HOH Chung Shih and Isaac LIM discuss their thoughts on the Composium 2021 Final Concerts with fellow CSS Members WANG Chenwei, Eddy CHONG and Yuting TAN!

On the Masters’ Replay Concert and Prize Presentation Concert – An Interview with CSS Members

Contributed by HOH Chung Shih and Isaac LIM

The Master’s Replay Concert and the Prize Presentation Concert served as the grand finale of Ding Yi’s Composium. The Master’s Replay Concert featured works by the adjudicators, representing the older, well established generation of composers, and the Prize Presentation Concert featured the competition works by the finalists, representing the younger generation of composers.

CSS has gathered a few of its members to share their thoughts on the two concerts: WANG Chenwei, the current composer-in-residence for the Singapore Chinese Orchestra, and Eddy Chong, a music theorist, joined us for a live interview, while Yuting TAN, a PhD student in Music Composition, sent in her responses separately. The interview was conducted by Isaac LIM, a young composer and CSS EXCO member. For each question, Isaac first presented his view as an emerging composer who is new to Chinese chamber music, before handing it over to Chenwei and Eddy to present their own views, correct/add on to what has been said, etc. As the interview is quite long, we will be publishing it in instalments, with one or two questions in each article. We hope this article will enrich your understanding of Chinese chamber music and provide some insights into its future. Enjoy!

Access the Composium 2021 Programme Booklet here to read more about the composers, adjudicators, symposium speakers and works featured at Composium 2021!

Do you see a difference in compositional techniques between the works written by the adjudicators and competitors?

Isaac: I am not that great at listening to a piece for the first time and understanding what’s going on (especially for non-traditional works) so I don’t have anything specific in mind but I did notice that in terms of structure and thematic material, the adjudicators tended to write pieces with more straightforward structures while the competitor’s pieces were more difficult to look at and say “this is theme A, this is theme B, this is the recap of theme A, etc.”

Chenwei: We can only compare the pieces performed in this concert, which may not represent how the adjudicators or competitors usually compose. If we look at just the performed pieces, I agree with your observation that the adjudicators’ pieces seem to have more obvious thematic material. The competitors’ pieces are mostly in the style of what is commonly practised in composition academia, like what they would compose in a conservatory’s composition major class. This style tends towards exploring sounds and trying to achieve soundscapes that are unheard of or rarely heard.

In Ding Yi’s first live-streamed symposium, Mr. QUEK Ling Kiong asked the panel, “what do you consider a successful work?” I commented on the Facebook page that the definition of success depends on what the intention is. I would liken an academic composition to a scientific thesis written using musical notes. The point is to explore musical concepts or compositional techniques rather than to express emotions. It is like a thesis versus a novel – the intention and objective are very different. Naturally, these two kinds of pieces would appeal to different audiences. General listeners are not very interested in what kind of compositional techniques are used as long as the piece sounds nice. On the other hand, people listening out for compositional techniques would be interested in the new ideas presented and might not mind whether or not the piece sounds “beautiful”. Depending on the approach, the definition of success would differ.

Both the adjudicators and the competitors are probably capable of composing either kind of music. However, I guess that the competitors, who are still in a conservatory or recently graduated, have a stronger desire to prove themselves in compositional technique. In contrast, the adjudicators have long left that phase and do not feel the need to prove anything. Thus, they compose as they please.

Eddy: I did not attend both concerts, only the competitor’s one, so I won’t be comparing, but in terms of a brief response to what Chenwei was saying about the criteria of success, it really depends on who is listening and what their criteria is. For example, if you ask a general member of the audience, I suppose to them a successful piece is one that grabs them; when they hear it they like it, and it engages them. A composer, on the other hand, would be listening to a lot of technical things. The other thing that is pertinent to the topic for tonight is if for example the listener is interested to see how this work relates to tradition; then it would be up against a whole different yardstick, to see whether this work is very cleverly or ingeniously drawing from traditional elements or whether there are some innovative touches to it, so different people would have different success criteria; it really depends on what you’re looking for. And just to put it into a much larger, historical timeframe, one would also want to ask the question fifty years later; is this work still being played? Has this work had some kind of influence that lasted? That would be a different kind of success. So it is very hard to nail it down to just one set of criteria.

