# Why is English music so reductive?



## Sven Bjorg (Sep 29, 2014)

There seems to me to be a correlation between the music of a composer and the style of architecture common in their lifetime. France, Spain and indeed much of Europe bar the UK is built in what I like to refer to as an antiquated style. Some people call this the rustic charm of paint, plaster and other such structural material falling from not just the exterior walls and roofs, but also the interior too. I find this style more alluring, enchanting and 'European' than much of the idiomatic English vernacular architecture, which is often too bland, reductive (i.e. Georgian style & laced window frames) and without the propensity for artistic verbosity, grandeur and opulence as found in the Renaissance architecture throughout Central Europe and Italy. Such visual froth manifests as the contrapuntal music of Bach, and such reductivism as the music of Handel. English style is very simplistic beauty, while the ornate Baroque architecture found in Vienna, Milan and Rome is stunning, and I assume had been the source of inspiration for many composers. Handel would have been incredibly receptive and attentive to detail. His house exemplifies above all the classical English reductivism of the Georgian architecture. Sitting in his room, he would have been indoctrinated by the style all around. Granted, would you deem the music of Vivaldi as that of a reductive or excessive sort? How, pray tell, do you perceive that which I have discussed as being conducive to a particular style? Please do falsify these claims.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Let me list a few major English composers ... Edward Elgar, Ralph Vaughan Williams, Benjamin Britten, Michael Tippet, Peter Maxwell Davies, Harrison Birtwistle, Thomas Ades ... how much similarity is there within just this group ... none at all that I can see. I would therefore say that your claim is without merit. As someone once said "All generalizations are false, including this one."


----------



## Sven Bjorg (Sep 29, 2014)

Becca said:


> Let me list a few major English composers ... Edward Elgar, Ralph Vaughan Williams, Benjamin Britten, Michael Tippet, Peter Maxwell Davies, Harrison Birtwistle, Thomas Ades ... how much similarity is there within just this group ... none at all that I can see. I would therefore say that your claim is without merit. As someone once said "All generalizations are false, including this one."


I am sure that should I listen to the music of composers, I would be able to identify its structural components, particularly its melody, as being indicative to a kind of English reductivism that is not only found in music, but also English culture. I do not believe there is a false dichotomy between music and the architecture of the country in which said music has been composed.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

It's not unusual for various art forms to be influenced by similar factors, but I suspect that may be less likely now than in the past. Our world is smaller today and more secular. Religion can have a big impact on art. The Catholic Church favors different types of artistic expression than, say, Quakers.

I'm not sure if "reductive" is the right word, though, and it invites the criticism that you are being reductive.


----------



## Sven Bjorg (Sep 29, 2014)

GreenMamba said:


> It's not unusual for various art forms to be influenced by similar factors, but I suspect that may be less likely now than in the past. Our world is smaller today and more secular. Religion can have a big impact on art. The Catholic Church favors different types of artistic expression than, say, Quakers.
> 
> I'm not sure if "reductive" is the right word, though, and it invites the criticism that you are being reductive.


Reductivism is the right word. Georgian architecture is built on reductive proportions, mathematics and reasoning. Each 'thing' of the collective whole is expressed as simply and as precisely as is possible. That is what I see when I look at Georgian Architecture. It appears to me as stolid, bland and without the intricacies of architectural embellishments of other European styles.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

At first glance I thought the title of this thread was "Why is English music so seductive?" Now that I see that I have been not seduced but reduced, I feel unworthy to comment further.


----------



## Figleaf (Jun 10, 2014)

Georgian architecture is based on classical (i.e. Greco-Roman) principles and proportions, so is not completely different from what you might find in Italy. English vernacular architecture is another style entirely. How does any of this relate to music? No idea...


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Handel spent his early formative years in Germany and Italy.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Sven Bjorg said:


> I am sure that should I listen to the music of composers, I would be able to identify its structural components, particularly its melody, as being indicative to a kind of English reductivism that is not only found in music, but also English culture. I do not believe there is a false dichotomy between music and the architecture of the country in which said music has been composed.


Are you saying that you are making these judgments without having listened to the music?


