As young musicians readying to enter our field at the very beginning of the twenty-first century, the question of where music is headed in the new millenium (and beyond) is one that affects us personally and deeply. After all, the answer will determine, to a large degree, our role in the period of music history encompassing our lifespan.

How unfortunate, then, that the past hundred years of music history seems to yield few clues as to the nature of its continuation. This essay will discuss briefly the class readings on this topic.

As a strong believer in the value of electronic and computer-generated music, I feel it is only proper that I begin by objecting to the points raised by George Rochberg in his speech of 1971. Rochberg argues strongly against the overlapping of art with science, denouncing such works as “devoid of human content” and “morally void.”

Rochberg's reasoning seems fundamentally flawed, however: he appears to be arguing both that science is all-pervasive in our society, and that art cannot (and must not) reflect upon science. This makes no sense, if we accept the definition of art as a reflection of our own human experience. In a society heavily focussed on science and technology; on machinery, and computers, and procedure; it is not only natural and permissible but inevitable that art forms reflecting these qualities will emerge. And indeed they have: minimalist artwork, serialist music, musique concrète, and electronic music all in some way reflect the highly-deterministic nature of late-twentieth-century human society, and in that regard they are all part of a “humanistic tradition.”

I suspect that Rochberg would also have reservations about the advancements in recording technology which have evolved, even those only of the thirty years since his speech was written. An ongoing trend is the shifting of control of musical performances from the artists to the audience, beginning with the introduction of the phonograph record and continuing up to the newest developments in consumer audio (most notably the widespread adoption of MPEG Layer-III, or “MP3”, compression). The public now has unprecedented power in controlling when, where and to what music they listen. This is a trend not likely to be reversed. It presents to musicians a double-edged sword: with this power people are every bit as capable of choosing what music they won't listen to as what music they will, which threatens to increase even further the separation between popular and “serious” (or experimental) music. However, with the ability to distribute high-quality recordings at virtually no cost, a lot of opportunities have developed for lesser-known artists to be heard.

With everything I have learned in this course, I cannot help but feel that there will be a return (at least partially) to tonality and other “classical” ideals in the twenty-first century. Composers of the current era seem to have taken great delight in straying as far as possible from musical tradition—not always, I suspect, with clear goals in mind—and have sometimes alienated themselves a great deal from their listeners as a result. In this regard, I agree wholeheartedly with the opinions Jeremy Beck expresses in his article, “Anything Goes? Composition at the Turn of the Century”. A great deal of music has been written in the past century that, examined objectively, shows little evidence of musical talent or understanding of music theory. I also have no doubt that the “trends” in music society which Professor Beck mentions have caused important (but, perhaps, tonal) works to be overlooked. (I find this personally distressing, as I have little interest in composing atonal music and would obviously prefer to have any compositions of mine stand or fall on their own merit.)

I think it is possible that, in response to the unreserved and unlimited approach to music of this century, the next generation of composers will begin to lean back towards ideals of the Romantic period, with tonality left stretched to a highly expressive form but not altogether abandoned.

On the subject of alienation from one's audience is Milton Babbitt's article, “The Composer as Specialist”, in which he discusses both the inevitability and the need for composers to operate away from public scrutiny and with the support of universities. Babbitt makes a very convincing argument; so much so that I find myself now forced to agree with him. It is true that music has advanced quickly in the past century, and that it has in some ways outstripped the ability of the average listener to appreciate. The improvements in recordable media since the publication of this article and the towering recording industry itself has, I would argue, greatly deepened the rift between “popular” and “serious” musics. If music is to be advanced further, it will now almost need to occur in a secure, academic environment like that promoted by Babbitt.

And yet it is always unclear to me why music needs to be “pushed forward,” particularly in the radical directions some twentieth-century composers have chosen to pursue. I am not convinced that Babbitt knows why, either, for in defending Webern's composition of “experimental,” atonal compositions his most compelling argument is that a major record label has recently decided to record Webern's entire output—as though it were simply the recording of music that justifies its creation, rather than anything intrinsic to the music itself or its applicability to anything external. Babbitt then at least partially redeems himself by stating at the end of his article that it is the “evolution” of music which guarantees its preservation, but even this argument seems to be only superfically valid.

In the end, I am left with a very poor grasp on what music's role in society is, beyond simply satisfying the need to fill silent gaps of time. It is not even clear to me why I myself am studying music, except that years of experience has proven to me that I will not be happy doing anything else. I am still not sure what musical role, if any, I will pursue once I have finished my education. However, I am confident that as I continue to learn about and experiment with music, I will start to develop answers to these questions. If nothing else, I certainly am excited to see in what directions music will develop throughout my lifetime.