Isaac: Looking back at my own music, I tend to compose with the mindset that Chenwei said of the adjudicators more than the competitors; I don’t think too much about compositional techniques as a way to prove myself or anything, I just want it to sound nice. I think it might be interesting to see how that changes as I eventually go to a conservatory, and it would also be interesting to see how the competitor’s work changes as they start working professionally and make a name for themselves.

Comparing the performances of works by older composers in the Master’s Replay Concert and by younger composers in the Prize Presentation Concert, what do you think of the direction that Chinese chamber music is headed? (i.e. towards more/less traditional music, personal opinion on this change)

Isaac: Initially, I thought that as is the trend of music and art in general, we would trend towards less and less traditional music, as people tend to want to explore new things; looking at the evolution of western music from Baroque to 20th Century, the music that people write becomes more and more “out there” and non-traditional. But after what Chenwei said about this modern sound being affected by wanting to showcase compositional techniques, I think that music may not change as much, but I still think people will want to keep exploring new things and trying to see where we can go with Chinese chamber music rather than staying with what is traditional and familiar.

Eddy: This kind of begs the question of what you mean by traditional and non-traditional; one can also take the view that tradition is something that is not static but continually evolves. Just as we talk about classical music as a tradition, it actually has evolved throughout the different periods, so much so that we can talk about Baroque style, Classical style, and so forth, but essentially they come from the same tradition. When we analyze music, we can always see where some of the ideas or techniques come from; they didn’t come from nowhere, it wasn’t totally new; it was always built on the past. We do also know that a lot of the time, composers do consciously look back. One of the most obvious things that comes to my mind is the New Classical style. There you have a whole generation of composers looking back in different ways. Some to Baroque music, others to Classical, to even Romantic; Tchaikovsky was one of the models. So they didn’t even look back that far. But then we have of course those who look back at the Baroque and so forth; so as a sort of historical movement, in the classical tradition, there already is that aspect of looking back. Even Debussy, when he came up with the impressionist style, a lot of his inspiration came from French Baroque music. So yes, he was interested in the impressionist symbolic art, but musically, he was actually interested in music even further back. So to me, tradition is always building on what the predecessors have done, it’s never inventing something totally new. I’m sure in your own composition, consciously or unconsciously, you are drawing from something that is already there.

Chenwei: So in other words, composers are always looking “Bach”. 🙂

Chenwei: Between Chinese and Western music, there is some difference in the historical development. Western music underwent a continuous, organic development, where one thing evolved to the next. Even though Schoenberg’s idea of twelve-tone music is considered revolutionary, some pieces by late romantic composers already verged on atonality, such as Liszt’s Bagatelle sans tonalité (1885).

For Chinese music, I would define “traditional music” as music developed within China with minimal Western influence. The rapid evolution of Chinese music into what we hear today “like in the Ding Yi concert” was obviously influenced by imported Western music theory and concepts, starting around the early 1900s. There are many historical reasons for this. At the time, the Chinese Qing dynasty was very weak after the Century of Humiliation from foreign powers. China used to be the “Middle Kingdom” which received tributes from lesser civilisations. Between the late 18th and the early 19th centuries, China lost almost every war with foreign powers, including Japan. Once considered barbarians by the Chinese, the Japanese rapidly became industrialised and advanced after the successful Meiji Restoration.

These events brought the Chinese a sense of inferiority regarding traditional Chinese culture, and they looked to the West as a model for progress and advancement. They felt they had to learn from their opponents and import their ideas to catch up. This social background influenced Chinese musicians too – they wanted to import violin techniques, Western harmony, create an orchestra, etc. In that way, there was an upheaval in Chinese music caused by importing Western music theory and superimposing it onto traditional Chinese music. Suddenly, pentatonic melodies were getting harmonised, and Chinese orchestras with SATB (soprano, alto, tenor, bass) instrumental sections were formed. These imported elements became assimilated over time, and we now take them for granted. Even Dance of the Yao People is now often called a “traditional” piece as it has been around for more than half a century, and we have gotten used to Chinese melodies harmonised and orchestrated.