----------



## Antiquarian (Apr 29, 2014)

English music is refined, not reductive. True, there seems to be a lack of Baroque architecture in the UK, but that is a result of our history. The effects of the Counter-Reformation were not as pronounced in England and Scotland as it was on the continent. Baroque architecture was a propagandist response to the more subtle ornamentation found in Protestant churches and dwellings. (In essence the message was "Do you see how grand and over the top our architecture is - The Roman Catholic Church is right, don't listen to those poor Lutherans.) As to the reasoning behind the correlation between Architecture and Music, all I need to do is listen to Henry Purcell's The Fairy Queen or Diocletian to disabuse myself of any thought that English music of that time was insipid, too Palladian, or "reductive"--at least no more than was being produced in Germany or Italy at the time.


----------



## Sven Bjorg (Sep 29, 2014)

Becca said:


> Are you saying that you are making these judgments without having listened to the music?


What on Earth are you talking about? Had you read my sentence correctly, you would have seen the conditional clause indicating a hypothetical situation that is yet to occur. No I am not making judgement of music I have not listened to.


----------



## Sven Bjorg (Sep 29, 2014)

Antiquarian said:


> English music is refined, not reductive. True, there seems to be a lack of Baroque architecture in the UK, but that is a result of our history. The effects of the Counter-Reformation were not as pronounced in England and Scotland as it was on the continent. Baroque architecture was a propagandist response to the more subtle ornamentation found in Protestant churches and dwellings. (In essence the message was "Do you see how grand and over the top our architecture is - The Roman Catholic Church is right, don't listen to those poor Lutherans.) As to the reasoning behind the correlation between Architecture and Music, all I need to do is listen to Henry Purcell's The Fairy Queen or Diocletian to disabuse myself of any thought that English music of that time was insipid, too Palladian, or "reductive"--at least no more than was being produced in Germany or Italy at the time.


This seems to be the most enlightened response to my thread.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

English music has quite a bit of variety... in fact, more variety than the English cuisine j/k (remember that Fat Duck is 1st top restaurant in the world).

Purcell, Britten, Birtwistle, and Vaughn Williams all sound different from each other. If you listen closely you will hear uniqueness for each composer.

Only Havergal Brian didn't interest me that much on a first listen but I promise to return back and hopefully appreciate his works more.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Sven Bjorg said:


> What on Earth are you talking about? Had you read my sentence correctly, you would have seen the conditional clause indicating a hypothetical situation that is yet to occur. No I am not making judgement of music I have not listened to.


You wrote: "I am sure that should I listen to the music of composers, I would be able to identify its structural components, particularly its melody, as being indicative ..."

That is, precisely, a judgment of music you have not listened to. "Should I listen" implies that you have not yet listened, and thus only by prejudging it could you feel "sure" of anything about it.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I don't get it. I thought sauces were reductive.


----------



## Sven Bjorg (Sep 29, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> You wrote: "I am sure that should I listen to the music of composers, I would be able to identify its structural components, particularly its melody, as being indicative ..."
> 
> That is, precisely, a judgment of music you have not listened to. "Should I listen" implies that you have not yet listened, and thus only by prejudging it could you feel "sure" of anything about it.


Yes and that sentence was in reference to a perquisite post in which Becca had listed Romantic and minimalist composers, all of which I am yet to listen to because at this particular time, I do not, nor will ever, deem their music as pleasing on my ears. I have listened to the music I have alluded to in my original thread, which is what you are mistaken over.


----------



## Avey (Mar 5, 2013)

Sven Bjorg said:


> There seems to me to be a correlation between the music of a composer and the style of architecture common in their lifetime.
> 
> ... much of the idiomatic English vernacular architecture, which is often too bland, reductive (i.e. Georgian style & laced window frames) and without the propensity for artistic verbosity, grandeur and opulence as found in the Renaissance architecture throughout Central Europe and Italy. . . .
> 
> ...


No one can. These are all your opinion. Regardless of how many scholars, academics, peers, or member here agree with this, any one of us can see a door, a window, or a pew and fundamentally disagree on how that architecture influenced any given artist's music. And all your later replies prove this, that you simply will disagree with opinions that have just as much relevance as yours.

