Here's the backstory:
In 2015, Jessy McCabe, 17, petitioned one of Britain’s biggest exam boards to include female composers in its A-level music syllabus.
Ms. McCabe found that Edexcel’s A-level Music Syllabus featured 63 male composers and no female ones. She also observed that on 8 March 2015, BBC Radio 3 managed to programme an entire day of music by female composers to honour International Women’s Day.
“Surely, if BBC Radio 3 can play music composed by women for a whole day," Ms. McCabe wrote, "Edexcel could select at least one to be part of the syllabus alongside the likes of Holborne, Haydn and Howlin’ Wolf?”
Edexel was initially unwilling to acquiesce to Ms. McCabe's challenge. Its head of music wrote: “Given that female composers were not prominent in the western classical tradition (or others for that matter), there would be very few female composers that could be included.”
After a Change.org petition subsequently launched by Ms. McCabe received 4,000 signatures, Edexcel apparently bowed to public pressure and changed their 2016 syllabus to include works by five women: Clara Schumann, Rachel Portman, Kate Bush, Anoushka Shankar and Kaija Saariaho.
You can read more about this story here:
- The back-story about the petition, before the changes were implemented (The Guardian)
- Story about the success of the petition, which led to a slightly more inclusive changed syllabus (The Guardian)
The inclusion of female composers/songwriters in the 2016 syllabus was celebrated by some, and criticized by others. Among the critics was Damian Thompson, who, in a 2015 article in The Spectator (a conservative British magazine on politics, culture, and current affairs, according to Wikipedia) entitled There’s a good reason why there are no great female composers, asked the question: How good is [women composers'] music compared with that of male composers?
He discussed works by several women composers – Clara Schumann (1819–1896), Fanny Mendelssohn (1805–1847), Amy Beach (1867–1944), Dame Ethel Smyth (1858–1944), Elizabeth Maconchy (1907–1994), and Thea Musgrave (born 1928) – to support his conclusion that women composers were not as good as their male counterparts, and therefore their music did not merit inclusion in the list of composers to be studied by British A-level students.
The counter-argument proposed by Ms. McCabe was that the inclusion of women composers in the Edexcel A-Level syllabus was important, “so that girls are freely able and inspired to become composers, to enrich the A-level syllabus and to ultimately ensure that women’s works are valued, as they should be.”
Here are a few thoughts further to this episode, and Mr. Thompson's response to it:
- As I pointed out in my previous post on this topic, the article's title, There's a good reason why there are no great female composers, is completely unrelated to the actual article. At no point does the author propose or discuss a reason, good or otherwise, why “there are no great female composers.”
- Further to the previous point, an unbiased and well-researched article exploring reasons for the extreme gender imbalance among composers of the common-practice period (roughly 1650-1900) would perhaps be enlightening to those that blithely assume that women and men competed on an equal playing field throughout history. They didn't, and, some argue, still don't, although the situation has improved significantly since the 1960's. Historically, the roles available to women were severely restricted, and, within this, the roles of women in any field within music were even more restricted. Yes, Clara Schumann managed to develop a career as a concert pianist, but women were barred from European orchestras; the Vienna Philharmonic did not accept a female member until 1997; The Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra did not hire its first female musician until 1982 (violinist Madeleine Carruzzo). I would be curious to know how often these all-male orchestras performed works by women prior to 1900; if it occurred at all, I suspect it was extremely uncommon.
- Only one of the five women composers selected for criticism by Mr. Thompson was included in Edexcel's syllabus: Clara Schumann. He therefore spent the bulk of his article arguing against the inclusion of women composers whose music was not subsequently included in the revised syllabus, but perhaps Edexcel's syllabus was published after Thompson's article.
- All works discussed in Mr. Thompson's article were selected by him. It seems possible that musicologists with expertise in the music of the named composers might have been able to find other, stronger works by these composers for discussion; when one's intention is to prove that music by women composers is not very good, it can hardly be a surprise when the examples chosen to illustrate this point do so rather well.
