|
| |
How did the Earl of Kelly effect British Composition in the mid-18th
century?
The sixth Earl
of Kelly apparently had some musical talent and a desire to be part of the chic
music scene circa 1750 (give or take a decade or so). The leading center
for advanced musical thought was Mannheim. There, composers such as Johann Stamitz, Christian Cannabich and others were creating something new, something
that eventually made the transition from the earlier Baroque style into the
newer Classical style (moving from the sounds of Bach/Handel to that of
Haydn/Mozart). He went to Mannheim for a few years and played in their
orchestra and learned from their composers. Not having their talent,
however, he decided that he'd rather be a big fish in the smaller pond of
England than be a very small fish in the highly competitive and creative
brilliance that was Mannheim (and by extension Munich, Salzburg, Vienna, Prague,
and basically much of Central Germanic Europe). So, he returned to Edinburgh
and London with all these new ideas he'd gathered in Mannheim. Now, while
he was less a composer than those he had been with in Germany, he was a better
composer than many of his colleagues in Britain. Although, this could in
fact be somewhat debated. What he did have, however, was a full knowledge and
skill at the avant-garde styles that were emanating from and which within a few
decades made central Europe around Vienna the leading center for music
composition (Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven are the big names, but there were many
somewhat lesser lights such as Salieri, Dittersdorf, Paisiello, etc. - all of
whom sound like Mozart or Haydn but not quite as brilliant. So, the 3rd
Earl, Thomas Erskine, became something of a fad/celebrity in his home country
and his new style (as in the rest of Europe) began to replace the music of
Purcell, Handel, Arne, and Boyce who were the leading names of the earlier
century.
Now, the real major effect the Earl had on British composition was actually
negative. When Handel arrived in London from his native Germany, he quickly
studied the reigning English composers and went through the archives to study
earlier British composers such as John Blow and Henry Purcell. Being a
fun-type person, he also spent time in the pubs absorbing English dance and
song. So, when Handel rose to fame, he managed to write in a style that was at
the same time German Baroque (like Bach) mixed with an understanding of Italian
Baroque (Vivaldi who basically influenced everybody including Bach) and large
doses of what the English would have accepted as traditionally their style.
Which is why Messiah feels so English or the Water Music or the Fireworks music
etc. Basically, everybody in England wanted to copy Handel and since Handel had
absorbed English style, the copying was easier than had he been a total
foreigner in compositional technique. What the 3rd Earl did was to introduce a
totally new approach to composition (albeit one that had been introduced through
the popularity of Johann Christan Bach, a son of earlier mentioned and today
more famous J S, but primarily through the opera). In order to fully
convey the radical new style, Erskine (3rd Earl, these English people have a bad
habit of referring to themselves sometimes through name and sometimes through
title and sometimes they have more then 1 title and they just seem to use
whatever comes first to mind) had to essentially impart a Germanic style upon
the English tradition which meant, in order to be totally hip and with it,
breaking with the older tradition rather than integrating with it as Handel had
done. But because it was a foreign style perfected by Erskine, it was
never truly his style and therefore, pleasant as his music is, little of it is
at masterpiece level. Because it became further watered down through those who
were influenced by Erskine - thus adopting the style second hand, so to speak -
English composers started to lose their individuality and were creating
symphonies and concertos in the manner of the Mannheimers which later would be
in the manner of Haydn and Mozart. But, their work is of little value other
than pleasant entertainment in and of itself. Which probably also explains the
almost hysterical love of Haydn's music (and Mozart's) in the 1790s.
Haydn's visits to London were almost as fan-fevered as were the visits of the
Beatles to the US 170 years later. Well, maybe not quite that extreme, but for
the times close. Because Haydn (and Mozart would have come but died) was
writing in the style introduced by Erskine and for Haydn it was a style that was
part of who he was rather than a style that was learned and adopted, and
therefore always with some degree of imitation as opposed to natural creativity.
It took the English composers almost a full century to rediscover their own
roots and be able to integrate their traditions with the mainstream late
Romantic compositional style. Gilbert & Sullivan were probably the first,
though their success was only in musical theatre. It wasn't until Vaughan
WIlliams, Frederick Delius, Edward Elgar and Gustav Holst began composing in the
1790-1930 period did English composition regain a place of importance and
influence.
|
