Program Notes for Second Serenade for Solo Alto Saxophone

Sun, 13 May 2012 18:44:09 GMT

As a follow-up on the online competition to record my new Serenade #2, here are the "program notes" about the piece.

The Second Serenade for Solo Alto Saxophone, like the first, uses a single melodic line to cast a spell over the listener, to lead you through an arch of motion with increasing tension and power, which then settles back to repose. It uses the poetry of a solitary line to conjure a mood and carry you through its emotional plot.

Saxophone Journal eloquently characterized the first Serenade: "As you listen and get caught in the magical lyricism of this unaccompanied piece, you forget about any lack of accompaniment. This Serenade is an exciting collection of well-connected arabesques which seduce the listener's ears." (January/February 2007 Issue)

The image of Cyrano de Bergerac serenading Roxanne in Rostand's great play, and his feeling of tender admiration for her, had been the inspiration for the first Serenade. The Second is in the same emotional field, but has more complexity to it--more of an inner journey from initial tenderness and love, to a period of darkness and struggle, to resolution into a playful "eye-twinkling" mood, and at last the caress of sweetly sensuous beauty.

Online Competition for New Saxophone Piece

Sat, 05 May 2012 01:55:00 GMT

I'm pleased to announce my Second Serenade for Solo Alto Saxophone.

As many of you already know, my solo piano piece Solitude has been the most popular of my compositions with general listeners. With instrumentalists, though, that title goes to my Serenade for Solo Alto Saxophone; it gets the most reviews, sheet music requests, recording sales on iTunes, etc. And it is performed routinely on college saxophone recitals. This got me to thinking about the piece--and inspired to write another one!

I just finished it in record time: the first Serenade (back in 2001) had taken me a meticulous 1.5 years (I was in school at the time and working on other compositions as well, but still that's a long time), whereas this one took me 1.5 days. That's the fastest I've ever written a piece! It turned out well, too--so I guess that means I'm getting wider mastery as a composer.

The new Serenade is in the same emotional/musical family as the first--warm and tender and rhapsodic. But it has certain differences: its form is a theme-and-variations, and has a darker feel for the middle section. Of course, the melodic themes are all new. Like the earlier Serenade, the new one uses the full range of the instrument from its absolute bottom note to its top (not including altissimo register), makes stentorian demands of breath control, and requires facilty with complex rhythms. The piece provides a great vehicle for the performer to "cast a spell" with the power of just that one solo line filling the space. The effect is meditative yet passionate.

As a launch event for this new piece, I'd like to invite any saxophonists out there to record the piece; if you send me your recording I'll post it to my website with the others and make them available for people's comments/comparison. If it makes sense, I'll even put in voting and a prize--but let's see how many of you want to bite first...

If you're interested, my wife Jocelyn will send out scores by email--just ask her for one at Events@MZacharyJohnson.com.

Best,
MZJ

P.S. Here are the program notes about the new piece.

The Titanic as Cultural Analogy

Sat, 28 Apr 2012 03:40:00 GMT

"The Titanic is a metaphor for what 20th-century Modernist Nihilism did to Western Civilization."

The story of the 1912 sinking of the HMS Titanic on its maiden voyage has proved a very vivid and interesting one to our culture. It is continually attended to in press coverage, literary references and art, including a Broadway musical and many books and motion pictures. The centennial of the sinking this year has given the attention an extra boost.

Plenty of boats have sunk over the course of history. Even if we confine ourselves to recorded history, I dare say tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands or even millions of boats have sunk--and been totally forgotten. They do not stand out in the popular imagination. The Titanic does.

Why?

It's not mere sensationalism, nor a morbid fascination with the suffering and deaths of so many people. The story of the Titanic is not just a horror story or a warning. There is more poetry to it--there is more drama and epic meaning in this tale.

At the time of her launch, the Titanic was the largest ship afloat. As a feat of state-of-the-art engineering and design, she was said to be not only luxurious but incomparably safe--indeed, unsinkable. Her name means "gigantic, colossal" and references the Titans, the race of powerful deities from Greek mythology. The very name "Titanic" gives an impression of mighty, solid strength, towering stature, and invulnerability.

The Titanic's passengers included some of the wealthiest, most influential and famous people in the world--among them John Jacob Astor IV, Benjamin Guggenheim, and Macy's department store owner Isidor Straus and his wife. The ship carried over a thousand European emigrants seeking a new life in America--the people willing to leave everything to pursue the dream of becoming a self-made man.

The "last word" in comfort and luxury, the Titanic had an on-board gymnasium, swimming pool, libraries, high-class restaurants and opulent cabins. A wireless telegraph provided convenient communication to both crew and passengers.

The Titanic was a culmination of the ideas, culture and productive capacity of the Industrial Enlightenment. The scene on that ship was one of great opulence and richness. The gentlemen in tuxedos and top-hats, and the ladies in elegant evening gowns with scintillating jewels, had the bearing and dignity of the aristocracy. They had the civilized manners, courtesy, gentility, and formal etiquette unique to the height of the British Empire. They heard light, clear, tuneful music; they were surrounded by sparkling chandeliers, rich hardwoods, fine china.

Sipping champagne and dancing, the passengers enjoyed themselves, safe in the knowledge of being untouched by the vast expanse of ocean around them--confident in the power of man's mind and his capacity to conquer nature--confident in the fact of progress and the betterment of human life.

And then... An unseen, subterranean force punctured the foundation of it all. A danger unseen by hubris, flouting the confidence and competence of the men steering the ship, smashed the barrier holding back the wild force of nature. The ship could withstand a puncture of four of its independent, bulkhead-separated, watertight compartments, but not five. The iceberg punctured five. A destructive force one-upped man's intelligence.

Something had been wrong underneath the surface, without being known or properly attended to. There was some kind of negligence, a failure of judgment, creating a vulnerability. It lead to something deep and unseen destroying the achievement.

All of the opulence, all of the human dignity, all of the wealth, all of the civilized refinements and luxuries--the great men and the great ideas--were blasted, smashed, sunk into oblivion. The manner of behaving, the style of dress, the opulent richness of decor, the splendor--the ideals and the thoughts and they very men--all of it was swept away and swallowed down, disappearing into a dark abyss.

Just as the Titanic is more than a ship for us, that iceberg is more than an iceberg. The Titanic was a symbol of the victory of man's reasoning mind; the iceberg is a symbol of a dark, antagonistic force, wiping out and decimating our awesome power.

The story of the Titanic encapsulates the essence of the 20th century: the annihilation of the European culture growing out of the Industrial Enlightenment, the blasting of its values, the submerging of its entire worldview and every detail of its grandeur. The iceberg is the destructive philosophical impulse of Modernism.