More recently, the New Music primarily practised in composition academia has also been superimposed onto Chinese music. For example, Qigang Chen and other senior Chinese composers pioneered the use of New Music techniques in their compositions for Chinese instrumental ensembles, which may or may not employ traditional Chinese elements.

In this concert, the younger composers most applied New Music techniques in their compositions. The adjudicators differed in compositional styles Mr. Watson and Mr. Law’s pieces showed a more common practice period kind of tonality and harmony, whereas the others used more New Music compositional techniques. The senior composers from China would have a deeper understanding of traditional Chinese music from China, and so both traditional and contemporary elements were strongly present in their works. On the other hand, most of the participants works were dominated by the New Music element. Yet, I could hear distinctive traditional Chinese influences in Liu Yuhui’s piece. The rest mostly used the instruments for their timbres rather than their historical backgrounds.

Yuting: I think that the sound worlds explored in Chinese chamber music are becoming more diverse, mostly due to greater interest in the exploration of timbral colours with the use of extended techniques, texture, and orchestration. It seems to me that as a result of this exploration, texture and timbral material has taken over melody and rhythm as the main subject of a few of these pieces by the younger composers. Several of the young composers embraced the use of extended instrumental techniques, exploring lesser heard timbres of these traditional instruments. These uncommon sound colours then form the basis of the composition or become the defining trait of the melody or texture that we hear.

A good number of the pieces in the Master’s Replay Concert drew inspiration from culture and history, whereas most of the works by the younger generations were inspired by current events and/or abstract ideas. Do you think it is important for new generations of composers to continue to look back at and be inspired by tradition?

Isaac: Maybe the adjudicators are not necessarily inspired by tradition per se, but things that they grew up with, that they are familiar with, and that have emotional significance to them. The competitors, not having grown up surrounded with these traditions would not have the same inspiration to draw from. I don’t think that it is necessarily a bad thing that the competitors are not inspired by the same traditions and culture that the older generations of composers are, but I still think it is good that we are aware of these things, to remember our history and to kind of keep these things in the back of our minds should we ever find inspiration in them.

Chenwei: I think there are three layers to this question. Firstly, does a piece for a Chinese ensemble necessarily need to exhibit Chinese features? To this, my answer is no; it doesn’t necessarily need to sound Chinese. We can use the instruments in their original cultural context or outside their cultural context. For example, it is fine for a piece to be influenced by Western music, or Indian music, or pop, or jazz, etc. The only important thing is that the work should use the Chinese instruments idiomatically and bring out their best. If Western compositional techniques are used, their appropriate application should be considered. For example, trying to achieve a sound like a Brahms or a Mahler symphony with Chinese instruments will not work out because the instruments’ properties are not amenable to producing that kind of sound. Chinese instruments are generally very individualistic, and so pieces that emphasise character (of a specific culture or just character in general) as opposed to blending and cohesion tend to work better for Chinese instruments.

Secondly, is it important for younger composers to learn traditional music? I would say yes. It’s fine to compose pieces that are not inspired by traditional Chinese music, but working with traditional Chinese instruments frequently without much knowledge about traditional Chinese music is not a good thing, as the composer’s vocabulary would be limited. Also, a lack of understanding of how these instruments are played in their original context and most natural setting would hinder the effective usage of these instruments even when writing for them in a non-Chinese setting. For example, I could use a traditional technique with an altered scale to create something non-Chinese sounding yet very idiomatic for the instrument.

Thirdly, we have a responsibility to pass on Chinese tradition because it is endangered. Most people nowadays wouldn’t automatically reach out for traditional Chinese music. It is not the first choice of music for most young Chinese, and those interested probably belong to a school Chinese orchestra. Of course, each generation of musicians will be inspired by different things because their lives are different.