- The threshold for inclusion in the Edexcell Syllabus is clearly not "all-time greatness," as in "equal in quality to the best music of Bach, Beethoven, Charlie Parker, Miles Davis, Stevie Wonder, and The Beatles." Ms. McCabe's letter, quoted above, mentions Anthony Holborne (late renaissance British composer of music primarily for lute, 1545-1602), and Howlin' Wolf (much-acclaimed blues singer and guitarist, 1910-1976). A quick perusal of Edexcel's 2016 syllabus reveals names such as Courtney Pine (British jazz musician, b. 1964), La Familia Valera Miranda (A family of musicians from the Oriente region of Cuba that play a mid-tempo form of ‘son’, a Cuban traditional musical style), as well as Vivaldi, Vaughan Williams, and Berlioz. The initial exclusion of works by all women from the Edexcell Syllabus sends a clear message that no women in the history of composition were as worthy of inclusion as any of the male musicians on the list, a position that is indefensible. Popular music artists are on the Edexcel list, but despite decades of great music by Kate Bush (subsequently included), Joni Mitchell, Carole King, Nina Simone, Taylor Swift, Dolly Parton, Loretta Lynn, Memphis Minnie, Laura Nyro, and countless others, not one was initially included. Film music composers are another category, and here again no females were initially chosen (Rachel Portman was included following Ms. McCabe's successful petition), despite the successful careers in this field of Sofia Gubaidulina, Hildur Guðnadóttir, Lesley Barber, or any of the other names on Wikipedia's list of female film composers.
- I'm not sufficiently familiar with Edexcel's history to know if they make a special effort to include British composers in their syllabus, but I noticed quite a few British musicians in the 2016 syllabus. If they do give British composers/musicians any kind of preferential status, which they have every right to do, why not make the effort to be inclusive of other groups within British society as well, such as women composers? Thanks to Ms. McCabe and a successful publicity campaign, the 2016 syllabus now does, albeit to a limited degree.
- As I mentioned above, Ms. McCabe argued in favour of the representation of women composers on the Edexcel syllabus, “so that girls are freely able and inspired to become composers, to enrich the A-level syllabus and to ultimately ensure that women’s works are valued, as they should be.” This in itself is an interesting argument – I don't know if there are any studies that prove that exposure to music by members of a target population empower or encourage other members of that target population to pursue careers in music, but it certainly seems possible. And if it is possible, then it seems worth doing. But mostly it's worth doing based purely on artistic merit.
Once again (I posted some recordings in my previous entry as well), here are a couple of recordings of music by Clara Schumann, with scrolling scores:
Posts
11 comments:
I find this topic interesting. Having read some of the names of popular music artists who are also on the A-list, it seems to me that the argument for the superiority of male composers begins to dwindle. It could be understood in a certain sense if we were dealing exclusively with the classical era, since it existed at a time when women, for the most part, simply weren't allowed to be composers. There are exceptions of course. With much more male material to deal with than female material in the classical world, such exclusivity could be understood if done under the guise of not wanting to sacrifice merit simply to arbitrarily include women. However, I don't think this is the case, granted the amount of women involved in popular music in the 20th century. I'm certainly far more familiar with Ella Fitzgerald and Stevie Nicks than I am with Howlin' Wolf. I've never even heard of Howlin' Wolf. I'm sure he's great though. Nonetheless, the A-list seems odd to me. Ideally composers would be selected based upon a variety of factors such as quality of compositions and how influential their works have been. In the case of 20th century popular music, I think many women could fit into those categories.
I was very happy to read in this post that her campaign was successful! What a great win! After reading your description of who was included in the original syllabus I am absolutely shocked and confused as to why none of the more famous female composers had been included. Even if it were to go off their seeming bias toward UK composers Ethel Smyth would be a fantastic choice! Her music is incredible in my opinion and she definitely holds her ground to any of the composers mentioned in the syllabus. It simply doesn't make sense, if contemporary, jazz, film and blues music is also included it is truly absurd that there were no women composers to begin with. Nina Simone was an incredible jazz pianist who wrote all her own songs, why not include her? There is a list of acclaimed contemporary female composers as long as the eye can see and still nothing? That to me is just plain wrong. While I can understand (although disagree with) the argument that if the works were strictly pre 1900 compositions you have fewer and fewer choices since female composers simply weren't as accepted as their male counterparts and their works unfortunately have not all survived through time; however if they were trying to argue that TODAY there are still no accessible works by female composers then it is simply absurd and to think that a large musical organization is thinking this way is discouraging.