This is why the story of the Titanic is so fascinating to people. It provides a symbolic encapsulation of the move from the ballrooms of Romantic-Era London to such things as Schoenberg's 1912 vocal melodrama Pierrot Lunaire Pierrot lunaire (a study in the splintered, fractured, insane mind) or Stravinsky's 1913 The Rite of Spring (a study in edgy modernist primitivism, which caused a riot at its premier in Paris)--to the World Wars which blasted the remaining cultural elements, from the buildings to the documents to the men--to the rowdy rebellion of American Rock n Roll--to the sit-ins of hippie counterculture--to the shallow slovenliness, casual cursing, sexual vulgarity, mayhem and vapid stupidity of today's American "culture."

This story resonates with people as it does because they know, deeply and emotionally, that it represents how Modernist Nihilism, the lust for destruction, obliterated the world of the Industrial Enlightenment. It punched a hole in the hull and sank it to the bottom of the ocean.

Is it any wonder that people are fascinated by the relics divers bring up from the the Titanic? They don't represent just rusty trinkets from a random boat--they are glimpses into the unthinkable, the inconceivable: such a world was once fully, concretely real. It was not a myth. It existed--not as a mirage, not as an artificial performance, not as a parody or a costume drama, but as a genuine culture which people deeply had in them. It was sincere and authentic--not fake.

And then it was gone--a dark force washed it away. The Titanic is a metaphor for what 20th-century Modernist Nihilism did to Western Civilization.

That's the meaning of the story of the story of the Titanic--the reason we are so captivated by its narrative. It says a lot about who we are as a culture and how we came to be what we are.

And, surprisingly, the ongoing interest in the story indicates that our culture may be reflecting on what was lost over the last century, and is, perhaps, having second thoughts.

How Music Teaches Values

Fri, 27 Apr 2012 21:15:00 GMT

To understand the world, one needs to know the sweep of history--the course of events and the varied cultures that existed throughout the world over time. One gains a great deal from learning the sequence of events, the big turning points, and what caused them.

There is another, less appreciated, and quite unique means of knowing history: music. Music approaches the world's people's from a unique angle: it gives a direct experience of what they were like. As the directly psychological art form, music provides an immediate and holistic summary of the nature of a people than does any description or picture. Music gets you inside the mind and soul of a culture. It is the closest thing possible to a time-warp in the sense of transporting you into exactly the frame of mind and kind of character a culture had.

What is the most powerful, direct and complete way of knowing the Greeks' love of wisdom, beauty and simple directness? It is through their music.

What is the most powerful, direct, and complete way of knowing the Romans' rough concern with conquest, power and brute physicality? It is through their music.

What is the most powerful, direct, and complete way of knowing the Medieval ideal of renunciation and spiritual purity, of turning away from this world, of life devoted to contemplation of the Divine? It is through their music.

Music teaches what nothing else can: the principle that animates a people's body and mind, the kind of movement and feeling and form of expression that was native to them, what their psychological character was.

But it is not enough to hear the music only. That can provide a distant, impersonal feeling; but in order to fully relate to it and "get into" a culture's character one has to understand what values are embodied in that music and how they are embodied. When a culture is distant from one's own, this requires a time of analyzing the sounds and understanding what the psychological content is.

Even for music one is intimately familiar with and which one relates to without difficulty, becoming a mature, self-aware, self-possessed adult requires understanding emotions in conceptual, rational terms.

Music--approached analytically and with a view to what its sensations combine to say about character--is thus a crucial means of teaching a child values. It is a crucial means of of acquainting a child with the moral element in man, of training him in the subject of moral character. Armed with full knowledge of what is possible to man, and of what, inside a person, constitutes the Good, a child is equipped to know himself and to create himself.

This is what MusicAtOurHouse offers. Core to the course is the Characterological Approach to Music, an approach which proceeds with continual awareness and attention to the way in which music manifests its maker's inner nature--including the total sum of his psychology, his personality, his moral character, his self-concept and self-esteem, the cultural values he holds, the way his mind works, his overall feeling and approach to life and the world.

Join us this year in learning values of mind, soul and body.

: Mr. Johnson

Music At Our House - Course in Music History and Appreciation for Homeschool Students, 2012-13

"My children are enjoying learning music history with Mr. Johnson -- he is very knowledgeable, and teaches with much enthusiasm, gentleness, and encouragement." --Mrs. Chen, Parent

Live class via teleconference
Recordings available online if you are unable to attend in person
Course runs mid-September 2012 to end of May 2013
Select music purchases will be recommended
Written work will be part of the course to help students conceptualize music
Meets once a week for 45 minutes
Taught by composer and Mannes College faculty member M. Zachary Johnson

Elementary School Level meets Thursdays 1-1:45pm EST
Junior/Senior High Level meets Thursdays 2:15-3pm EST

Description: The course will contain several topic modules over the year, with some flexibility as to their length and content. We will cover holiday music over the holidays, touch on the music of Asia in order to integrate with HistoryAtOurHouse coursework, sample the "Greatest Hits" of Classical Music, and delve more intensively into topics of special interest such as the life of Beethoven. (Prior participants in MusicAtOurHouse are welcome to join this course, as the content is substantially different from prior courses.)

Early registration 50% off!

Single payment of $180 for the year (=$20/mo) (ordinarily $360). Early pricing ends July 31.

Choose Level

We mostly expect to:

Child's name:

*Note: for multiple children in the same household attending the same class, only one registration fee is necessary.

* * *

We welcome your support of MusicAtOurHouse by making a donation, as the tuition fees do not entirely cover the cost of the program. While these donations are not tax-deductible, they do support bringing artistic values into the education of homeschool children.

The Characterological Approach to Music (Part 2)

Thu, 26 Apr 2012 01:51:11 GMT

I got permission from my wife to use her as an example for the idea that music expresses what kind of person you are. This is an example from the listener's side of things as opposed to the composer's side.

Years ago, Jocelyn and I were listening to a certain compilation album of "hits of classical music." We listened through the full album several times over the course of one or two months. We would enjoy many of the pieces, but one of them stood out. Each time that particular piece came on, Jocelyn would pep up and get intensely interested and excited. Her energy and mood would get a special boost and she would smile. This one was was very obviously her favorite.

She didn't know the title of the piece, and it had no words. It was an orchestral work. It was the sound and the feeling of that sound that appealed to her.

