.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

John Williams is one of the greatest living composer today. He has been awarded Honorary Doctorate by leading music schools such as Harvard, Honorary Membership of the Royal Academy of Music, and other awards such as the United States National Medal for the Arts; let alone Grammy Awards for film scores. In short he is recognized today by performers, academia, national institutions, record labels, listeners, other artists (such as film makers, writers) as a composer of enormous creativity and talent.

I challenge you to show me to argue that Dr. Williams is not a great composer.


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

ArtMusic said:


> John Williams is one of the greatest living composer today. He has been awarded Honorary Doctorate by leading music schools such as Harvard, Honorary Membership of the Royal Academy of Music, and other awards such as the United States National Medal for the Arts; let alone Grammy Awards for film scores. In short he is recognized today by performers, academia, national institutions, record labels, listeners, other artists (such as film makers, writers) as a composer of enormous creativity and talent.
> 
> I challenge you to show me to argue that Dr. Williams is not a great composer.


John Williams is probably among my Top 30 favorite composers. I am not a film fan, but I like his music.

But all of these honorary doctorates, memberships and prizes, do they mean anything? We are living in a tasteless, corrupted time without artistic standards and compass.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I would agree with others here that Star Wars is a great movie. I went as a counselor with my day camp group. I asked if any of the kids had seen the movie and they all had - some 5 times. They were all immensely excited even though they had seen it before. I've probably seen it 3 time now and always find it exciting, fun, visually stimulating, and satisfying. 

I'm not a film music buff so I don't really know sound tracks well. My daughter has played a lot of Williams' stuff in concerts and surprised me by saying some of it is quite hard to play. I like his music, but again, I can't really critique him because I don't know enough.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

ArtMusic said:


> John Williams is one of the greatest living composer today. He has been awarded Honorary Doctorate by leading music schools such as Harvard, Honorary Membership of the Royal Academy of Music, and other awards such as the United States National Medal for the Arts; let alone Grammy Awards for film scores. In short he is recognized today by performers, academia, national institutions, record labels, listeners, other artists (such as film makers, writers) as a composer of enormous creativity and talent.
> 
> I challenge you to show me to argue that Dr. Williams is not a great composer.


It would be impossible to objectively determine if anyone is a great composer, so I consider your challenge to be of no merit.

You find Williams a wonderful composer; I don't. It's a tie!!


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

mmsbls said:


> My daughter has played a lot of Williams' stuff in concerts and surprised me by saying some of it is quite hard to play. I like his music, but again, I can't really critique him because I don't know enough.


Williams spent most of his career working with top talent in California and London, and that's the level his music was designed for. Even the Wiener Philharmoniker had trouble with some of his more contrapunctual music.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

ArtMusic said:


> John Williams is one of the greatest living composer today. He has been awarded Honorary Doctorate by leading music schools such as Harvard, Honorary Membership of the Royal Academy of Music, and other awards such as the United States National Medal for the Arts; let alone Grammy Awards for film scores. In short he is recognized today by performers, academia, national institutions, record labels, listeners, other artists (such as film makers, writers) as a composer of enormous creativity and talent.
> 
> I challenge you to show me to argue that Dr. Williams is not a great composer.


One doesn't use the honorific "Dr." for those with honorary degrees. It's just embarrassing when you do it in front of people who know the difference. And about the great thing, you should probably ask Williams what he thinks about it. He would likely acknowledge that he is a good film composer while rolling his eyes at you.


----------



## Christine (Sep 29, 2020)

I've been listening to Williams' film music since I was 12. However, if Jaws, ET, Raiders and Star Wars were scored by a different composer, I'd STILL love those films. In fact, there are movies and TV shows whose music I think sucks (example: Star Trek: Voyager), but I still love the shows or movies. 

As for Williams being derivative, this suggests there are classical composers who kind of sound like Williams, or, to put another way, Williams sounds like a lot of classical composers. I'm no authority on classical music, but I have to ask, what classical composers does Williams' music kind of sound like? I don't mean themes like Star Wars, but INCIDENTAL music. 

When I listen to Shosty, I hear a little of Williams every so often, but nobody quite sounds like Shosty, either. So who are the other classical composers Williams allegedly derived INCIDENTAL music from?


----------



## Christine (Sep 29, 2020)

I just also want to add: I agree with the OP that the acting wasn't all that great, though Harrison Ford did a pretty good job portraying an arrogant, swaggering BUT likeable character. However, I'll never understand why they cast Carrie Fisher. She was a dog. And the acting requirements for her role, 10,000 prettier actresses could've easily pulled off. If she hadn't had famous parents, she wouldn't have even been cast as an extra. But still, there were plenty of more attractive actresses who weren't smoking coke addicts they could've hired.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Christine said:


> I just also want to add: I agree with the OP that the acting wasn't all that great, though Harrison Ford did a pretty good job portraying an arrogant, swaggering BUT likeable character. However, I'll never understand why they cast Carrie Fisher. She was a dog. And the acting requirements for her role, 10,000 prettier actresses could've easily pulled off. If she hadn't had famous parents, she wouldn't have even been cast as an extra. But still, there were plenty of more attractive actresses who weren't smoking coke addicts they could've hired.


I think Fisher made for a good Leia. Sure, she's not the prettiest woman in the world, but she had the sass and zest to pull off that role like few others could.


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

Christine said:


> I've been listening to Williams' film music since I was 12. However, if Jaws, ET, Raiders and Star Wars were scored by a different composer, I'd STILL love those films. In fact, there are movies and TV shows whose music I think sucks (example: Star Trek: Voyager), but I still love the shows or movies.
> 
> As for Williams being derivative, this suggests there are classical composers who kind of sound like Williams, or, to put another way, Williams sounds like a lot of classical composers. I'm no authority on classical music, but I have to ask, what classical composers does Williams' music kind of sound like? I don't mean themes like Star Wars, but INCIDENTAL music.
> 
> When I listen to Shosty, I hear a little of Williams every so often, but nobody quite sounds like Shosty, either. So who are the other classical composers Williams allegedly derived INCIDENTAL music from?


