Polish Music Journal
There has always been "contemporary music." It might affect like truism, yet it is far from a platitude. Many believe that contemporary music is only that of the present time. However, all the music of the past was once "contemporary" and it has to fight out a struggle for acceptance as long as it was evolving innovations. It was a war for survival, and the fight was always victorious.
With the increasing importance and domineering role of technique and science, general over-abundance of material goods
and rising standard of physical life in the western world, a certain decrease in intensity of reactions to musical innovations
is marking mankind of our era. Changes are too numerous and too frequent. The times of the Gluck-Piccini clashes and turbulences around Richard Wagner's revolution are over. The blasts
given to the tradition by Arnold Schoenberg (serialism) and by Igor Stravinsky (primitivism) were taken by the surrounding world calmer than they really should deserve by virtuoe of their importance; the radious of their reprecussions did not reach beyong ballet and painting, leaving aside reflections upon human society and politics. The battle for
self-prservation wenton through the past five decades of political crises, wars and aesthetical metamorphoses with considerable vehemence indeed, but it confined itself to the orbit
of musicians—obviously, in the epoch of growing specialization.
The new music exists; a new musical language is here; we must register and dodify it. But there is every reason to rebel. A resurrected Beethoven would be more intensely
shocked listening to some of today's musical products than Hucbald (840-930, organum) listening e.g.
to Beethoven's overwhelming last movement of the Ninth, with its orchestral and choral cosmos and unheard-of soloistic cantilenas, a par excellence revolutionary work in its own right. It is worth noting that conservative Europe ejected a large number of fiery protagonists of the music-by-chance idiom (Stockhausen, Boulez, Otte, Paik, Cerha, Xenakis, Bussotti, Kotonski, Cardew, among
others) and the "aleatory doctrine" is seriously revered at several European festivals, particularly in Germany, where a reasonably good contemporary work has less chance of being presented than an almost fraudulent piece of so-called
music, which simply by its daring originality gains attention (a phenomenon to be met in exhibitions of today's painting and sculpture). The meaningful saying among musicains
es muss klingen (it ought to sound) becomes travesty as teh score acoustically certainly sounds, it does not do so musically; as a matter of fact it happens that for long stretches it does not sound at all
(minute-long rests), alluding tot he "space-music" of tomorrow. THe times are forgotten when compsoers expressed something; it woudl be sheer inslut to many a composer of today if we searched in his abstarct creation expression of feelings
and moods. An "indeterminacy" fabric aims often at surprising the audience, the players and . . . the composer himself and is regarded as
fuga dalla realtá (excape from reality—Italian Berio).
Yet we do not dare to ultimately appraise the present situation; our historical perspective is too short. The critics, thw world
of tomorrow, will put forth the verdict. We must admit the existence of all these ultra-liberal streams in music
of our times, streams changing their bed in ten-, five-, even two-year cycles, for what was en vogue yesterday can be
out-moded today. What was decisive
in creative music in the past will be also in the future: the individual taste and honesty, the genius of the tonemaster, his
innate intuition leading to artistic results often in controversy to the actual likes of the world which embraces him. THere were many musicians who wrote music in
the days of all the big ones (big ones to us), but who
except the historians talks today about Kullak, Seffani, Richter, Ries, Zoellner, Zumsteed, Bossi, and dozens of others, all quite respected in thier generation?
We today are deprived of the right to judge and the privilege to know who will be accepted by the coming generations. WE can presume, we are allowed to do so, but the final judgment is beyongd our competence.
While established living American composers such as Harris, Sessions, Copland, Gianini, Barber, Piston, Creston ,Porter, Menni, Schuman and a few others
can be found on the regular symphonic concert or festival programs quite frequently, the younger ones find it harder to become recognized, or even heard. The many
music schools affiliated with our universities provide a fruitful ground for experimenting and progress ("Electronic Suite" by Prof. Lejaren A. Hiller Ji., given its
premiere this year at University of Illinois, calling for full equipment of a tape-recorder and itas lall possible accessories used at random, "Three Noh Masks" by Kyoshiga Koyama, with . . . nine shoe horns
in the score, presented recently by the ORchestra of Northwestern University), and, last but not least, composers' own organizations
create an outlet for new talent. Among them the International Society for Contemporary Music seems to be the most important (formed in 1922 in Salzburg), with chapters
founded all over the world. These operate to foster the composition and performance of modern and controversial music, with the Chicago Chapter as the most vigorous American group in the past few years.
The biggest tribute we can pay a composer is to listen to his music. Let us do it frequently. By doing so we will "understand" modern music better, we will get accustomed to it—our
children already are—we will possibly like it, and we will be at any rate more in the position to distinhuish good from bad and to discern and appreciate the
beautiful.
[1].
Phi Beta Fraternity is, according to their web site (www.phibeta.com), "a professional co-ed fraternity for persons
in the creative and performing arts. It offers its members widened horizons of artistic expression and development.
Phi Beta encourages high professional standards, scholarship and the use of its members' talents in service."
The Fraternity was founded as a student club at Northwestern University in Evanston, IL on May 5, 1912 and became a national organization
in 1917. [Back]
Copyright 2003 by the Polish Music Journal.
Contemporary Music—Yes or No
Roman Ryterband [1]
![]()

Ryterband on the cover of The Baton, Spring 1963.
USC Polish Music Center.
See its larger image.
Reaction to the Past
The Changes
Approval—Negation
The Status of Today's Composer
Audiences' Open Mind—Condition Sine Qua Non
![]()
NOTES
Reprinted from The Baton of Phi Beta (spring 1963): 4-5, 19-20. The author is identified as "Phi Beta ARtist Patron"
and the following note precedes the text: "Roman Ryterband, B.A. LL.M., M.M., composer, conductor, pianist and educator, authors the first in a series of articles on various aspects of the wtin-arts of Phi Beta to appear semi-annually in the Baton. Mr. Ryterband is outstanding in the field of contmporary musica and holds board membership in the Chicago Artists' Association, the Chicago Chapter of the International Society for Contemporary Music and is on the faculty at the Chicago Conservatory College. Flutent in six languages Mr. Ryterband has done extensive research particularly in the field of folk music of different nations. He received his education at the State
Academy of Music in Lodz and the Universities of Warsaw and Berne and has concertized througout the musical centers of Europe,
Africa and America."

Editors: Maja Trochimczyk and Linda Schubert.
Editorial Assistance: Krysta Close.
Publisher: Polish Music Center, Summer 2003.
Design: Maja Trochimczyk & Marcin Depinski.
Comments and inquiries by e-mail: polmusic@email.usc.edu