The music was proudly regal yet light and lively; it was stately and grand but also delicate and spirited; it was solemn yet cheerful; the sound was bright and clear; the texture of the music was rich and intricate without being muddled or heavy, like a fine brocade; yet the motion of the music was also formidable, with a march-like, measured firmness. The music had, somehow, both a feminine grace and a powerful strength.

It was only afterward that I told her, and we both laughed, at the fact that the piece was Handel's Entrance of the Queen of Sheba. If you know my wife, you know why that couldn't be more perfect.

The Queen of Sheba was a wealthy monarch who, impressed with King Solomon's reputation, went to visit him and "pepper him with questions." The two became lovers.

Here's another good rendition with a faster tempo: The Arrival of the Queen of Sheba

The Characterological Approach to Music (Part 1)

Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:05:00 GMT

If you knew a person who was characteristically morose, moody and dark in his outlook, and then he made some music which was dark, moody and morose, you would think "yes of course, that's him." But if his music was light, peppy, delicate, bright and cheery, this would raise questions in your mind. You would automatically wonder about the explanation for this surprising difference, such as: Maybe there is more to that person than you ever suspected, and your previous idea about him was oversimplified; maybe his happy music was a mockery or parody instead of a straight intention; maybe the dark, moody personality you know is an affectation, not his true self, and he is a phony; maybe there was a misprint in the concert program; maybe someone else wrote the music and he plagiarized it. Whatever it is, there must be some explanation for the mismatch between the known character of the man and the character of his music.

When a musician creates his music, it is an expression of who he is; he uses the sounds that convey his own inner state, and avoids those that go against it--while deeply using and taking for granted what kind of person he is. If there seems to be a disparity between his soul and his sounds, then there must be some other factor at work.

Consider some further, related facts: When you learn what kind of music a person likes, you learn a lot about that person. When you have a strong personal reaction to a piece of music, it is because it connects to who you are inside. When you do not feel a strong emotional activation by a certain music, it is because you cannot relate to it--the content of the music is not integrating with the content of your Self. Different music appeals to different people--because of the ways in which their souls, or psyches, or inner natures differ.

In short, there is a connection between being a certain kind of person and liking a certain kind of music.

This axiom is the core of what I call the characterological approach to music. This approach proceeds with continual awareness and attention to the way in which music manifests a person's inner nature--including the total sum of his psychology, his personality, his moral character, his self-concept and self-esteem, the cultural values he holds, the way his mind works, his overall feeling and approach to life and the world.

There is a lot to say about this, but first and foremost a couple of broad examples from history.

The ancient Greeks (as usual unique in knowing themselves) described themselves as "lovers of beauty with economy." The Greeks were a philosophical culture (remember the word philosophy comes from "love of wisdom"), and preferred profound thoughts expressed in a plain, direct, and concise form. That form of soul-character is in the Epitaph of Seikilos, the oldest surviving complete piece of music from Greece.

Compared to their neighbors the Greeks, the Romans were more brutish and physicalistic/materialistic, more sensationalistic and crude. There was still an element of heroism in the culture, but consider, for instance, the throngs of people cheering in the Roman Colosseum at the gladiatorial competitions and executions, the grisly dismembering of slaves and animals, and the enormous desire for pageantry and celebration of miltary conquest. Their music, which we know only in the form of approximate re-creations based on limited historical records, is correspondingly crude, wild, chaotic and physicalistic.

Medieval Christians modeled themselves on the Augustinian idea that a focus on contemplating the Divine, while renouncing all physical concerns, was the moral and holy way to be. Gregorian Chant embodies that ideal in sound: it is a coldly haunting, darkly serene, meditative and contemplative sound, a perfectly melded flow with no vigor of rhythm and without any other arousing element. It reflects purity of soul, a turning away from pleasure and sensual indulgence, a rejection of physicality, in exactly the Christian moral sense.

The Renaissance, with its ever-growing richness of mind and increased complexity of inner life, found Gregorian Chant too simple and just "not enough" to be interesting or fulfilling. The story of the progression from the Dark Ages to the High Renaissance is the story of the introduction and progressive mastery over the coordinated bringing-together of cognitive lines or threads into a fabric--the harmonious combination of the "many voices" of polyphonic music. As for instance in the music of Palestrina.

The characterological axiom--the fact that music expresses the nature of its maker (and appeals to listeners based on the kind of psyche it embodies)--is the bedrock of my approach to music, including the course for homeshoolers, MusicAtOurHouse. In future blog posts I will continue to elaborate on this approach--but the best way of learning it is to hear and talk about the examples!

Part 2

Greek vs. Roman View of Man in Sculpture

Tue, 10 Apr 2012 23:30:00 GMT

The contrast between the ancient Greek and Roman views of man is evident not only in their respective musics, but also in their sculpture. Here are two examples from the Met Museum's Greek and Roman Gallery.

Both sculptures are mature yet youthful male nudes. Both portray heroic strength and health. Both use the "contrapposto" posture--with the figure's weight mostly on one leg and the angle of the shoulders and hips in opposition--to show the symmetrical body in a more dynamic and organic way. Both have richly coiled hair which adds to the volume of the head.

LEFT: Hellenistic Greek Bronze, ca. 100 BC --- RIGHT: Roman Marble of Hercules, from the reign of Nero ca. 70 AD

Rome had conquered and assimilated Greece by the time the Roman Hercules (right) was made, and this sculpture clearly shows the influence of the Greek ideal. But the differences are remarkable.

The Roman figure is heavier, bulkier and more stodgy. The Greek is more lean, light, flexible and fluid. The Roman figure's muscles have a flexed, tense quality, drawing the head and arms in toward the torso--whereas the Greek figure is more open and relaxed. The neck is longer, the arms spread open wider. Notice the way the respective hands show the same contrast of drawn-in versus supple openness.

The Roman wields a club and carries the pelt of a Lion; both of these objects create a downward pull of gravity on the figure. The Greek figure (probably) held a tall spear pointed to the sky.

The most significant difference is in the face: The Roman figure frowns; the lips are firmly set. The downward turn of the mouth is echoed by the hairline, and accentuated by the stern tension of the heavy brow. The eyes and the overall facial expression are dull and dim.

The face of the Greek figure is taller and more human. The expression is plain, direct, intelligent--totally without strain or stress, totally at peace, and totally alive. The line of the nose and the hair create an upward point; his head makes the shape of a flame, just as does his right hand (perhaps it held a torch?). The face is not intimidating or stern. It is serene yet full of life. It is serious without being grave. It is an open face; even the lips are parted in sensual breath.

The Roman theme is intimidating brute force. The Greek theme is man's efficacy, natural poise, and wisdom.