It is definitely very important to include a broad spectrum of composers to study- to witness a variety of backgrounds, perspectives, and influence. Obviously if a woman composer was deemed to be not only less skilled than her male counterparts, but also less historically significant, she should not be included in the curriculum. But in MUS2005 we learn about Hildegard Von Bingen who was without a doubt both skilled and historically significant. I cannot say that I am an expert on the subject but I am certain there are many more examples that could be found, it is simply due to the fact that male composers were much more prominent so their works are easier to find (more accessible). I think the extra effort put towards finding talented and important female composers is worth it to hear work from a variety of backgrounds and perspectives. Aside from composition, women's inclusion in music is still a significant historical milestone worth discussing within a curriculum even if only briefly.
Hi! This topic is an interesting topic to think about.
On a related topic, it is obvious that the lesser presence of women in fields such as music composition, but also science for example, and the little encouragement for women to work in those fields, most certainly impact each other, creating a circle. Women aren't encouraged to do so, and even when they are offered to, they won't chose a path such as science, military force, etc.
Then how do you think that we, as a society, could break that circle?
It is true that women had less opportunities to compose music centuries ago but this does NOT mean that females composers did not exist. To use language such as "Not prominent" really says "we know there's a few and we don't care enough to include them". This is so lazy and music curriculums would be missing out on tons of cool topics to teach and expand on. I think focusing on too narrow a scope of composers is limiting especially when it comes to most of them being dead European men. Having female composers in the syllabus really brings out the bigger picture and illuminates what has been missing for so long in post secondary music education. Its amazing to see Jessica succeed and I hope more underrepresented composers get the recognition they deserve!
I am performing a recital in two weeks that is all about women. It is about female composers such as Clara Schumann, Fanny Mendelssohn, and Alma Mahler, as well as some other male composers who were writing about/for strong women. I was tricky to find music by female composers for soprano voice and piano that had the meaning that I wanted, but that is a very specific request. I found loads of music written by female composers for other instruments. There is NO REASON, as Michael mentions above, why female composers cannot be integrated more into mainstream classical music at this point in history.
Music written by female composers is not different technically or thematically than music by men. If you placed 100 pieces of music side by side, half by women, and half by men, no one would be able to blindly guess who wrote what. The only reason that we do have have access to more music my female composers, is because women have been oppressed in the classical genre for years, and the music has been driven deep into the musical abyss, therefore making it harder to find and less likely to be performed by musicians unless they actively go looking for music by a female composer. Also, a lot of female composer's music has been published under a mans name, and therefore it is unidentifiable as music written by a woman.
A lot of work needs to be done to pull this music out of the dark and make it prevalent in today's classical music scene. A lot of progress has indeed been made, but we have a long way to go to reach equality in the classical music genre.
It is super frustrating to keep hearing the narrative that women were not, are are not, good composers. While I know the title of the article is clickbait, how unfortunate is it to see that people still think less of women in the arts. While women continuously tried to get into the music scene, as soon as they were married, they were basically banned from doing anything besides tenidng to their house, and their children. It actually fumes me to hear that women just "weren't good". As a matter of fact, there is probably WAY more music composed by women than we think, and it is probably published under a mans name, or initials. Even Fanny Mendelssohn fell into this trap, and she is a well-known female composer. Women were continuously pushed out of music circles, but they still made an impact. They still composed, taught, and performed music, but because they were not able to do so on such a high level, they were not able to get as muche expereince, or recognition. So yeah, female muscians might not be well-known, but to not include them in any level of music is lazy, and the people who collected the works should probably work a tiny bit harder, to see the ICONIC music women wrote WHEN THEY WERENT ALLOWED TO!!! As you can probably tell, this topic riles me up. Women are, and were, important. They were hidden musical forces, playing and writing for their souls, and their love of music. There was no money drive behind their wishes, there was no forcing them to write, they did it for passion. I think that is lovely!!!!
