I read about this book in a recent edition of The Wire: Adventures in Sound and Music (September 2024), and since I haven’t read a book about music in awhile–Michael Oliver’s biography of Stravinsky last December–I thought that I would take up Sounds within Sounds, which I have read as a Kindle doc because all of my books are still boxed up from the cross country move..
Molleson begins with her childhood love of classical music (Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, the canon). When she is older, and her musical education formalized and more fully developed, she continues to hear and study those core composers. Her curiosity, though, leads her to search out other composers beyond the core, after which she grapples with the logic of those who defend the core by claiming that their “greatness” would be reduced if more composers were included. Molleson doesn’t believe in such an exclusive zero sum game. Molleson’s tastes are open and inclusive, and value from the addition of new, creative voices. For Molleson, classical music is not a protected reserve behind closed borders but an always open field full of creative people producing amazing new music. She asks a set of questions which establish the purpose of the book: “Why did the official narrative, the concert programmes, the festival line-ups, always revolve so narrowly around the same clutch of ‘core’ composers that I’d learned about in my kids’ stories? Why were they so exclusively white and so male, so European and so American? Where were all the others? Because there were plenty of others. There are.”
Her answer could have resulted in a very long book, because the twentieth and twenty first centuries have produced a lot of classical composers. Molleson, though, focuses on only ten, all outside the white male Euro-American canon. Sounds within Sounds functions–not as a compendium of the new–but as a guide to experiencing classical music as an open field rather than a closed reserve. Four of the composers are men, and six are women; nationally, there is one Mexican, one Brazilian, one Philipino, one Russian, one Ethiopian, one Dane, one French, one New Zealander, and two Americans (one woman, one African-American).
The essays are structured around interviews: the composers, if they are alive; family, friends, colleagues, and music scholars. Molleson is also part of the process, because with each composer and essay she is on her own path of discovery. She does not write from the distanced perspective of an expert but as someone who is learning and putting together different pieces of information (biographical, historical, musicological, political, personal) together to form a coherent interpretation of each composer and make sense of their unique creative output. What clearly attracts Molleson to these ten is their uniqueness: their paths to becoming composers make each stand out as distinct.
In the first chapter, Molleson focuses on the Mexican composer, Julían Carrillo, although she also spends some time on the more well known Silvestre Revueltas. I know the latter, particularly Sensemaya and La Noche de las Mayas, but I had never heard of Carrillo. More importantly, I had always thought that it was European and US composers (e.g., Charles Ives) who first explored microtones and had no idea that someone in Mexico, on the margins of cultural power, was doing breakthrough work challenging the standard twelve tone western scale. Within Mexico, though, Carrillo (and Revueltas, too) was an outsider, because he pursued a path that did not take into account Mexico’s post-Revolutionary recovery of folkloric and pre-Hispanic cultures as sources for remaking a national culture that is more authentic and less eurocentric. But Carrillo didn’t care about this post-Revolutionary push and followed his own microtonal muse. Molleson describes him as an odd bird, but it was that oddness that made him interesting and creative. From his system, El Sonido de 13, Carrillo claims the possibility for an infinite number of tunings, which would revolutionize not only the way that music is composed but played. Imagine a Beethoven symphony played using a microtonal scale. I like Molleson’s short analyses of exemplary works by Carrillo, and I feel fortunate to be able to listen to them through Spotify or YouTube. Throughout the book, I was happy to be able to use music streaming as a listening and research tool. Carrillo and the other microtonal composers opened up western classical music to new creative opportunities, which for Molleson is all to the good.
Chapter 2 is about Ruth Crawford Seeger, of whom I know a little and whose compositions are dauntingly modernist. I love a challenging listen. I had understood her story as one of lost potential, that she gave up compositing to marry Charles Seeger and become mother/stepmother to his children (the more famous children: She is stepmother to Pete and mother to Mike and Peggy). Beyond album notes, this is the longest biography that I’ve read on Seeger. Molleson’s take on Seeger is more nuanced and complex than the story of lost potential that I had in my head, but Seeger’s story is still one of unrealized potential and is sad. Crawford went to Chicago from Florida to study music, with the aim of returning home to become a piano. Chicago, though, lit a fire, and her exposure to early twentieth century modernism tapped into her latent genius as a composer. She goes east to study with Charles Seeger and then is the first woman to receive a Guggenheim and goes to Berlin, where she writes her great work String Quartet 1931. Of the composers she interacted with in Europe, she was most inspired by Bela Bartok, and his ethnomusicological work in his native Hungary. Ruth and Charles Seeger had fallen in love before she went to Berlin. It is the Depression, and with no other opportunities to pursue composition, she marries Seeger. Fortunately, Charles tapped into a WPA Project to record and preserve American folk music. Ruth transcribed the cylinders. She is still using her considerable musical talents, but to create an archive of others’ music, very much like what Bartok was doing in Hungary. It is also worth noting that after she finished a transcription, the Seeger family would learn the piece and sing it. Talk about a folk revival! Molleson notes that after the transcription work, Ruth had begun composing again, now pulling from her amalgamated knowledge of classical and folk music in a new burst of creativity. Unfortunately, she contracted cancer and died before being able to compose much. Molleson structures the essay around an affable interview with the daughter, Peggy Seeger; two women, two feminists, puzzling out the loss or trying the weigh the balance of gains and losses of a uniquely talented musical genius.