To learn more about the Greek and Roman cultures, I recommend these books:

Student Writing on Greek vs. Roman Music

Tue, 10 Apr 2012 21:20:00 GMT

Here are some examples of what students have written for MusicAtOurHouse--on the subject of Greek vs. Roman music (and how they compare to modern America). Writing about music is essential to the MusicAtOurHouse approach so that the student learns to deal with the subject of art and emotions in a conceptual, rational way. The following are from the Junior/Senior High Level of the class, and are quoted with permission from the students and parents.

Owen F.

The Greeks and Romans looked at music very differently. The Greeks saw it as a true form of art; men could dedicate their lives to the perfection of their music. The Romans thought of it as effeminate and as little more than background entertainment. Their music was often loud and simplistic, used to please crowds and direct troops. In stark contrast the Greeks had meaningful, harmonious songs. In accordance with their musical principles the Greeks favored the lyre, flute and other sweet sounding instruments while the Romans preferred the louder horns and drums. A large testament to how little the Romans valued their music is that they never created musical notation to record their works of art. The Roman music is somewhat similar to American popular music, built for crowd appeal and volume rather than beauty and meaning. While the Greeks valued their music highly the Romans thought of it as little more than an amusing pastime or a military tool.

Victoria B.

Greece and Rome were quite different in regard to music. The Greeks believed that music expressed manliness, but the Romans thought it was ridiculous and impractical. When the Romans did use music, it was not treated the same way that the Greeks treated it. The Greeks made music for beauty, for enjoyment, and to express ideas. They used music to show humanity and ethos, but the Romans used it in battle for certain commands and to scare the enemy away. Greece appreciated music and used it to convey personal ideas whereas Rome had music to incite mobs and for military purposes.

Roman music is alike to some modern American music in that it does not often have a clever or firm tune. Both can be loud and obnoxious with no real meaning.

Matthew C.

Greece and Rome fundamentally differed in their views of music: the Greeks thought of music seriously and as an essential art, whereas the Romans did not think highly of music, nor did they treat it seriously. While the Greeks composed to express individual emotions and ideas in their music as a manly pursuit, the Romans thought of music as effeminate unless used in military or festive application, for marches, or to frighten and demoralize the enemy for example.

As a result, the Greeks developed a clear sense of melody to convey their personal thoughts, used fine, sensitive instruments like the lyre (taking example from Apollo), and focusing on the ethos of music. The Romans instead focused on sensational values (Dionysus’s traits) to convey mob enthusiasm, using instruments like aulos and drums and rough brass instruments to create a raucous, loud, and unfocused noise. Roman music accordingly sounds crude and unsophisticated.

The focus of individual expressment versus spectacle music leads to other differences, such as subtlety, sensitivity, and creativity to more accurately depict one’s thoughts versus unrefined, sensational, music mimicking from others.

Unfortunately, American music sounds increasingly similar to Roman music, being less imaginative (using simple chord progressions and repetition, for example), and expressing festivity and inanity: often it requires little attention and focus because of its simplicity (Greek music, although simple in sound, is complex in idea), and so don’t encourage thinking. Still, it has certain values above Roman music. It does express personal ideas (they are not public interpretations), and it uses harmony (when Rome had no sense of chordancy).

Mary M.

Rome and Greece are very different in musical culture. Unlike the Greeks, Romans did not value ethos and their attitude towards music was very Dionysus-like; the music was loud, clashing, and crazy. The instruments of the Romans were much more blaring than those of the Greeks and were used more for military use. They believed music to be girly while the Greeks believed that the ability to write and play music was the height of manliness. The Romans also used many instruments at a time as opposed to the Greek style of having just one melody at a time.

Roman music and modern day American music are very similar. Like the Romans, we do not value ethos. Also, like the Romans, our music is very crazy and Dionysus-like. We have large rock concerts filled with throngs of screaming people. Our music contains many instruments and complicated accompaniments like the Romans and is not simple as Greek music was. The Romans also had ‘hits’ and celebrity singers, which is certainly similar to our current culture."

Celia M.

In the ancient world, music was viewed differently by various cultures. The Greeks saw music as manly, beautiful, and important to the human soul. The Romans, however, believed music to be girly and unimportant unless it was tied to military endeavors. Considering their contrasting opinions on the value of music, it is no wonder that Roman and Greek music sounded very different as well.

Greek music was simple, portraying beauty and truth. The lyre, a small harp, was the favored instrument because of its simple sound. All unnecessary ornaments were cast aside, and a pure melody was left to shine. Because the Greeks held music dear to their hearts, they developed a system for notating and preserving their works. They carved them into stone tablets and copied them onto papyrus, preserving them for the future.

The Romans, however, didn't think that music was important enough to write down. They had no such system of notation, and therefore their works were not preserved. Instead of creating works to last a lifetime and beyond as the Greeks did, the Romans preferred what we might call 'one hit wonders.' Roman songs and performers found sudden popularity, but then were just as quickly buried beneath the newest craze. Unlike the Greeks, the Romans preferred loud, blaring music. Brass, percussion, and wind instruments were favored over the lyre's clear sound. Roman music often sounded like a military march, matching the culture's warlike ways. Truly, it seems Greek and Roman music could hardly be more different.

There are many similarities between ancient Roman music and modern American music. Pop stars with their loud, blaring music, top 40 hits, and outlandish performances call to mind the Roman musical tradition.

American music also contains many ornaments (fancy drum rhythms, showy guitar solos, even cowbell!). It is interesting to note that most American instruments originated in Rome. The french horn, trumpet, and even the guitar are just a few examples of Roman instruments which have evolved over time and are used in America. The American way of writing catchy music for the masses rather than preserving music for future generations is also similar to that of the Romans. Most, if not all, of the "great" songs that make it to the top 100 hits today are forgotten within weeks. Considering the many similarities between Roman and American music, the question is: will the simple, beautiful way of Greece ever win out in American musical tradition, or is it fated to remain in stone tablets for eternity?

I'm very proud of these students!

More information about the MusicAtOurHouse program, including an audio podcast sample of the class, is available here:
http://musicatourhouse.com/?page_id=243

Best,
MZJ

Greek vs. Roman Music

Tue, 03 Apr 2012 23:56:10 GMT

Hello Everyone,

I recently wrote to you about the oldest complete song known, the famous Greek "Epitaph of Seikilos." Another interesting lesson from MusicAtOurHouse was the contrast between this and the music of the Roman Empire.

