===       ===     =============        ====
             ===       ===           ==            ==     =
            == ==     ===           ==           ==      ==
           ==   ==== ===           ==           ==      ==
          ==     ==  ==           ==            =       =
         ==         ==           ==             ==    == 
        ==         ==           ==               ====
       M U S I C          T H E O R Y         O N L I N E
                    A Publication of the
                  Society for Music Theory
      Copyright (c) 1993 Society for Music Theory
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Volume 0, number 2      April, 1993      ISSN:  1067-3040   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
  General Editor                          Lee Rothfarb
  Co-Editors                              David Butler
                                          Justin London
                                          Elizabeth West Marvin
                                          David Neumeyer
                                          Gregory Proctor
  Reviews Editor                          Claire Boge
  Consulting Editors
	Bo Alphonce		Thomas Mathiesen
	Jonathan Bernard	Benito Rivera
	John Clough		John Rothgeb
	Nicholas Cook		Arvid Vollsnes
	Allen Forte		Robert Wason
	Stephen Hinton		Gary Wittlich
					  
  Editorial Assistants                    Natalie Boisvert
                                          Cynthia Gonzales
  All queries to: mto-editor@husc.harvard.edu
  This file is:  mto.93.0.2.tlk
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
AUTHOR:  Judd, Robert
TITLE:  Commentary on Neumeyer's MTO 0.1 article
REFERENCE: mto.93.0.1.neumeyer.art
File: mto.93.0.2.judd.tlk
David's essay has a couple of "spikes" of its own at the end
([19-20]).  Two things, somewhat distinct, struck me.  1) "I suppose
it is no secret that [music theorists'] language or methods are not
designed to facilitate judgments of value, but only to support them
after they have been made.  Perhaps the most far-reaching implication
[of the essay] is that the link between the tools of technical musical
criticism and the ideology of masterwork culture is not at all
secure."  If the first sentence is true, the second is also no secret
at all.  Surely it is axiomatic that one's direction at point of
departure determines where one goes?  Value judgements would seem to
fall under the subject of aesthetics, and I wonder why DN didn't talk
more about issues of aesthetics in the essay.  (Or, for that matter,
issues of cognition: how one sound is perceived to "mean" or be apt
for some given dramatic event.)
2)  I also wonder why DN didn't raise the issue of opera composition;
I hope it's not too banal to draw attention to the close
genre-relation of film music and opera music: indeed, opera seems even
better suited to a discussion of how music supports a desired
"physical" mood, or how music interacts with drama.  Perhaps you could
comment, David?  
I agree with the final spike, "where's the real tinsel?"  Indeed, it's
not such a black-and-white, pop vs. masterwork culture, thing, as we
all know.  E.g., I may choose to study "pop" opera, e.g. Madame
Butterfly; you may choose "masterwork" opera, e.g. Salome.  Which is
tinsel?  obvious.  Why?  depends on your ideology.  But we could also
group Salome AND Madame Butterfly as "masterwork" compared to
"Showboat", couldn't we?  
Therefore, could perhaps a finer delineation of types of cultures and
ideologies than DN's binary one be drawn up?  If not, why not?
Thanks again for getting this stuff going.  I found it most
interesting, & hope others too will offer some reactions.
Bob Judd
robert_judd@zimmer.csufresno.edu
======================================
AUTHOR:  Kosovsky, Bob
TITLE:  Commentary on Neumeyer's MTO 0.1 essay
REFERENCE: mto.93.0.1.neumeyer.art
File:  mto.93.0.2.kosovsky.tlk
I believe that the derivations of film music stem not so much from opera
or "serious music" (or "classical music" - whatever you want to call it --
the stuff you go to a concert hall to hear) but from more of the popular
idioms of the time.  Now granted, operatic and symphonic music were used
in abundance to accompany silent films (Ride of the Valkyries accompanied
the ride of the KKK in Griffith's BIRTH OF A NATION (1915) -- but so
were popular tunes of the day.  (Momentary excursis:  part of the problem
I'm having in separating classical from popular music genres stems occurs
from a time -- prior to WW I -- when such distinctions are not as clear
as they would later become.)