In each chapter, Molleson spends significant time detailing the historical and political circumstances for each composer. For Carrillo, the Mexican Revolution dominates; for Ruth Crawford Seeger, it’s the Depression. Chapter 3 is on the Brazilian Walter Smetak, with whom I was not familiar at all. Like Carrillo, Smetak became fascinated with microtones, and like the American Harry Partch he built his own instruments to best realize those microtones. He was hired by the Federal University of Bahia in the late 1950s, when the university went all in for culture and hired forward-thinking artists. Initially hired to do instrument repair, Smetak came to build sonic objects. Bahia was a melting pot of cultures–where there was no monocultural “authenticity”--and Smetak’s bricolage instruments reflected that multiplicity. Smetak coined the term “ caossonance,” a sound that is beyond consonance and dissonance. Molleson points out that Smetak was a precursor to the open-minded, free-thinking Tropicalia movement(e.g., Helio Oiticica, Gilberto Gil, Tom Zé, Os Mutantes), whose wild and challenging art and music got them in trouble with the Vargas dictatorship (1964-85): too much freedom of expression. Perhaps like Ruth Crawford Seger, low and high art forge a link, but in Brazil that link became politically powerful and, thus, a target for government oppression.
I know Philipino José Maceda because of his album on John Zorn’s Tzadik label, Gongs and Bamboo. He learned western music, becomes a pianist, and studied in Manila, Paris, and Los Angeles. As someone who bridged the West and the East but realized that the East occupied a subordinate position vis-a-vis the West, Maceda becomes an advocate for Asian classical composers. Like Bartok and Crawford Seeger, he becomes an ethnomusicologist and did extensive field recordings of folk music around the Philippines, Asia, and the world. Like Pierre Henri, Pierre Schaeffer, Else Marie Pade, and Éliane Radigue, he became a practitioner of musique concrete, which involves the recording and manipulation of found sounds. He wrote music for the non-western instruments he recorded. Unlike Carrillo, he is more of a nationalist, but only in that he uses the music of the Philippines as a starting point for his own creativity. Unlike the Tropicalia artists who were targeted by the Brazilian government, Maceda was weirdly championed by the Marcos dictatorship, particularly Imelda Marcos, as an example of living Philippine culture. The dictatorship made possible the performance of his piece musique concrete piece “Ugnayan,” which required the coordination of 38 radio stations across Manila. More often than not, creatives find themselves suppressed or oppressed by political systems, but not always.
At the Long Play Festival in Brooklyn two years ago, I saw the pianist Jenny Lin perform a piece by Galina Ustvolskaya. The lighting in the theater was dim, and I didn’t notice until the end that Lin was wearing wrist braces. It was a ferocious, loud, and repetitive piece, so I understood why Lin needed the braces. Some celebrate Ustvolskaya for her brutal minimalism, while others dismiss her for it. In Chapter 5, Molleson’s point and that of the others she interviewed–a contemporary composer, pianist, musicologist, and Ustvolskaya’s widower–is that Ustvolskaya was utterly unique, a unicorn, whose work cannot be explained by influence or education (Shostakovich was one of her teachers). She was gruff, exacting, and brutally honest, and, unlike Crawford Seeger, who felt the need to conform to a conventional gender role, Ustvolskaya did what she wanted. Like Carrillo in Mexico, she was a complete outsider. Perhaps her genius led to her outsider status, or perhaps her outsider status made her genius possible. That she wrote this music while living in Stalin’s USSR, which was never kind to artists, seems unfathomable.
In Chapter 6, Molleson takes up the anti-Ustvolskaya, the Ethiopian nun Emahoy Tsegué-Mariam Guèbru, whom I first heard about from pianist Anthony Coleman at the Big Ears Festival in Knoxville two years ago, who dedicated his solo piano set to her. Coleman is a gentle soul, and so was Emahoy Tsegué-Mariam Guèbru. Her music is the exact opposite of Ustvolskaya’s: gentle and meditative. Molleson centers the essay around her interview of Emahoy in her room at the Jerusalem convent where she lived. Molleson’s analysis is very much grounded in Emahoy’s life, which moved in so many directions: from musical prodigy to nun to her return to music, from learning western classics to listening to sacred music to improvising using Ethiopian scales to writing and recording music. All is mixed with history politics. Emahoy’s well-to-do family and the open culture Addis Ababa in the early twentieth century allowed Emahoy to pursue her talents, which included a European education. But those opportunities were deferred when Mussolini invaded Ethiopia, and Emahoy and her family were jailed. After the war, though, when she applied for a visa to study music in Europe again the government inexplicably turned her down. In the resulting life crisis, she immersed herself in faith and sacred music. Years later, she took up the piano again, improvising songs based on Ethiopian scales and modes, after which she began to write music, which she recorded. Like everyone else in this volume, Emahoy’s path to creativity is distinct.