Also, while I will defer to your opinions on architecture -- because you clearly have an interest or education in it -- your characterizations of the music here are contrary to mine. The exact opposite. Elgar, or Britten, or Walton -- there is nothing "simplistic" or "repetitive," or at least no more than any other classical era or form. I would submit that all that "bland" architecture had a negligible influence on their work.

But ears can disagree.


----------



## Guest (Feb 20, 2015)

I don't know what this thread is supposed to mean, so I'll just go ahead and say that Britain is going stronger than most countries today. Birtwistle, Maxwell Davies, Goehr, Ferneyhough, Dillon, Barrett, Finnissy, Harvey, Saunders, Benjamin, Weir... their avant-garde "scene" today is so full of formidable, varied, colorful music - it's unreal.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Georgian architecture dating from c. 1720-1830 is essentially a Neo-Classical style... rooted in Greek and Roman architecture.










There is a stress upon simplicity and clarity of form... quite like the Neo-Classicism of Jacques Louis David. The French and Italians remained firmly rooted in the Rococo style until shortly before the French Revolution. All of this means little as far as impacting English composers (primarily of the late 19th/early 20th centuries). 19th century English architecture can be incredibly ornate. You have the revival of various earlier styles:

Tudor Revival:










Gothic/Renaissance Revival:










Indian/Orientalist style:










Or Victorian:










I would also ask how this all compares considering the architecture (and music) of France and Vienna... and later the United States... that are among the most modern of the time. How does it play out when considering the music of Russia... and their rather dated and conservative architecture?


----------



## Kevin Pearson (Aug 14, 2009)

Deleted for irrelevancy


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Sven Bjorg said:


> There seems to me to be a correlation between the music of a composer and the style of architecture common in their lifetime. France, Spain and indeed much of Europe bar the UK is built in what I like to refer to as an antiquated style. Some people call this the rustic charm of paint, plaster and other such structural material falling from not just the exterior walls and roofs, but also the interior too. I find this style more alluring, enchanting and 'European' than much of the idiomatic English vernacular architecture, which is often too bland, reductive (i.e. Georgian style & laced window frames) and without the propensity for artistic verbosity, grandeur and opulence as found in the Renaissance architecture throughout Central Europe and Italy. Such visual froth manifests as the contrapuntal music of Bach, and such reductivism as the music of Handel. English style is very simplistic beauty, while the ornate Baroque architecture found in Vienna, Milan and Rome is stunning, and I assume had been the source of inspiration for many composers. Handel would have been incredibly receptive and attentive to detail. His house exemplifies above all the classical English reductivism of the Georgian architecture. Sitting in his room, he would have been indoctrinated by the style all around. Granted, would you deem the music of Vivaldi as that of a reductive or excessive sort? How, pray tell, do you perceive that which I have discussed as being conducive to a particular style? Please do falsify these claims.


Early English style isn't about simple beauty at all. Think Spem in Alium. Think of the Farnaby Fantasias, the Purcell music for viol consort and Pucell's keyboard suites, the Byrd Fantasies. Even in more poetic music - Gibbons say - I don't think it's so simple at all.

In the 20th century English music has been far from simple, on the contrary. Think of Finnissy and Ferneyhough and Dillon and Birtwistle. And even something like Elgar's second symphony is far from simple.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

nathanb said:


> I don't know what this thread is supposed to mean, so I'll just go ahead and say that Britain is going stronger than most countries today. Birtwistle, Maxwell Davies, Goehr, Ferneyhough, Dillon, Barrett, Finnissy, Harvey, Saunders, Benjamin, Weir... their avant-garde "scene" today is so full of formidable, varied, colorful music - it's unreal.


True and yet the musical life in London is so dead for recent music, I mean for concerts. Or am I just not going to the right venues.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> True and yet the musical life in London is so dead for recent music, I mean for concerts. Or am I just not going to the right venues.


London isn't dead for music . I think that they are focusing on recorded music more than concerts there?


----------



## Guest (Feb 20, 2015)

albertfallickwang said:


> more variety than the English cuisine j/k


That's fighting talk :devil:


----------



## Guest (Feb 20, 2015)

Mandryka said:


> the musical life in London is so dead for recent music, I mean for concerts.