When I hear John Williams's film scores, I hear a lot of composers, though Shostakovich is not one of them. There are a lot of composers that his music can often sound like, but I mostly hear Wagner, Richard Strauss, Holst, Prokofiev, early Stravinsky, Tchaikovsky, and a little Beethoven. Sometimes his music is more of a mixture of various styles, and other times certain composers' influence stand out more.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Christine said:


> As for Williams being derivative, this suggests there are classical composers who kind of sound like Williams, or, to put another way, Williams sounds like a lot of classical composers. I'm no authority on classical music, but I have to ask, what classical composers does Williams' music kind of sound like?


Film music isn't like "real music." It should serve the film above all else -- and if the film is derivative of period films, it's only fair that the music is too. I don't fault Williams for this. He was earning a paycheck. A BIG paycheck.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Christine said:


> I just also want to add: I agree with the OP that the acting wasn't all that great, though Harrison Ford did a pretty good job portraying an arrogant, swaggering BUT likeable character. However, I'll never understand why they cast Carrie Fisher. She was a dog. And the acting requirements for her role, 10,000 prettier actresses could've easily pulled off. If she hadn't had famous parents, she wouldn't have even been cast as an extra. But still, there were plenty of more attractive actresses who weren't smoking coke addicts they could've hired.


Two words: *metal bikini*.


----------



## Saxman (Jun 11, 2019)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> It's decent, but I can name probably 100 composers (and 50 from the 20th century alone) who wrote music better than the best of Williams.


But this is an opinion, not a fact. Just need to be clear on that.

As an aside to the thread, I've never understood the need by some to attack Williams, calling him derivative, unoriginal, a thief, B-side material, etc. It's like there is a need to discredit him. Is it because he's more successful than others? Perhaps there is a need to romanticize those who came before? It never made a whole lot of sense to me. No other film composer seems to polarize forums like John Williams.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

NoCoPilot said:


>


the image at 1:50 in the video reminded me of:


hammeredklavier said:


> always remember, always remember:


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> It would be impossible to objectively determine if anyone is a great composer, so I consider your challenge to be of no merit.
> 
> You find Williams a wonderful composer; I don't. It's a tie!!


Such an old argument that has been quashed by the institutions awarding Dr. Williams the honors.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

ArtMusic said:


> John Williams is one of the greatest living composer today. He has been awarded Honorary Doctorate by leading music schools such as Harvard, Honorary Membership of the Royal Academy of Music, and other awards such as the United States National Medal for the Arts; let alone Grammy Awards for film scores. In short he is recognized today by performers, academia, national institutions, record labels, listeners, other artists (such as film makers, writers) as a composer of enormous creativity and talent.
> 
> I challenge you to show me to argue that Dr. Williams is not a great composer.


Brian Ferneyhough is one of the greatest living composers today. He has been awarded Honorary Doctorate by the Royal Birmingham Conservatory, he was appointed foreign member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Music, he was appointed professor at the University of California San Diego, he was visiting professor at the the Harvard University Department of Music, he was awarded the Siemens Music Prize, has directed an annual mastercourse at the Fondation Royaumont in France, and is currently the Bonsall Professor of Music at Stanford University. In short he is recognized today by academia, music festivals, national and international institutions, other artists (such as other composers and musicians) as a composer of enormous creativity and talent.

I challenge you to show me to argue that Dr. Ferneyhough is not a great composer.

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

P.S. I of course do not believe that Dr. Ferneyhough is objectively a great composer. I'm just pastiching your own line of reasoning, which constitutes of the _argumentum ad verecundiam_ fallacy, second in popularity only perhaps to the ubiquitous _argument ad hominem._


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

EdwardBast said:


> One doesn't use the honorific "Dr." for those with honorary degrees. It's just embarrassing when you do it in front of people who know the difference. And about the great thing, you should probably ask Williams what he thinks about it. He would likely acknowledge that he is a good film composer while rolling his eyes at you.


I would love to meet Dr. Williams and receive his autograph. I'm sure he would roll his eyes at his fans with disdain as you put it ....


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

chu42 said:


> Brian Ferneyhough is one of the greatest living composers today. He has been awarded Honorary Doctorate by the Royal Birmingham Conservatory, he was appointed foreign member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Music, he was appointed professor at the University of California San Diego, he was visiting professor at the the Harvard University Department of Music, he was awarded the Siemens Music Prize, has directed an annual mastercourse at the Fondation Royaumont in France, and is currently the Bonsall Professor of Music at Stanford University. In short he is recognized today by academia, music festivals, national and international institutions, other artists (such as other composers and musicians) as a composer of enormous creativity and talent.
> 
> I challenge you to show me to argue that Dr. Ferneyhough is not a great composer, compared to Dr. Williams.
> 
> ...


Ferneyhough is not a very well known living composer today at all, compared to Dr. Williams.


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

NoCoPilot said:


> Film music isn't like "real music." It should serve the film above all else


What is real music? Why shouldn't the film serve the music? Music is art No. 1, isn't it?

Where is the "real music" difference between John Williams films and Richard Wagner operas?

Wagners idea was to subordinate the music to the drama. So his operas don't have number pieces like operas before. But he made some great music. Isn't his music real music?

Operas tend to serve music more than films because films don't use singing, but I don't see a necessary categorical difference.



NoCoPilot said:


>


That is not too close. If this is a problem, Gustav Mahler has a problem too. I could show passages from Mahler symphonies that are close to Haydn, Bruckner and Tchaikovsky passages at least. But he made something new and great out of it like John Williams.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

^ Exactly, Dr. Williams' harmonies and melodies are ever so strikingly fresh, and correct for the musical characterization required in films. Only tonal, melodic inventions can work, in short; music rooted in traditional harmonies. That is why Dr. Williams is a great living composer today (amongst other reasons, too).


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

ArtMusic said:


> ^ Exactly, Dr. Williams' harmonies and melodies are ever so strikingly fresh, and correct for the musical characterization required in films. Only tonal, melodic inventions can work, in short; music rooted in traditional harmonies.


