OK - so let's start to try to unpack the following examples of the wisdom of Mr Pace as communicated to us via our resident 11-inch vessel (sorry, John - no rudeness intended, so please don't take it as any!)...
Ian Pace:
Some of these comments look like they are something of a simplification of what I would have said (or maybe came out rather simplistically when typed in a hurry), but basically:
"Sorabji's compositional techniques are rudimentary and require no talent."
I think the sentiment was to do with how Sorabji's abilities in terms of harmonic and contrapuntal writing seem deeply limited, in terms of his ability to distinguish between the quality of results - running through the motions with little or no refinement with respect to the result. Hence those interminable fugues, for example. It's a few years since I looked at quite a bit of his music in detail, though - definitely remember finding the compositional ability deeply limited.
What seems to be most "limited" here is the information that Mr Pace provides. I note with interest but no surprise that he admits to having not examined Sorabji's music in detail for some time, but what does he really tell us here? He does not expand at all on what he perceives Sorabji's harmonic and contrapuntal "limitations" to be, still less offer examples with explanation. What does he mean by "his ability to distinguish between the quality of results"? Is he suggesting that some of Sorabji's works are noticeably better and less harmonically and contrapuntally flawed than others but that the composer could not tell the difference between them? If so, which are the better and which are the worse ones and on what specific grounds might such value judgements be made? Alas, Mr Pace refrains from revealing his secret here, as elsewhere. By what measure are Sorabji's fugues "interminable" (which term is, of course, to be taken not literally but as an analogy for "over-long")? And is he claiming this disproportionality for all of them or only some and, if the latter, which are OK and which not - and why? Oddly enough, he doesn't tell us this either!
"Sorabji's music expresses extremely misogynistic sentiments."
There's one of his essays in which Sorabji's total and utter contempt and dismissal for female musicians, and anything social constructed as 'feminine' in music. I would argue that his music has a lot to do with eliminating all such elements.
Well, go on, then - argue it, Mr Pace! But, of course, he doesn't, apparently believing it sufficient to state that he "would" seek to argue it! It isn't.
Sorabji certainly did take issue with the adequacy of the physique of certain performers and, in just one of around 60 chapters in his two books of essays, made some trenchant remarks on this subject, many of which were directed towards women performers.
At this point, I should perhaps point out that, in a number of Ian's written observations, he has decided to conclude that I wholly support every word that Sorabji wrote and spoke and every thought that he ever had. Why he should do this, other than in a pointlessly desperate attempt to support one of his arguments, is unclear. As it is, of course, neither I nor any of Sorabji's performers, editors or sholars are mere "clones" of the composer in the way that such a sentiment appears to suggest.
Anyway, whilst by no means seeking to defend Sorabji's every word about women instrumentalists, I do feel that it is sensible and proportional to point out that he was not backwards in coming forward when the performances of particular women delighted him; examples that spring immediately to mind are Guilhermina Suggia, Eileen Joyce, Myra Hess and a number of singers, but there were certainly others among his critical writings. Has Ian read any of Sorabji's published criticism other than those two books of essays? Again, I cannot be certain, but I doubt it. In any case, Sorabji wrote almost no music criticism for the final 45 years or so of his life although he was still compositionally active until he reached the age of 90; as Ian did not know Sorabji personally or correspond with him, it would be unlikely that he would know about the high regard in which he held performers such as Jacqueline du Pré, Yvonne Loriod or Martha Argerich - but then Ian seems not to feel the need to equip himself with overmuch factual knowledge in order to make some of the remarks about Sorabji that he has done here.
But then I digress somewhat; Ian's accusation was that Sorabji's music "expresses extremely misogynistic sentiments"? How does it do this - indeed how could it do it? He doesn't tell us. Surprise, surprise!
"Sorabji's music is obsessed with itself."
Definitely. Totally wrapped up in its own 'inner world'.
But what does that mean? He doesn't even begin to tell us, any more than he bothers to state why he thinks (as presumably he does) that this is a "bad thing"! If, in the absence of any supporting explanation whatsoever, Ian is nevertheless willing to trot out the phrase "totally wrapped up in its own 'inner world'" as though a pejorative dismissal requiring no elaboration and brooking no argument, I don't think that I'd care to know his view of the last five quartets of Beethoven...
"There's always a right wing clique around that guy [Sorabji]."
Quite a number of the Sorabji devotees are also involved with right-wing economic ideas and the like, and some seem alarmingly sympathetic towards Sorabji's own ultra-elitist, ultra-right-wing views.
Really? Does it occur to anyone here at this point that the expectation that such a statement might be followed by a citation of names as examples would be less than reasonable? So, once again, we have a bald statement with no names mentioned and no proof of anyone's involvement in "right-wing economic ideas" or explanation of what "the like" is supposed to represent in this context. We have no list of Sorabji's alleged "ultra-élitist, ultra-right-wing" views, let alone a brief desciption of them that might at the very least seek to distinguish between those of, say, Margaret Thatcher and Adolf Hitler even if that wouldn't of itself illustrate anything about Sorabji's own views.