The Greeks (including the warrior Spartans) valued "beauty with economy" and considered poetry and music to be essential to manly virtue. The Romans valued success in material matters: engineering, war and conquest, spectacle and sensation, and rough leisure; they accepted music relating to military purposes and ceremony or celebration, but otherwise considered considered poetry and music to be impractical or even detrimental to masculinity.

Since the Romans did not notate their music or form theory about how to structure the notes (as the Greeks had done), we have relatively little to go on. But the evidence of instrumental artifacts, as well as written literary descriptions, indicates that Roman music was radically different from Greek. Here are some re-creations of Roman music.

Baccus, named after the God of wine, sounds slow tones of flutes with repetitive ornaments, sometimes with sliding pitch, accompanied by a slow drumbeat, some chimes and rattles, as well as some vocal noises. It is a hazy and mystical sound.

Neniae, a lament named after a funeral deity, is very unsettling. We hear women moan and wail, we hear long woodwind tones with bleary, fluctuating pitch; there are varied cries from women's voices in an undulating sound collage.

Imperium, meaning "power to command," is a chaotic brass fanfare of the sort that would have related to Roman military actions and military leaders. The blaring notes of two brass instruments clash against each other in a jumble,
accompanied in a march rhythm by percussion and dissonances from other wind instruments.

Pavor, meaning "the act of trembling or quaking with fear," is a wild, fast sound with rapid spasms of notes from winds, quick drumming, some baying and caws from women's voices--but is overall more melodic than the other examples.

Here is the complete set of re-creations:

Music From Ancient Rome vol. 1

In MusicAtOurHouse, we not only remarked on how different the Romans were from the Greeks, we also asked: What about our own culture? Are we more like the Greeks or like the Romans?

Music At Our House
2012-13 course in music history and appreciation
for homeschoolers
Description: The course will contain several topic modules over the year, with some flexibility as to their length and content. We will cover holiday music over the holidays, touch on the music of Asia in order to integrate with HistoryAtOurHouse, sample the “Greatest Hits” of Classical Music, and delve more intensively into topics of special interest such as the life of Beethoven. (Prior participants in MusicAtOurHouse are welcome to join this course, as the content is substantially different from prior courses.)

Discounted registration is now open.

* * *

We welcome your support of MusicAtOurHouse by making a donation, as the tuition fees do not entirely cover the cost of the program. While these donations are not tax-deductible, they do support bringing artistic values into the education of homeschool children.

Best,
MZJ

World's Oldest Song and New Course

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 23:23:49 GMT

Hello Everyone,

I'd like to share with you one of the pieces of music we've studied at Music at Our House--and which has been a great favorite of both mine and the students.

The ancient Greek "Epitaph of Seikilos"--the oldest complete piece of music known--was found chiseled into a grave stone in the area of modern Turkey near the Aegean Sea. It dates from around the first century AD, but may be as old as from 200 BC.

This song is unlike most things we are familiar with. It is distant from us not only in time and place, but also in style. Yet in class we discovered that the more we discussed the meaning of the text and the emotion of the music--and saw how tightly integrated they were--the stronger our emotional reactions to the song became.

The song is sensuous and expresses a profound, heartfelt sentiment, but the style is not emotionally effusive. The style is plain, stark, direct, minimal, and totally straightforward. It might strike you as cold and barren, but the song's economy in fact makes it all the more powerful. Its text captures a sweeping philosophy of life in four little lines:

While you live, shine
Have no grief at all.
Life exists only a short while,
And time demands its toll.

Epitaphe de Seikilos

The Epitaph of Seikilos has both the sunny perspective of enjoying life, and the more mournful element of acknowledging loss and mortality. Leave it to the Greeks to say so much with so little! As Thucydides said, the Greeks were "lovers of beauty with economy." They were a very special culture.

That's a taste of what is covered in the exciting Music at Our House Program for Homeschool Students!

Here's our offering for for Fall 2012...

Music at Our House:
Course in Music History and Appreciation
for Homeschool Students
Fall 2012

"My children are enjoying learning music history with Mr. Johnson -- he is very knowledgeable, and teaches with much enthusiasm, gentleness, and encouragement." --Mrs. Chen, Parent

Live class via teleconference
Recordings available online if you are unable to attend in person
Course runs mid-September 2012 to end of May 2013
Select music purchases will be recommended
Written work will be part of the course to help students conceptualize music
Meets once a week for 45 minutes
Elementary School Level meets Thursdays 1-1:45pm EST
Junior & Senior High School Level meets Thursdays 2:15-3pm EST

Early registration 50% off!

Single payment of $180 for the year (=$20/mo) (ordinarily $360). Early pricing ends July 31. *Note: for multiple children in the same household attending the same class, only one registration fee is necessary.

* * *

We welcome your support of MusicAtOurHouse by making a donation, as the tuition fees do not entirely cover the cost of the program. While these donations are not tax-deductible, they do support bringing artistic values into the education of homeschool children.

Please feel free to share this announcement with anyone you think would be interested in this course for homeschoolers!
Best,
M. Zachary Johnson

2011 Year In Review

Sun, 08 Jan 2012 11:16:42 GMT

As a New Year's post, here's some of the progress I made in 2011...

Started Music at Our House with Scott Powell--looking forward to the next time we'll offer these online music history and appreciation courses (details coming soon)
Released my book "Dancing with the Muses: A Historical Approach to Basic Concepts of Music."
Continued teaching at the Mannes College of Music, getting youngsters into musical life
Guest lectured on ancient music for Western Civ courses at NYU, in collaboration with Prof. Liora Brosh
Taught my first (and last) semester as a Professor (at Hofstra University), where I was reminded how, ahem, awful the academic humanities are (I refer not to the students but to the faculty)--which is part of what inspired me to create this list of resources skeptical of academia
Celebrated my and Jocelyn's 1-year wedding anniversary.
Adopted Clarence the kitty
Did lots of home-improvement projects :)
Did extensive research for my opera, created the plot, and wrote about half of the text and music so far--I'm super-excited to make my announcement about it--soon!
Attended a seminar by Ken Davenport on "Getting Your Show Off the Ground"--during which I agreed to a deadline of May 19 for completing the opera.
Gave an informal reading of some of the songs for guests on Thanksgiving day.
Raised funds for the opera through my ongoing connection with the New York Foundation for the Arts (I will be hitting you up big-time when the opera production starts coming into being!)

Shirley Verrett Has Died

Sun, 07 Nov 2010 07:15:00 GMT

I am stunned to learn of the death yesterday of the extraordinary opera singer Shirley Verrett. Here is her Times obituatry: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/06/arts/music/06verrett.html

She had been my singing teacher at the University of Michigan, and she was an absolutely amazing lady. She had a great spirit, a great vivacity and energy, a great dramatic flair, a great love of life. I loved listening to her recordings, and in my singing lessons I always found it a thrill when she would sing to demonstrate something--those high notes would really blow you away even when she was holding back!