Nonsense. The film music you love is gradually becoming extinct; that's a good thing.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Bulldog said:


> Nonsense. The film music you love is gradually becoming extinct; that's a good thing.


yep, certainly JW's swashbuckling style of scoring is now considered more old hat than common, not that I approve of course. Technology and production has overtaken soundtracks and changed the approach and soundworld and even the way film music is composed.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

chu42 said:


> Brian Ferneyhough is one of the greatest living composers today. He has been awarded Honorary Doctorate by the Royal Birmingham Conservatory, he was appointed foreign member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Music, he was appointed professor at the University of California San Diego, he was visiting professor at the the Harvard University Department of Music, he was awarded the Siemens Music Prize, has directed an annual mastercourse at the Fondation Royaumont in France, and is currently the Bonsall Professor of Music at Stanford University. In short he is recognized today by academia, music festivals, national and international institutions, other artists (such as other composers and musicians) as a composer of enormous creativity and talent.
> 
> I challenge you to show me to argue that Dr. Ferneyhough is not a great composer.
> ...


Ironically though, chu42, in several modern music threads here that is exactly the reason given for Ferneyhough's and Saunders' legitimacy and importance if not greatness as composers. Legitimacy and importance might be as tough to define as greatness.


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

Bulldog said:


> Nonsense. The film music you love is gradually becoming extinct; that's a good thing.


Extinct? You mean newer composers write in a different way? But that doesn't mean it is extinct. Beethovens music for example isn't extinct too. It is still played. And John Williams films will still be played too. I don't know much about films, but it is obvious that many John Williams films are big famous films.

But the problem that newer generations write in different ways is a problem that classical music overall has. Classical music is replaced by some hip hop or in the best case by more primitive classical music (compare Hans Zimmer to John Williams). But its surprising that this is called a good thing on a classical music forum. And even the popular music itself isn't as good as it was before some decades ago. Music and culture overall is in a crisis.


----------



## LAS (Dec 12, 2014)

I'm a fan of Williams too! And as for movies being a deal breaker, think of the "classical" music that accompanies opera. Schindler's List is one of my favorite CDs.

And then there's Fanfare for the Common Man.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

LAS said:


> I'm a fan of Williams too! And as for movies being a deal breaker, think of the "classical" music that accompanies opera. Schindler's List is one of my favorite CDs.
> 
> And then there's Fanfare for the Common Man.


You have confused me. *Fanfare for the Common Man *was Aaron Copland, yes?


----------



## Christine (Sep 29, 2020)

NoCoPilot said:


> Film music isn't like "real music." It should serve the film above all else -- and if the film is derivative of period films, it's only fair that the music is too. I don't fault Williams for this. He was earning a paycheck. A BIG paycheck.


 What people are forgetting is that Williams scored something like 200 hrs of film music. People take several seconds of music, such as the Tatooine desert scene, and declare him a thief. If you add up all the seconds of his "stolen" music, and divide into that 720,000 (the number of seconds in 200 hours), you'll get a very tiny tiny TINY number reflecting the percentage of his compositions is "stolen."


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

ArtMusic said:


> Ferneyhough is not a very well known living composer today at all, compared to Dr. Williams.


Wait, so now the recognition of the masses matters?

Average people greatly prefer pop music over everything else, and essentially do not know much about classical music at all, so why is their opinion on classical music suddenly important to you?


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

consuono said:


> Ironically though, chu42, in several modern music threads here that is exactly the reason given for Ferneyhough's and Saunders' legitimacy and importance if not greatness as composers. Legitimacy and importance might be as tough to define as greatness.


It's because institutional legitimacy might resonate with both objectivists and the fans of the avant-garde. Surely there is a lot of overlap between the two.

I think the opinion of academics is more credible than the average person on the street; that is, I can imagine that the academic has deeper and more sophisticated reasons for appreciating a certain composer.

But since I don't believe in objective greatness, I don't rely on the opinions of others to tell me what composers are great. A smart person's opinion is still an opinion.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

chu42 said:


> It's because institutional legitimacy might resonate with both objectivists and the fans of the avant-garde. Surely there is a lot of overlap between the two.


It doesn't mean much to me, nor does the opinion of the editors of the New Grove.


> I think the opinion of academics is more credible than the average person on the street; that is, I can imagine that the academic has deeper and more sophisticated reasons for appreciating a certain composer.


In many ways that's debatable as well. An academic can also have sophisticated reasons for calling junk a masterpiece, in other words more sophistication than sense.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> Nonsense. The film music you love is gradually becoming extinct; that's a good thing.


Dr. Williams' art will not. His concertos for various instruments are wonderfully received by leading music schools and art academies. His trumpet concerto is astoundingly popular.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Bulldog said:


> Nonsense. The film music you love is gradually becoming extinct; that's a good thing.


I don't know about that. Quality films that I love are becoming extinct too, and that's not a good thing.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

chu42 said:


> Wait, so now the recognition of the masses matters? Average people greatly prefer pop music over everything else, and essentially do not know much about classical music at all, so why is their opinion on classical music suddenly important to you?


As I said, I think there is a difference between "classical music" and "avant-garde / philosophical music".
I think, in order for composers to be regarded as being a part of classical music, they:
1. must show by words or actions that they have connection/relation with close predecessors (in terms of timeline) in classical music history ... 
2. ... and also distant predecessors in classical music history. (In the case of Wagner, for example: Beethoven would be a close predecessor, whereas Palestrina would be a distant predecessor of his) 
3. must not indulge in avant-garde philosophies like "everything we do is music".

Based on these criteria, Williams qualifies, whereas Cage doesn't.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

The _Jurassic Park_ theme is almost symphonic and I am sure Dr. Williams can write a symphony based on it. Here he is conducting the Vienna Philharmonic. I am glad we do have some new art music composed this way and I really don't understand why there should be any "controversary".


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

ArtMusic said:


> The _Jurassic Park_ theme is almost symphonic and I am sure Dr. Williams can write a symphony based on it. Here he is conducting the Vienna Philharmonic. I am glad we do have some new art music composed this way and I really don't understand why there should be any "controversary".


