9th question in series: "noteworthy but not well-known composers" - SCOTT JOPLIN - agree, disagree?

Question

((7th and 8th questions still open, should you care to respond: Thomas Arne, John Adams; all others are resolved))

Scott Joplin(1868-1917)

Some of you may disagree: "is not noteworthy"; "is well-known"; or, he really can't be considered a genuine "classical" music composer in any sense of the word.

Be that as it may(what an original phrase-?), please share with us anything you deem worthy of sharing, and thanks for doing so.

I for one, feel that if he had written nothing other than the "Maple Leaf" rag, he should be considered a musical genius: a genuine American master-piece.

Has anyone ever attended a live performance, or heard a complete performance of his opera, "Treemonisha"?

-------------------------------------------------

As always, any suggestions, criticisms - positive or negative - welcome. Any thoughts on the format of this series?

Alberich

Answer 1

I personally enjoy Joplin, and ragtime in general, but in small doses. In fact, here at my store we have a bi-monthly meeting of the local ragtime society.and everybody has a lot of fun.



Joplin wrote some really fine stuff aside from Maple Leaf, such as the "Magnetic Rag", "Peacherine", "Solace", etc. I can go the rest of my life without hearing "The Entertainer", thank you very much. In fact, I used to be the ragtime pianist at the local 6 Flags theme park. (Please help me to forget those days.)



I do not consider him to be "not-well-known", but I am undecided as to whether he should be considered classical or not. His music certainly has staying power, but he wrote in a very formulaic manner, always the same forms, always the same harmonies and progressions (e.g., his cadences are almost always cycle of 5ths progressions -- VofVofV, VoV, V, I. A little bit naive, primitive and repetitive for my taste. But in terms of ragtime, he is the avowed master, IMO. He used proper voice leading, spaced his harmonies well, and came up with good, well constructed tunes.



Treemonisha was performed by the Houston opera some years ago, to mixed reviews. I have heard recordings of portions of it, including the overture, and, as I said, Joplin is good in small doses. I would not be able to sit through an entire 3 hours of it



Joplin is one of my "secret" indulgences -- I have been known to spend some time reading through one or two of 'em at a sitting. Don't tell anyone

Answer 2

Influential, yes; noteworthy, yes, but not well known ... no*



I think that he's quite well known, especially after Marvin Hamlisch's soundtrack to the motion picture The Sting was released. There was a certain rise in the popularity of Ragtime piano, and arrangements of ragtime music. Surely the amount of Ragtime that gets played has since diminished



Ragtime is a uniquely American (I'd even go as far to say regional, centered in the mid-Atlantic and southern states, especially Misourri) style of music.



If you want, popular but a rather more obscure ragtime composer it would be James Scott (1886-1938).



I'm not sure that I'd categorize this genre as classical, but it certainly requires some dexterity and virtuosity. Then again, art songs from Europe around the same time are considered classical, so let's just keep ragtime there as well.



As to your last question, no I've never heard a complete performance of Treemonisha. For a real treat, though, see if you can pick up a copy of "E Power Biggs Plays Scott Joplin on the Pedal Harpsichord" -- http://www.amazon.com/Power-Biggs-Plays-Joplin-Harpsichord/dp/B000VG18X6



* "double-negatives are a no-no!"

Answer 3

I consider Scott Joplin a perfect candidate for this series. I consider him a classical composer, and an influential composer in both the classical and pop worlds. He certainly thought of himself as a serious composer.

His music had a huge revival in the mid 1970s. First among classical and jazz fans with and album of rags played by Joshua Rifkin (who also played bach). Then a little later by the Movie The Sting and the popular soundtrack by Marvin Hamlisch which was a huge pop hit. Hamlisch always did the right thing and gave proper credit to Joplin.



I have seen Treemonisha on Broadway in a production (I think) from the Huston Grand Opera. It was only a partial success but was winning for its spirit. I must admit that the thing I remember most from the matinee was the young woman who sang Treemonisha - she was Kathleen Battle who would soon go on to bigger and better things.



Its hard to imagine any 20th century music without the infuence of syncopation and rags.

Answer 4

He reminds me a lot of Irving Berlin, a talented composer whose work in a "popular" genre has relegated him to a familiar but lightly regarded footnote in music history.



Grab a random handful of sheet music songs from Berlin's era and you find a lot of hack work that could be turned out in one's sleep; then sneak ANY Berlin tune that isn't well-known into the pile, and see how much it stands out from the others. I think Joplin is like that.



He took a formulaic style and turned out small musical gems, with interesting melodies, appealing harmonies, and a dash of virtuosity. His work is so far above the norm for rags that virtually all other composers of the style are completely unknown, save for an occasional single work, while Joplin has never been out of print and is synonymous with ragtime.



In 1899 Strauss wrote "Ein Heldenleben, " and Joplin wrote the "Maple Leaf Rag." I know we're all serious musicians here - and I personally love Strauss - but I know which one I would rather have written :)

Answer 5

The form of 'Ragtime is hardly American. It echos the layout of Brass Band medleys (I shouldn't dignify that 'form' any further, perhaps), and is about as organised as peering into a photo album that has pictures taken by eight photographers, living in eight different countries, and taken over a period of 200 years.



Ragtime, to me, has always been thought of as shallow, cheap, ingratiating froth. Melodically shallow, and harmonically simplistic, at least 200 years behind what was happening in Europe etc.



Then, quite by chance, I heard a very old recording of Joplin playing his music. "Solace" It was exquisite, sensitive piano playing, and the music was far less disorganised than I expected. It was captivating!



Maple Leaf Rag begins with pointless clanging, but it redeems itself with magnificent polyphonic rhythmic interplays soon, before disintegrating a la Brass Band Medley. Hardly great music, but Joplin's delicate playing still captured my attention.



Like Australia's Percy Grainger, Joplin never tried to be avant guarde, but his quality of redemption is his delightful mastery of the piano, and his ability to charm without any pretence of profundity or genius.



EDIT... If one chooses to paint what is often called 'cheesecake' in an effort to be popular as an 'artist', it is manifestly stupid to be offended when one's name is not listed alongside that of Picasso! Many American composers, living in a community that tends to judge success in terms of money earned, seem to be a little put out when the world outside the USA dismisses their output with a degree of disdain.



Joplin, to me, is a talented musician who conformed to the mores of the country in which he lived. He entertained those around him. This, furthermore, he did very, very well. But he lived at the time of Schoenberg, of Debussy, of Webern. Only a blindly patriotic American would feel hurt that Joplin is not mentiuoned alongside them.