I am so sad to learn that she is gone. She was an incredibly elegant, articulate lady. She had grace and poise. She was the opposite of a stereotypically "airheaded" singer. She was an intellectual and an artist. Her audiences benefitted from her artistry and power on the stage. We students benefited from her scientific mind and amazing ability to analyze and communicate.

Here she is singing one of my favorite melodies, "Mon coeur s'ouvre a ta voix" (My heart opens to the sound of your voice) from Samson and Delilah. The rich lyricism, the depth and dramatic power of her voice are amazing.

God bless you, Shirley Verrett.

Ayn Rand's Play Ideal in NYC

Wed, 30 Jun 2010 10:10:00 GMT

I saw Ayn Rand's play "Ideal" in New York two weeks ago with my fiancee and friends. It is directed by Jenny Beth Snyder at the 59E59 blackbox theater. Since the reviews of the play in the lamestream press have been what they've been, I feel obligated to say something.

I love the play and knew it well before attending. Since I had known the work only as a dry script, the main thrust of my interest was in seeing Ideal made real. In that respect I give the performance highest marks. To see and hear the play with the full immediacy and reality as the work was meant to have was very moving and was a special experience for me--one which I will never forget. We are very fortunate to have the benefit of a production to see--even Ayn Rand herself never saw the work produced.

The story: the extraordinary screen actress Kay Gonda is accused of murder and disappears on a quest to find purportedly a place to hide, but in fact to find a soul with the virtue of integrity. The progression of the play is a brilliant structure, a set of variations on a theme. In each scene the audience first hears a fan letter read aloud, a letter that had been written to Kay Gonda by an admirer. We then see the letter writer in the context of his life, and see his response to the arrival of Kay Gonda herself, in the hour of her darkest need. Her presence is what Gonda intends it to be: a test of man's devotion to his own professed ideal. With each visit we see a new character, a new motivation, and a new kind of response to the dilemma posed by Gonda's presence and predicament.

As Leonard Peikoff wrote in the introduction to the play, the theme of the work is "men's lack of integrity, their failure to act according to the ideals they espouse. The theme is the evil of divorcing ideals from life." The story is the quest of the stunning beauty and powerful ideal of Kay Gonda to find a soul who matches hers, who wants to live life in the way with the kind of idealism Gonda portrays on the screen. The climax of the story is the resolution of Gonda's crisis of being alone as an idealist.

Given this kind of theme and drama, it is no suprise that the snarky, faux-humble New York intelligentsia has unanimously desired to dismiss the play as silly and childish. There is psychological protection going on here. A man who has let his own ideals slip doesn't care to have it rubbed in his face--so he writes a sardonic, pseudo-intellectual review attempting to poop on Ayn Rand's grand and vaunted Romanticism.

The reviewers at the trashy New York Post, at the washed-up, bankrupt old socialist rag the New York Times, and the theatre-biz site backstage.com understand Ayn Rand's viewpoint about as much as she respected Stalin. Consider the ending punch by backstage.com's Snark in Residence David Sheward: ""Ideal" is far from ideal as a drama of real people in real conflict." It is against precisely that sort of "realistic" repudiation of ideals that Ayn Rand wrote the play, you moron.

Now what did I think of the production? I found it very powerful overall--very dramatic and intense. I loved hearing Ayn Rand's brilliantly terse and focussed dialogue.

From the point of view of what can be expected from our cynical, grey, pragmatic, unprincipled culture I think the production was as good as can be expected. I don't think the director or actors grasp Ayn Rand's viewpoint very deeply. But can you believe it--the play was performed with no postmodern irony, no anti-Ayn Rand parodying or snobbish double entendre. It was given straight, as it deserves to be.

Dan Pfau, Ted Caine, and Kim Rosen deserve to be singled out as the actors who best understood the meaning of the play, and therefore best put accross their characters.

Kim Rosen was, I'm afraid, miscast in the role of the bitter, nagging old mother-in-law, but she was razor-sharp in her role as Ms. Shyly--which is exactly what the play needs. In that role Rosen was excellent in her searing bluntness and in the piercing intensity of her gaze. That is what Ayn Rand would have wanted.

Ted Caine was a convincing Mr. Perkins--the dutiful husband who feably clings to his ideal, but only until he is confronted with the immediate and very real onus of acting on it. The scene developing his character was very powerfully done, which is Caine's achievement.

Dan Pfau plays the two roles that are most in accordance with the heroine's ideals: Mick Watts who is Kay Gonda's only annointed press agent, and Johnie Dawes, whose character is the culmination of the story. These characters have the remarkable and rare devotion to Kay Gonda's "like nothing you bastards ever dreamed of" ethos, even though both of these characters are psychologically defeated from the get-go. Pfau succeeded in conveying all the reality and complexity of these figures; he made them very ideally real.

Playing a pure character, a fully integrated and whole, healthy, strong, virtuous and ideal soul--like Kay Gonda--is something I have never seen an actor do successfully. Gary Cooper failed in the film of The Fountainhead. With thousands of years of religion behind us, people are unfamiliar with and cannot feel the feelings of a pure, uncorrupted, non-sacrificial ideal. But that is what Ayn Rand's worldview makes possible and that is what her work requires.

In this play, Jessie Barr played Kay Gonda as a traditional female heroine, with traditional female emotional suppleness and sloppiness. That was a disappointment because it seemed that Barr didn't understand Ayn Rand very well. But I admire her intensity even if she was missing the austerity and severity characterstic of an Ayn Rand heroine. It is important to remember that the character of Kay Gonda is, in essence, Ayn Rand herself. So an excellent way to understand the psychology would be to watch video of Ayn Rand, such as her interviews. Ayn Rand was not sloppy and "sensitive," she was penetratingly and passionately rational.

I'm reminded of the story I once heard about a visitor to Ayn Rand's apartment who asked about one of her cats, something to the effect of "is that Ayn Rand?" (She thought the cat had been named after its human mommy perhaps?) --to which AR's husband replied: "That can't be Ayn Rand, she doesn't have any claws." (!)

I thank Jenny Beth Snyder for directing this play. I thank her for taking it seriously. I thank Karina Martins for producing it. I thank her for taking on the herculean task of making it happen--as someone who has produced artistic events in New York I know how hard this is. I thank the cast for their efforts. And most of all, I pray that these efforts and similar ones will continue.