You see, yes, Williams is much like the "Old School" film composers, crafting music that not only fits the films, but stands on its own merits.

Compare with this track from *Tyler Bates*' score from *The Guardians of the Galaxy*: It, too, is orchestral, and it, too, fits the action and the overall vibe of the film. But the track has no substance; it's mood without a roadmap, merely riffing on rhythm and chords and riffs that stretch far longer than a 'traditional' composer might use them.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

consuono said:


> It doesn't mean much to me, nor does the opinion of the editors of the New Grove.
> In many ways that's debatable as well. An academic can also have sophisticated reasons for calling junk a masterpiece, in other words more sophistication than sense.


But you rely on the "informed consensus" to determine what is great and what is not.

So it seems to me that:

When the informed consensus agrees with your taste, they are objectively correct.

When the informed consensus disagrees with your taste, they are objectively wrong, or in fact not informed at all.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

chu42 said:


> But you rely on the "informed consensus" to determine what is great and what is not.
> 
> So it seems to me that:
> 
> When the informed consensus agrees with your taste, they are objectively correct.


Can you show me where I said that?



> When the informed consensus disagrees with your taste, they are objectively wrong, or in fact not informed at all.


Ditto? In fact I distinctly remember typing that my opinion on Tchaikovsky goes against the consensus and that I respect the consensus anyway.

On the other hand I probably can dig out posts assuring me that academic credentials and prestige and whatnot do mean quite a bit.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

consuono said:


> Can you show me where I said that?
> 
> Ditto? In fact I distinctly remember typing that my opinion on Tchaikovsky goes against the consensus and that I respect the consensus anyway.


You said:



> An academic can also have sophisticated reasons for calling junk a masterpiece, in other words more sophistication than sense.


This is in your subjective opinion then, and not in reference to objective qualities of "junk" and "sense"? If so, then I won't press it further.



consuono said:


> On the other hand I probably can dig out posts assuring me that academic credentials and prestige and whatnot do mean quite a bit.


Not sure if I'm misinterpreting this, but your reasoning for what constitutes as objective greatness has always been based on the "informed consensus"-that is, the consensus of academia.

I have never argued anything similar to this and in fact I have gone on record saying that academic knowledge only means something to you if you subscribe to their frame of thinking.

For example, if you subscribe to the idea that Western common practice voice leading produces enjoyable music, then you will trust the opinions of a person who is an expert in voice leading.

If you don't subscribe to this idea, then their opinion has little to no weight for you.

Neither person is "objectively correct". They will simply find the experts that conform to what they enjoy.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> You said:
> 
> An academic can also have sophisticated reasons for calling junk a masterpiece, in other words more sophistication than sense.
> This is in your subjective opinion then, and not in reference to objective qualities of "junk" and "sense"? If so, then I won't press it further.


Yeah, an academic can be an educated fool. It's not exactly a new concept.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

consuono said:


> Yeah, an academic can be an educated fool. It's not exactly a new concept.


So how is it that academic consensus determines objective greatness?


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

chu42 said:


> So how is it that academic consensus determines objective greatness?


Since when is "consensus" limited to academics? It isn't.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

consuono said:


> Since when is "consensus" limited to academics? It isn't.


You said "informed consensus"-what is this if not academia?

At least there can be an objective definition of a music academic-someone who has a degree in a musical field and/or studies music professionally. That can be defined.

If you mean to include random people off the street who have an interest in classical music, who gets to decide if they are informed or not?

Is the threshold 5 years of listening? 10 years?

What if they have only listened to a single time period for 20 years and still have no knowledge of any other music era? Would you still consider them "informed?"


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> You said "informed consensus"-what is this if not academia...


Musicians, average Joe listeners...you don't have to be an academic to be informed.


> At least there can be an objective definition of a music academic-someone who has a degree in a musical field and/or studies music professionally. That can be defined.


In physical science, maybe, but I don't see how a music degree in itself is objective proof of some refined all-knowing taste and judgement.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

pianozach said:


> You see, yes, Williams is much like the "Old School" film composers, crafting music that not only fits the films, but stands on its own merits.
> 
> Compare with this track from *Tyler Bates*' score from *The Guardians of the Galaxy*: It, too, is orchestral, and it, too, fits the action and the overall vibe of the film. But the track has no substance; it's mood without a roadmap, merely riffing on rhythm and chords and riffs that stretch far longer than a 'traditional' composer might use them.


Yes, I agree. I was going to post about this. John Williams characterizes the characters and the film's dramatic pace skillfully like any great opera composer have done. The main characters in _Star Wars_ and other movies for example show that very well. He is a truly gifted composer today.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

chu42 said:


> So how is it that academic consensus determines objective greatness?


In the case of John Williams for example, academic recognition with honorary doctorates is not something taken lightly.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

consuono said:


> In physical science, maybe, but I don't see how a music degree in itself is objective proof of some refined all-knowing taste and judgement.


Exactly, it's not. And neither is just being an average Joe listener.

So I'm not sure how it helps your argument that informed consensus determines objective greatness. Sure, academics can also be "foolish" by your standards-and average Joes can't?


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

ArtMusic said:


> In the case of John Williams for example, academic recognition with honorary doctorates is not something taken lightly.


It seems to me that in the case of composers you like, academic consensus is the end all be all of the discussion.

In the case of composers you don't like, academic consensus is next to useless.

Which is it? Are academics "objectively right" about John Williams, or are they "objectively wrong" about Xenakis, Stockhausen, Crumb?


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

chu42 said:


> It seems to me that in the case of composers you like, academic consensus is the end all be all of the discussion.
> 
> In the case of composers you don't like, academic consensus is next to useless.
> 
> Which is it? Are academics "objectively right" about John Williams, or are they "objectively wrong" about Xenakis, Stockhausen, Crumb?


They are objectively right about John Williams, who have received numerous recognition. I have not researched the case with the other composers. The topic of this thread is Dr. Williams.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

ArtMusic said:


> They are objectively right about John Williams, who have received numerous recognition.