Why does traditional Chinese music tend to appeal more to senior citizens in Singapore (aside from Chinese music practitioners)? My feeling is that when they were growing up, that music was part of their lives. I once attended a lecture in Vienna by the composer John Groves. He said that to appeal to a particular audience group, you have to know what kind of music they were listening to when they were experiencing their first love. It’s an interesting statement. When people grow up, certain kinds of music become a part of their lives due to various circumstances. Perhaps it’s simply because they are exposed to some types of music and not others. When they age, they still feel nostalgia for the same music. As for the younger generation, most probably have only brief exposure to Chinese music, if at all. Their first choice for the vast majority would be pop. When today’s youths are in their 70s, they will probably still like BTS rather than switching to Chinese music. That is to say, interest in the traditional arts is mainly due to age, per se, but rather what one experienced when they were growing up.

As the younger generation lacks interest in traditional Chinese music, I think that as composers, we bear the responsibility to use our expertise and position to promote and educate about traditional Chinese music. If we just compose using new elements, traditional Chinese music would fade away more quickly.

Eddy: To give you a short answer, it is yes, composers should look back at tradition. The long answer would be to sort of unpack this, as Chenwei has already begun to do, making reference to all kinds of traditions. To answer the question, first of all we have to define what we mean by tradition: whether we’re limiting it to just Chinese music, or whether we’re casting it really broad. In the Singapore context, if you ask me, that tradition should be plural, simply because we’re in a multicultural society. The kind of soundscape we grew up in is very very diverse. Consciously or unconsciously, you’re hearing all kinds of music. So that is very much part of our sonic upbringing, and therefore if you want to draw on some of these elements in your composition, I would say yes, there is some value in looking more deeply into each of those traditions. For example, Chinese New Year is coming up. You’re bound to hear the more traditional Chinese New Year songs, but you will also hear some new ones, as well as modern-day cover versions of traditional Chinese New Year songs, including playing on other ethnic instruments. I remember in the past, you had your sitar playing some kind of Chinese New Year songs. Obviously all these composers and arrangers are dipping into those various traditions and bringing together multiple traditions in a kind of collage, to spark inspiration but at the same time to kind of develop their own voice; a voice that draws on a whole range of influences. Which, if you look at history, is not totally new. Western composers are doing it all the time; Bartok for example. Yes, he was very interested in collecting folk songs from the east european region, but he was also looking at Bach, learning his contrapuntal techniques, he was looking at Beethoven, incorporating the more germanic developmental style. He was also innovating, because his string quartets for example had some unusual ways of playing the string instruments. More generally, he was able to create a sort of new orchestral palette. We know of his Night Music, which was both a harmonic invention as well as orchestral innovation, to create those sounds that evoke the right kind of imagery in his mind. All these things meant that he must have looked back, and he must have understood it well enough to be able to innovate. So my long answer is yes, but the yes is to many, many traditions. At the end of the day, I think it is not so much that you do it because you must look back at certain traditions, but what is important is that it must be authentic to you. Different people will grow up in different sonic environments, with different things that appeal to them, so for them to be looking back at traditions, I think everyone will have a different set of traditions. So I would say in general yes, look back, but it’s not looking back at a particular tradition or set of traditions, but one that is very dependent on the individual.

Chenwei: A question I’ve been asking for a long time is, “with so many compositions available, why should anyone listen to or play mine?” I would have to offer a different voice compared to other composers past and present. My personal interest lies in multicultural music, so besides Chinese music, I also use elements of Gamelan, Indian, Malay and Arab music to form my unique voice. Other composers would, of course, have their own interests and express their voices in different ways.

