Who qualifies as "contemporary" composers?

Posted by: Paper Plane on 21 October 2013

And on what grounds?

 

For instance, is Alfred Schnittke, who died in 1998, still contemporary or now merely classical? Presumably, Sir John Tavener, who is still with us, is (still) contemporary?

 

Interested to hear your comments.

 

Thanks

 

steve

Posted on: 21 October 2013 by Kevin-W
Originally Posted by Paper Plane:

And on what grounds?

 

For instance, is Alfred Schnittke, who died in 1998, still contemporary or now merely classical? Presumably, Sir John Kenneth Tavener, who is still with us, is (still) contemporary?

 

Interested to hear your comments.

 

Thanks

 

steve

As with most other artforms, I guess that if they're still active, they count as contemporary. It helps if they're on, or near, the cutting edge, but that's not a prerequisite. For example, the architect Quinlan Terry, who creates neo-classical pastiches masquerading as buildings, could be regarded as a contemporary architect, because he's still working - even if he works in a defiantly non-modernist or non-contemporary idiom.

 

I've no idea who Ken Tavener is, but John Taverner is still going and could be counted as a contemporary composer.

 

So could Boulez, Reich and Glass. But Cage and Messaien could not, as they're no longer with us, or active.

 

Maybe.

Posted on: 22 October 2013 by YanC
Originally Posted by Kevin-W:
As with most other artforms, I guess that if they're still active, they count as contemporary

andrew lloyd webber?

Posted on: 22 October 2013 by Kevin-W
Originally Posted by YanC:
Originally Posted by Kevin-W:
As with most other artforms, I guess that if they're still active, they count as contemporary

andrew lloyd webber?

Well, yes, he is, in a way, although I don't think many would classify him as a "serious" composer in the way that Boulez or even Sondheim are.