And I think that it's also not a question
of what was used, but HOW it was used.  Basing my understanding of silent
film music mostly on early sound films (those in which there was a 
syncronized soundtrack without dialogue -- and such films dating from the late
1920s and early 1930s, must represent an advanced stage of silent film
music compositional art -- e.g. DON JUAN (1926), SUNRISE (1927), even
CITY LIGHTS (1931)), I would say that the use of music is not really like
what you find in opera.  In fact, I would say that the use of music in
silent films probably bears a closer resemblance to music that was used
in Broadway shows.  When I first heard that recent recording of SHOW BOAT, I
was amazed to hear the unsung music ("background music" -- not in the 
Schenkerian sense!) because it worked in the same way as does the silent
films with music that I've seen.  Though the opera-to-movies path seems
tempting, I think the available evidence does not follow it.
One additional tangential note.  The usually-heard story about Schoenberg
and movies is based on the one from the biography by Willi Reich.  In
brief, it states that the head of MGM was considering Schoenberg as a 
composer for THE GOOD EARTH.  Schoenberg stated his conditions:  "I want
$50,000, and a guarantee that not one note will be changed" -- "Thus ends
the relationship of Schoenberg to the movies" says Reich.  But in fact
there must be more.  According to the catalogs of the Arnold Schoenberg
institute, there exists quite a bit of music written for THE GOOD EARTH
and for another film (of which I don't remember the title).  It would be
interesting to examine these sketches as evidence of how Schoenberg
envisioned the relationship of music to film, and to see how it relates
to the Begleitungsmusik, Op. 34.
Bob Kosovsky
Graduate Center -- Ph.D. Program in Music(student)/ City University of New York
New York Public Library -- Music Division
bitnet:   kos@cunyvms1.bitnet        internet: kos@cunyvms1.gc.cuny.edu
Disclaimer:  My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my 
             institutions.
=============================================
AUTHOR:  Neumeyer, David
TITLE:  Reaction to comments on the MTO 0.1 essay
REFERENCE: mto.93.0.1.neumeyer.art
File:  mto.93.0.2.neumeyer.tlk
Many thanks to Bob Kosovsky and Steve Smoliar for the Schoenberg/film-music
leads. NOSFERATU, like THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI, do seem such obvious
choices for Schoenberg's Op. 34 that I will indeed spend some time hunting up
releases (or performances). 
As to the Schoenberg/MGM story, this has been confused so many times over the
years with a similar Stravinsky/MGM story (Stravinsky wanted $100,000 and a
year to compose his score--the money was no problem; it was the schedule that
killed the deal) that many skeptics--including myself--have assumed that only
one of them is true. William Rosar (in Clifford McCarty's FILM MUSIC I) has
documented the Stravinsky story very thoroughly, but, if Bob's statement about
Schoenberg sketches for THE GOOD EARTH is correct, it would appear that 
perhaps BOTH stories are in fact true.  Rosar does discuss MGM's motivations 
for approaching well-known "serious" composers--they were quite similar to
Warners' reasons for hiring Erich Korngold: to bring in a prestige name (read
"European concert composer") at a time when extensive symphonic underscoring
was very fashionable. Which plays into the "tinsel" question, no?
And, a footnote/correction: David Broekman was music director for Universal
and it's well known that he did not write some of the music that is credited
to him (this was quite common in the early 30's--and at some studios (including
Paramount and 20th Century Fox) much later). The music for FRANKENSTEIN is not
credited and I took the word of one usually reliable source that Broekman
wrote the music for the main titles. But in fact he didn't--William Rosar
again (quoted in Randall Larson's MUSIQUE FANTASTIQUE) has found that it was
Bernard Kaun, who was the son of Hugo Kaun and is best known as an orchestrator
(he worked with Max Steiner quite a bit).