And what is this élitism" in context and why is it, by implication, something of which only to accuse Sorabji? Have there not been ample other examples from even before the days of Beethoven's remark about the quartet player's "puny violin"? Wasn't Busoni guilty of this? or Alkan before him? and, more recently, Babbitt, Carter, Birtwistle, Boulez and heaven knows how many other composers who have not built their respective careers on abjectly trying to write what they're told that the public wants to hear? No - this really doesn't stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.
"Sorabji sympathized with the racial theories of the Nazis."
I think what I said was that Sorabji's absolutist theories on race, in which ethnicity is everything (and environment and culture count for little) - to the extent that he can make extravagant claims for ethnic origins for which one has to go back many centuries to find any individual in the genealogy actually resident in the geographical area with which he associates this ethnic group - bear a disturbing resemblance to the sort of racial fundamentalism associated with the Nazis. Claiming that a 700-year old Persian ancestry is all-determining, whether the conclusions are positive or negative (and all positive claims made for such things inevitably imply negative sentiments towards other ethnic groups) is not so different from a policy of exclusion based on the fact that someone may have a distant Jewish ancestor, say.
[/i]
Again, none of this stands up to serious examination. Yes, Sorabji placed racial origin above national identity, but his principal reason for doing so was that the former cannot be changed by history whereas the latter can and often does fluctuate according to political shifts of many kinds - a sort of immutability as distinct from a changeling, in other words. Sorabji's Parsi origins are of a good deal more than a mere 700 years' vintage and were on his father's side only in any case and, as I have already pointed out, "racist" sentiments from people of mixed race are something of an improbability. Mr Pace seeks to argue that Sorabji "can
(by which he presumably means "did") make extravagant claims for ethnic origins for which one has to go back many centuries to find any individual in the genealogy actually resident in the geographical area with which he associates this ethnic group", but Sorabji did nothing of the kind - nor would he have done, since he knew well that generations of his father's family were based in and around the city that we now know as Mumbai, which is, of course, in India, not Iran.
It is sadly all too well known that the "racial fundemantalism associated with the Nazis" by definition involved a belief in the need to exterminate a certain race; Mr Pace's implication that Sorabji's racial views "bear a disturbing resemblance to" those is an allegation of great gravity that is wholly unsupported by any evidence that Sorabji sought even to support, let alone to participate in, the extermination of any race. Once again, however, Mr Pace seems to believe that such evidence in not necessary in order for his argument to be convincing; sadly, his belief is once again wholly misplaced.
So, here are my followup questions, before you guys freak out. Numbering refers to the question I will ask regarding each topic:
1- So would you say his composition displays an inability, or a lack of interest in displaying an ability whose existence we're unsure of? For instance, are you saying you see that which indicates poor ability, or simply believe he pigeonholed himself somewhat?
It's a fair question, although you might do well to try to probe further and elicit more specific detail here (but perhaps that's your intention following suchever answer as you might get to this)...
2- Are you saying that there is a causal link between his views on female pianists and the type of music he writes vis-a-vis so-as to, in his mind, be inaccessible to a woman performer, for instance?
If that is indeed the case, I hope that you don't merely get "yes" as the answer, for it would need far more than that even to begin to aspire towards credibility. Someone ought to tell Donna Amato, too, methinks! And why did Sorabji wrote most of his songs for soprano and piano?
3- Do you mean that it is more of a voyeuristic listening experience as opposed to an engrossing or involving one? Or do you simply mean that it's iconoclastic, which isn't inherently an insult?
It will be interesting to read what he comes up with here!...
I'm not going to ask about #4 because to get to the bottom of this would take a lot of questioning and amplification about Sorabji's political views, which I really don't care about. Perhaps I'll leave it up to you, Alistair, to tell us if you think the statement is factually accurate? I'm sure you don't find it apropos to Sorabji's music (nor do I, of course), but Ian does value music on its social criteria, so to him it may be important.
I hope that I've already done this adequately above and, indeed, I do not find this kind of consideration à propos to Sorabji's music or indeed anyone else's; it may indeed be important to Mr Pace because he values music as you say he does, but that is surely a matter for him personally rather than for the composers or their listeners and should therefore be regarded as such, no more, no less?
I'm also not going to ask about #5, as that seems to be what Alistair figured it would be about, although Ian's argument isn't exactly unconvincing, I must admit. However, it does make the comparison to Nazism quite a bit less derogatory as some of the other possibilities, certainly.
I don't quite get what you mean here, but I hope that what I've written above will be of some help in exposing the sheer nonsensical nature of this "proto-Nazi" accusation.
Finally, in wishing you luck with your further questioning, I would once again counsel all who are reading Mr Pace's views here - including any additional ones that he may yet deign to provide - to give due consideration at all times to the extent, if any, to which any of Sorabji's performers, editors, scholars, listeners and the rest - or indeed those in charge of A&R and the like at such record companies as Altarus and BIS - concur or idenfity with any of them or whether they are purely the thoughts of Chairman Pace.
As a random, gloating aside, he might play a short piece in memoriam of Babbitt that I'm writing
Who cares if anyone listens? No, of course I don't mean that and it's only a (rather bad) joke - and one that I know will not be lost on you, otherwise I would not have cracked it! I hope, however, that other pianists consider performing it as well. Let us know more about this if you will. Just make damn' sure you don't include any subliminal Sorabji quotes in it!...
Best,
Alistair
Topic: Ian Pace on Sorabji