Non-comprehensive list of academic degrees and institutional awards received by Karlheinz Stockhausen:

1964 German Gramophone critics' award
1966 SIMC award for orchestral works
1968 Grand Art Prize for Music of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia
1968 Grand Prix du Disque (France)
1968 Member of the Free Academy of the Arts, Hamburg
1968, 1969, and 1971 Edison Prize (Netherlands)
1970 Member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Music
1972 SIMC award for orchestral works
1973 Member of the Academy of Arts, Berlin
1974 Federal Cross of Merit, 1st class (Germany)
1977 Member of the Philharmonic Academy of Rome
1979 Honorary Member of the American Academy and Institute of Arts and Letters
1980 Member of the European Academy of Science, Arts and Letters
1981 Prize of the Italian music critics for Donnerstag aus Licht
1982 German gramophone prize (German Phonograph Academy)
1983 Diapason d'or (France) for Donnerstag aus Licht
1985 Commandeur de l'Ordre des Arts et des Lettres (France)
1986 Ernst von Siemens Music Prize
1987 Honorary Member of the Royal Academy of Music, London
1988 Honorary Citizen of the Kuerten community
1989 Honorary Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
1990 Prix Ars Electronica, Linz, Austria
1991 Honorary Fellow of the Royal Irish Academy of Music
1991 Accademico Onorario of the Accademia Nazionale di Santa Caecilia, Rome
1991 Honorary Patron of Sound Projects Weimar
1992 IMC-UNESCO Picasso Medal
1992 Distinguished Service Medal of the German state North Rhine-Westphalia
1992 German Music Publishers Society Award
1993 Patron of the European Flute Festival
1993 Diapason d'or
1994 German Music Publishers Society Award
1995 Honorary Member of the German Society for Electro-Acoustic Music
1995 Bach Award of the city of Hamburg
1996 Honorary doctorate (Dr. phil. h. c.) from the Freie Universität Berlin
1996 Composer of the European Cultural Capital Copenhagen
1996 Edison Prize (Netherlands)
1996 Member of the Free Academy of the Arts Leipzig
1996 Honorary Member of the Leipzig Opera
1996 Cologne Culture Prize
1997 German Music Publishers Society Award
1997 Honorary member of the music ensemble LIM (Laboratorio de Interpretación Musical), Madrid
1999 Entry in the Golden Book of the city of Cologne
2000 German Music Publishers Society Award
2000-2001 The film In Absentia made by the Quay Brothers (England) to concrete and electronic music by Karlheinz Stockhausen won the Golden Dove (first prize) at IFAF Leipzig.
2000 Special Jury Mention, Montreal, FCMM
2000 Special Jury Award, Tampere 
2001 Special Mention, Golden Prague Awards 
2001 Honorary Diploma Award, Cracow
2001 German Music Publishers Society Award
2001 Polar Music Prize of the Royal Swedish Academy of the Arts
2002 Honorary Patron of the Sonic Arts Network, England
2003 German Music Publishers Society Award
2004 Associated member of the Academie Royale des Sciences, des Lettres & des Beaux-arts
2004 Honorary doctorate (Dr. phil. h. c.) of the Queen's University in Belfast
2004 German Music Publishers Society Award 
2005 German Music Publishers Society Award
2006 Honorary member of the Accademia Filarmonica di Bologna
2008 On 22 August, Stockhausen's birthday, the Rathausplatz in his home town of Kürten was renamed Karlheinz-Stockhausen-Platz in his honour
2008 On 10 October, the Studio for Electronic Music of the Royal Conservatory of The Hague in the Netherlands changed its name to Karlheinz Stockhausen Studio
2009 German Music Publishers Society Award
2010 The municipality of Kürten adopts the designation "Stockhausengemeinde" (Stockhausen municipality) in honour of the late composer.



ArtMusic said:


> I have not researched the case with the other composers.


Well, now you know.



ArtMusic said:


> The topic of this thread is Dr. Williams.


If you think academics are only "objectively correct" about certain composers and wrong about others, then it seems to me that you're cherry-picking institutional credentials only when it suits you.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Interesting list attributing to Stockhausen.

Today however, Dr. Williams is more widely recognized by the music world, which means listeners, artists of many endeavors (such as film, writing and stage), record labels and so forth. There is a natural equilibrium of recognition bestowed onto Dr. Williams and I am thankful for that. He receives standing ovations nearly whenever he completes a major recording cycle.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

ArtMusic said:


> Interesting list attributing to Stockhausen.
> 
> Today however, Dr. Williams is more widely recognized by the music world, which means listeners, artists of many endeavors (such as film, writing and stage), record labels and so forth. There is a natural equilibrium of recognition bestowed onto Dr. Williams and I am thankful for that. He receives standing ovations nearly whenever he completes a major recording cycle.


This is all very well and good as a justification for why _you_ think John Williams is great. It really does not pertain to objective greatness.

It is interesting how you will jump from "academic recognition" to "general music recognition" when one no longer serves your narrative.

I like John Williams too but to argue that he is objectively great because he is more recognizable-surely you can see problems with this line of reasoning.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Williams' talents are more for mainstream, blockbuster films, whereas Stockhausen's were more for horror/gory genres


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

chu42 said:


> This is all very well and good as a justification for why _you_ think John Williams is great. It really does not pertain to objective greatness.
> 
> It is interesting how you will jump from "academic recognition" to "general music recognition" when one no longer serves your narrative.
> 
> I like John Williams too but to argue that he is objectively great because he is more recognizable-surely you can see problems with this line of reasoning.


Yes, it does as I explained with reference the awards and recognition, and also the general recognition of Dr. Williams' art ever since he has been composing. I do not see any problems with my line of reasoning.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

hammeredklavier said:


> Williams' talents are more for mainstream, blockbuster films, whereas Stockhausen's were more for horror/gory genres


John Williams has very strong musical characterization when it comes to film music. His awards include science fiction to anything that is serious drama such as _Empire of the Sun_. It shows a creative zest that is infused with touching the human condition, an objective requirement for writing great music (as seen from Renaissance to Romantic periods). That is why his film music has received so many awards. He understands drama and the pacing of that drama to blend in with orchestral/vocal notes.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

hammeredklavier said:


> Williams' talents are more for mainstream, blockbuster films, whereas Stockhausen's were more for horror/gory genres


I had never actually attempted to listen to Licht due to its massive length. The excerpt you posted convinced me that it might be worth my time.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

ArtMusic said:


> Yes, it does as I explained with reference the awards and recognition, and also the general recognition of Dr. Williams' art ever since he has been composing. I do not see any problems with my line of reasoning.