However, I think that if one is dealing with compositional techniques alone, there is a limit to how much one can do that has not already been done. When we look at 20th-century Western music, almost everything imaginable in terms of compositional techniques has already been done by the 1980s. You name it, someone has done it before – spectral music, tone clusters, microtones, aleatoric music, extended playing techniques, even setting instruments on fire. When I was studying in Vienna, I felt that the composition scene wanted New Music to be always new, yet it was hard to find new things to do that were not similar to previous endeavours. Therefore, the manipulation of compositional technique alone is reaching an asymptote. I didn’t want to go in that direction because many people have done that before me, and many are still doing it.

Instead, I turned my attention to multicultural music and its fusion. “Fusion” means not just fusing Chinese / Indian / Malay with Western music, as is often the case with most commercial fusion music that we hear. We can do fusion in many other ways, for example, Chinese with Indian, or Teochew with Hokkien. This then opens up a lot more possibilities, and each combination would produce a unique type of sound that would enable me to compose distinctive pieces.

Yuting: To me, writing music inspired by the past as well as current events of our time are equally important. A musical composition based on historical events or traditions can be an effective way of preserving and facilitating general awareness of cultural heritage. On the other hand, I believe that the music composers write is a reflection of the time we live in. Thus, it is only natural for composers to compose with current events in mind.

Do you think a move to less traditional music would make Chinese chamber music less accessible to the public, or perhaps less supported? Conversely, would composing more traditional music make Chinese chamber music more accessible to the public?

Isaac: Less traditional music would definitely be more difficult for the public to understand and get into; already when my mum (an amateur musician) looks at some of the works I compose that aren’t that out there, she has difficulty enjoying or understanding it. So I think that more non-traditional music would be more difficult for the public to understand and so it would be more difficult to attract audiences; but on the other hand, like what Chenwei said, even traditional Chinese music is an endangered genre, and so going back to traditional music might not become so popular either.

Eddy: Maybe I will mention one other factor that we have not talked about tonight, and that is: packaging. I think in our modern society, a lot of times, the packaging really makes a lot of difference. In that regard, I think Ding Yi and even SCO have been quite successful in how they package and repackage so-called traditional Chinese music, and therefore building a different generation of audiences, which is very different from the traditional Chinese music lovers. The earlier generation, when you tell them about traditional Chinese music, they’re thinking about the really “traditional” music that is from 30, 40 years ago, that kind of tradition. Whereas with the younger generation, their expectation of traditional Chinese is broader, and more open-minded. To me, I suspect – and I’m just going on a hunch here – whether you’re going with a large ensemble or chamber music, it’s probably not going to make much of a difference, at least for the younger generation. If it is something that is packaged in a way that appeals to them, I don’t think they have any hang-ups about “oh a traditional Chinese orchestra needs to be this size”, or “needs to have these instruments”, or “this kind of structure”, or “that content”; I think those matter less to the younger generation. I’m speaking more as an outsider, as I’m not really in the Chinese music circle. I think Chenwei is closer to that circle, so maybe Chenwei you can comment?

Chenwei: This question raises further questions, like what is meant by “traditional”? Is it traditional Chinese, or do you mean traditional in the sense of tonal and using conventional harmonies as opposed to atonal or New Music? As for “the public”, I guess you would mean the non-musically trained. In short, I suppose you are trying to ask whether composing in an academic style would alienate the general public?

I think it wouldn’t be a move to this kind of style. “Move” implies doing the new thing at the expense of the old, which wouldn’t happen. Compositions in a New Music style add on to what already exists. Just as there will be composers writing in a New Music style, there will also be composers writing in a traditional Chinese style or a Western tonal style. Therefore, there will be many styles of Chinese chamber music.

The audience reception depends on how the concert is programmed. If a concert is mainly New Music, then we wouldn’t expect the general public to enjoy it very much, for the reasons I stated in the beginning: “are you showcasing a thesis or a novel?” If the audience attends a thesis presentation expecting a novel, there’s a mismatch. For the general public, the concert programming might favour tonal music.

Yuting: Composing more traditional music may seem like the “safer route” to take to make Chinese chamber music more accessible to the public. However, I think a move to less traditional music could have the potential to attract a new group of audiences, as it offers them a fresh listening experience that they may not have encountered before.