Comments on: David Bruce: The Next Osvaldo Golijov?

By: dieter ammann

dieter ammann — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 00:31:32 +0000

Thank you, Steve. Very interesting AND funny at the same time. Did’nt understand everything at all, but liked the things I understood…;-)

By: zeno

zeno — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:23:37 +0000

“Notice his mentions have grown much rarer the last couple years.”

J.S. Bach also apparently had a similar problem after his trip to Sans Souci didn’t pan out as he had expected and blindness started setting in. And then there were his pesky but talented kids and their musical fads.

By: Steve Layton

Steve Layton — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 02:18:40 +0000

Dieter, I’ve heard and had so many of the same questions, conversations and debates the past decade or two, that I think I might do just as well to send everyone to read this blog al the way through:

http://www.classicalmusicisboring.com/archive/2011/01/cmib00077.html

By: dieter ammann

dieter ammann — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 01:10:29 +0000

In my opinion, the discussion concerning aesthetics and style in contemporary music is very different in the USA than it is in (Western)Europe. Anything goes….

By: Steve Layton

Steve Layton — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:14:09 +0000

Gee, the next Golijov already, when Golijov himself has barely had time to be the first! …Notice his mentions have grown much rarer the last couple years.

By: Frank J. Oteri

Frank J. Oteri — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 12:48:03 +0000

You might be interested in a talk I did with David Bruce last year during one of the bad snow storms; I think he had some really astute stuff to say…

http://www.newmusicbox.org/article.nmbx?id=6273

FJO (in the press room at MIDEM trying to catch up with Seq21 during a lunch break)

By: Jeff Harington

Jeff Harington — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 08:06:56 +0000

The thing about this new generation of melodic composers, is that I often get the feeling that they don’t understand that you live and die by your material, and given that, I just don’t get the need to go back and hear it again. Really good melodic music makes you just love it, like a good pop song or rock song. You hit replay immediately at the end. We should be getting these types of emotional reactions – if the material was great. This is just simple nice stuff, but it would be B-Side stuff for a rock or pop group. Classical music of the past and rock music of the past is loved now, not only because it’s ‘great’, but because it’s lovable. It invites adoration. You can’t get it out of your head!

And since they’re still claiming that this is ‘classical music’, how about a contrasting section, proof in some manner that your material is not only superb, but is plastic and mutable; that you can control the listening experience. Otherwise, it’s really just crossover pop music. Thanks for introducing this composer to us and thanks for your much warranted enthusiasm.

By: Paul Pettigrew

Paul Pettigrew — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 02:24:02 +0000

I note the creative “storm-in-a-teacup” discussion but all I can say is that it is truly amazing here in far-off Western Australia to be able to hear all this musical activitiy freely available on-call. Has anyone sampled the Carpe Diem String Quartet programmes on IntantEncore. Maybe a trifle too “old-fashioend” for some but truly bloody beaut (and heartfelt) to listen to!
My only complaint is that the University of Wisconsin-River Falls Commissioned Composer series doesn’t specify exactly WHAT is being played other than to name the pieces “track 1″, “track 2″, etc. Superb to listen to but what exactly ARE Julia Wolfe’s tracks 1-5 in Guard My Tongue? Kind of spoils the listening experience??

By: Christian Hertzog

Christian Hertzog — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 22:56:11 +0000

I listened to The Eye of Night about 8 or 9 times (thanks Instant Encore–you are a blessing to reviewers!). Unlike Golijov’s music, which reveals diminishing returns (to my ears) upon relistening, Bruce’s music continues to work very well. By that alone, I am impressed. I can’t imagine listening to a Demase work 7 times in a row and it holding my interest.

Yes, his music is conservative. But unlike wishy-washy tonal composers today, Bruce writes full, gratifying melodies (perhaps illustrative of what Mizzy Mazzoli wished for in a recent editorial: http://n.pr/eqXfeX ). And unlike pop-influenced composers who wink at us (like say, Paul Schoenfield or even some Golijov), Bruce is completely sincere. There is a direct honesty to his music. Check out his Carnegie Hall work, Piosenki. http://www.davidbruce.net/works/piosenki.asp

It’s exceedingly well written and compelling.

I’m not arguing Bruce is a great composer–there aren’t many composers under 40 I would say that about (Ades maybe). But I am predicting that he will be very successful if he continues to write works like The Eye of Night and Piosenki. If you want novelty or an original voice, go elsewhere. But if you want some good solid tunes cast in sturdy forms, Bruce can provide that. And that IMHO is nothing to disparage.

By: Tom Jackson

Tom Jackson — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 21:46:24 +0000

I was hoping “bob d.” could enlighten us by giving a few examples of what David Bruce should be doing instead. It’s hard for me to think of a current composer who doesn’t use gestures that are “familiar.”