Not that this means anything objectively-but I'd like to point out that Stockhausen was an early inspiration on the Beatles.

"Paul McCartney introduced Stockhausen's work to the group, turning John Lennon into a fan; Lennon and Yoko Ono even sent the composer a Christmas card in 1969. He appears on the Sgt. Pepper album cover, 5th from the left in the top row, between Lenny Bruce and W.C. Fields. In particular, "A Day in the Life" (1967) and "Revolution 9" (1968) were influenced by Stockhausen's electronic music."

"Jazz musicians such as Miles Davis, Cecil Taylor, Charles Mingus, Herbie Hancock, Yusef Lateef, and Anthony Braxton cite Stockhausen as an influence.

Frank Zappa acknowledges Stockhausen in the liner notes of Freak Out!, his 1966 debut with The Mothers of Invention.

On the back of The Who's second LP released in the US, "Happy Jack", their primary composer and guitarist Pete Townshend, is said to have been inspired by Stockhausen.

Rick Wright and Roger Waters of Pink Floyd also acknowledge Stockhausen as an influence.

ELP was influenced by Ginastera, Ligeti, and Stockhausen, among other modern composers.

San Francisco psychedelic groups Jefferson Airplane and the Grateful Dead are said to have done the same; Stockhausen said that the Grateful Dead were "well orientated toward new music"

Founding members of Cologne-based experimental band Can, Irmin Schmidt and Holger Czukay, both studied with Stockhausen at the Cologne Courses for New Music.

German electronic pioneers Kraftwerk also say they studied with Stockhausen, and Icelandic vocalist Björk has acknowledged Stockhausen's influence."

It seems to me that Stockhausen had massive musical recognition even outside of classical music, much like John Williams did. Add this to his gargantuan list of academic achievements, and we have a very strong argument, by your standards, for the objective greatness of Stockhausen.

If you're talking about recognition by mainstream audiences, obviously the guy being featured in blockbuster films is going to have more mainstream popularity than the guy composing 29 hour opera cycles.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

In any case, Dr. Williams is the greater composer today. His music is widely recorded, performed, studied and whistled by listeners. He is held in the highest regard by *the world*. (Please start a separate thread on other composers that you might wish to compare Dr. Williams with.)


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

ArtMusic said:


> In any case, Dr. Williams is the greater composer today. His music is widely recorded, performed, studied and whistled by listeners. He is held in the highest regard by *the world*.


Ah, the whistling component to great music. I'm confident you don't have any more of a clue than I do as to what the people of the world are whistling. however, when I do hear a person whistling, I'll ask if he/her is whistling to a Dk. Williams piece of music.


----------



## Machiavel (Apr 12, 2010)

Maybe because he copied from so much composers before him sometimes note for note in the same key or just minuscule details like putting a chord there to change it a bit. Holst, korngold, stravinsky.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

ArtMusic said:


> In any case, Dr. Williams is the greater composer today. His music is widely recorded, performed, studied and whistled by listeners. He is held in the highest regard by *the world*. (Please start a separate thread on other composers that you might wish to compare Dr. Williams with.)


I still can't get over someone with a Jabba the Hutt avatar saying "Dr. Williams".


----------



## neofite (Feb 19, 2017)

ArtMusic said:


> In any case, Dr. Williams is the greater composer today. His music is widely recorded, performed, studied and whistled by listeners. He is held in the highest regard by *the world*. (Please start a separate thread on other composers that you might wish to compare Dr. Williams with.)


If it is really true that "Dr. Williams" is "the greater composer today," this is a reflection of the sad state of music composition today.


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

Could someone recommend a great place to start with Williams? I heard some of his music some years ago and did not like it one bit. However, I'm sure that says more about me than it does Williams. And given so many obviously music-savvy people vouch for him, I may have got him wrong.


----------



## Alfacharger (Dec 6, 2013)

chu42 said:


> Not that this means anything objectively-but I'd like to point out that Stockhausen was an early inspiration on the Beatles.
> 
> "Paul McCartney introduced Stockhausen's work to the group, turning John Lennon into a fan; Lennon and Yoko Ono even sent the composer a Christmas card in 1969. He appears on the Sgt. Pepper album cover, 5th from the left in the top row, between Lenny Bruce and W.C. Fields. In particular, "A Day in the Life" (1967) and "Revolution 9" (1968) were influenced by Stockhausen's electronic music."
> 
> ...


Francois Truffaut talked to Ray Bradbury about adapting his novel Farenheit 451 into film, Bradbury suggested that Bernard Herrmann do the score. This is what Herrmann remembered.

"Why do you want me to write 'Fahrenheit'? You're a great friend of Boulez and Stockhausen and Messaien, and this is a film that takes place in the future. They're all avant-garde composers. Why shouldn't you ask one of them?" Truffaut replied, "Oh no, no. They'll give me music of the twentieth century, but you'll give me music of the twenty-first".

"I felt the music of the next century would revert to a great lyrical simplicity and that it wouldn't truck with all this mechanistic stuff. Their lives would be scrutinized. In their music they would want something of simple nudity, of great elegance and simplicity. So I said, if I do your picture, that's the kind of score I want to write - strings, harps, and a few percussion instruments."






John Williams told Herrmann about his idea about of writing a symphony.

"In the early sixties, I wanted to write a symphony. One day at lunch I complained to Benny about wanting to write some music other than film music. His answered, "Who's STOPPING ya?" His answer was so blatant and direct-and right-that I went home and spent the requisite four or five months writing this piece."