Repeal Obamacare

Sun, 28 Mar 2010 02:35:00 GMT

Democrats were willing to Kamikazee-dive the Obamacare bill into America because the passage is a matter of principle: a nationalized healthcare system is a 180 degree reversal of the Constitution. This bill completely destroys the principle of the sovereign, self-sufficient, self-responsible individual. It completely destroys the principle of independence and individualism that was the essence of the Founding Fathers' political outlook.

In place of the inalienable rights of man, in place of the the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of one's own happiness by one's own effort, the Democrats have attempted to establish a permanent welfare state. They have done all they could to turn the USA into the USSR--to establish an economy that is centrally controlled and ruled from the "top" down by politicians and bureaucrats wielding total power over citizens.

If this bill is permitted to stand, it is the end of the Land of the Free. Obamacare must be repealed.

I am pleased that 14 states' Attorneys General have filed suit against this bill and hope that the courts will find it to be unconstitutional--because it is.

According to the Bill of Rights in the Constitution--which is the supreme law of the land, preceding and superceding any act of Congress:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." And,
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

It can never be stressed enough that the government is permitted to to nothing except that which is expressly permitted by the Constitution, while private citizens are permitted to live their lives as they choose. Individuals are limited only by the fact that they may not violate the rights of others, which means no force or fraud. That is America's founding principle.

The Constitution does not grant the government the power to control the medical field. Therefore it is not entitled to do so.

If the courts fail to serve their Constitutional function as a check on the tyranny of Congress, then a new Congress must repeal the bill. Establishing a new Congress devoted to repealing Nationalized Healthcare is the responsibility of every American--a duty that we must dispatch beginning on November 2, 2010.

For now, I support further Tea Party demonstrations (peaceful ones) and suggest that everyone sign the various petitions demanding the repeal of Obamacare. We must demonstrate the sheer number of people who recognize that Obamacare is a monstrous attack on our liberty.

http://www.teapartypatriots.org/repealthebill/Default.aspx

http://repealitpledge.com/

http://treygrayson.com/repeal-obamacare

Arts & the Economy

Sun, 14 Mar 2010 10:25:00 GMT

Here is an interesting article about the rates of job loss in various sectors of the economy since the 2007 start of the depression/recession, as measured by jobs listing agrregator Monster.com.

It shows that of all areas, the worst rate of loss was in arts & recreation. Notice that rates of job loss in utilities, manufacturing, and especially mining were much lower. This shows that Maslow's hierarchy of needs is indeed true: man's attentions and efforts go first to his most basic physiological needs such as breathing, eating and drinking; once those needs are met he is free to attend to a need for clothing and shelter, and so on up the hierarchy of needs to wider values of safety and security, friendship, and at the highest level, in the most successful society, he is free to meet psychological needs such as the need for self-esteem and art.

And when economic conditions become more dire, we see an opposite progression. Men have no recourse but to retreat down and attend to more evolutionarily primitive and more pressing and dire needs. They no longer have the resources to support that which is uniquely human, that which is creative as well as idealistic. Men are forced to concern themselves primarily with physical requirements and abandon, out of unfortunate necessity, the pursuit of spiritual values.

I would mention however, that there is the phenomenon of "escapism"--according to which people want to (for instance) go to a film or the theater to enter a world that is brighter and lighter than the one they face in daily life. That is certainly true, and it is not just as an anecdotal matter. This relates to the very purpose of art which is to sustain and nurture man's psychological health and his positive view of the world. Perhaps people still meet their need of art, but with minimal expenditure--through borrowed books or through various free offerings of music and public domain material on the internet.

Nevertheless, there is no doubt that investment in the arts comes to a radical halt when economic conditions become dire. I think that there is a connection between freedom and economic prosperity. Let's hope, for all our sakes, that the increase of government power we have seen is reversed soon in favor of a renewed respect for individual liberty as the founding father's intended. Then men will be free to prosper and once again turn their resources toward not only the basic necessities, but also to man's higher potentialities.

The Head and Heart in Music

Tue, 08 Sep 2009 21:28:22 GMT

This summer I’ve made rapid progress on my book “The Head and Heart in Music.” I’ve drafted about half of the book so far. “The Head and Heart in Music” upholds an ideal of the marriage in music of intelligence and passion. It presents a comprehensive theory of music built around the basic duality of cognition and feeling, of reason and emotion. It begins with a new theory of the survival value of music, continues with a theory of emotion as motion of consciousness, and culminates by connecting music to man’s moral nature. The latter part of the book draws on some Greek ideas including “ethos” and the Apollo versus Dionysus distinction. The book is against both prudishness and destructive rebellion; it is based not on religion but on the morality of the pursuit of one's own happiness and fulfillment in life on earth. Music is viewed as a part of the process of learning and growing throughout life, and as a part of the life course of the noble and heroic man.

The Parthenon and Classicism

Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:30:00 GMT

In working on my book, I've been thinking a bit about what it means for art to be "classical." It's not a concept I'm very fond of in application to music because people think it means purely formal, the opposite of self-expression. It's a very problematic term. But if you think of classicism as it pertains to ancient Greece, you can see why people started using the word for music like Haydn and Mozart. The Parthenon in paricular is a good example since it has the same clarity, neatness of proportion, eternal and iconic nature, and clean rational structure as the compositions of these Enlightenment era composers. Here is an amazing video produced by director Costa-Gavras for the Acropollis Museum. I find it interesting not only because of the beutiful re-creation of the Parthenon, but also for the dramatization of the history of the structure in future eras--a history of horrible abuse by barbarians, christians, and muslims.

Salute to Schuyler Chapin

Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:40:00 GMT

Mr. Schuyler Chapin—former general manager of the Metropolitan Opera, dean of Columbia University’s School of the Arts, and New York City Commissioner of Cultural Affairs—passed away yesterday, March 7. He had recently turned 86 and died peacefully at home in the arms of his wife Catia, whom he adored without bound.

The New York Times’ obituary, which does not do him justice, may be read here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/arts/music/08chapin.html?_r=1&hp

For the past four years, I have had the honor of serving as Mr. Chapin’s secretary, assisting him with his business affairs, letters, and writing projects. I want to say how personally important it was for me to know him, and to place on record what a special and great man he was.

What young person would not admire a man who had served both as a pilot in the Second World War, and as the general manager of the Metropolitan Opera? Who would not admire a man who would tell you, at lunch, a wide range of the most unbelievable and fantastic stories—which were absolutely true? He would tell you how he had been spared a recall to the military by meeting the dependents requirement—because his wife had unexpectedly had twins just before he was scheduled to report. He would tell you of speaking to Glenn Gould in his office when he received a phone call that resulted in Gould leaving absorbed in a plan to record Strauss’s unusual setting of Tennyson’s Enoch Arden. He would tell you of Horowitz and Bernstein, of exchanging “opera gossip” with then-new Mayor Giuliani; he would tell you of princesses, Presidents, and playing cards with Rachmaninoff.

