Samn

I would check out Kalevi Aho, one of the students of Rautavaara, his music couldn't all be considered romantic, but quite a lot of it is based in tonality and the use of melody, I especially like his 8th symphony. Keep in mind there are many contemporary composers who have written in a multitude of styles, some of Rautavaara's symphonies are completely atonal. Also there are composers like Part, Gorecki, and Penderecki, who started out very atonal, but have changed to a more tonal language. If you are interested in tonal contemporary music I would recommend looking into the later works of the three composers I just named as well. All three write music that is very religious in nature, but nonetheless very beautiful. I also recommend Max Richter, who is somewhat of a minimalist, but not of the pulse music style of Reich and Glass, which I also find quite interesting. I believe he classifies his style as Post-Classical. And forgive me but I feel I have to correct you that Atonal music usually isn't "random" as you put it. Also you aren't really going to find many living composers that write traditional romantic music in the exact style of that era, as that would be comparable to writing a contemporary novel using the language of Dickens or Dostoyevsky, and in my opinion a stagnation of art, however there are many composers who write tonal music that can be considered to work towards the aesthetic aims of the romantic movement, and that someone interested in that movment would find quite enjoyable. Hope this helps!

I do think the idea that atonality is an aquired taste, so to speak, is quite valid. I for one found atonal music repulsive at my first encounter, now, though I think of it as bleak sounding, I have no "difficulty" listening to it. Ultimately though, it comes down to personal values of aesthetic judgement I suppose. As far as my new style, I plan to have a movment of my Third String Quartet (My first Objectivist influenced piece) ready for performance by early November and would love to share it here once I have a recording. Also, what did Rand say about conditioning the ear?

I consider myself an Objectivist and I love the music of Schoenberg, Webern, Ligeti, etc. Essentially everybody you are not supposed to like as an Objectivist. I just wrote an account of my own musical philosophy on the Objectivist Music thread. I will explain here that my respect for these composers comes from recognition of their technical prowess which are made evident to anyone trained in music with a mind open enough to actually spend time with one of their scores. Atonality does not eliminate form, rather it creates a new set of rules, especially Serialism. Having been trained in the composition of atonal music, I can assure you that form in the traditional sense is a constant point of discussion. I direct you to the Passacaglia movement of Pierot Lunaire, which features masterful treatment of an intervallic theme. Or Webern's Second Variation for Piano, in which he combines tone rows in such a way that each pitch is an equal distance from A 4 as its corresponding pitch in the row with which it is being combined. If you have studied twelve tone theory at all, you would recognize that a considerable amount of mathematical consideration is necessary for the creation of such a piece. I understand that atonal music doesn't correspond with Rand's aesthetic values, nor does it promote Objectivism. I personally have been tending towards tonality in my own music (I am a composer), however it is completely ignorant to discount what were really remarkable achievements made by these musical pioneers. After all, Beethoven was considered a "madman" in his day. Also, for those who are interested in tonal modern music, I recommend the minimalist movement of the late 20th century, some of this music is very beautiful, and is almost all tonal. I particularly enjoy the music of Arvo Pärt, even though it is spiritual. And of course, Rachmaninoff, as always is a mastermind. His Second Piano Concerto is one of the pieces that got me interested in composing in the first place. Also, though he went through many styles, Stravinsky did write twleve tone music. A composer who I find of specific significance to Objectivism is Shostakovich. Though on the surface some of his works were Soviet propaganda, a closer inspection shows mockery of the Soviet Beuracracy that was so intent on transfoming his life into a living hell, as well as assertations of his individuality, most prominiteyly the DSCH motif, which spells his initials in the German notation system. I view his music as a triumphant laughing in the face of the forces of tyranny, as well as a tribute to the victims of such a horrible Collectivist regime.

First of all, let me introduce this post by clarifying that I am very new to objectivist philosophy, as well as this site, this being my first post. All of the discussion in the post has been geared towards popular music, which there is nothing wrong with, however, as a "classical" musician I would be interested in a dialogue regarding contemporary classical music and its relationship to Objectivism. I am a contemporary composer studying at the University of Michigan. My music until my recent encounter with Ayn Rand was very typical of the Avant-Garde music of the latter half of this century. For those of you who are unacquainted with such music, it is characterized by extreme atonality, lack of conventional melody, employment of not traditional uses of instruments, and ranges in approach from Aleatoric "chance" music, to highly mathematically complex Serialist music. I have experimented with all of these styles, the result of which is very bleak discordant music. Ayn Rand describes this sort of music in Atlas Shrugged and is clearly opposed to it. l understand that her philosophy regarding art is that it should be a clear articulation of the artists philosophical convictions, portraying man as he "might and ought to be", and consequently understand her opposition to atonal music, the justification for which is often the "horror and suffering of the 20th century world". I too am interested in moving my music away from this direction in the interest of forwarding a positive and joyful view of not only man but myself. However as a trained musician I find the technical, mathematic, and creative aspects of much atonal to be wonderfully innovative and interesting. What I am beginning to do is write music that opens with atonal language that gradually, through the incorporation of melodic elements, coalesces into triumphant, driving, and melodic sections. Thus representing a journey towards mans realization of his full potential, and mirroring my own feelings as I abandoned the bleak philosophies which dominated my life for the incredible self esteem which I have gained through Objectivism. I also am trying to incorporate innovative techniques that can be utilized in a variety of musical contexts, such as electronics, or extended-techniques, examples of which include plucking piano strings, or tapping the body of a string instrument. None of my most recent music has been recorded yet, so I am unable to refer anyone to it. However if the ideas I explained are of interest to any of you I would love to discuss them. I also agree with Pete Caya about progressive rock. I play in a prog rock band myself and find the sheer technicality of the music to represent something heroic.