Williams' Symphony has been performed only a couple of times and withdrawn by the composer. Some liken it to his Sinfonietta for Wind Ensemble written around the same time.

https://thelegacyofjohnwilliams.com/2019/10/08/john-williams-early-concert-works/


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

HenryPenfold said:


> Could someone recommend a great place to start with Williams? I heard some of his music some years ago and did not like it one bit. However, I'm sure that says more about me than it does Williams. And given so many obviously music-savvy people vouch for him, I may have got him wrong.


If you end up enjoying him, then you got him wrong. If you never end up enjoying him, then you were right all along.

Don't bother with what other people think. Explore his music as much as you'd like, and if it doesn't click then leave it at that.

I personally find Williams a tremendous asset to any blockbuster or fantasy film, but I find myself getting bored when I listen to him on his own.


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

chu42 said:


> If you end up enjoying him, then you got him wrong. If you never end up enjoying him, then you were right all along.
> 
> Don't bother with what other people think. Explore his music as much as you'd like, and if it doesn't click then leave it at that.
> 
> I personally find Williams a tremendous asset to any blockbuster or fantasy film, but I find myself getting bored when I listen to him on his own.


Yes, that all makes sense. Can you recommend a composition for me to start with, properly?


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

HenryPenfold said:


> Yes, that all makes sense. Can you recommend a composition for me to start with, properly?


Like I said, I don't really enjoy his music on its own. But Superman, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Jaws are certainly among my favorite film scores.


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

chu42 said:


> Like I said, I don't really enjoy his music on its own. But Superman, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Jaws are certainly among my favorite film scores.


Thanks. I'll try Indiana Jones and Superman.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

HenryPenfold said:


> Could someone recommend a great place to start with Williams? I heard some of his music some years ago and did not like it one bit. However, I'm sure that says more about me than it does Williams. And given so many obviously music-savvy people vouch for him, I may have got him wrong.


Yeah, I'd be reticent to hand you an *"Introduction to John Williams"*, as you've already a preconceived notion of not liking his music. Likely you've heard his *"greatest hits"*, and those are likely the pieces you really don't like - probably the *Star Wars, Indiana Jones, E.T.* and *Superman*, all of which won him Grammys except for *Jones*. And there's *Jaws* too. And . . . *Harry Potter* and *Jurassic Park*.

And it's even more difficult when you factor in his more than 40 Academy Award nominations (winning 5).

So, then, I guess I'd suggest listening to music from some of his more "serious" scores, like *Schindler's List, Seven Years in Tibet, Saving Private Ryan*, and *Empire of the Sun*.

There's also more than a handful of scores from films that you've forgotten about in the wake of his more "epic" scores:

*Dracula (1979), How to Steal a Million, Goodbye Mr. Chips, Rosewood, Heidi, Black Sunday*, and *The Cowboys*.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Growing up with Star Wars, ironically his last Star Wars score Ep. 9 has the most Star-Warsy sound to me. Weird... not sure that even makes sense, it just does.






Also yeah, Bruckner.

This from 1980 sounds very Star Warsy to me too. I guess it's subjective:


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

HenryPenfold said:


> Could someone recommend a great place to start with Williams? I heard some of his music some years ago and did not like it one bit. However, I'm sure that says more about me than it does Williams. And given so many obviously music-savvy people vouch for him, I may have got him wrong.


Henry, try the Cello Concerto and the Violin Concerto as alternatives to his scores....


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

mikeh375 said:


> Henry, try the Cello Concerto and the Violin Concerto as alternatives to his scores....


Better to start with equally popular but different, ie.











Ultimately you just may not enjoy his music.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Ethereality said:


> Growing up with Star Wars, ironically his last Star Wars score Ep. 9 has the most Star-Warsy sound to me. Weird... not sure that even makes sense, it just does.


I have noticed it too. It sounds like a stylistic fusion of the entire series, with call-backs not only to the immediate two prior scores, but also to the soundworlds of the first and second trilogy. It ticks all sorts of subconscious boxes for what makes "the Star Wars sound" to those who know it by heart.


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

pianozach said:


> Yeah, I'd be reticent to hand you an *"Introduction to John Williams"*, as you've already a preconceived notion of not liking his music.


I haven't got a ''preconceived notion of not liking his music'', I simply listened to some of his music quite some time ago and thought it was *****. I'm looking to have another go with fresh ears. We serious music fans do not let prejudice get in the way.



> Likely you've heard his *"greatest hits"*, and those are likely the pieces you really don't like


Nope. Can't say I have. Apart from seeing Starwars in the cinema many years ago.



> - probably the *Star Wars, Indiana Jones, E.T.* and *Superman*, all of which won him Grammys except for *Jones*. And there's *Jaws* too. And . . . *Harry Potter* and *Jurassic Park*.


Gonna give a few more listens to IJ and Superman and the very interesting suggestion from *mikeh375 * concerning a violin and a *cello* concerto

*And thank you very much for all those helpful links, I look forward to sampling as much of it as I can*

And it's even more difficult when you factor in his more than 40 Academy Award nominations (winning 5).

So, then, I guess I'd suggest listening to music from some of his more "serious" scores, like *Schindler's List, Seven Years in Tibet, Saving Private Ryan*, and *Empire of the Sun*.

There's also more than a handful of scores from films that you've forgotten about in the wake of his more "epic" scores:

*Dracula (1979), How to Steal a Million, Goodbye Mr. Chips, Rosewood, Heidi, Black Sunday*, and *The Cowboys*.




















[/QUOTE]

..........................................


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

HenryPenfold said:


> We serious music fans do not let prejudice get in the way.


I don't know...if I see Brad Pitt's mug on something it lowers my estimation of it a few notches. Well, maybe except for _Twelve Monkeys_.


----------



## Alfacharger (Dec 6, 2013)

Ethereality said:


> Growing up with Star Wars, ironically his last Star Wars score Ep. 9 has the most Star-Warsy sound to me. Weird... not sure that even makes sense, it just does.


I'm a fan of the Prequel scores. Less Korngold and more Williams. Three favorite tracks from Episodes 1,2 and 3.
















