At the symphony, melodic music is more memorable — but does that make it better?
Music has a long history of binary divisions in style.
In the Renaissance and Baroque eras it was religious music written for ecclesiastical functions versus secular music. Later, it was programmatic music that told explicit stories vs. absolute music, which is music for its own sake.
More recently, say the 20th and 21st centuries, there has been sharp disagreement about whether melody is a positive aspect of music or an unfashionable pastiche of historical style.
Consider as a case study Friday’s Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra concert, which featured music from both of these camps. Star violinist Hilary Hahn joined guest conductor Juanjo Mena in a program of music by the Argentinian composer Alberto Ginastera (1916-1983), the American composer James Lee III (1975), Spain’s Pablo De Sarasate (1844-1908) and England’s Edward Elgar (18571934).
Needless to say, the 19th century composers were more tune-based and whistle-able. But does that make them “better?”
Melody and memory
Melody isn’t the only memorable musical element. Composers can build works from rhythmic cells and harmonic progressions as well, but melody is the most easily recognizable way to develop an emotional arc, whether there’s a specific story in the music or not.
Elgar’s famous “Enigma Variations” anchored and closed the program, a warm, familiar collection of variations on a theme describing the composer’s friends in vivid musical detail. (In addition to being based on a single tune, the piece is also therefore programmatic. In contrast, symphonies, for example, are generally “absolute” works of music.) The work opens with a clear statement of its melody before recasting the tune with different instruments and in different keys, suggesting different characters and emotions in an easily comprehensible way.
On Friday, Mr. Mena’s interpretation sounded cluttered and messy, with fuzzy edges that obfuscated some of the work’s more pristine writing. Still, the orchestra brought Elgar’s cast of characters to life with reasonable vivacity.
The other work on the second half was Sarasate’s “Carmen” Fantasy, a showpiece for violin and orchestra based on tunes from Bizet’s famous opera. The piece is a celebration of the violin’s capabilities as an instrument. Ms. Hahn delivered a controlled account of the piece, its edges a bit smoothed for my taste, though she cut loose at the close.
Abstract art
Ms. Hahn also performed Ginastera’s Violin Concerto, a denser work with a formal scaffolding far more intricate than Elgar’s variations. The melodic material Ginastera transforms and harkens back to throughout the work isn’t tuneful, however — it’s more fragmentary, bursts of color and passion apparent in tight trills and arpeggios. Ms. Hahn was in her element here, and she delivered a masterful account of the work’s blazing passages and thoughtful reflections alike.
Textures and tones are interestingly varied, but it’s tougher to connect with the work’s abstraction.
Finally, the concert opened with Lee’s “Sukkot Through Orion’s Nebula,” a programmatic, musical take on the Jewish festival by the same name. In contrast to the Elgar, this 11-minute work is more fragmentary and opaque — a detailed program note explains how the material develops, but it’s more varied in temperament and, again, trickier to connect with than the more straightforward works like the Sarasate and Elgar.
I’m no philistine, but I’ve come to liken the difference in styles between melody driven music and non-melodic music to the difference between figurative and abstract visual art. Figurative art is easier to engage with and enjoy on some levels, but of course this doesn’t make it “better.” It simply asks less of us as viewers.
On the other hand, I find the energy and variance of abstract works engaging, but I gravitate toward simple, more geometric and angular works. (Calder and Mondrian jump to mind, for example.) The amount of variation in abstract styles is both a strength and weakness — frankly I find the majority to be impenetrable or even pretentious, but the styles I connect with resonate just as well as the figurative masters I enjoy.
The same can be said of music. While I personally don’t enjoy Ginastera’s music, I found Lee’s orchestration engagingly direct. I’d never write off non-melodic music as a genre, however I think its inherent abstruseness gives this style an uphill battle.
It’s all a matter of taste.