David Neumeyer
neumeyer@ucs.indiana.edu
========================================
AUTHOR:  O'Donnell, Shaugn
TITLE:  Commentary on Neumeyer's MTO 0.1 essay
REFERENCE: mto.93.0.1.neumeyer.art
File:  mto.93.0.2.odonnell.tlk
Just a quick reaction to Robert Judd's comments about David  
Neumeyer's "Schoenberg at the Movies." While several of his points  
are pertinent (e.g., on aesthetics and cognition), the issue of opera  
composition doesn't seem particularly relevant. I find a rather  
substantial genre-gap between opera music and film music (a notable  
exception being musicals). A film score generally acts as a gloss on  
the drama, hence the possibility of Neumeyer's commutation tests,  
while an opera score is a musical version of the drama. (Just listen  
to Schoenberg's Op. 34 on your headphones next time you enjoy a  
performance of Salome to test this.) I don't mean to downplay the  
significance of the relationship between drama and music in either  
genre, but the two perspectives are remarkably different and  
therefore merit distinct treatment regarding aesthetic, cognitive,  
and analytic issues. The contrast between the performance orientation  
of opera music and the artificial soundspace (created by modern  
recording technology) of more recent film music further separates  
these two genres.
In reference to the "tinsel" question: I say it's all music, from MTV  
to the concert hall, whether it's Bartok's Fourth Quartet, Coltrane's  
"Giant Steps," Lennon's "Imagine," or anything else you care to name  
(Baroque fugue, rap song, etc.). I may be laughably naive, but is  
there really any need for the continual segregation of the musical  
world into "cultivated" and "vernacular" traditions?
Shaugn O'Donnell
Queens College/CUNY
odonnell@aaron.music.qc.edu
=============================================
AUTHOR:  Smoliar, Stephen
TITLE:  Commentary on Neumeyer's MTO 0.1 essay
REFERENCE: mto.93.0.1.neumeyer.art
File:  mto.93.0.2.smoliar.tlk
I have one comment to offer about David's article in response to his request
for information about films which used the music of Schoenberg's Opus 34.
There was an Ojai Festival somewhere around the summer of 1980 at which Lukas
Foss conducted a program on the theme of music and cinema.  During his
performance of Opus 34, he had an excerpt from the original (silent) NOSFERATU
projected on a screen behind the orchestra.  Unfortunately, I do not have the
resources out here in Singapore to provide an accurate reconstruction of the
event;  but I shall supply what my memory can.  I am almost certain that Foss
conducted all three movements, without interruption, just letting the film run,
without changing shots for the different movements.  I also believe that the
portion of the film he used was the one in which we see the Count entering the
bedroom with the camera looking over his shoulder, allowing us to see that he
is not reflected in the mirror.  The also includes a few cuts to close-up shots
of his face.  That is the best I can recall without sitting down with my
videotape of the film.
Stephen W. Smoliar; Institute of Systems Science
National University of Singapore; Heng Mui Keng Terrace
Kent Ridge, SINGAPORE 0511
Internet:  smoliar@iss.nus.sg
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
8. Copyright Statement
[1] Music Theory Online (MTO) as a whole is Copyright (c) 1993,
all rights reserved, by the Society for Music Theory, which is
the owner of the journal.  Copyrights for individual items 
published in (MTO) are held by their authors.  Items appearing in 
MTO may be saved and stored in electronic or paper form, and may be 
shared among individuals for purposes of scholarly research or 
discussion, but may *not* be republished in any form, electronic or 
print, without prior, written permission from the author(s), and 
advance notification of the editors of MTO.
[2] Any redistributed form of items published in MTO must
include the following information in a form appropriate to
the medium in which the items are to appear:
	This item appeared in Music Theory Online
	in [VOLUME #, ISSUE #] on [DAY/MONTH/YEAR]. 
	It was authored by [FULL NAME, EMAIL ADDRESS],
	with whose written permission it is reprinted 
	here.
[3] Libraries may archive issues of MTO in electronic or paper 
form for public access so long as each issue is stored in its 
entirety, and no access fee is charged.  Exceptions to these 
requirements must be approved in writing by the editors of MTO, 
who will act in accordance with the decisions of the Society for 
Music Theory.
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
END OF MTO ITEMS