Bonus.. John Williams channeling John Adams. from AI.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Any of those beautiful themes could be further developed into symphonies, songs, concertos or just about any large scale work. I have no doubt that John Williams remains creative enough to do so.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

ArtMusic said:


> Any of those beautiful themes could be further developed into symphonies, songs, concertos or just about any large scale work. I have no doubt that John Williams remains creative enough to do so.


Tchaikovsky could even write a symphony if he wanted to!


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I don't think John Williams is really that controversial, or at least nowhere near so much as on this forum. I see it more a case as him being reduced to a pawn in ongoing ideological battles here.

John Williams' music is part of the stage and screen segment of the performance canon pie. This consists of ballet, incidental music to plays and film music. Increasingly, film scores played live by orchestra with simultaneous projection of the film have become an area of growth for orchestras, financially and otherwise. These tend to attract younger audiences who aren't so much interested in the traditional performance canon, most of which was composed between 1750 and 1950 (to them that's ancient history). At the same time, film music in the form of suites has been part of traditional concerts for ages, earlier generations of composers already provided an extensive repertoire (including many of the big names, e.g. Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Walton, Vaughan Williams, Bernstein, etc.).

Although John Cage isn't part of the core performance repertoire, his music is taught, studied and also performed by specialist ensembles dedicated to contemporary classical music. Its just as much part of the mid to late 20th century period which saw film music come to increased prominence. While Williams composed music to accompany film, Cage composed for ballet. Cage's professional (as well as personal) relationship with choreographer Merce Cunningham can't be overestimated in this regard. Perhaps it can be compared with Williams' repeated collaboration with directors Lucas and Spielberg.


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

I've given a few hours to listening to Williams' music recently and I don't think it's my cup of tea. No culture wars, no preconceptions, just not to my taste. I can't put it more politely.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

HenryPenfold said:


> I've given a few hours to listening to Williams' music recently and I don't think it's my cup of tea. No culture wars, no preconceptions, just not to my taste. I can't put it more politely.


As far as film composers go, perhaps you should be trying Jerry Goldsmith instead:


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

chu42 said:


> As far as film composers go, perhaps you should be trying Jerry Goldsmith instead:


I've listened to this once through and I think it's excellent. I shall definitely be returning to it. What a marvellous 14 minute suite. Love the ending!

I guess with film music, it's a case of one man's meat .......

Thank you very much for taking the trouble to put this my way :tiphat:


----------



## jojoju2000 (Jan 5, 2021)

I totally screwed up the discussions.... again.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I like some pop music and get my low brow music experiences from that genre. I like and respect some apparently light classical music when it is well done and honest about itself - Gilbert and Sullivan's operettas, for example, and Strauss waltzes. But I really hate it when music pretends to be something that it isn't or when people are conned into believing that fib! Williams' film music is fine for what it is - blockbuster music for blockbuster films - but I am amazed at how many take it seriously as pure music. I've noticed that that sort of fandom is usually linked to a strong dislike of any of the wide variety of serious contemporary music. The two positions seem to go together but I am not sure why, nor why it matters so much to them.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

jojoju2000 said:


> I totally screwed up the discussions.... again.


How? You merely posted a topic for discussion and people gave their responses to it. Its obvious you thought through and put effort into your argument which you backed up with examples. That's okay, no need to be too hard on yourself.

Classical music is diverse enough to embrace film music and avant-garde. I think that its mainly dynamics on this forum which keeps the need for a dichotomy alive on TC. Unfortunately the reality on TC is that the same sorts of worn out disputes go on and on. Strange, but that's how it is. So don't worry, most likely the issue isn't you, its the forum.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Sid James said:


> I don't think John Williams is really that controversial, or at least nowhere near so much as on this forum. I see it more a case as him being reduced to a pawn in ongoing ideological battles here.
> 
> John Williams' music is part of the stage and screen segment of the performance canon pie. This consists of ballet, incidental music to plays and film music. Increasingly, film scores played live by orchestra with simultaneous projection of the film have become an area of growth for orchestras, financially and otherwise. These tend to attract younger audiences who aren't so much interested in the traditional performance canon, most of which was composed between 1750 and 1950 (to them that's ancient history). At the same time, film music in the form of suites has been part of traditional concerts for ages, earlier generations of composers already provided an extensive repertoire (including many of the big names, e.g. Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Walton, Vaughan Williams, Bernstein, etc.).
> 
> Although John Cage isn't part of the core performance repertoire, his music is taught, studied and also performed by specialist ensembles dedicated to contemporary classical music. Its just as much part of the mid to late 20th century period which saw film music come to increased prominence. While Williams composed music to accompany film, Cage composed for ballet. Cage's professional (as well as personal) relationship with choreographer Merce Cunningham can't be overestimated in this regard. Perhaps it can be compared with Williams' repeated collaboration with directors Lucas and Spielberg.


I wouldn't compare Cage with Williams. The two wrote vastly different types of music let alone the popularity of it today differs enormously. I would also think Williams is likely to be remembered well by posterity.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

ArtMusic said:


> I wouldn't compare Cage with Williams. The two wrote vastly different types of music let alone the popularity of it today differs enormously. I would also think Williams is likely to be remembered well by posterity.


. . . while it's fully within the realm of logic that Cage will be remembered as more of a punch line.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

pianozach said:


> . . . while it's fully within the realm of logic that Cage will be remembered as more of a punch line.


I don't understand your sentence. Yes, I can agree Cage might be well remembered for works like _4'33"_ and other philosophical comments. Dr. Williams will be remembered for the innumerable film scores, concertos and awards.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

ArtMusic said:


> I don't understand your sentence. Yes, I can agree Cage might be well remembered for works like _4'33"_ and other philosophical comments. Dr. Williams will be remembered for the innumerable film scores, concertos and awards.


Sorry for the misunderstanding.

I was merely added a tag to your sentence.

"I wouldn't compare Cage with Williams. The two wrote vastly different types of music let alone the popularity of it today differs enormously. I would also think Williams is likely to be remembered well by posterity, while it's fully within the realm of logic that Cage will be remembered as more of a punch line.


----------

