On this glorious day, I am thinking of Bach.  Yes, of course Bach.  That hero of music, nearly unknown in his lifetime, and eminently legendary ever since; that epitome of greatness in music and innovation.  But, do you know what I would like to see?  I would like to see more people looking to Bach, not just for interesting performances, done with different instruments in different places, not just homilies and remembrances and endless historical reviews; I would like to see more people looking to Bach for the thing which Bach did best: Composition.  Countless times, we have heard of the influence of one great composer on another great composer, but what about this most unique period in history today?  We have the advantage, the unspeakable advantage and the almost unheard-of possibilities resulting from the advent of sound equipment and recording technology, thus to be influenced in powerful ways by whatever composer(s) we choose!

A man of my acquaintance called our day a day of  “Musical Amnesia”.  How can it be that in the age of technology, when every effort has been made to put even the most obscure compositions at our disposal, that we have forgotten about this principle of influence?

At an early age, I learned that when I wrote music, it reflected, to a great degree, the music to which I had been listening.  I could tailor my compositions with the flick of my wrist, and write in any style I chose, depending on what I was listening to.

Why then, if we love Bach so much, (and there are many who claim to) or Mozart, or Beethoven, or any of them, why then is there not more emulation?  Why is it that we hear Bach and Mozart from the Concert Hall in ever tighter concentric circles of elitist performances, yet, from the cutting edge of composition, whether in the University or the Movie Studio, there is an ever deepening black hole of empty show, marked by cheap imitations and knock-offs of half-baked a-tonal pseudo-music?

Where would be the harm in using our technology to influence our writing so that it might reflect the best of the history of this world?  We alone have had this capability.  And why not use it?  Why look to the past only as a relic, to be worshiped from afar?  Why not put it into the minds and hearts of our young people in ever more consistent and purposeful ways and let the influence of great teachers have it’s sway?

The best use we can make of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Vivaldi, Handel, etc. is to let them ‘influence’ our writing.  They could be powerful teachers, if we would let them.  I am always surprised at how little influence they have had in our Universities.  Instead of enlisting these great minds and their music to influence new and upcoming composers, they give them a passing nod, talk about them as though they were dead, (which, of course, they are not!) and direct the student’s minds to the field of exploration of ‘new frontiers’ in music.  Leaving the past in the past, they march forward without the guidance of these Masters, only to find that the result is Chaos, Disharmony, Abandonment, Disillusionment, and Despair.  As a result, and in spite of the pretenses to the contrary, no one really likes to listen to or support such stuff, but it looks good on paper and it gleans the funds of government grants.

I have lived long enough to see that music has a life of it’s own, in addition to the life of it’s composer.  That musical life can be either strong or weak, long or short, simple or complex.   The justice of life has decreed that there is some music that lives, and other music that dies.  Who would wish to give birth to a child only to have that child die within a short time?  No one.  By the same token, a composer naturally wishes for his music to outlive him.  In order for music to live, it must have life.  Perhaps we do not know exactly what quality of the music gives it it’s life.  But we do know that Bach and many others were able in some inexplicable way, to tap into that mysterious source and endow their music with it.  Bach’s music lives.  It just lives.  Only a fool would ignore the wisdom of a great teacher when that teacher is willing, able and available.

 

Today, I am grateful for my wonderful heritage! As a child I experienced many different faiths. I consider this rich background to be a wonderful foundation for this business of producing music. Much of what I have written has been for the church; and I say church in it’s broadest sense. People of faith often have much in common. One of those things can be music. I love how music bridges the gaps between religions and brings people to the core of what it is all about. I want to be a part of what makes America great. Our heritage of faith is one of those pillars of greatness, and music is, in my view, the largest foundation stone. Here’s to the music we all have in common. and here’s to the music we will have in common in the future which we have yet to discover!

Church music is the lifeblood of choral music.  With thousands of churches doing music every day around the globe, I believe that this avenue of performance and listening holds tremendous opportunity for growth.  In his day, Bach worked tirelessly to provide what he hoped would be a sort of revival of church music.  He wished for more powerful, moving performances, more uplifted congregations, and more growth experiences for musicians.  Today, we are all indebted to him for his vision, and his personal, musical integrity and genius.   As a composer, I have often been subjected to ideas about the past and present state of music.  In my college years, there seemed to be a general lack of interest in providing more and better church music, but there was plenty of interest in being innovative and productive in other aspects of the composition world.  Recently however, it feels like there is a revival of interest in music in churches and religious settings of all kinds, not to mention the booming internet music industry in which religious music is not exactly taking a back seat.  There are many more churches today than even fifty years ago, and with all the diversity abounding in the religious world, the music in these churches reflects that diversity in a grand way.

There has been much debate about styles, instruments, forms, and features of music to be used in churches and even more about the so-called “religious” music being produced outside the churches.  Never before has there been such a call for music of faith of every kind and style.  To me, this is a unique opportunity to explore the possibilities of music for any religious purpose.  I am of the opinion that all the good music has not been written yet and that there are great musicians out there now, who are capable of the best we have ever seen.  I believe in them.  I believe in the innate ability of people to create whatever they can imagine.

When I first began writing music, I sent my music to one publisher who wrote back to me that he intended to publish only music that had certain limited ranges for the voices (much lower than the industry standard), certain limitations in the difficulty of the accompaniments, (he wished them to be simple enough for a moderate beginner), and certain limitations in the amount of part singing, (he wanted only occasional 4 part harmony, and mostly unison or occasionally two parts).  After I read his letter, I was amazed!  I wondered what would have happened if Handel had tried to publish his music with this publisher today!  As a church choir director for many years, I understood the restrictions which are often placed upon us by the limitations of our choir members, but for my part, I did not wish to dumb-down the music to accommodate the limitations, rather I wished to help the choir to progress to greater and greater things through the use of gradually more difficult pieces.  On the whole, I feel that my efforts were successful.  However, what that publisher said to me has haunted me ever since then.  I have wondered if it is a general consensus that there should be simpler and simpler things to sing so that people who know little about music can have a “good experience” in a church choir, or if there are more people like me who believe that there is something more and better to be gained by stretching and reaching higher.

I have seen the internet become a clearing-house for all kinds of self-published music.  Anyone, anywhere can now “publish” his own work and people can see it and purchase it.  I believe that what is needed now is not more of what we already have that is flooding the internet, our churches and our schools.  What is needed now is composers who have a vision of what choral music can be in this age.  We have the ability to proliferate music at the click of a button, but if that music has merely been churned out of a formula with a computer-generated ‘grinder’, then we are no further along the path toward anything.  Today, even after 300 years and more, people still go back to Bach.  People still seek out and love his music.  It still enlightens, uplifts, inspires and generates power in the lives of people in all walks of life.  What did he have that seems to be lacking today?  Whatever it is, it’s where I am going, just as fast as I am able.

Kathleen Smith