Odd; a common view outside of London is that London receives all the funding and attention; everywhere else does not "exist" or certainly not worthy of comment. 
We have to make do with Morris dancing and mud wrestling in our caves for our pagan "culture."


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> You wrote: "I am sure that should I listen to the music of composers, I would be able to identify its structural components, particularly its melody, as being indicative ..."
> 
> That is, precisely, a judgment of music you have not listened to. "Should I listen" implies that you have not yet listened, and thus only by prejudging it could you feel "sure" of anything about it.


I almost posted exactly the same thing last night but decided not to feed a .... oh, no - I can't finish that sentence :angel:


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

dogen said:


> We have to make do with Morris dancing and mud wrestling in our caves for our pagan "culture."


you get neither in my hermit cave - keep thy Mercian tricks to thyself


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

dogen said:


> Odd; a common view outside of London is that London receives all the funding and attention; everywhere else does not "exist" or certainly not worthy of comment.
> We have to make do with Morris dancing and mud wrestling in our caves for our pagan "culture."


You have a cave!
What we wouldn't give for a cave........etc etc etc


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Mandryka said:


> True and yet the musical life in London is so dead for recent music, I mean for concerts. Or am I just not going to the right venues.


In my opinion, if you want live classical music, there are only about ten places in the world to be, and London is one of them, up there with Vienna, Berlin, NYC, Tokyo, Paris, Amsterdam... Ok I'd better not risk listing too many, lest I get criticized for what I leave out. But you've got to be in a very big, very wealthy city, or all you get are crumbs.


----------



## Guest (Feb 20, 2015)

science said:


> crumbs.


You have crumbs!
What we wouldn't give for crumbs........etc etc etc


----------



## Polyphemus (Nov 2, 2011)

science said:


> In my opinion, if you want live classical music, there are only about ten places in the world to be, and London is one of them, up there with Vienna, Berlin, NYC, Tokyo, Paris, Amsterdam... Ok I'd better not risk listing too many, lest I get criticized for what I leave out. But you've got to be in a very big, very wealthy city, or all you get are crumbs.


You also have to take into account the Governments commitment to the arts. With decreasing subventions and slashed budgets the smaller houses inevitably suffer. If the prices get too high for what is in effect a substandard product the audiences will diminish. It is a vicious circle. I agree with you about the above cities, its lovely to go to Amsterdam London or Cologne to top quality concert halls and orchestras but in the meantime we must continue to support our local orchestras.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

dogen said:


> Odd; a common view outside of London is that London receives all the funding and attention; everywhere else does not "exist" or certainly not worthy of comment.
> We have to make do with Morris dancing and mud wrestling in our caves for our pagan "culture."


While we have to make do with Bruckner and Mahler and Beethoven and Brahms and Schubert and Elgar and Strauss. There's much less early music compared with Paris and much less recent music than Berlin or Amsterdam or New York (as far as I know -- I may have missed the venues, I hope Someguy will help here)

Oxford seems to have interesting stuff going on, and it's pretty easy to get to from The Smoke. I always find out about the good concerts too late (I missed History of Photography) And there have been some great harpsichordists playing in Bach and Norwich -- noone in London seems to invite them.

Early organ music's a complete disaster here as far as I can see.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Hah. After reading all of the above, I still have no understanding of what 'reductive' music is. Apparently it isn't minimalist, and HP's mention of sauces only seems to apply to sauces. I have never got the impression that England's (and Ireland's) music left significant stuff out; after the baroque it seems in general to be over-filled, if anything.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

> True and yet the musical life in London is so dead for recent music, I mean for concerts. Or am I just not going to the right venues.


Do you mean that Mahler, Britten and (arrrghh) Sibelius aren't modern enough for you?


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Becca said:


> Do you mean that Mahler, Britten and (arrrghh) Sibelius aren't modern enough for you?


People get so fixated on "new" music versus "old music," or even music from fifty years ago versus the _'au courant'_ of the minute.

These taxonomies are merely incidental to me.

I'm only interested in music that isn't 'today' or 'yesterday'- but only 'forever.'


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

The name is Bond, James Bond.

Lots of wonderful British composers are thriving. Continuing a new heritage.


----------