The Dane Else Marie Pade is another story, like Emahoy’s, of innocence put through the ringer and out the other side came a singular talent. As a child, Pade is sick much of the time and lives through the sounds that she hears, which fire her imagination throughout the rest of her life. As a teenager, she rejected the Nazi invasion of Denmark and worked with the Danish Resistance building telephone box bombs. She is captured and jailed. In the cell, she hears a short tune in her head and writes it on the wall, after which she is punished for defacing the cell. The tune becomes the basis and inspiration for her subsequent career in music. After the war, she worked for Danish Broadcasting, doing soundtrack/background work. She heard sounds in her imagination and turned to others, electronic engineers, to help her realize what she heard. As a woman in Denmark working in electronic music, she is on the margin of what is happening in Europe (Stockhausen, Shaeffer, Berio) and pursued her own path. Her most notable work–at least for me, a retired literature professor–was inspired by James Joyce’s Ulysses. Just as Joyce wrote about Dublin, Pade created an electronic soundscape of Copenhagen, Symphonie Magnetophonique. José Maceda did the same for Manila with his giant collaborative piece, “Ugnayan,” as did Pierre Henri for Liverpool, Venice, and Paris.
The chapter on Muhal Richard Abrams seems the least well-realized in the book. I know, have read, or listened to much Muhal. He was a founder of the American Association of Creative Musicians (AACM), which changed the course of jazz in the 1960s. I’ve read Paul Steinbeck’s recent book Sound Experiments: The Music of the AACM
Muhal is well celebrated in avant jazz circles, but as Molleson claims perhaps not beyond them. She makes the point about his productivity, that he uses a system, the Schillinger System, to facilitate composing for him or any one, a great leveler. Mollesen speaks to his productivity, his outreach to others, the wide variety of compositions (not just jazz). She doesn’t do the kind of analysis of pieces that she does in other chapters, and Molleson’s personal touch is missing. And as much as Muhal deserves a chapter in this book, so do others like Anthony Braxton, Roscoe Mitchell, or Henry Threadgill. I agree with her, though, that Muhal is an original. Through his own works and those of his fellow AACMers, amazing amounts of creativity were unleashed. My love of jazz would be much diminished without Muhal Richard Abrams.
The chapter on Eliane Radigue, for me, may be the most enlightening one in the book. I have listened to Radigue’s music and heard it performed a few times. I like it, but wish that I liked it more than I have. I’m not sure that I have had the patience for it, because it is very slow and the minimalist of minimalist music. Molleson discussion helped a lot. Like Pade, it was sounds that intrigued Radigue, so when she heard musique concrete composer Pierre Schaeffer’s work on the radio she heard her future. Like Crawford Seeger, she faced similar tensions between family and art when she went to work for Schaeffer and Pierre Henri, who used her as an assistant but did not recognize her status as an artist. Following her artist husband who received a fellowship to study in New York, she found the milieu she needed (Steve Reich, LaMonte Young, John Cage, Laurie Siegel) to become the composer she imagined herself to be, searching to find the “sounds within sounds.” What I find most intriguing is the last section where Molleson talks about the work that she has created this century for musicians and acoustic instruments. Radigue does not write the music down, does not produce a score. Instead, she works by interviewing the musicians who will play a piece, conversing with the musicians until they have reached a collaborative understanding of what she wants. At Long Play this year, Ensemble Klang played her piece, “Occam Hexa V,” which they realized only after going to her apartment in Paris and spending time with her talking about the piece: Composition as oral transmission. What defines “Occam Hexa V” as a piece of music? There is no score. Ensemble Klang did not memory melody lines, rhythms, or chord changes. There were conversations and then performances of the piece. “The” is perhaps too definite of an article to link with Radigue and Ensemble Klang’s creation.
Like Radigue and Pade, Annea Lockwood is fascinated by sound, in particular sounds in nature. Molleson is at her best when she interviews the composer, because the information shared and Molleson’s analyses are, as a result, much more intimate and revealing. Biography and autobiography are essential for understanding the composers and compositions in this volume. I have listened to Lockwood’s work and seen it performed, but I’ve never really understood what she’s done until now. It is not enough to consider her a sound artist or a musique concrete composer manipulating found sounds.<--These are just categories and don’t reveal what is inside the music, the raison d’etre of the sounds. In the interviews, Molleson gets at the raison d’etre. Like Pade and Radigue, Lockwood was fascinated with sound at a young age in her native New Zealand. In the interview, Lockwood speaks at length about her focus on the sounds in the natural world, which Molleson then interweaves with the love story between Lockwood and her life partner, Ruth Anderson, who was also a sound composer. The love story illuminates the art story and vicé-versa.
In Sounds within Sounds: Radical Composers of the Twentieth Century, details about the composers, their lives and works are important, but what Molleson does best here is piece together complex paths–perhaps “maps” would be a better term–of creativity.