Though the author’s scope ranges from the early 19th century to the present day, it is not a comprehensive history, rather it is a sort of micro history of a musical genre born of sadness, hate, anger, and political dominance. It is a genre I have chosen to call “classical protest music”. And, for the sake of this review, I am referring to the incorporation of protest as a valid and effective modality for the contemporary composer.of so called “western art music”, Until the very late 19th century, music served mostly entertainment, celebration, worship, and memorial functions. But this is about a new, if frequently discomforting voice for this art form.

Music, like drama, and sometimes poetry are art forms that burn most brightly in performance. They exist on a page or even simply within the artist’s mind but come fully alive only in the temporal realm of performance. They then come to exist in the memories of the individuals who experience it. And those memories also exist concurrently within the overall social reality. Politics, philosophy, economics, and spirituality which ultimately frame art are now incorporated into the art form as it talks back to history.

The function of protest music in the popular or vernacular genre, one that arguably has had a greater impact in fomenting political change than than protest music in the guise of the western classical tradition, has been well documented. Not so with music of the concert hall classical format.

Jeremy Eichler’s beautifully researched and written micro history makes a case for this art form framing (or reframing) history. Of course, not all expressions of protest hit the target of actually influencing history, but this book is not about that. It is about the birth of a concept little known in music until the late 19th and early 20th century. It is a genre which persists today in the so called political classical genre.

The book is filled with historical facts and people which become metaphors as the author elucidates the historical contexts that, in retrospect, can be seen as the genesis of art not just passively responding to historical events. They are attempts to use art to comment about and, hopefully influence history and to express outrage, sadness, and to call for change.

Music, ever the realm of entertainment and celebration, now increasingly finds purpose and mechanism to participate, not only as a supplier of entertainment and homage, but also as “a voice crying in the wilderness” in dialogue with the social/political milieu.

Eichler chooses four musical pieces by four different composers from four different time periods to tell the story of the evolution of western art music to speak with in an informed, publicly intellectual voice. In its ideal presentation, it succeeds best when it resonates with the hearts and minds of the audience. That can and sometimes does “go viral” (in common parlance) and subsequently influences public opinion.

The musical exemplars the author chooses includes:

Richard Strauss (1864-1949) “Metamorphosen” (1946)

Arnold Schoenberg (1874-1951) “A Survivor from Warsaw” (1947)

Benjamin Britten (1913-1976) “War Requiem”(1962)

Dimitri Shostakovich (1906-1975) “Symphony No. 13 ‘Babi Yar’” (1962)

Each composer, each work is subjected to historical, philosophical, and (I would say) spiritual/mystical analysis. And, to accomplish this, he goes back first to the early 19th century to discuss the rise of the idealized German gconcept of “Bildung” and the subsequent rise of antisemitism famously touted as a necessary fact by Richard Wagner (1813-1883) and subsequently amplified to the extreme of The Shoah.

Many musical works are referenced here, but John Foulds “A World Requiem” (1923), which is a large grandiose work of post romantic grandeur that seems to embody many of the elements that have come to characterize classical protest music. The work, written for large forces incorporates both liturgical and non-liturgical texts from disparate sources (not just western literature). It was conceived seemingly as a sort of final statement, a “requiem to end all requiems”, so to speak. Though popular in its day, it no more succeeded in preventing violence and hatred than Alexander Scriabin (1872-1915) in his unfinished Mysterium” succeeded in making the composer an immortal in a transcendent realm described from the spiritual imagination of Theosophical writings. But it did make a huge impact on protest as a valid modality for the artist. Protest in any modality doesn’t always have the intended impact. The point is the statement itself.

Foulds’ work can be seen as a sort of precursor, if not template for Britten’s “War Requiem”. More importantly the success of Foulds’work revealed a sympathetic audience who doubtless saw in it a clarion call, a grandly hopeful expression to an audience hungry to resolve the hatred, anger, and sadness of the increasingly divided and chaotic world as it evolved post 1919. It spoke to a fervent hope for healing and transcendence and remains a historically significant work of musical art.

Doubtless, many composers were delighted to identify this burgeoning need. Countless works followed Foulds’ noble effort and continue to this day in larger and smaller forces. Protest music, visual art, poetry, and drama are born of pain, sorrow, and hope derived from a sometimes pleading, sometimes shouting optimism. Much like audience engagement in sing alongs, audiences are invited to participate politically, emotionally and share the pain, sadness, and outrage as art speaks back to society rather than simply decorating it or celebrating it. Now, art embraces critique, not simply memorial.

Eichler discusses each composer and work, contextualizing them historically, geographically, emotionally, and philosophically/spiritually.

Richard Strauss

He begins then, with Richard Strauss (1864-1949) and the only work cited here that does not have a vocal component or a text. It is also more a personal reaction rather than an a work explicitly engaging with politics and history. It remains the most unique and enigmatic piece in the oeuvre of a man who remained, if not always happily, employed from the late nineteenth century, through two world wars and horrific historical events and wildly differing leaders. To this listener’s ears, it seems more of a catharsis, a musical processing of the composer’s emotions and possibly exorcizing them and containing them in this music. It is truly a powerful piece but it does not rise to the m...

New Music Buff

Message History

Delivery option(s)