Bottom line: If you are colecting works to put into a book, you should work a little bit harder to unveil, and rediscover, (or just republish) music written by women, people of colour, and other marginalized communities. They exist, you are just a little lazy, and small-minded. :)
I was really interested to read both this post and the part 1 on this topic. Especially because this question is one I find myself faced with almost daily. I'm starting to see a shift in the music community about performing and celebrating women composers (although there's still more to be done of course!) but I think the problem is bigger. I see many music traditions that have historically excluded women continuing today, maybe with women being invited in or maybe not. In my eyes, the problem is bigger than not programming female composers. For example, choral music was for men and boys only for many years early on in its history. Although today, choral singing is possibly even dominated by female-identified singers (at least in North America) the tradition of male-only choral music is still very much alive. I have had to sing choral music where I am not aloud to use my voice in its full capacity because I am meant to sound like a 10 year old boy-soprano based on the performance practice of the piece. So yes, we need to acknowledge and program music by female composers - but we also need to start to unpack the MANY traditions that are entrenched in sexism and the idea that male musicians are superior.
It is pretty sad that for most of the western classical music history women were never thought as capable as men to compose music or be musicians even. I am so happy this school of thought is vanishing away more and more with time, and today more than ever this inequality is become smaller and smaller. Obviously there is still a lot more work to be done to find real equality, but to realize that everyone can be a good composer, no matter if they are male or female, we can look no further than the classrooms we are in, where compositions by both women and men are absolutely beautiful.
While I appreciate that the author of this article took the time out of his day to share his thoughts on the internet, I am almost most amazed at why we (as a society) are giving men like him the time of day. I am amazed that, in 2019, somebody read that article and decided it was ok to publish to the world. Unsurprisingly, I went to take a look at the article from the original link and it has been taken down (good). While the environment in music, especially in music academia, is certainly taking a turn for the better in terms of gender equality, I think the next big necessary step towards gender equity in music is to deplatform anybody who is still willing to uphold these dated, misogynist ideas. While some fields, such as music education and music therapy, seem to be becoming a more even playing field across genders, fields such as composition and theory seem to be much slower moving, and I think it has a lot to do with the constantly perpetuated idea that all the “great” composers from the canon were male. When a young female is taking music lessons, it likely isn’t hard for them to imagine being a music educator, or a songwriter like Taylor Swift. However, when the highest level, most important repertoire they are being presented with is by an exclusive circle of all-male composers, it can be hard for young women to envision themselves in a compositional career. Even when I decided that composition was something I was interested in, it was difficult to picture myself pursuing it, as all the people I knew who were composers looked the same (and not like me). This issue extends further than gender as well, and affects all minorities to different extents (ex. race, sexuality, religion, etc.). It is important to also note that there are more people than just this author who hold these beliefs, and also hold powerful positions in music. For example, the team that created the syllabi mentioned in this post were all complacent in pushing these ideas, consciously or not. Therefore, I believe it is necessary and urgent that we stop giving power to anybody who is willing to perpetuate the idea that the only great composers were men, and it is high time that we begin including living female composers in the conversation of “great composers”
I read and commented on part one of this post last year and as you’d probably guess, my opinions on this subject have not changed. I think you have to have a lot of nerve to take some of the most well-known women composers in Western classical music and use their work to say that it is not as good as the music men wrote during the same time period. I find this to be especially true when you consider the circumstances that women, in general, were in at any point before WWI (and even then) because they rarely had the means to acquire the education they needed to make a career for themselves in any field or support from their families let alone society. Even now, I will be one of the people who argue that women still do not compete on the same level as male composers, however, I still think this problem has a simple solution; program more music by women and teach upcoming music students about women composers! Mentioning the names of women composers will immediately open the eyes of young female musicians to what has been done and what will continue to be done by other women in music and ultimately encourage them to do the same should they wish to pursue a career in music.
Post a Comment