>What changed around 1800 was how widespread the acclaim for these 
musicians became. Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven were the first 
composers to have European-wide reputations that outlasted them. 

A couple of things caused this:

1. development of commercial mechanisms to allow publishing and 
distribution continent-wide (culture-wide).

2. the rise of a middle class to buy music (and perhaps doing so as a 
way of taking on the airs of the upper class).

Before that time music was largely local (with many notable 
exceptions, of course, but none with the reach of either of the 
Classical period's big three).

So, I would argue that the beginning of the Classical canon is 
probably a result of the industrial revolution.

There's also a huge role in there for the rise of German nationalism, 
but that's another thesis entirely.

-- 
David W. Fenton                        

Both 1) and 2) were well established long before 1800, though admittedly not so 
strongly. As for the localism
of earlier music, I would suggest that at the very least Lully and Corelli (not to 
mention, e.g., Josquin des Prez
and Palestrina) had continent-wide fame and influence, and virtually all major Bq. 
composers had significant 
influence beyond the borders of their own nations.

But the main argument against this theory is that neither the rise of the middle class 
nor of music publishing
could have had any effect on the main cause of music's ephemerality, which was 
fashion, pure and simple.
The aging Schuetz, writing to request a pension from his employer, quoted an overheard 
conversation in
which someone remarked (punning on the Thirty Years War) that "a thirty-years cantor 
and a thirty-years
tailor are of no use to anybody in this world." Even today composers' reputations tend 
to take a big
hit when they are in their seventies, then rise again later (regardless of when they 
actually die). When I was a 
college freshman in 1964 the conventional wisdom RE Stravinsky was that he had written 
a handful of 
undeniably great works in his youth, but had gone steadily downhill ever since. Ten 
years later it was 
fashionable to sneer at Copland, Hindemith, and Shostakovich. In 1900, Gottschalk was 
considered a bad joke. 
Only a few years ago Crumb was being dismissed in certain circles as a has-been. I 
could go on forever.

Before 1800, when a composer went out of fashion, the decline was irreversible, and 
the composer would become
totally forgotten. What changed things was the Romantic cult of genius, which held 
that a great work of art
was of permanent and unchanging value, a notion that we still maintain. 

Andrew Stiller
Kallisti Music Press
htp://home.netcom.com/~kallisti
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to