Schuyler Chapin’s life was itself a history book.

When the world recently lost Beverly Sills, Luciano Pavarotti and Brooke Astor (three of Mr. Chapin’s many illustrious friends), I felt much the same as I do now: that their deaths represented a loss of the living links to the sensibilities of a prior era, to the values and culture of the pre-counterculture, pre-modernist world.

I wrote that Beverly Sills was “of a generation that had grown up at a time when the sense of life, and the standards of the nineteenth century were still strongly present in American culture, and she was the kind of person to take them up, propagate them further, and add her own artistry to the sum.”

I feel similarly about Schuyler Chapin.

I grew up in post-counterculture, post-60s America, and have never liked the nature or results of the counterculture upheavals or the ideas behind them. Rather, I have for a long time admired the art, manners, and many of the basic values of pre-WWII culture. The 19th century had nevertheless been distant for me; the era was something I learned about from books and film, not something I had had firsthand contact with.

Schuyler Chapin was for me a direct link and immediate manifestation of that world. I cannot tell you how important this was for me personally, particularly given the kind of music I write. Knowing Schuyler was a concretization and affirmation for me of a part of myself.

What I want to communicate is, simply, what kind of man he was.

It may seem strange to focus on his manner as something of great importance, but you must know what an unusual and strong impression Schuyler made on the people who knew him.

Schuyler Chapin was an aristocrat in the best possible sense of the term. He was a man of arts and letters (which fact came across immediately upon meeting him), and one of the most educated and erudite people I have ever known. He had become so on his own, he had had very little formal education (a fact which interestingly was the bit of common ground that led to Schuyler’s friendship with Peter Jennings).

For most of his retirement, Mr. Chapin read more books than I (and I read a lot of books). Keeping up with him became a good challenge—and, of course, he always had good books to recommend.

His letters are models of personal expression—of his unique blend of articulateness, directness, purposefulness, charm and politeness. In assisting Mr. Chapin with his letters and other writings, I learned a great deal about using the English language. Above all, I was impressed by his florid, fluid prose. When I first started working for Mr. Chapin, he had one bone to pick with my typing from dictation: “Too many commas.” That was quickly corrected.

I don’t think it was a coincidence that Mr. Chapin especially loved Wagner’s “endless melody”—his favorite opera was Tristan und Isolde.

Mr. Chapin published three books, all of which are fascinating reading:

his autobiography Musical Chairs: A Life in the Arts;

the story of his experiences with opera stars, Mezzos, Sopranos, Tenors, Bassos and Other Friends;

and the testament of his experiences with the great conductor, Leonard Bernstein: Notes from a Friend.

Schuyler could be piercingly direct, and one would sometimes see the merciless incisiveness of his wit (he was a fan of Oscar Wilde). Yet he had the irreproachable correctness and politeness of a genuine gentleman. When I discussed with him some of my students at the Mannes College, one of the first things he asked me, with a pointed tone, was: “Do they have any manners?”

He was a man of demanding standards; he was delightfully charming and lighthearted, and at the same time, beneath that, quite serious. He had a way of inclining his head to look at you with a direct (and I must say, riveting) gaze from below his brow—that simply made you pay attention. And what he said, you would not forget.

He was an unassuming but natural and formidable leader.

He had a brilliant dramatic flair (witness the storytelling in his books). He was utterly unpretentious, had no trace of pompousness or affectation, and hated any type of obsequiousness. I remember every once in a while Mr. Chapin would receive a visit from some person or other who was fawning or ingratiating, and I could see his manner change immediately. He got a little squirmy at first, became quieter and more withdrawn from conversation with the person, and after not too long would put an abrupt yet perfectly polite end to the visit.

Schuyler Chapin was a consummate hero-worshipper, a lover of human competence who was impatient with anything less. He loved art, which he repeatedly dubbed “the signature of man”—a concept that he had seen inscribed on a new arts building and which he attributed importance to—and he loved artists.

If I had to sum up Mr. Chapin in a word I would say that he conveyed, quite unmistakably but totally unselfconsciously, that mark of moral greatness which is personal dignity.

Looking back over his life, Schuyler was able to make a statement rare, beautiful, and the very proof of a life well-lived: he told his family that he had done in life everything he had ever wanted to do.

Schuyler was a prolific and skillful letter writer, a man of the age of letters who had mastered the form; when he faced the task of writing a letter of condolences he was fond of referencing a line from Thomas Campbell’s beautiful poem “Hallowed Ground.” It is with a heavy heart that I quote that stanza now, in memory of Mr. Chapin himself:

“But strew his ashes to the wind
Whose sword or voice has served mankind,—
And is he dead, whose glorious mind
Lifts thine on high?—
To live in hearts we leave behind
Is not to die.”

During these past years of his retirement, I was Schuyler Chapin’s secretary.
He was my hero.
I consider having known him to be one of the great honors of my life.

Sincerely,

Matthew Zachary Johnson
Secretary to Schuyler Chapin

with Mr. and Mrs. Chapin at Steinway Hall in 2005.

P.S. The Mayor ordered that flags in New York be flown at half mast this week in honor of Schuyler.

P.P.S. Schuyler Chapin as impressario knew the art of getting a packed house. I think he would have been pleased to know that even his funeral was "standing room only."

New Review of Serenade Album

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 08:28:01 GMT

I'm pleased to announce that our new album, Serenade: Music for Saxophone & Piano has gotten a lovely little review with Midwestrecord. The reviewer writes that the CD "will be grandly enjoyed by listeners looking for some music with depth that isn’t impenetrable."

Read the review at:

http://www.midwestrecord.com/2009/01/18/011809/
(It's down the page under "Sound Artist Records, Brian Horner - Elizabeth Avery.")

Purchase Serenade: Music for Saxophone & Piano at

http://cdbaby.com/cd/horneravery

It is also available at amazon.com, borders.com, iTunes and at many other online retailers.

Commentary on my PRO-IP Article

Sun, 28 Dec 2008 00:45:00 GMT

I just discovered that Patrick Ross, the prolific and insightful writer at the Copyright Alliance, wrote commentary on my article about the PRO-IP Law and the moral basis of copyright.

http://blog.copyrightalliance.org/2008/11/rights-education-and-morality/