Te Deum (2012) (mp3)

Jubilate (2011) (mp3)

 O salutaris hostia (2008) (mp3)

 Two de la Mare Songs (2012) (mp3)

Not the world’s best photo (it doesn’t help that no-one is looking at the camera) but proof I was in Poland with Paweł Łukaszewski and Douglas Pew.

So what makes it so inspiring but yet so baffling?

Well, to really get to the nub of this issue you would have to know the vast output of RVW’s work, to understand his position as celebrated musical icon of the first half of the twentieth-century and a little of his religious, political and social beliefs. But presuming you don’t know much about that, it comes down to two things: the idea behind it, and the way it sounds.

Flos Campi (literally translated as ‘Flower of the Fields’, if anything adding to the RVW pastoralism) is a work for small orchestra, solo viola and wordless chorus. This combination in itself is very odd, beautiful and inspired, but very odd. One can imagine RVW sitting at his desk and thinking “today I’m going to write something different! Where shall I start? Orchestra? Yes. Solo violin? No, a viola would be more different. Anything else? Well why not – a wordless chorus!” Not a usual combination (certainly not for 1925) but one that works so well and constantly make the ears tingle with new sonorities. The work is separated into six movements each of which is prefaced with a quotation in Latin (and why not?) from the Old Testament Song of Solomon, one of the most sensual and sexually charged passages of the Bible. This sensuality is reflected in RVW’s music, moving from the languishing for love to the final ecstasies, to what can only be described as the gentle consummation of the sixth section. Steamy stuff. And not a lark in sight.

The work begins with a celebrated bi-tonal (two keys played simultaneously) duet for oboe and viola which sets the mood for the piece as a whole; this then gives way to unusual parallel intervals in the orchestra before the impassioned entry of the choir. The second movement seeks to neutralise some of that passion with long modal polyphony (many voices) in the choir and folky elements from the viola – much more the RVW that many know and love. It is in the fourth movement that we really get to the bonkers stuff, a strange full orchestra pagan dance which sounds something like a 1930s film score of a Medieval banquet, full of droning woodwind, staccato brass and more parallel fourths and fifths. To emphasise this silliness, the fifth movement returns to the modal polyphony but now with a quiet side drum beating the dance rhythm from earlier. Just odd. The final movement returns to the oboe/viola duet before a long passage of beautiful pastoral polyphony, finishing with the solo viola.

It is a strange piece, in fact it feels like two strange pieces surgically attached to each other. It seems to ask so many questions: why the instrumental combinations? Why the Latin text but wordless chorus? Why the crazy dance and lush polyphony? Why never do anything like this again? Maybe because these questions aren’t easily answerable it becomes more alluring. Certainly of all RVW’s output it is Flos Campi that seems to appeal most to current composers (both Adès and Knussen have stated such) and although never likely to be performed that often (due to the instrumental resources), it seems to be getting more performances as the years go by. I like the quote from Gustav Holst (he of some equally baffling music including the exotic Sāvitri and the Beni Mora suite) after hearing the first performance: “I couldn’t get hold of it”. I agree. But it’s great.

PAC

Flos Campi (movement 1)

To purchase this recording (Jacques Orchestra, Cecil Aronowitz, EMI 567221) click here.

So what is in this letter, and why write it? Well, to cut a long story short, there were several organisations all working within the field of contemporary music that were merged to form Sound and Music in 2008. This new organisation is an Arts Council funded body with a remit to provide opportunities and enhance our awareness and understanding of contemporary music making of all persuasions. Nothing wrong with that. However, the general feeling is that Sound and Music has been focusing a little too much on the Sound rather than the Music – i.e. more on sound installations, sonic art etc rather than notated, ‘acoustic’ (again, for want of a better term) music of the Colin Matthews, Nicola LeFanu type.

Whether this is entirely true is a moot point. Certainly Sound and Music does cater very extensively for the sonic art part of the deal – this is an area of music I know very little about, so it would be wrong to suggest if practitioners of this are happy with the coverage they get or not (though I’d like to know). There is plenty of information and opportunities for acoustic composers on the Sound and Music website; you just have to search for it quite hard, often navigating unfamiliar events, composers and language to get to something useful. I think part of the problem is that with the previous organisations (SPNM – Society for the Promotion of New Music, and the BMIC – British Music Information Centre) composers knew exactly what they were getting, where to look for it and were ‘safe’ in the knowledge that there was at least one organisation with their best wishes at heart. It just isn’t apparent now that this is the case – or is it?

I think it is admirable that the composing fraternity are mobilising to action, and through various means of communication it appears that 90% are pro-action against Sound and Music – it has almost become something of a cause célèbre, something to be seen to be for. However it is some of the dissenting voices that have generated the most interest for me, some questioning the role of art music, it’s reliance on funding bodies, it’s clinging to tradition; some questioning whether the SPNM was actually any good, did it provide the opportunities people suggest, did it favour establishment types over genuine new voices? Certainly, with a new director of Sound and Music to be announced, it is time to have these discussions and to raise these questions. All forms of contemporary music making (with the exception of popular musical forms) are niche and any attempt to narrow exposure to them would seem a folly – surely all artists involved in contemporary music should bond together for the greater good – isn’t that the point of Sound and Music?

For what it is worth, I gave up my membership of SPNM when it merged in 2008, not necessarily because I objected to the merger but mainly because I never felt like I was getting anywhere with applying to the various schemes and opportunities. I felt quite disenfranchised with the organisation and wanted to make my point (which I’m sure they felt!) though hold no hard feelings. I think there should be an organisation helping young composers, providing opportunities, giving people their first tastes of the professional music world, but like all government funded bodies we shouldn’t be too reliant on them, because once they’re gone, they’re gone.

PAC